mikem8634 Posted April 4, 2013 Share Posted April 4, 2013 I have previously, although I don't anymore. And I completely agree that physically demanding work is different to most retail/clerical type positions. However, someone being considered "fit to work" isn't black or white - they could be fit to work but only with reasonable adjustments. Has anybody claimed it is black or white? Do you have any response to the information I provided about ATOS? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnvqsos Posted April 4, 2013 Share Posted April 4, 2013 I have previously, although I don't anymore. And I completely agree that physically demanding work is different to most retail/clerical type positions. However, someone being considered "fit to work" isn't black or white - they could be fit to work but only with reasonable adjustments. I thought ATOS deemed a person fit to work or otherwise with no grey areas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikem8634 Posted April 4, 2013 Share Posted April 4, 2013 I thought ATOS deemed a person fit to work or otherwise with no grey areas. Good point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianthedog Posted April 4, 2013 Share Posted April 4, 2013 Has anybody claimed it is black or white? Do you have any response to the information I provided about ATOS? No, they haven't. However, it shouldn't need articulating that this is not a black and white process, should it? I didn't know you expected a response - all you did was tell me you'd previously written this elsewhere without explaining how these criticisms would affect the 900k people who dropped their spurious claims, which I'd been discussing. ---------- Post added 04-04-2013 at 14:05 ---------- Good point. So now it is black and white? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikem8634 Posted April 4, 2013 Share Posted April 4, 2013 No, they haven't. However, it shouldn't need articulating that this is not a black and white process, should it? No, it shouldn't and doesn't, so why did you? I didn't know you expected a response - all you did was tell me you'd previously written this elsewhere without explaining how these criticisms would affect the 900k people who dropped their spurious claims, which I'd been discussing. I quoted it as a response to you question about why some people may consider it a wheeze. Apologies if that did not suggest that I thought it warranted a response in relation to your general defence of ATOS. It was not intended in relation to the 900k which is why I did not refer to that aspect of the debate. Still, now you know, I shall await your response. So now it is black and white? Only for ATOS it seems, in particular in their inflexible assessment protocol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianthedog Posted April 4, 2013 Share Posted April 4, 2013 No, it shouldn't and doesn't, so why did you? I quoted it as a response to you question about why some people may consider it a wheeze. Apologies if that did not suggest that I thought it warranted a response in relation to your general defence of ATOS. It was not intended in relation to the 900k which is why I did not refer to that aspect of the debate. Still, now you know, I shall await your response. Only for ATOS it seems, in particular in their inflexible assessment protocol. Through contradicting yourself, you've completely and utterly lost me. I'm not defending ATOS, I'm supporting an intiative which has resulted in 900,000 fewer people claiming money to which they're not entitled. This was the point I was making in the post to gnvqsos - hence not really being interested in the post you made criticising ATOS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikem8634 Posted April 4, 2013 Share Posted April 4, 2013 Through contradicting yourself, you've completely and utterly lost me. I'm not defending ATOS, I'm supporting an intiative which has resulted in 900,000 fewer people claiming money to which they're not entitled. This was the point I was making in the post to gnvqsos - hence not really being interested in the post you made criticising ATOS. I am not contradicting myself. ATOS procedures rely on black and white adjudication (which you maintain you disagree with) in order to justify rejecting legitimate claims. You only seem to be crisicising black and white thinking when related to offering benefits (to cancer sufferers etc in your example) and not when refusing them. That does appear to be a contradiction. ATOS are a huge part of implementing the initiative you support so why are you not interested in their failings to implement it fairly? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lotusflower Posted April 4, 2013 Share Posted April 4, 2013 But what do you suggest? http://www.debtbombshell.com/ Rob the poor, the disabled, the already disadvantaged and all those people at the bottom of the income scale. Laud the millionaires, give them a 40 grand plus a year tax cut, reward massive failure at corporate level with equally massive bonuses and imprison any of the halfwits who have the temerity to complain. That should do it!...for starters at least. ---------- Post added 04-04-2013 at 14:46 ---------- Just as an aside to the IDS bashing... He also introduced the ATOS assessments for incapacity benefits claimants. Ahead of that coming into force 830k people dropped their claims. An idiot, or someone doing what is expected of them? Mmmm, like this you mean? https://www.facebook.com/pages/The-People-Vs-The-Government-DWP-and-Atos/430588573684275 ---------- Post added 04-04-2013 at 14:49 ---------- I know one lazy sod that has been scrounging for years that decided to come off incapacity benefit before he was found out. Prove it! I've come across claims like this before. Usually they are based on suspicion alone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted April 4, 2013 Share Posted April 4, 2013 Prove it! I've come across claims like this before. Usually they are based on suspicion alone. It’s not something that can be proved, it’s just something that I know, it’s supported by other people that know of similar people, which is backed up by the amount of people that have chosen to stop claiming or have been stopped from claiming. What many have been saying for years has been proven to be right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister M Posted April 4, 2013 Share Posted April 4, 2013 Hasn't this guy already been shown to have lied and so this WHOLE thread is now pointless. I think the lie didn't pertain to him living on £53 per week but that he lied on his CV Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.