Don't Lose Your Job

[Atheist-Lite]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011 ... -sanctions

Rising numbers of vulnerable jobseekers are being tricked into losing benefits amid growing pressure to meet welfare targets, a Jobcentre Plus adviser has told the Guardian.

A whistleblower said staff at his jobcentre were given targets of three people a week to refer for sanctions, where benefits are removed for up to six months. He said it was part of a "culture change" since last summer that had led to competition between advisers, teams and regional offices.

"Suddenly you're not helping somebody into sustainable employment, which is what you're employed to do," he said. "You're looking for ways to trick your customers into 'not looking for work'. You come up with many ways. I've seen dyslexic customers given written job searches, and when they don't produce them – what a surprise – they're sanctioned. The only target that anyone seems to care about is stopping people's money.

"'Saving the public purse' is the catchphrase that is used in our office … It is drummed home all the time – you're saving the public purse. Feel good about stopping someone's money, you've just saved your own pocket. Its a joke."

The claims came as the big businesses handed contracts to get the long term jobless into worktoday said the government should privatise jobcentres so that their firms could work with people who have been jobless for less than a year.

Statistics from the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) show the total number of cases where people have lost their benefits has soared since the beginning of 2010 to 75,000 in October, the latest month available. The figures also reveal the number of claimants with registered disabilities being cut off has more than doubled to almost 20,000 over the same period.

This follows a change in the rules in April last year where sanctions were extended to claimants who were late for jobcentre interviews and other less serious offences.

(continued)

[egbert]

A whistleblower said staff at his jobcentre were given targets of three people a week to refer for sanctions, where benefits are removed for up to six months. He said it was part of a "culture change" since last summer that had led to competition between advisers, teams and regional offices.

"Suddenly you're not helping somebody into sustainable employment, which is what you're employed to do," he said. "You're looking for ways to trick your customers into 'not looking for work'. You come up with many ways. I've seen dyslexic customers given written job searches, and when they don't produce them – what a surprise – they're sanctioned. The only target that anyone seems to care about is stopping people's money.

"'Saving the public purse' is the catchphrase that is used in our office … It is drummed home all the time – you're saving the public purse. Feel good about stopping someone's money, you've just saved your own pocket. Its a joke."

And how else do you suppose we're gonna pay for THE ROYAL WEDDING?

[PsychoSerenity]

It's incredibly depressing but it doesn't surprise me at all. When I first signed on they mentioned they were tightening up on the rules, seemingly with no consideration that those failing to comply most likely need more assistance, not to be cut off. It's not like anyone wants to live off JSA, it's barely enough to get by as it is - if I didn't have savings to fall back on I don't know what I'd do.

When I was first signing on they always did a quick search on their system; They picked out, relatively randomly out of the three broad categories I'd had to initially give, two or three vacancies. They gave me a matter of seconds to scan them and see if there was any reason why I couldn't do them, then printed them out. To start with I thought they were just trying to be helpful, after all I can search the same systems myself online - then a few months in, I found out that whatever they print out for us is stored on their system and we can face sanctions if we don't apply for those same jobs - regardless of whether there's a legitimate reason (eg no personal transport) why we can't take them, never mind whether we want them or not. It may have been only that I'd applied to enough more suitable jobs of my own accord, and luck that they didn't check up on which jobs they were, that meant I didn't get referred for a sanction.

Now that I know that I'm certainly not going to let them push me into applying for jobs that are no good - at the very least I can demand more time to look over the details before they add them to the system and print them out - I'm not sure if I'm allowed to tell them that I'd rather search for myself at home, though one week a friendly helpful old lady working there suggested to me that I do that so I have more time to decide - but that was her call not mine.

Either way I expect that whatever job I get to get off benefits will be something I'll want to quit as soon as I can get something better. After nearly four months searching there's only been two jobs I've been genuinely excited about.

Anyway this has mostly turned into me ranting and whining, and many (but certainly not all) of the staff at the jobcentre have been helpful towards me - but basically being on JSA is NOT an enjoyable experience, and hearing that some of them are getting targets to get people off JSA without getting them work is disgraceful.

[Santa_Claus]

This follows a change in the rules in April last year where sanctions were extended to claimants who were late for jobcentre interviews and other less serious offences.

(continued)

I don't count turning up late as "less serious". that costs money. If someone can't even be arsed to even turn up on time, why should they get cash? To my mind it says in black and white that the person is not looking for a job. And therefore they don't qualify for JSA. What they do qualify for is the "sitting on arse day time TV allowance" - that'll be a different dept.

Disabled is a tricky one, me is presently looking at employing a long term disabled person (physically he is f#cked and he ain't getting better - but has a useful brain) I will even be willing to re-design that firm to allow him to work from home on hours that entirely suit him and his needs - and perfectly willing to wait on him to play himself back in to the working game (one of the things about being long term physically sick is that it sucks the mental life out of you as well). Although I am after his brain, he ain't the cleverest person - which is part of his use . and for me the attraction is he is cheaper. and loyalty (that and choices are / will still be limited).

But trying to work out the rules so he doesn't lose his benefits immediately, and more importantly doesn't lose 3 years of "work" proving he is sick to get to the accepted level of sick - is proving problematic. to be honest I don't want any money from the Govt. I (and he) just needs certainty that if this job didn't work out for him, he doesn't go back to being fully able bodied and then spend the next few years re-proving he is physically f#cked.

The good news is that I seem to have discovered a grant that means I could shoot him for some cash if he doesn't breed well. or that could be the wrong form

As a company vehicle I was thinking of giving a him half a Dalek

[Atheist-Lite]

I don't see the schizophrenics, bi-polars and autistics all following these rules, attending appointments on time etc so I guess they'll be of no fixed abode in the community once they've been moved onto JSA over the next few years?