Ipswich Unemployed Action.

Campaigning for Unemployed Rights.

Workfare: BBC, Well-Fed Loafers Have Their Say.

with 43 comments

‘Make ’em work’ – could workfare work for Britain?

Lazy Loafer Eamonn Walsh says,

“The question of whether those claiming benefits should have to work for their money has long polarised political opinion, to such an extent that it has often been pushed to the political margins.

However, this week the former head of the CBI, Lord Digby Jones, told Panorama that he thought the time was right for the introduction of workfare – as the plan is often called.

Lord Jones actually took a step further than most in claiming that if he were a viewer at home, Panorama’s report on the young unemployed would make him so angry that he would want to starve some of the long-term unemployed back into work.”

Something ol’ jowelly blubber-guts is unlikely to do in the immediate future.

Digby Jones after a Good Feed.

“He added that he thought he was in step with the British public’s thinking on the subject.

Workfare is of course an alternative to the social welfare system that operates in the UK and is rooted in the US of the early 1970s.”
Yes, it is a system with earlier roots: the workhouse.

“In the UK, as long as people are demonstrating that they are actively seeking employment then – if eligible – they receive their benefits.”

In many US states – and indeed parts of Australia and Canada – unemployed have to take jobs – often in the public or voluntary sector – to continue to earn their benefits. If they don’t accept an offer of work, then they don’t receive their payments.”

Do they get paid for this? What do people getting real wages think abo0ut having the workless do their jobs?

“Panorama went to McDowell County, West Virginia in the United States for a programme broadcast on 7 April 1986 to investigate the workfare system operating there.”

Another jaunt for the loafers who ‘work’ for the BBC.

“There, they found workfare employees in almost every area of the public sector, from patient day care in health centres and residential homes, to street cleaning to, perhaps most surprisingly, walking the beat as police officers, able to do everything a regular police officer could do – except carry a gun.”

No doubt Deputy Dawg puts ’em in irons if they get uppity and ask for some pay.

“What Panorama also ‘discovered’ was a system that appeared to be working successfully.

The kind of well-nourished ponce who did this ‘research’ probably never let off sipping mint julips with the good ol’ boys who told them this.

“Those employed claimed that workfare gave them dignity and a sense of self-worth from working for their benefits and the local mayor spoke of the contribution made to the local economy and the public good.”

We bet that Deputy Dawg was close by when this was said.

“Workfare was not without its critics. Opponents claimed that it was simply a source of cheap labour and that it actually stymied opportunity for the unemployed.”

Strike a light! Amazing. Some of the inhabitants of Houndstown in McCounty sweating on the chain-gang would like some real pay! Hot diggery-dog!

“But its popular appeal and apparent economic sense made it a vote-winner and a form of workfare was introduced nationally in the US in 1996 under Bill Clinton.”

“It remains to be seen whether workfare will be introduced in the UK after the election, but with unemployment continuing to rise and the need for public spending cuts now generally accepted, it might prove to be a tempting option for future government”

It bleeding well is going to be introduced. No doubt about that.

 

(from Here. )

Advertisements

Written by Andrew Coates

April 29, 2010 at 9:49 am

43 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Well, its the case of taxpayers’ disgust at the benefits system but more to the point paying for something where you are not (or feel like) getting anything back.

    Almost all (if not all) taxpayers receive benefit sometime in their lives:- be it child benefit, tax credits or even pension when reaching retirement age.

    There will always be the jealousy over paying for others… and this is what happens all the time in a Government system like ours.

    * Why pay in for the NHS… when you have never even been in hospital?

    * Why pay in for Social Security… when you personally receive no support from it?

    * Why pay in for MPs… when they never do anything to help you and fiddle their expenses?

    * Why pay in, just for the Government to pay EU membership which subsidizes poorer EU countries (which doesn’t benefit anyone in the UK)?

    * Why pay in for your regional police force (part of council tax)… who you don’t respect, do not have any faith in and are only basically paying to be arrested or unfairly detained having your civil liberties eroded?

    We can of course flip it to: taxpayers funding acts of terrorism and war etc. but we wont go there.

    I like the workfare assumption of getting something for something – something which I sit on the fence of… for example: if you do not have enough NI contributions, you cant claim JSA (CB); if you do not meet the criteria for JSA (IB) then you cant claim JSA. Perhaps, a third option of doing work without meeting all criteria could be considered.

    But this workfare idea is still on the old model of the work-less throughout generations of families… a rare problem today in % terms – something which DWP fails to target in order to bring in the wide policies affecting everyone.

    For a person like myself, workfare kills any opportunity of employment and I do fear many people killing themselves because of it.

    First you are branded with it on your CV interchangeably with someone who had done Community Service – be difficult to leave 6 months unemployment gaps in there. Secondly, you are no longer able to seek work… with the 10 hours jobsearch activities as “optional” on clients needs.

    As a jobseeker for quite some while… its not as easy as ring fencing a period of time to do jobsearch and expect to get employment.

    Primarily, you need to be available for office hours… Monday-Friday 9am to 5.00pm and you must have a greater availability than just one day or morning/afternoon: this makes it somewhat impossible to properly seek employment through workfare.

    The internet websites are available 24/7 – which you could do at home in your own time. You can’t however call for an application form/informal chat at 2am in the morning.

    Secondly, you need to complete application forms and written applications (with CV) in the daytime. This is typically a persons optimum time: when they are working office hours, its going to be difficult to do a good job in the evening or at night when tired from a days hard work. And yes… by then you would have missed the last post.

    Thirdly, deadlines… obviously varies on number of jobs and the industry of the local labour market but you should be aiming to apply for as many jobs as possible which you are capable of doing while spending a lot of time on them to get them up to a great standard. I find jobs normally have a deadline of 2 weeks average: some are as short as a week and some 3-4 weeks.

    If the job has a deadline for say 2 weeks… picking up the job advert at the end of the week – defined as your window of opportunity by your workfare provider – will stick you to a major disadvantage; especially if you have to call them for an application form. This means you will receive it in a few days time: if its a Thursday or Friday then perhaps not until next Monday or Tuesday. Obviously no time to complete it while doing workfare so you wait and bring it to your workfare provider on your next Thursday or Friday session… when the deadline is Friday its too bad you have missed it. Possible on Thursday session however providers are slow to post and first class isn’t always next day delivery.

    Likewise a job which requires a written application and has a week deadline… although you don’t have to request an application form you will still have to wait for the session to complete the letter hoping it will arrive on time. “Early bird gets the worm” doesn’t apply with jobs… however, its important to make sure it gets there for the deadline – you should allow a margin for postal delays.

    So now, after workfare its likely 2.5 years unemployment… and you think someone will give you a job? lol!

    Employers hate a) a person who hasn’t currently got a job and b) specifically a person unemployed for longer than a month… some employers will give people a chance but not normally for those over 6 months unemployment.

    Flexible New Deal

    April 29, 2010 at 11:33 am

  2. Flexy, you’ve hit the nail on the head when you say, “For a person like myself, workfare kills any opportunity of employment”.

    It will be a real stigma: we will be a class of serfs under the thumb of others.

    How are we going to get a proper job when we’ve branded like that?

    Andrew Coates

    April 29, 2010 at 11:52 am

  3. Direct action, anyone?

    Workfare will be impossible if its administrative centres are reduced to smoking ruins.

    Dan Owen

    April 29, 2010 at 3:03 pm

  4. A few years ago they tried to starve many younsters in Lowestoft into work, but rather than either get that elusive job that untill now had been avoiding them or lay down in the street and starve to death like good little boys and please Lord Digby all that happend was they kicked off a massive crime wave, as supermarkets soon wised up to them their only imediate alternative was to go and burgle peoples homes for food, So a load of innocent people who just happend to have the misfortune of already living in the same deprived area get their homes burgled thanks to government policey.

    No doubt Lord Digby approves of the many youngsters who have taken things a few steps further and don’t sign on at all as they have other income from drug dealing etc and don’t want the restraints/ attention caused by signing on.
    This governments present actions are just sowing the seeds for organisted crime to rule our most deprived areas in a decades time as whole statas of society are being villanised and dismissed by repeated governments. So organised crime will fill the vacum. If you don’t believe me can anyone imagine “Benefit Busters” being filmed in Naples or Solntsevo?

    lowestoft's finest

    April 29, 2010 at 3:18 pm

  5. “starve some of the long-term unemployed back into work”.

    anyone who takes this view does not deserve to be held in any position,quoting something like this on broadcast television is not a credible thing to do and shows nothing more then a concentration camp figure with distorted ideas’ and hide no solutions’.

    this goes to highlight the character that has the governments and city’s ear,leading to state the country has now found itself in,of course they will still clap about all this around a banquet table while joe public has to stomach the consequences’ with high unemployment,total disregard in peoples well being only hold “a what good are they in the workplace view” ignoring other needs and trivialising peoples problems’ while ignoring the truth through tunnel vision, and hide the devastated lives.
    an economy that has been in bad shape for a long time with severe underlying problems has been pushed to one side instead trying to mask the causes by printing more money and creating more economic problems’,while eager to highlight argentina it came as a shock to many when scenes similar appeared on uk high streets.
    those combined with unrealistic expectations all combine to to bring about unsustainable debt levels’,perhaps lord digby might have been wiser to focus on these,and solutions to them (if there was any).

    as for the bbc these can be dealt with by following the guides here.

    http://www.bbctvlicence.com/

    i am glad to say i have dealt with this organisation some time ago.

    when polices fail its always been time to focus attention on those that are forced to claim state benefits’,while unemployment is out of control slurs prevail on those effected by it consequences’ it is only then those that have been affected come to realise the treatment handed out to the less fortunate.

    ken

    April 29, 2010 at 7:29 pm

  6. Sgt Major ‘Hang em and Flog em’ Jones spouting his usual rubbish.

    Funny A4e Photos

    April 29, 2010 at 9:40 pm

  7. I came across the website of Ipswich Community Radio yesterday.

    The site said they’re always looking for people to go out an do intereviews or features on anything from local bands to Jobseekers Allowance.

    Here’s the link: http://www.icrfm.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&task=blogcategory&id=5&Itemid=10

    Funny A4e Photos

    April 30, 2010 at 10:50 am

    • We link to it.

      Does anyone know anyone who ever listens to it?

      I note, btw, that Lord Digby Jones now reads this site and calls himself “Uncle jim”

      2010/04/29 at 9:04 pm “Make the lazy scum work for their benefits instead of sitting on their fat arses all day”

      Andrew Coates

      April 30, 2010 at 11:36 am

      • Lord Digby is an “Uncle Tom” not an “Uncle Jim”.

        lowestoft's finest

        April 30, 2010 at 11:57 am

  8. Sorry, didn’t know you linked to it or anything about the station. But thought it might be a great opportunity for someone local to get the ball rolling in the fight against workfare.

    Funny A4e Photos

    April 30, 2010 at 12:38 pm

  9. If the young unemployed were to boil this fat fooker (providing they could find a pot big enough lol), throw in some fresh herbs and a few kilos of salt and there would be enough to feed them for goodness knows how long lol

    reggie

    April 30, 2010 at 12:50 pm

    • Spot On !! It would be interesting to know in real life how many unemployed 20 somethings (other than Princes Harry and William) Lord Digby actualy knows before we get a program of his “expert” oppinion on the subject.

      I sincerely hope he is an expert on 20 something unemployment as his expertness as a buisnessman looks decisevly dodgy, as any buisnessman other than Lord Digby and Gerard Ratner realises you don’t start off by rubbishing the product you are promoting.

      So how is going on on TV and slagging off all the unemployed 20 somethings he now wants employers to employ going to go down? Other than making it far less likely than before he opend his mouth?.

      lowestoft's finest

      April 30, 2010 at 6:18 pm

  10. I get the impression that old triple chins is jealous of of those guys, probably cos they are having sex with 20-somethings without having to pay for it, eh Digby 🙂 Why do these evil old fookers always want to make life a misery for the young.

    reggie

    April 30, 2010 at 12:56 pm

  11. Is the same Digby Jones who when he was a director of iSoft were busy ripping of the NHS?

    Shame on the BBC for giving mouthpiece of Big Business airtime to to peddle his insidious propaganda. If the BBC wants to play at this game, maybe we should go the whole hog and privatise this propaganda machine into a black hole in space.

    Workfare for All! and the includes Digby Jones, and the likes of Grape Vine, Vivian Shite and all the other assorted BBC parasites.

    Oracle

    April 30, 2010 at 1:06 pm

  12. Ah, Dear Old Digby, the Lord of False and Misleading Reasoning. So lets get this straight Digby, if we all work for nothing, thereby “reducing employer costs”, employers will in turn “create more jobs”, these new “reduced cost” employees will create “more demand”, thereby we will all be filthy rich. Something doesn’t quite stack up there, Digby, don’t you think.

    Has this hobbling embarrassment to a lump of lard EVER done a day’s REAL work in his ENTIRE privileged life? Its time to put lardy arse to useful and productive work, boil him down and “manufacture” him into bars of soap. End of.

    Raw Deal

    May 1, 2010 at 11:52 am

    • I, along with my sister and a few friends all posted our CV to Reed’s website. We ALL received a call from “Kay Lopez” of “Reed Specialist” at the “Harrow office” regarding this vacancy for an “Executive Fundraiser based in Millwall”. It did seem strange the “looking for a person to start work initially for 12 weeks {sic}.. er.. or longer with a view to going permanent on a salary of 18,000… er… 17 and a half… er 17 to 17 and a half”. [sic]

      I did ‘phone “Kay” back to “discuss this in further detail” as requested. For a moment I thought that I had won the X-Factor, my dream job or at least that is the way “Kay” was tried to sell it. “Kay” made no further mention of salary. When pressed she admitted that this would be unpaid for the “initial” period and then went on to say that “it is best viewed as a mini-internrship” which “would hopefully extend beyond the initial 12 weeks”. As if I was expected to feel grateful!

      Reed are in effect advertising vacancies at salaries that they have absolutely no intention of paying.

      What are Reed and their ilk being allowed to get away with this?

      I am a graduate with a good degree from a good university, so it is not just the unemployed that are being exploited.

      What a shocking state of affairs!

      Regards,

      Sarah

      Sarah Morriarty

      May 8, 2010 at 10:14 am

  13. I received an interesting mis-dialled answerphone message from Reed Specialist

    “Hi this is a message for **. This is ** at Reed Specialist. I’ve reviewed your CV and have pulled a vacancy for an Executive Fundraiser in **. They are looking for someone to work for 6 weeks approximately with a view to going permanent on a salary of 20,000.. 19 and half.. 19 to 19 and a half. I’m just calling to check your availability and would like to to call me back to discuss this vacancy in more detail.”

    What exactly does this mean? Are Reed Specialist and this employer expecting someone to work for six weeks (approximately) for nothing? At what salary? “With a view to going permanent”?

    NO TO WORKFARE

    May 1, 2010 at 1:24 pm

    • I, along with my sister and a few friends all posted our CV to Reed’s website. We ALL received a call from “Kay Lopez” of “Reed Specialist” at the “Harrow office” regarding this vacancy for an “Executive Fundraiser based in Millwall”. It did seem strange the “looking for a person to start work initially for 12 weeks {sic}.. er.. or longer with a view to going permanent on a salary of 18,000… er… 17 and a half… er 17 to 17 and a half”. [sic]

      I did ‘phone “Kay” back to “discuss this in further detail” as requested. For a moment I thought that I had won the X-Factor, my dream job or at least that is the way “Kay” was tried to sell it. “Kay” made no further mention of salary. When pressed she admitted that this would be unpaid for the “initial” period and then went on to say that “it is best viewed as a mini-internrship” which “would hopefully extend beyond the initial 12 weeks”. As if I was expected to feel grateful!

      Reed are in effect advertising vacancies at salaries that they have absolutely no intention of paying.

      What are Reed and their ilk being allowed to get away with this?

      I am a graduate with a good degree from a good university, so it is not just the unemployed that are being exploited.

      What a shocking state of affairs!

      Regards,

      Sarah

      ..

      Sarah Morriarty

      May 8, 2010 at 10:16 am

    • Executive Fundraiser my arse…. you’ll be stood around all day long in the town centre with a random charity emblazoned on your back accosting members of the public and asking them to sign up. I pass these folk all the time, didn’t think they got paid much, but this is taking the biscuit. Don’t think anyone will be eating biscuits on this kind of money. Surprised that anyone lasts 6 weeks let alone 12 in this job, looks quite a high turnover gig.

      Red Hot Chilli

      May 8, 2010 at 3:21 pm

  14. Kay Lopez

    Millwall

    NO TO WORKFARE

    May 1, 2010 at 1:29 pm

  15. It was they are “looking for someone to start working for six weeks…”, as if the salary kicked in after you had been working for “six weeks” “approximately”. To mean it sounds like a scam to have someone working for six weeks (and then longer) or until such times as Reed Specialist find another mug to work for nothing all the while dangling the carrot of a salary. Otherwise they would have stated “starting on a salary” off. I wonder how many other vacancies that Reed are offering have a indeterminate time period before the salary kicks in?

    NO TO WORKFARE

    May 1, 2010 at 1:41 pm

  16. “looking for someone to work for 6 weeks approximately with a view to going permanent on a salary of 20,000.. 19 and half.. 19 to 19 and a half”

    Means either:

    a) 6 week temporary job @ salary pro rata – possibly permanent if you are the right candidate

    b) 6 week temporary job fixed contract without any real chance of becoming permanent (just to get you interested)

    c) rolling contract… (i.e. not permanent)

    d) 6 week paid trial… to be permanent at approx £14,000 annual salary when the client succeeds

    As for an “Executive Fundraiser” I have to say a 6 week ring fenced probationary period contract is rather short. Such a role would have high expectancies… this means if you dont bring in the targeted revenue you are out of the job.

    Its approx £385 week without deductions… so 6 weeks is around £2,310 w/out deductions plus the employer’s NI contributions bill.

    Basically, its a temporary 6 week fundraising vacancy… if you can meet targets plus make enough money for a £20,000 annual salary on top you might get an extension.

    This is unlikely, if the organisation can only commit to around £2,500 capital for this role its unlikely it will be anything major. All charities etc. have restricted funds and reserves – if income was an issue – they would have to dip into such money to increase the income – if they do not want to commit to more than 6 weeks (remember with fundraising occuring you don’t need the £20k upfront and people are normally paid 2-4 weeks in arrears) it clearly shows they do not intend it being permanent or anything more than short term.

    Flexible New Deal

    May 2, 2010 at 9:35 am

    • NO WAY have these fookers got any intention of ponying up…. the $$charity$$ will get some freelabour and reed will get their $$bounty$$ I’d tell Kay Lopez to go take a flying fuck!!

      Red Hot Chilli

      May 8, 2010 at 3:26 pm

  17. Digby Jones the fat cunt talks shite!

    Trouble is these ‘tax breaks’ habitually just see the money going to the owner/shareholders and not into creating jobs. If the firm was doing enough business they would employ more (if available) naturally.

    It’s the ‘theory’ behind ‘trickle down’ economics/tax policy beloved in the early 90s.

    Interesting to note in today’s Times the 1st leader berates the idea of reducing the tax burden on the poorer (altering the lower tax band) and increasing it on the better off (CGT increase, no extra IHT money) whereas getting the money in at the bottom is what you need. The poor are more likely to buy than the rich. That is a better way to fuel the economy.

    Chinese and Indian (or similar) wage costs are likely to be substantially lower then the UK for a long, long time anyway – that’s why outsourcing happens. Ask the shareholders if they’ll accept a smaller dividend to keep jobs in the UK?

    Frood

    May 14, 2010 at 5:36 pm

  18. “Trouble is these ‘tax breaks’ habitually just see the money going to the owner/shareholders and not into creating jobs. If the firm was doing enough business they would employ more (if available) naturally.

    It’s the ‘theory’ behind ‘trickle down’ economics/tax policy beloved in the early 90s.” – exactly!

    Economists call it the “utility of money”, the idea being to give everyone maximum benefit from the economy.

    Say you give a minimum wage worker £100 and that fat fucker Digby Jones £100, who gets more “utility” from it?

    Raw Deal

    May 14, 2010 at 7:49 pm

  19. When Digby talks about “reducing employer costs to create jobs”, what he really means is “reducing employer costs to increase shareholder profit”. Digby arguments hold about as much weight as fart in a wind storm, a business’s labour costs are fixed, why would reducing their costs translate to them taking on more staff? And why is Digby allowed to go unchallenged spouting the same guff over and over again on every media outlet from here to Timbuktu?

    Raw Deal

    May 14, 2010 at 7:55 pm

    • Old pork pie face wants a bigger share of the pork pie lol

      reggie

      May 15, 2010 at 10:02 am

  20. Workfare comes in many shapes and forms. I recently completed a postgraduate course and was offered a 6 month “placement” with a computing firm working Monday – Friday, 8am to 6pm for benefit + £10-£4 travel, and with 4 hours of daily travelling by bus/train too.

    Jenny

    May 15, 2010 at 1:16 pm

  21. The young are lazy! Seriously, Digby? What a preposterous presumption! The laziest bastards that I know are the capitalists like Digby who harbour the inordinately absurd idea that the working class owe them a living.

    Chris Heron

    May 15, 2010 at 4:42 pm

  22. Rollie Pollie Brummie Funster, Pie Eating Workfare Fan and “business expert” Digby Jones is back in the news again, as this time he been caught talking sh*te on TV by Radio 4 program “More Or Less.”

    Digby Jones went on TV this week with a stern warning to the new government to “stop bashing the banks”, “as banks represent 24% of Britain’s tax revenue”, unfortunately for Digby Jones More or less were listening and the figures sounded well out to them as the truth is banks contribute no more than 12% of Britain’s tax not 24% that the expert Digby Jones’s claims.

    So far he has not returned any enquiries regarding how he arrived at his figures from “More or Less”.

    lowestoft's finest

    June 4, 2010 at 12:56 pm

    • What utter nonsense you talk, lowestoft’s finest. What a trifling matter you do seize upon in your pathetic and futile attempt to besmirch the honourable and upstanding reputation of Lord Digby. Do you seriously expect Lord Digby’s figures to be correct to the nth degree? Well do you, you cretin? Lord Digby obviously has far more important concerns to lend his undisputed talents to. One is certain that even someone as obviously cretinous as yourself can comprehend that simple fact. And more to the point: without the Tax Revenue generated by the hard-working bankers there would be no money in the kitty to pay for your welfare handout check! Think before you open that moronic mouth of yours!

      And what the bloody hell business does someone of your obviously limited intellect have listening to Radio 4! Outrageous!

      Good day to you

      Rt Hon Benedict Gummer MP

      Rt Hon Benedict Gummer MP

      June 4, 2010 at 1:44 pm

      • wot duz “honourable’ meen ?

        FikDoleSkum

        June 4, 2010 at 3:19 pm

      • Honourable means able to get an honour (knighthood, peerage).

        Means nothing more than that.

        Flexible New Deal

        June 4, 2010 at 4:55 pm

    • Fair enough, Lord Digby Jones may not be the most arithmetically astute of business leaders, and indeed his calculations may be out by 100% give or take a few percentage points. But lets not get bogged down by trivial detail, shall we? Lord Joneses compelling and forceful argument still stands, and that is that without a shred of doubt, without the Banking Sector the economy would at present be on its knees.

      Sir Fred Goodwin

      June 4, 2010 at 2:18 pm

  23. What utter nonsense you talk, lowestoft’s finest. What a trifling matter you do seize upon in your pathetic and futile attempt to besmirch the honourable and upstanding reputation of Lord Digby. Do you seriously expect Lord Digby’s figures to be correct to the nth degree? Well do you, you cretin? Lord Digby obviously has far more important concerns to lend his undisputed talents to. One is certain that even someone as obviously cretinous as yourself can comprehend that simple fact. And more to the point: without the Tax Revenue generated by the hard-working bankers there would be no money in the kitty to pay for your welfare handout check! Think before you open that moronic mouth of yours! One is sure that even someone as obviously cretinous as yourself, lowestoft’s finest, can comprehend the simple fact: that without the Tax Revenue generated by the hard-working bankers that there would be no money in the kitty for your welfare handout check! Think before you open that moronic mouth of yours! Lord Digby One is sure that even someone as obviously cretinous as yourself, lowestoft’s finest, can comprehend the simple fact: that without the Tax Revenue generated by the hard-working bankers that there would be no money in the kitty for your welfare handout check! Think before you open that moronic mouth of yours!

    Good day to you

    Benedict Gummer MP

    Rt Hon Benedict Gummer MP

    June 4, 2010 at 1:33 pm

    • Dear Mr. Sir Rt. Hon. Benedict Gummer MP, Scourging Angel, and Fresh Prince of IP1.

      Sir, I find your attack on my intellectual capacity unfounded. I would first like to point out that confusing “Cold Calling” with “Kerb Crawling” is a simple mistake any Job Seeker could make.

      Neither do I accept the accusation that the honest hardworking unemployed folk of Lowestoft are in anyway edumacationaly subnormal work shy criminal troglodytes inhabiting Suffolk’s answer to Siberia as implied by so many of your posts

      To counter this slur I would like to point out that I am in fact looked on by many as Lowestoft’s foremost intellectual.
      I have in my house nearly one thousand books, and what’s more I’ve nearly coloured them all in.

      A spokesman for Lowestoft Central Library was described as being “furious”.

      Yours
      Lowestoft’s Finest (GCSE with Honours)

      lowestoft's finest

      June 4, 2010 at 6:52 pm

  24. As a long-standing supporter of Ipswich Unemployed Action can I say that my dear brother Benedict is speaking utter tosh and tommy-rot.

    He has been living off daddy’s cheques since the day he was born.

    As for hard-work, he can hardly get up in the morning without his manservant bringing in a cup of Earl Grey. He then is dressed, helped downstairs from his ten story mansion in Ipswich’s chic district off the Norwich Road, and driven to ‘work’.

    That is, he spends the rest of the day down the Drones Club playing billiards and throwing bread-rolls at Spiffy and Bertie Wooster.

    Cordelia Gummer

    June 4, 2010 at 3:16 pm

  25. Is loafers a British term for something? I’m really confused.

    Kate

    July 14, 2010 at 2:03 am

    • Loafer means idler – surely that’s the same in US English?

      To the rozzers a butcher’s at the boat race of a chav or a pikey is all that’s needed to identify who’s a loafer.

      Me, have you ever read a magazine called The Idler?

      Guide to modern living.

      Andrew Coates

      July 14, 2010 at 9:23 am

      • Loafers I think MIGHT come from US English but may derive from loofer as into soakup ?. Any English teachers out there that can help ?

        Philip

        July 24, 2010 at 10:40 am

  26. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-10748313

    Lord Digby Jones calls for rethink in university focus

    A radical rethink on higher education is needed and many universities should consider awarding more vocational qualifications, former trade minister Lord Digby Jones has said.

    The ex-director general of the CBI says degrees do have value but that they are not the best option for all students.

    UK universities are attracting record applications but firms often complain graduates do not have the right skills.

    The body that represents universities has disputed Lord Jones’ claims.

    Nicola Dandridge, chief executive of Universities UK, said colleges already offered a wealth of vocational courses.

    Lord Jones said courses need to deal with “the challenges of today”.

    Undergraduate applications to start university this September are up almost 12% on last year – despite the fact that there is an average of 70 graduates applying for each graduate level job.

    Lord Jones told the BBC: “Too many universities have made a very quick progress to a place where actually today they are not too sure what they are there for and, of course, the world of work has changed.

    “What the world of work needs out of universities has changed.

    “A lot of them should look again and say ‘could I link in earlier with people, could I link in with schools better, could I get local businesses in better, and then can I produce something where someone is better skilled to face the challenges of today which might not necessarily end with the word degree’.”

    Ms Dandridge said critics were wrong to attack universities, saying colleges were continuing to respond to courses required by the job market.

    “What you tend to find is new courses are viewed with some suspicion by people who went to university some time ago,” she said.

    “But some of these new courses are actually just reflecting where the market is at.

    “For example the digital economy is huge and creating lots of new types of university courses. Someone who’s not engaged in that kind of world will think ‘oh, well, that’s a Mickey Mouse course’, but actually that’s where industry is at.”

    ‘No guarantee’

    Statistically, graduates have better job prospects than non-graduates, and also go on to earn more over the course of their career.
    Continue reading the main story

    Start Quote

    I think a lot of people do think having a degree is a guarantee for success and I don’t think so”
    Shawn Brown
    Entrepreneur

    But getting that crucial first job is becoming more and more difficult. Elizabeth Hayward, who graduated in entertainment management a year ago but still cannot find a job, said: “The whole talk in the sixth form was all about university really, nothing else apart from uni.

    “And now as a result I feel like I have wasted £20,000 and all my time when I could be going straight to work and having no degree and maybe being higher up and working my way through the ranks with experience. Now I have a degree but can’t get a foot in the door.”

    Shawn Brown, who decided university was not for him and started his own cleaning business with the help of a grant from the Bright Ideas Trust, said: “I think a lot of people do think having a degree is a guarantee for success and I don’t think so.

    “You have to have some ambition, some drive to go forward and really do something with that degree. Just having a a degree doesn’t guarantee a job.”

    Carl Gilleard, from the Association of Graduate Recruiters, say high quality degrees are essential but agrees that they can be seen as the only option, when in many cases young people would be better off choosing another path.

    “Perhaps there has just been too much emphasis on going to university,” he said.

    “For some people going to university is probably the wrong way to start their working life and careers.”

    However, university lecturers say it would be a huge mistake to discourage young people from studying for a traditional university degree.

    Sally Hunt, the general secretary of the University and College Union, said the UK is competing with other major economies where the number of young people with degrees is rising.

    “America, France, Germany just as examples, India as another – all of them are saying they want to have more graduates.

    “They are doing that because they know that’s how the wealth and security of their society is protected in the future.

    “Why would we want to race to the bottom when what we should be doing is protecting what is one of the crown jewels of our country.”

    BBC News

    July 24, 2010 at 9:33 am

  27. i had invested in a cleaning business and of course, this is a great business ;:,

    Chinese Girls

    November 24, 2010 at 5:20 pm

  28. Brisbane Kerbing – Add beauty and value to your landscape by having continuous concrete garden edging. Numerous Kerbing Designs avaliable.

    kerbing ipswich

    February 23, 2013 at 10:46 am


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: