Changing JSA allowance

[0742Sheff]

No, i'm not IDS and I did not say to treat people like criminals - sorry if my example has upset you. However, I do believe that people should have to do some form of work for the benefits they receive if they haven't found work themselves after x amount of time.

 

 

But that means the government would have to pay 1.7 million people the minimum wage for said work. If not they would be breaking their own law.

 

JSA is nowhere near the minimum wage.

 

Also. What would you suggest the government make these 1.7 million people do?. Clean pavements? Clear wasteland? Help in the community? shovel crap?.

In any scenario there would be way too many people and those people would be taking the jobs of workers that are already doing those jobs.

[T.J.]

But that means the government would have to pay 1.7 million people the minimum wage for said work. If not they would be breaking their own law.

 

JSA is nowhere near the minimum wage.

 

Also. What would you suggest the government make these 1.7 million people do?. Clean pavements? Clear wasteland? Help in the community? shovel crap?.

In any scenario there would be way too many people and those people would be taking the jobs of workers that are already doing those jobs.

 

 

 

People would work, at National Minimum Wage, for the number of hours that equals JSA and yes, clearing wasteland, cleaning pavements etc would be suitable work.

[INTERVIEWER]

People would work, at National Minimum Wage, for the number of hours that equals JSA and yes, clearing wasteland, cleaning pavements etc would be suitable work.

 

That would be just 11 hours per week then.

[chem1st]

Just a thought and not to start an argument, just wondered if this could work. with all the "cuts" going on, i thought why not limit the amount of time you could claim Job seekers allowance for upto 2 years. then you cannot re claim for say 1 year. that way it would stop all the people who fall out of school etc, coming into the country and going onto JSA and just live on benefits. reason i say this is i have seen the documents job seekers sign to claim JSA and they agree to accept any role above minimum wage and within 1 and a half hours travel distance. which i really dont believe people claiming do. and before anyone says it i have been on JSA before but did actively look and accept work to get on benefits. but think how much this would save as JSA would be cut by 33 % each year!!!

 

But could it work?

 

Unemployment is increasing and people are finding it hard to gain employment, especially the long term unemployed with little experience.

 

I know, why don't we make life harder for the unemployed!

 

I presume you are also in the 'higher rent now' band of people when it comes to housing, and would like to see a 50000% increase in the price of flour (bread) so that it becomes only a luxury of the bankers.

[chris1983]

Unemployment is increasing and people are finding it hard to gain employment, especially the long term unemployed with little experience.

 

I know, why don't we make life harder for the unemployed!

 

I presume you are also in the 'higher rent now' band of people when it comes to housing, and would like to see a 50000% increase in the price of flour (bread) so that it becomes only a luxury of the bankers.

 

even if you had little skills you cant tell me it would take you more than 2years to get a job in a food factory or Mcdonalds. yes lets make life harder for the general unemployed, especially the ones who sit on their backside out side of the cathedral supping cider and swearing infront of children then return to the shelter behind.

[fake]

As long as the same employment laws apply, then I would agree with you. This includes minimum wage.

 

I agree but the employment laws and others to do with employment are designed to protect the employed and do not apply in these cases as the person is classed as a "forced" volunteer. That means no insurance in the workplace, no minimum wage, cant join a union, no employment rights and some of the Human Rights Act also don't apply.

 

Quote by 0742sheff:

 

"The government aren't going to let people walk the streets with nothing at all."

 

Yes they are, especially those on a FND scheme. If they don't or cant comply with the rules they can be sanctioned for up to 26 weeks which means a complete loss of JSA benefits. IDS has already announce the end of any hardship allowance. There is also a Mandatory Work Related Activity for 4 weeks that all on FND must do without any payment.

 

People should realise that setting up a system whereby the unemployed work for benefits (workfare) will cost a lot of money especially as most will be short term jobs until they find work. The rise in unemployment will also make it cost more and even the DWP have stressed it don't work.

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/nov/13/workfare-and-costs-of-benefits

 

The costs would be to start with; the cost of kitting people out to comply with H&S (protective clothing/boots/gloves etc), the cost of training, the cost of travel and the cost of supervision/management of any scheme. There is also the cost of peoples jobs being lost because people on benefits will be doing their jobs.

 

Rant over..

[INTERVIEWER]

Not a bad idea then - leaves plenty of time for looking for a proper job, as well as doing some good (I assume the work involved would be community type stuff, rather than going into a factory or somesuch and taking a job that would otherwise have been available)

 

You obviously don't understand the Tory/Lib Dem intention behind 'workfare' - which is to punish the poor for their economic weakness and to make existing on benefits an intolerable ordeal.

 

Workfare will only push up the welfare bill (being hideously expensive to administer and run) whilst doing little to create employment.

[INTERVIEWER]

but are you seriously telling me someone on JSA couldnt find "any" job within 24 months, as the contract states they sign when they claim they are job seeking - they will accept any role above minimum wage and within 1.5 hours travel distance.

 

The problem is not the unemployed refusing to take jobs (which is actually only a very tiny minority) but employers refusing to employ the long term unemployed (people who have been out of work for six months or more).

 

We must legislate to force big employers (those who employ 100 workers or more) to recruit only those who have been in receipt of out of work benefits for at least 12 months - punishable by large fines and imprisonment for the bosses if they do not comply.

 

Banks should be forced to recruit from only the long term unemployed as a means to give something back to society for their destructive greed.

[0742Sheff]

 

Quote by 0742sheff:

 

"The government aren't going to let people walk the streets with nothing at all."

 

Yes they are, especially those on a FND scheme. If they don't or cant comply with the rules they can be sanctioned for up to 26 weeks which means a complete loss of JSA benefits. IDS has already announce the end of any hardship allowance. There is also a Mandatory Work Related Activity for 4 weeks that all on FND must do without any payment.

Rant over..

 

I am sorry but this will not happen imho. 'If' for whatever reason i was unemployed and i was told i was getting nothing for 26 weeks then i would be forced in to a corner. I would either find work (ideal), or i would go and turn to crime.

The fact is i have a family and if the government didn't provide for me i would do whatever it took to feed them.

 

The costs would be to start with; the cost of kitting people out to comply with H&S (protective clothing/boots/gloves etc), the cost of training, the cost of travel and the cost of supervision/management of any scheme. There is also the cost of peoples jobs being lost because people on benefits will be doing their jobs.

 

Pretty much what i was getting at in my post.

[Ms Macbeth]

What could be done to help/encourage the long term unemployed back into work? The problem didn't start when the Coalition took over as government, the clue is in 'long term'.

 

The point about the value of minimum wage agains JSA isn't really valid, because if income based JSA is someone's only cash income, then they will also be benefiting from having their rent paid, possibly another £60-£70, and their council tax £10-15 a week. Thats just a rough example of a single person who is renting fairly cheaply. Realistically then, they are getting benefits of around £140 a week. A family, for example, with two adults and two or more children obviously get far more. We don't really need to think about those on contribution based JSA as they are obviously recent workers (its only paid for 6 months).

 

I accept that jobs aren't easy to get for many people, but rather than say what shouldn't happen, why not come up with ideas of how to make the long term unemployed/never been employed more employable? And if it means they have to attend courses, or do voluntary work, then why not? I know when my OH, in his 50s, wanted to work after being ill for several years, the only way for him to get experience/references was to do some voluntary work, which he did - and he enjoyed it - and eventually got a job. He wasn't even getting JSA as I was earning.

 

Why do people not get motivated to do something that might have benefits in the long term?