woodmally Posted April 21, 2015 Author Share Posted April 21, 2015 A good post. I think we also have to remember that the number of 'malingerers' is actually very small. The publicity they receive makes them seem far more numourous then they are. As for sanctions etc, I think you would get better results with more genuine help, rather than punishment. Self-esteem can be fragile, but essential in raising a persons chances of securing a job, yet current methods seem to be doing all they can to destroy it. Yes the number of mallingerers is very small however you are forgetting the impact they have. Do they sit at home all day watching tv and living a quiet life, No? They are out taking drugs getting drunk, getting into fights not to mention procreating babies they cannot afford to keep without us paying for them. So not only do they have a huge impace their numbers are rising. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Berberis Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 (edited) We don't punish criminals by starving them, yet we think it right to take the last little bit of income off some of the poorest people when they're unemployed. It's a damn disgrace. The thing is, to sign on you have to sign an agreement to do a number of things to get a job. If you fail, like any contract, you are in breach. Do you think that if there were no such thing as sanctions people would bother to look for work if they didn't want too? What would you do to make people, able to work but not willing, to look and apply for jobs and take them if offered? Edited April 21, 2015 by Berberis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronthenekred Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 The thing is, to sign on you have to sign an agreement to do a number of things to get a job. If you fail, like any contract, you are in breach. Do you think that if there were no such thing as sanctions people would bother to look for work if they didn't want too? As a last line of defense what action would you take towards those that breach the 'contract'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Berberis Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 As a last line of defense what action would you take towards those that breach the 'contract'? Why not answer the question I have asked instead of asking it back at me. What would you do to make people, able to work but not willing, to look and apply for jobs and take them if offered? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronthenekred Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 Why not answer the question I have asked instead of asking it back at me. What would you do to make people, able to work but not willing, to look and apply for jobs and take them if offered? Rather defensive:suspect: You didn't ask a question of me, you addressed it to Chris. I did ask a question of you though based on the 'contract'. If you are unable to answer just say, not difficult is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_Sleeps Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 The thing is, to sign on you have to sign an agreement to do a number of things to get a job. If you fail, like any contract, you are in breach. It's not an equal contract when the choice is between starvation and state benefits. A person isn't free to negotiate terms with DWP. Contract ethics is moot. Do you think that if there were no such thing as sanctions people would bother to look for work if they didn't want too? I don't think sanctions punish the people who don't want to work - they punish people who fail certain conditions. The mentally ill are much more likely to be sanctioned than the feckless. What would you do to make people, able to work but not willing, to look and apply for jobs and take them if offered? Honestly, nothing. It's not difficult for this small part of the population to be permanently useless. One cannot force them to have ambition, or force them to want to work, and thus all efforts to do so will be fruitless. Some people are just that way inclined. I don't think that the benefits system works at its best when it is punitive. Most people are having a hard enough time without sanctions taking away the small income they do get and leaving them queueing up at a food bank for their meals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 It's a contract with society, look for a job and be available for it and society ensures you don't starve. Don't look for a job and society leaves you to figure out how to stay alive on your own. That seems fair enough to me. Of course it's only fair enough if it correctly identifies the feckless and doesn't catch the unfortunate by accident, which is the real problem isn't it? I don't know much about the system, what kind of breaches exist, and which ones catch the wrong people? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ubermaus Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 The problem seems to be people being sanctioned for the smallest of things. Sometimes its DWP at fault. Sometimes the job seeker. And then what to do about job seekers having no money? because they need money to live and seek jobs. Its stick over carrot mentality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onewheeldave Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 I don't know much about the system, what kind of breaches exist, and which ones catch the wrong people? One is not turning up for DWP appointments. Seems fair enough- however, many have been sanctioned for not appearing at appointments they didn't know about. That's clearly not fair. The DWP sends it's post 2nd class, and, even at the best of times, it frequently arrives the day before an appointment- if the post is late, or it gets lost, the claimant will not know about the appointment: they will be sanctioned regardless. Pentcentage of claimants sanctioned between 2008 and 2012 was 19%. That's DWP figures abtained via a FOI request i.e. almost 1 fifth of all claimants got sanctioned. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/223287/foi_4383_2012.pdf Do you believe that 1/5th of all claimants are malingerers/lazy/stupid (I know some on here probably do, you appear to possess a degree of intelligence though), or, is there something deeply wrong with the DWP system? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olive Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 What's in the current contract you sign up to when you "agree" to the JSA terms? How many jobs do you need to apply for? Does it make any difference what kind of jobs you are going for To get to interview for my current job it took a fair few hours to work up the application, including a lot of research for the post. It wasn't a case of just churning the application out, not even a boiler-plate with variations job. How many of those in a week would you be expected to do? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now