Govt loses appeal over back-to-work scheme

[Leah-Lacie]

Quote:

 

Originally Posted by go4it

 

 

I take it your friend was out of work.

 

The placement got her back in work.

 

Why did she feel conned?

 

I assume she was lead to believe that she would be paid a proper wage for the trial period but then found out it wasn't.

 

The fact that she ended up with a paid f/t job there is just pure luck. Had a staff member not left she would have done the 3 months working for a PRIVATE company, getting paid by the taxpayer and then found herself back at the jobcentre.

 

I have no problem with people being asked to work for their benefit but it MUST be limited to minimum wage LAW.

 

Eg, Someone aged 22 on JSA alone, NMW is £6.31 and JSA is £56.80, so to fit the individual should not be expected to work more than 9 hours a week.

 

Also these places should NOT be in the private sector. Private companies should not be profiting from what is essentially free labour for them since it's the taxpayer paying the benefits to the individual.

 

It was exactly that - the Jobcentre led her to believe it was an interview for a fully paid 'proper' job, so she was unhappy to find out she was working 30 hour weeks for 3 months for her income support. She mentioned getting paid about "2 pound odd an hour" to me. Her daughter is 5 and at school at Longley, they live near Pitsmoor, she was having to take her daughter to school early and leave her at breakfast club, get back into town, work 6 hours and get back to pick her up, just scraping it in time.

 

 

Posted from Sheffieldforum.co.uk App for Android

[go4it]

How did the Osbourne family make their fortune?

 

I haven't got the time to check - but I believe it is wallpaper.

 

---------- Post added 31-10-2013 at 11:46 ----------

 

It was exactly that - the Jobcentre led her to believe it was an interview for a fully paid 'proper' job, so she was unhappy to find out she was working 30 hour weeks for 3 months for her income support. She mentioned getting paid about "2 pound odd an hour" to me. Her daughter is 5 and at school at Longley, they live near Pitsmoor, she was having to take her daughter to school early and leave her at breakfast club, get back into town, work 6 hours and get back to pick her up, just scraping it in time.

 

 

Posted from Sheffieldforum.co.uk App for Android

 

There is rarely a fully paid job these days from the start. Most will have a temp phase or probation period. But it got her a job, and even if the position hadn't materialised she would have been in a better position to apply for other jobs.

[Leah-Lacie]

She didn't mind doing the back to work placement, what annoyed her really was the way JCP made out like they had set her an interview up for what was a fully paid job. Once she attended the 'interview' where she was basically told she could have the 'job' it was too late to say she didnt want it (wrong hours etc) or she would be sanctioned. She felt that was wrong of them.

However, she is very pleased to have a job now, she had been trying for a long time, even trying to set up her own business in the time she was out of work, which didnt quite manage to take off.

If a staff member at B&M hadn't left though, what would the chances have been of them keeping her on? When they can get more 'free labour' from the jobcentre instead?

 

 

Posted from Sheffieldforum.co.uk App for Android

[Manlinose]

How did the Osbourne family make their fortune?

 

 

his father was the co-founder of Osborne & Little - a posh people's wallpaper manufacturer

 

if i remember correctly - george osborne is a beneficiary of a trust fund that, amongst other things, owns a chunk of the shares in the company

 

but i think the profits of the company have been pretty poor in recent years

[Mecky]

if you actually read my post you will see that is exactly not what i am saying

 

So what are you saying then? Wouldn't it be better if you were clear about what you're saying rather than just making a sweeping statement?

[alchresearch]

Just watches the news story, Cait Reilly is the young lady who went to court.

 

Complained that she had to work at Poundland. She was volunteering at a museum or something and thought that was sufficient to earn her job seekers allowance.

 

Spot on. It was covered in the last thread about her that she didn't like the fact having to go to Poundland interfered with her volunteering at the pen museum.

 

While volunteering is very admirable, it shouldn't come before job seeking.

 

This post sums it up nicely:

 

She was working as a volunteer at the Birmingham Museum of Pens. She wasn't exactly helping cancer patients get to hospital. She wanted to be offered a job there but none had materialised but she seems to think that she should be allowed to work there as long as she likes, supported by benefits in the hope that at some point in the future they might offer her a job.

 

As does this:

 

She was doing a work placement more suitable to find a proper job. In fact it appears to have worked as I read that little Miss Prissy is now working at a supermarket.

 

So those valuable skills she learnt at the shop floor of Poundland worked then.

 

Play in the pen museum in your own time not on taxpayer funding.

Whatever judge the EC had they need their head banging to knock some sense into it.

 

and:

 

Why can't the pen museum offer valuable work experience?

 

Just looked at the website. The range of experience looks greater than two weeks of stacking shelves at poundland could provide.

 

and:

 

The way that I would see the volunteering angle is that "The Pen Museum is operated entirely by volunteers" in any case. One would assume that the other volunteers have all the same calls on their time as she does, except that she didn't have any work to go to.

 

She's really pushing it to claim that she should have been at The Pen Musuem instead of Poundland (or somewhere else).

 

Whether she should have been sent to Poundland is another thing altogether. If she genuinely picked up valuable work skills there, then she should appreciate that. Whether she would pick up any valuable work skills by doing extra volunteering at The Pen Museum is very much open for debate.

 

As for Poundland / Jobcentre / Government, a reasonable compromise would for Poundland (or whoever) to pay her an amount equal to benefits plus expenses, unless they can demonstrate that they are giving her training worth more than the value of her benefits.

 

Putting Poundland aside, there are lots of employers out there that take part in these schemes and take them seriously, not just as a source of cheap labour. That should be encouraged and integrated properly into the benefits / job seeking system.

 

From what I've heard in reports, I'd not be very keen to have her on my staff if she turned up for an interview with me.

[Resident]

 

There is rarely a fully paid job these days from the start. Most will have a temp phase or probation period. But it got her a job, and even if the position hadn't materialised she would have been in a better position to apply for other jobs.

 

I started my new job 6 weeks ago. I got full pay from day 1 which was the start of 2 weeks in-classroom training.

[Manlinose]

So what are you saying then? Wouldn't it be better if you were clear about what you're saying rather than just making a sweeping statement?

 

"the benefit system should ensure that they are not worse off as a consequence of doing so"

 

what is not clear about the above statement?

 

if someone takes a job and, as a consequence, they lose benefits that makes them financially as a whole worse off, the benefits system should ensure that their income is at least as much as they would get if they hadn't taken a job

 

no-one coming off benefits and into a job should be financially worse off as a result