Benefit cuts are fuelling abuse of disabled people, say charities

[Alan Fry]

Originally Posted by martyh

They take their chances the same as anyone else .
Considering that Remploy is a not for profit government funded organisation then it does not surprise me in the least that they will be subject to cuts the same as anyone else ,and as with all businesses these days they are subject to restructuring just to stay afloat so why should Remploy be any different ?

The government should however help create more decent jobs

[mertle]

Originally Posted by martyh

They take their chances the same as anyone else .
Considering that Remploy is a not for profit government funded organisation then it does not surprise me in the least that they will be subject to cuts the same as anyone else ,and as with all businesses these days they are subject to restructuring just to stay afloat so why should Remploy be any different ?

very brazen Im all right jack atitude there hope you never in this position. They want them to be working yet destroying all the help needed to get disabled work.

Alot of support funding has been shelved without it companies wont employ those in need this where Remploy filled the gap. Many those will be thrown on the scrapheap these was wanting work.

The last cull remploy factories only 1 in 12 got a job in mainstream. Reality this the future those disabled who lose there jobs from remploy. That was under better climate now job market even worse it will be lucky to see 1 in 30 get a job. That think will be being kind while there abundance able bodied potential workers out there you wont see many disabled get a look in.

I hate this I'm all right jack arrogent atitudes make me sick to death of this country. The saving on this was nothing.

As for disabled support this motion think again organisations was suposed to support welfare changes and streamlining disabled payments and removal dla for the new one. It was complete crock of lies now disabled organisations shown to be against some of the legislation.

It will be the same on remploy when most disabled will get shafted as there support evaporates. Workfare is the future disabled working for nothing with forced labour with threats of removal of benefits.

[Gary L]

The Jack attitude will be this countries downfall. we're allowing all this to happen because we're alright Jack. but even Jack knows that all of it is going to blow up in our faces in due time.

and fortunately I'm going to be around to see the chaos.

Originally Posted by mertle

very brazen Im all right jack atitude there hope you never in this position. They want them to be working yet destroying all the help needed to get disabled work..........snip

.

You do realise that the money isn't being taken away it is being ringfenced .All the government are doing is what the majority of charities want which is to stop segregating disabled people and help them to work in the mainstream work enviroment .
When Remploy was started back in 1945 the world was different place with very few if any work places willing or able to employ disabled people .Now with modern disability laws factories and offices are not allowed to discriminate so the Remploy factories are not needed ,they are a drain on any budget set aside for helping disabled people .Very few of the factories actually break even they are sucking up the money meant for other purposes so the best thing all round is to shut them and use the money to help more disabled people more effectively

Originally Posted by Gary L

The Jack attitude will be this countries downfall. we're allowing all this to happen because we're alright Jack. but even Jack knows that all of it is going to blow up in our faces in due time.

and fortunately I'm going to be around to see the chaos.

Interesting viewpoint (if a little strange).

What if the chaos blows up in your face - will it still be fortunate then?

Originally Posted by Gary L

The Jack attitude will be this countries downfall. we're allowing all this to happen because we're alright Jack. but even Jack knows that all of it is going to blow up in our faces in due time.

and fortunately I'm going to be around to see the chaos.

Even the charities that have any involvement with Remploy can see that the model is outdated and unviable ,why should the government use money to keep a loss making factory open when the same amount of money can help many more disabled people .

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by Hugh

Interesting viewpoint (if a little strange).

What if the chaos blows up in your face - will it still be fortunate then?

Yes. because I can tell everyone I told you so.

[Chrysalis]

Me and my MP are helping someone at the moment.

The DWP got their postcode wrong so the person didnt get an appointment letter for a medical assessment and as a result has got kicked off. The DWP refused to make a new appointment and also refused to follow past precedent set in previous trubunal rulings.

The DWP have always been tough but I have never seen this kind of behaviour before, they appear to have gone out their way to be awkward in this case. They even read out the wrong postcode over the phone to the MP who is now a witness in the event.

---------- Post added at 16:22 ---------- Previous post was at 16:13 ----------

Originally Posted by martyh

You do realise that the money isn't being taken away it is being ringfenced .All the government are doing is what the majority of charities want which is to stop segregating disabled people and help them to work in the mainstream work enviroment .
When Remploy was started back in 1945 the world was different place with very few if any work places willing or able to employ disabled people .Now with modern disability laws factories and offices are not allowed to discriminate so the Remploy factories are not needed ,they are a drain on any budget set aside for helping disabled people .Very few of the factories actually break even they are sucking up the money meant for other purposes so the best thing all round is to shut them and use the money to help more disabled people more effectively

I dont think the world is much different now.

Most disabled people who work are usually people who turned disabled when already employed by that company and as such the company would have to be careful sacking them.

eg. when I fell ill half a dozen years or so back I was working for jessops and it took them just 2 weeks to sack me as I was in a probation period, I asked them to redeploy me and even drop my wages but they werent interested. That was when I claimed IB, they even told me to claim it and wrote a letter to the DWP.

I think the difference is now quite simply there is less sympathy in what is a harsher living environment.

I spoke to someone within the DWP when a case was been discussed about 6 months back and was discussing the new medical with them, they were pushing across the point that the modern work place is now more disabled freindly etc. and the new medicals were to reflect that. I said companies were only doing whats required by law and will still not willingly employ sick people, its goes against common sense and their duties to shareholders. The DWP seem to have missed the point its not about what someone can do its more about if they employable and how their physical health is affected. When I asked the DWP person to give me some examples of companies employing sick people they couldnt even name me one. What the DWP is essentially doing is telling sick and disabled people they need to compete for jobs on a equal footing with fit and able people in a dog eat dog world, knowing they will just get slaughtered.

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

I dont think the world is much different now.

Most disabled people who work are usually people who turned disabled when already employed by that company and as such the company would have to be careful sacking them.

eg. when I fell ill half a dozen years or so back I was working for jessops and it took them just 2 weeks to sack me as I was in a probation period, I asked them to redeploy me and even drop my wages but they werent interested. That was when I claimed IB, they even told me to claim it and wrote a letter to the DWP.

I think the difference is now quite simply there is less sympathy in what is a harsher living environment.

I spoke to someone within the DWP when a case was been discussed about 6 months back and was discussing the new medical with them, they were pushing across the point that the modern work place is now more disabled freindly etc. and the new medicals were to reflect that. I said companies were only doing whats required by law and will still not willingly employ sick people, its goes against common sense and their duties to shareholders. The DWP seem to have missed the point its not about what someone can do its more about if they employable and how their physical health is affected. When I asked the DWP person to give me some examples of companies employing sick people they couldnt even name me one. What the DWP is essentially doing is telling sick and disabled people they need to compete for jobs on a equal footing with fit and able people in a dog eat dog world, knowing they will just get slaughtered.

I have to disagree with most of that post .The latest figures bandied about are that 48%of disabled people of working age are working which isn't bad compared to what it used to be so obviously there are companies employing disabled people ..Companies that do employ disabled people tend to find that the disabled person tends to stay with that company which is better for everybody .There is plenty of help for companies when they employ disabled people both from the government and charities .I think yours and others attitudes that the world and his brother are ganging up on disabled people quite tiresome ,there has never been as help for disabled people in all walks of life as there is now ,we are ,at last doing what they want and that is treating them as individuals and equals instead of lumping them in one group

[Chrysalis]

I dont care for figures, I care for real life experience. I am just balancing the discussion here and will still be stepping back from the discussion so wont be arguing this with you.

Also disability can wildly vary, what these figures dont show is how the working are disabled. People like yourself think the world is black and white and that disabled = disabled.

Variations such as the condition itself, the severity, if its managed well with treatment etc.

[AdamD]

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

eg. when I fell ill half a dozen years or so back I was working for jessops and it took them just 2 weeks to sack me as I was in a probation period, I asked them to redeploy me and even drop my wages but they werent interested.

I think the difference is now quite simply there is less sympathy in what is a harsher living environment.

I spoke to someone within the DWP when a case was been discussed about 6 months back and was discussing the new medical with them, they were pushing across the point that the modern work place is now more disabled freindly etc. and the new medicals were to reflect that. I said companies were only doing whats required by law and will still not willingly employ sick people, its goes against common sense and their duties to shareholders.

Same happened with me and I agree about what you said regarding the DWP

Few companies is going to hire someone if they can't meet or exceed existing workers speed/efficiency.

And they're hardly going to hire someone who, even if being truthful, has frequent bouts of illness.

In my case, I suffer from chronic migraines/cluster headaches which leave me bed ridden for a day or more, who in their right mind would hire me if I'm "potentially" off several times a month?

The last company I worked at only allowed three sickness days...ever, so I had to leave rather than be "disciplined" and eventually fired.

Originally Posted by AdamD

The last company I worked at only allowed three sickness days...ever, so I had to leave rather than be "disciplined" and eventually fired.

You sure about that, i suspect that is wrong and you gave up your job for nothing

[peanut]

Originally Posted by martyh

You sure about that, i suspect that is wrong and you gave up your job for nothing

I'm sure he probably meant occurrences rather than days. Employers like Unilever has something similar, where if you are off for 4 occurrences in one year, you could be sacked. This could mean that 1 day off would be 1 occurrence and the same if it was for 1 week (consecutive days). So in theory if you take 4 separate non consecutive days off in 1 year, you could end up out of a job.

Originally Posted by peanut

I'm sure he probably meant occurrences rather than days. Employers like Unilever has something similar, where if you are off for 4 occurrences in one year, you could be sacked. This could mean that 1 day off would be 1 occurrence and the same if it was for 1 week (consecutive days). So in theory if you take 4 separate non consecutive days off in 1 year, you could end up out of a job.

That sounds more reasonable

[dilli-theclaw]

A few pearls of wisdom from the job centre wheni was still seeing the DEA.

Having to attend hospital once or twice a week is not a barrier to getting full time employment - any employer will allow you to make up the time.

The access to work scheme means that an employer will have no problem taking you on as the government will pay part of the cost of the specialist equipment to do so. Oddly though in all the interviews I've had a fair few have cited the reason they can't afford this as a reason for me not getting the job.

Then of course as I've mentioned elsewhere the job centre won't let me see the DEA now until I've been assessed for ESA.

But despite all this I'm still doing it all off my own back now, I would appreciate help from the government with it but it seems sadly lacking.

Does it stress me out ? Yep but there's nothing I can do about it so I plod on.

Now that Natalie lives with me I'm not on means tested benefits do I can do work from home like fixing pcs which is what I do a lot of.