The dreaded work capability assessment

[truman]

I can see that if the trend towards increasing involuntary unemployment and underemployment continues, together with increasingly threadbare welfare policies that assume that vacancies are plentiful – compounded by government insistence that only poor skills, poor motivation and worker's 'inflexibility' is the key cause of unemployment - the outcome will inevitably be increasing hardship and, potentially, social unrest.

 

 

If you're going to cut and paste at least tell us where it's from

 

http://www.socresonline.org.uk/17/2/16.html

 

"This coalition government's social agenda is that public services in the areas of welfare and social care, merely 'crowd out' the voluntary, charitable and familial provision of support for those in need of various types of assistance, as well as undermining innate 'self reliance'"

 

"if the trend towards increasing involuntary unemployment and underemployment continues, together with increasingly threadbare welfare policies that assume that vacancies are plentiful – compounded by government insistence that only poor skills, poor motivation and worker's 'inflexibility' is the key cause of unemployment - the outcome will inevitably be increasing hardship and, potentially, social unrest (Gorz, 1999). "

[Brin56]

If you're going to cut and paste at least tell us where it's from

 

http://www.socresonline.org.uk/17/2/16.html

 

"This coalition government's social agenda is that public services in the areas of welfare and social care, merely 'crowd out' the voluntary, charitable and familial provision of support for those in need of various types of assistance, as well as undermining innate 'self reliance'"

 

"if the trend towards increasing involuntary unemployment and underemployment continues, together with increasingly threadbare welfare policies that assume that vacancies are plentiful – compounded by government insistence that only poor skills, poor motivation and worker's 'inflexibility' is the key cause of unemployment - the outcome will inevitably be increasing hardship and, potentially, social unrest (Gorz, 1999). "

 

 

Touche mon brave ! You are very quick .

 

Trying to keep postings succint and in line with what I also think.

 

Do you have a view on this issue? - I am learning here as I am going to be facing this path soon

[I1L2T3]

Blame is part of the game. Because they get money from the state disabled people are treated like an enemy.

[juniee]

i see certain people on here have gone very quiet maybe if they read a bit more and kept themselves more informed they would have a better balance of life instead of having a blinkered view.

I find it helps to read two or three different newspapers that have opposoing views to help me decide which stance that I want to be on.

as regards the WCA it is a farce your fate has been decided before you walk through that door

it is and always has been a cost cutting exercise

[southcoast]

Its ALL about saving money,they know full well that employers are not going to employ people with disabilities when they have able bodied east Europeans who will work the socks off for minimum wage and have no health issues.wake up.

[Anna B]

Atos has just been awarded two contracts worth a total of £400M to run the PIP(replacing DLA), The third contract has been awardeThe security company G4S is apparantly in line for this contract for Northern Ireland. It may also win the national trial of the PIP benefits, with both contracts worth an estimated £200Md to Capita - for Wales and parts of central England.

 

The awarding of these kind of contracts is part of the neoliberal democracy in a nutshell: we have trivial debates over minor issues by all the political Lib Lab Con parties which are basically basically pursuing the same pro-business policies regardless of formal differences and campaign debate.

 

So Democracy is permissible as long as the control of business is off-limits to popular deliberation or change; i.e., so long as it isn't democracy

 

This coalition government's social agenda is that public services in the areas of welfare and social care, merely 'crowd out' the voluntary, charitable and familial provision of support for those in need of various types of assistance, as well as undermining innate 'self reliance'.

 

I can see that if the trend towards increasing involuntary unemployment and underemployment continues, together with increasingly threadbare welfare policies that assume that vacancies are plentiful – compounded by government insistence that only poor skills, poor motivation and worker's 'inflexibility' is the key cause of unemployment - the outcome will inevitably be increasing hardship and, potentially, social unrest.

 

There are , for just a start, millions of search results that can be viewed on the growing awareness of the need to challenge, revoke and evolve a new political landscape capable of challenging this inhuman unsustainable ideology.

 

So we need to bat away these flies that reduce people's attempts in the posts to understand the implications of these policies, to just whinging benefit scroungers

 

Would this be the same G4S that made a total **** up of the security arrangements for the Olympic games?

 

Isn't it about time the taxpayer had some say in who gets these contracts. They're paying for it after all...

[Ghozer]

Its all well and good finding those who can work 'with support', but which employers will offer/provide the support and patience needed? Especially if theres more expense to them! - otherwise, will the govm'nt subsidise at least some of it for the employers?

 

Then theres the flip side, people like me who want to work, know they can do certain types of work and are willing to, but theres no where hiring or if there is they give it to someone 'more suited' (in other words, someone we dont have to give any support to)

 

Where are the checks and assessments on employers?

[Teddybare]

What can't they do?

 

Many things.

I've answered this at least twice now but the post seems to have disappeared.

If someone is otherwise physically healthy, just for example, but has mental issues that prevent them from working or in some cases even leaving the house, why should that person get 130£ a week whereas a person out actively looking for work only get 60-70£ a week? Any necessary additional requirements should be provided free of charge in stead of the extra money.

If the amount for everyone was enough to live on, there is no reason it shouldn't be equal for everyone. DLA forms have for a long time been reliant on the particular wording and as such Jobcentre advisors tell claimants to go and have it filled in at CAB. This surely is wrong.

If everyone got the same amount regardless there would be no need for all this whittling about "passing" the dreaded work capability assessment and it would put an end to false claimants. People could decide whether or not they were fit to work themselves.

[juniee]

so everytime i want something done i have to get permission from the goverment for this and then have get them to fill in a form to say that they have done this.

try thinking your ideas through properly

your idea would cost more money and cause more problems than it solves and no i do not think that the dole money is enough to live on and you are falling for the old tory game of divide and conquer

in the seventies it was the single parents fault ie if you worked you were not a good mother and if you did not you were a parasite now it seems the shift has turned onto the disabled a lot of whom have worked for many many years and due to illl health which in a lot of cases has been caused by thier work

if you are fit and healthy you do not need taxis to get around as a lot of disabled people do

wheelchairs, mobility scooters are not free they are very expensive items

luckily i can manage without these but not the taxis or do you want to take our indepence away never mind you can have a go at the pensioners as they get double the dole money see what i am trying to get at

this is the tory policy of putting one group against another

put the rich against the low paid because the rich think that their wages are too high and their shares are decreasing

[Teddybare]

Missed the point completely as usual. And yes if pensioners get double dole money to live on then everyone should get that amount. No means testing, no medical involvement, no bureaucracy = cheaper benefits system, no more whinging, no more thousands of benefit fraudsters and the units paid to find them.

Taxis only required for disabled folks? Jog on. Nobody likes the buses. They're not nice places. Doesn't stop even wheelchair users and blind people from using them.