I would not wish unemployment on anybody!

[ben280489]

Fair point. And let's extend it to appearance. So anyone who:

 

• Is clearly under the influence.
   
  
• Pretends they cannot understand English (apart from 'I'll see you in a fortnight')
   
  
• Obviously hasn't had a wash in a week.
   
  
• Has no proof whatsoever of job-seeking activity
   
  
• Thinks the JC is a creche for their ugly, loud, next-generation feckless kid(s).
  

 

Can join the queue marked 'Clear off. Don't waste our time'. This will give you the time to spend with people who obviously want help and maybe even brighten your mood!

 

But of course, that won't happen. Discrimination, innit? Breaches their 'Human (?) Rights!'.

 

But actually, it's plainly stated in your literature etc. - 'Should be actively seeking work...' when they plainly aren't. But this is blatantly ignored whereas the 'You must tell us...even if it's only for a day...' is adhered to rigourously.

 

I see people like this in the job centre all the time. Especially the ones who cannot understand english unless it suits them. Lol Its so funny.

 

But its also not funny, think of how much money is wasted on translation services. If they cant speak english, what chance do they have of been a productive worker for your average company? Little or none.

[Grandad.Malky]

If they cant speak english, what chance do they have of been a productive worker for your average company? Little or none.

 

Don’t kid yourself, there are factories full of Polish workers (don’t you know anyone that works at Bassets) and much of the manual farming work is done by foreign workers.

 

Company I work for employs a lot of Polish staff. 160 employees overall. Before the influx of polish workers an average month would see a turnover of 29 staff, on average. Obviously you don’t want to have to train 29 staff every month.

 

You have to be able to rely on your workforce and if someone doesn’t even bother to let you know they’re not turning up, what’re you supposed to do?

 

Experience has shown our company that the foreign staff turn up, on time and work.

 

End of the day, they want work. Who’d you employ?

1. Someone who can’t be bothered to get out of bed to call you?

2. Someone who’s motivated enough to have moved country to better their lot?

 

http://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/archive/index.php/t-232459.html

[happyhippy]

That's all understandable happyhippy, but it's a lot of conjecture on your part. What if this and what if that. I never said JC workers shouldn't be allowed breaks or a chance for a cup of tea. Even if they have had to deal with 10 morons prior to my appointment, they should still maintain enough professionalism to treat me appropriately, seeing as I have arrived on time, looking presentable and speaking politely. At least offer me an apology for having to wait around for half an hour.

 

I agree with you shaz, but it's reality it's not conjecture. It doesn't matter, as you rightly say. A public facing job is a job no matter what and there are standards which are expected to be kept.

 

When I mentioned staff taking a break, it was in relation to being kept waiting. Not that you suggested that nobody should have a break!

 

There are so many jobs out there where snotty, rude customers will make you feel like turning into the incredible hulk, but if everyone succumbed to those feelings the world would be chaotic. You have to put on your fake smile and stay polite; I know this from my own experience and I know it's not easy, but it's just something you should do as a good employee. It is something the majority of people at the JC have forgotten how to do.

 

I'd reckon it's the other way round actually. A hell of a lot of the signing-on staff are very inexperienced, and also rushed. There is nobody to cover usually as well, and they have much less time too.

 

I guess my point here is to treat everyone individually and appropriately; if some tool rolls into the jobcentre late and with an attitude, fine, keep them waiting and don't apologise. If, however, someone like me turns up, on time, show me the same respect.

 

They are kept waiting. What about the person who also turns up on time, who has also been inconvenienced by a moron before you?

 

They must be seen before you, despite the fact it inconveniences you, as they have already been inconvenienced. This is a daily matter, and believe me it is troublesome in the extreme.

 

I certainly agree (again) that you should be shown respect. Please also respect workers who have little control over their working patterns. It is a two-way process.

[happyhippy]

I know i said i would not post on this thread again despite the fact i started it.

 

But i have to say... i hear the same thing all the time Keith.

 

 

"People are cheating the system"

 

 

Who? How? In what way?

 

 

I could think of a few ways, but im not sure the problem is so huge.

 

Of course there will be people who lie about things like council tax, for example single mothers saying they live alone so they get more benefits.

 

But i think the truth is, most will probably only do that because they need to. Surviving on benefits is hard, and such thing as a £30 discount per month on council tax (assuming she has to pay any of it), could make a huge difference to the food thats going on the table in that household.

 

 

But then you have the people who clearly cheat the system. Those faking disability. Those who have cash only jobs on the side while claiming JSA and other benefits. These people do exist, maybe not in such large numbers , but they need finding, and punishing. They should pay back every penny!

 

Ben, what has this got to do with your complaint about being being poorly treated as you were away from Sheffield?

[manxbiker]

Could be the Manx version. I do actually think there is one as well. The only online reference I found was to the DWP 1002. I'll look at a current copy as soon as possible.

 

No the manx one is much simpler bit like myself realy

Still in front of me in black and white

 

•

go away from home, even if it’s for a day

Bottom line page 25 dwp 1002

Thank you happyhippy for that sorce of knowledge

[manxbiker]

Does that cover it happyhippy

[happyhippy]

Fair point. And let's extend it to appearance. So anyone who:

 

• Is clearly under the influence.
   
  
• Pretends they cannot understand English (apart from 'I'll see you in a fortnight')
   
  
• Obviously hasn't had a wash in a week.
   
  
• Has no proof whatsoever of job-seeking activity
   
  
• Thinks the JC is a creche for their ugly, loud, next-generation feckless kid(s).
  

 

Can join the queue marked 'Clear off. Don't waste our time'. This will give you the time to spend with people who obviously want help and maybe even brighten your mood!

 

But of course, that won't happen. Discrimination, innit? Breaches their 'Human (?) Rights!'.

 

But actually, it's plainly stated in your literature etc. - 'Should be actively seeking work...' when they plainly aren't. But this is blatantly ignored whereas the 'You must tell us...even if it's only for a day...' is adhered to rigourously.

 

I knew I'd forgotten to reply to summat! 'My' literature? You're making assumptions again!

 

As I have said repeatedly, I hope in this case common sense is used, and that the case in point is treated as a 'domestic emergency', which doesn't fall under the same rule. Now let's look at your list.

 

Point 1: Clearly? How do you know? Being under the influence doesn't mean that you can't competently do a job. Just those which require you not to be so.

 

Point 2: If someone has difficulty in speaking or doesn't speak English, this is obviously sorted out at the initial claim stage. It is at that point, if they qualify for JSA or other benefits which require an element of jobseeking activity, they are referred to English language courses.

 

End of story.

 

Point 3: Might be working part-time as a mechanic, and trying to sort out his own business. Most people a few years ago who had seen me down at the Lane wouldn't have thought "Well, he's clearly a manager in the Civil Service at a National Level with a responsibility crucial to the function of a huge Government Department".

 

Never judge a book, and all that. I'd have thought you'd be trying to proffer me that advice, not the other way about.

 

Point 4: Got me here, as there is a form which can be issued and should be checked. People who are required to do so should have all the information every time they turn up. Thing is though, the staff also spend all day trying to get Mr "Like You'll Get Me To Move Now, As It's Two Hours Until Opening Time" to play the game, whilst keeping the likes of shaz and your good self behind all through that.

 

It really isn't easy.

 

Point 5: People who are there with semi-feral children are few and far between (though often loud), and unlikely to be a part of the jobseeking element of Jobcentre Plus, unless they happen to be with the NDLP section.

 

It's not a case of 'brightening a day', or 'making it easier', but trying to explain why staff's days are dulled, and perhaps more so than people realise.

[happyhippy]

Does that cover it happyhippy

 

Didn't I answer this a bit back

[Tipex]

Right... lets just say the bus that i normally get to the job centre didnt turn up, and i miss my appointment? despite the fact i set off on time etc... as normal, i didnt control the fact the bus didnt turn up...

 

Just as with my situation i did not control the fact the motorway then the parkway were jammed. I set off with plenty of time to get back, it was unforeseen circumstances that stopped me getting to the job centre on time, not the fact i chose to go help an old lady.

 

You must work at the job centre or something. Idiot.

 

 

The problem the job centre have with me, the reason they are disputing my claim for JSA is not because i could not make my sign on time, its because i did not tell them i was "going away from home" for a few hours. That is the issue here.

 

To be fair if you had employment you couldn't leave town. It'd be expected of you to get to work on time, everyday.

[carly83]

To be fair if you had employment you couldn't leave town. It'd be expected of you to get to work on time, everyday.

 

have to argue though that if in employment he would be likey to be there for what 40 hours a week then free to do as he pleases for the other 128 hours!

 

his not commited a crime so surely its unfair to expect every hour of every day to be spent twiddling his thumbs waiting for replys from jobs when he could be proactive and living a normal life (ie say he got a job doing 4 days on 4 off type shift work), and he wasnt due to work untill 4pm on the monday so arranged to take his gran shopping in the morning is this not a normal thing for someone who is working? so why expect him not to because he has extra free time on his hands at the moment!