Why do West Street job centre staff have to treat people like dirt?

[ricgem2002]

The bottom line here is that Job Centre staff, like other government departments, are supposed to be Civil Servants"! For years now they have generally been not civil and not "served" the public who pay their salaries.

It is quite common now among local councils, government quangos, police etc.

My daughter in law paid NI for thirty years before losing her job. They wouldn't pay her anything, not just for a period but for ever! Yes her husband was working but on a low wage.

Sorry but have no sympathy or time for the public sector after years of experience.

:rant:

your dil was robbed of her entitlement to 6 months of benefit(sorry don't know whats it called now ) did she appeal?

[Mecky]

I put to everyone who whinges on about the jobcentre.

 

If someone is rude to you - use the complaints process or even better on the day ask to see a manager and make your complaint in person.

 

Understand that the staff there have to put up with a lot of stuff you may not see when you happen to be there which isn't that great. Understand that they have to deliver what the Govt says - they get NO say in that at all. You may not like it and they most likely for the most part don't either. They are not there to sanction anyone by wrote, target or anything else but it;s a two way street. You don't do what you've signed up for, then you will get sanctioned

 

The staff can't change anything rules wise. The only way that gets changed is if you lobby MPs enough to get them to change the law. They make the laws, the civil service is there to carry them out like it or not. Moaning on here isn't going to get that changed with respect.

 

---------- Post added 27-07-2014 at 00:56 ----------

 

 

Ghozer - then complain through the official channels if you have been not treated as you'd like to be. We all wear name badges so shouldn't be difficult to identify. All you have to do is write in via the complaints process detailing what happened in your particular case. It's not that difficult and can be done via email.

 

I can tell you have never studied sociology and psychology, let alone politics

[Frederick1]

your dil was robbed of her entitlement to 6 months of benefit(sorry don't know whats it called now ) did she appeal?

She and her husband had a few goes at the Jpb Centre but they just kept "palming them off"!

Not being the "pushy" types they eventually let it go, so she spent four years unemployed and unpaid! All irrelevant now has he died June last year.

[AnthonyTapp]

Sanctioning people if they cant follow the rules is not treating them like dirt.

Not to say whether I think they are fair or effective.

 

As a family member of a job centre staff member who daily hears of claimants not doing it right ie not doing enough steps to cover the seekers agreement ,the easiest of which is to go on line and just go on the jobcentre page (yes that does count as one step )which is an easy 5 a week which some don't even manage bt they can do fb daily and other things I fly agree with the above comment

[Mr Bloke]

As a family member of a job centre staff member who daily hears of claimants not doing it right ie not doing enough steps to cover the seekers agreement ,the easiest of which is to go on line and just go on the jobcentre page (yes that does count as one step )which is an easy 5 a week which some don't even manage bt they can do fb daily and other things I fly agree with the above comment

You see, with respect, this could be the type of attitude people are complaining about.

 

I suspect that it's only easy to access the jobcentre page 5 times a week if you have internet access at home.

 

It's easy to assume that everyone is as computer literate as yourself.

 

The "If I can do it, then why can't they?" mentality, without really being interested as to why it is so difficult for some people.

[999tigger]

You see, with respect, this could be the type of attitude people are complaining about.

 

I suspect that it's only easy to access the jobcentre page 5 times a week if you have internet access at home.

 

It's easy to assume that everyone is as computer literate as yourself.

 

The "If I can do it, then why can't they?" mentality, without really being interested as to why it is so difficult for some people.

 

Except that is what each jsa claimant agrees to and signs for. They shouldnt sign and agree to what they dont understand. There are many free points of internet access such as libraries or many of the work programme providers where a person can get access to the internet. If they cant use the internet, then they should say so and go to a class where they can be taught how. That is not treating them like dirt. Expecting people to do something to look for a job is a separate issue as to whether sanctions are fair. It also doesnt amount to treating someone like dirt.

[AnthonyTapp]

You see, with respect, this could be the type of attitude people are complaining about.

 

I suspect that it's only easy to access the jobcentre page 5 times a week if you have internet access at home.

 

It's easy to assume that everyone is as computer literate as yourself.

 

The "If I can do it, then why can't they?" mentality, without really being interested as to why it is so difficult for some people.

 

I don't assume they have access neither does my family member, when I signed on for a time i didn't have home access to a home computer but I went to either the job centre which was a 2 mile each way walk or the library about the same distance in the opposite direction daily to get access and that wasn't in a city like sheffield with a lot more amenities ,also the claimants have signed a legal document stating they will do these things that can easily be changed to suit changing circumstances as and when they happen by simply talking to an advisor when they sign

 

And my family member goes out of there way to help claimants even doing things they aren't ment to do so they go away happy even if this does take time

[Mr Bloke]

Except that is what each jsa claimant agrees to and signs for. They shouldnt sign and agree to what they dont understand. There are many free points of internet access such as libraries or many of the work programme providers where a person can get access to the internet. If they cant use the internet, then they should say so and go to a class where they can be taught how. That is not treating them like dirt. Expecting people to do something to look for a job is a separate issue as to whether sanctions are fair. It also doesnt amount to treating someone like dirt.

Yeah, I agree with all that...

 

... but I think the problem here is that everyone seems to be being treated the same.

 

Not everyone wants to be or is capable of being internet savvy. Sending them on a course does not necessarily give them the confidence to go it alone and start applying for jobs online.

 

Does everyone that signs the jsa agreement by default agree to use the internet for job searches or is it possible to have that clause removed for those that don't like using the internet?

 

What happens if you don't sign the jsa agreement? Presumably you don't get anything?

 

So of course people are going to sign...

[AnthonyTapp]

Agreements are easy to change both with the amount of points agreed to do and the types of jobs by talking to an advisers ,as they understand things changed like when I was signing I couldn't afford to tax my van so couldn't look for certain jobs that I agreed to search for they can also change the distance you are expected to look for work within

[Mr Bloke]

Agreements are easy to change both with the amount of points agreed to do and the types of jobs by talking to an advisers ,as they understand things changed like when I was signing I couldn't afford to tax my van so couldn't look for certain jobs that I agreed to search for they can also change the distance you are expected to look for work within

... and presumably this is fully explained to people?

 

So, if agreements are easy to change, how come so many people get sanctioned?

 

Wouldn't it just be a case of needing to change the agreement to better suit the claimant's circumstances?