Ipswich Unemployed Action.

Campaigning for Unemployed Rights.

Conservatives: unemployed to “work for the dole” on community programmes

with 41 comments

In the news,

 The latest plank of Mr Cameron’s “Big Society” pitch, encouraging people to “take more control over how the country is run”.
The new welfare contract pledges to “tear up the old ways of dealing with worklessness”.

The work programme, to be up and running by the end of 2010, promises to ensure people “get help as soon as you need it”.

A range of business-led training places will be offered, starting with 50,000 in the hospitality and leisure industries, while 400,000 apprenticeship, training and college places will be available to under-25s.

Work clubs will be set up, providing somewhere for the unemployed to go during the day where they can learn skills and make contacts, and individuals looking to start businesses will be given access to a business mentor and start-up loans.

A sanctions regime will be put in place within six months of the Tories taking office, cutting Jobseeker’s Allowance (JSA) for people who refuse to join the work programme.

Benefits will also be cut for up to three years if people refuse to take up “reasonable” job offers or if they are caught repeatedly committing benefit fraud.

Long-term claimants who cannot find work will be required to “work for the dole” on community programmes, and all people claiming incapacity benefits will be reassessed – and transferred onto JSA if they are fit enough to work.


(from Here) (more here)


How this fits in with ” encouraging people to “take more control over how the country is run” is clear.

One group of people, friends of the Conservative Party, will take control over running other – the unemployed –  people’s  lives.


Having just finished a ‘placement’, which might as well as have been workfare, though conditions were good and what I did was of some use, I would add this. Firstly, that if we are forced to work on a long-term basis for our miserable Dole, we will not be happy workers. Secondly, travel and other costs on the ‘wage’ we get, make a real problem. £18 a week in my case  – which we pay out in advance and get back when we present every single one of our bus tickets  – is a big sum to get us to work in the first place. Thirdly, there is nothing, nothing, that sticks in my craw like the idea that doing this for the foreseable future (Cameron’s plan, and the rest of the main parties, including the Liberal Democrats as far as I am aware – prove me wrong)  is part of building a “Big Society“.


Written by Andrew Coates

May 4, 2010 at 8:43 am

41 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Well, I could write a book on this but I will instead number a list of my opinion from this article and those referenced within:

    1. Concept is good (that to tackle [unemployment]: work needs to be done ASAP and not 6, 12,18 or 24 months down the road)

    2. Flaws are certainly mentioned from the offset: (for example) If I was made redundant today and joined the dole queue tomorrow… that is “unemployment” and not “worklessness” – my presence at the crappy Joke Centre (Jobcentre) wouldn’t be down to me not wanting a job but because a) I had just lost mine and b) you dont get a new job overnight.

    3. Worklessness is a rare condition (?) that runs in families mainly in the larger city areas – Jobcentre Plus has refused to tackle this (although prior to Jobcentre Plus and the introduction of the Jobseekers Act 1995 which outlawed this 14 years ago should have ended this trend) to increase the attack on the poor throughout the entire country (i.e. “save more money”).

    4. I can’t see how a “work programme” can be up and running by end of 2010 – that is absolute bullshit.

    Lets assume that they have already planned the programme to the last detail… they are forgetting the tender process (I assume they will subcontract out as I don’t see Jobcentre Plus with the resources required), the legislation (Acts are 1 year typically, or a month if fast tracked; Statutory Instruments can be created in a month if they use existing Acts), staff training at Jobcentre (took them ages to understand Flexible New Deal and I doubt most still know the ins and outs of the new regime)

    5. If they rush a scheme by end of 2010 (I am thinking November-ish) it wont be able to keep the promise of offering help – “just keep signing and we will refer you when the resources are available.”

    Flexible New Deal

    May 4, 2010 at 2:18 pm

  2. (continued…)

    6. Why are Con-servatives following Labour… that is what Labour did with the New Deal choose hospitality industry first.. but I recall more numbers than 50,000…

    7.“while 400,000 apprenticeship, training and college places will be available to under-25s.”

    Wahoo good for the young ones! Actually… we read that as 400,000 apprenticeships at first glance… then it states “training” (New Deal, Flexible New Deal, Community Task Force etc.) which we know isn’t going to be real training… followed by “college places” it is probable that thousands of under 25’s will go to college; that has been what always happened, right?

    I wanted a bit of reassurance that… it would be…… 400,000 *additional* places… and a breakdown of each i.e. 100,000 new apprenticeships, 200,000 training places and 100,000 places on college courses in addition to the existing (I don’t know perhaps overcrowd the college rooms, build a new college (“workhouse”) or extend existing colleges with a new wing nicknamed the unemployed scum.

    8. “Work clubs will be set up, providing somewhere for the unemployed to go during the day where they can learn skills and make contacts, and individuals looking to start businesses will be given access to a business mentor and start-up loans.”

    Anyone who thinks you can walk in and gain new skills must be an idiot. These places are the worse organised places ever. I remember a similar “optional course” I was referred to by Jobcentre Plus operated by Seetec in town.

    You attended for only 2 days a week and did absolutely nothing. Apparently you were set to get training and a grant of up to £500 out of ESF to get you into work.

    No extra money for attending but the concept was great… you go there to get the additional help including money for anything to help you get a job.

    Well… you attend the days you wanted, no organisation at all, no guaranteed staff attendance (just any person to “hold the fort”), attend how often you want (2-3 days was recommended) for around 10-16 weeks… the papers for jobsearch were outdated and only a few computers to be shared with people playing games on them… everyone else talking or otherwise doing something to keep their brains occupied.

    So, the chances of getting the money or training? No chance, no rota for having anyone in who can deliver training etc. (i.e. stick your name to the list) and to get a chance of getting the money…you have to hope that a) your tutor is in b) that s/he has time to fit you in or talk with you and c) that your idea to get training etc. with the money is approved. This isn’t that clear cut unless you attend 5 days a week then your tutor could be on annual leave or a “training course”.

    Dencora House was a similar setup under New Deal – no organisation or guaranteed staff most of the time, lack of resources, hoping that a member of staff will get you training or a work placement.

    So this scheme will just be a renamed thing – the same old crap – I am sure this Labour scheme at Seetec was the same scheme as one created by the Con-servatives in a previous Government, just renamed.

    As for business… I doubt any longterm unemployed would have a good chance of setting up a business and getting anywhere with it.

    9. “A sanctions regime will be put in place within six months of the Tories taking office”

    Con-servatives have no idea: the masters of the Jobseekers Act 1995 … and Labours contributions means the sanction regime is already available.

    *added*: or did they mean the 3 year sanctions/ban?

    Flexible New Deal

    May 4, 2010 at 2:23 pm

  3. (continued…)

    10. “Benefits will also be cut for up to three years if people refuse to take up “reasonable” job offers or if they are caught repeatedly committing benefit fraud.”

    Finally, removal of benefits for those who have committed benefit fraud on more than one occasion… this is the best idea they will ever have, and have ever had.

    I fully agree to this. However, the refusal of a job as an alternative scenario worries me…

    Firstly, in order to realise a job offer has occurred:
    a) the person had to receive a Jobseeker Direction (JSD) for a job
    b) gone to an interview(s) and been offered the job and
    c) declined it, and either told Jobcentre Plus or they found out by a different means.

    The trouble is, step b will be avoided. It wont be refusing a job offer… but refusing to apply for a job as notified. This isn’t a job offer. “Reasonable” doesn’t mean the dictionary definition… it just extends what a “job offer” means…

    “refusing a job offer” means declining an offer of a job contract.

    “refusing a reasonable job offer” moves the goal posts and means “refusing any vacancy by refusing to apply for it or failing to attend an interview, as it is reasonable expected that such steps are required in order to get a job offer – thus committing such offences to avoid a job offer can be treated as refusing the job offer”.

    “refusing a reasonable job offer” doesn’t mean “turning down a job offer that is not right for the candidate (i.e. distance, job goals and other circumstances), is below the national minimum wage or is unsuitable under law (i.e. nature of the job is illegal, not DDA compliant etc.) has good cause for refusal and shall not be sanctioned”.

    I hope the sanctions have not moved from 2, 4 and 26 weeks to between 6 months and 3 years. I predict a riot!

    11. “and all people claiming incapacity benefits will be reassessed – and transferred onto JSA if they are fit enough to work.”

    Why another reassessment?

    Anyone who hasn’t been forced onto Jobseekers Allowance (JSA) already, is deemed unwell enough not to be able to work.

    Why move the goal posts to force even more disability claimants onto Jobseekers Allowance?

    Simple: cuts down the cost of Social Security.

    Flexible New Deal

    May 4, 2010 at 2:26 pm

  4. In fact the scheme is the system as it is developing. BNot that this is a coincidence as Freud was involved in framing the Labour one, and is now in the Tory camp.

    As far as I am aware anyone refusing a job now can be sanctioned. Anyone repeatedly commiting benefit fraud risks prison apart from anything else.

    The key point is not the guff about new training places for the young (all the manifestos have that). It is the Community Service for the long-term unemployed. This has been set in motion by the latest welfare ‘reforms’, and could be up and running quickly.

    Pilot schemes (East Anglia, Manchester) include plans to have some in operation this autumn. Just in time for the waves of cuts in government spending they’ll have a cheap source of ‘volunteers’ (as I was officially called during my placement) for public services.

    Andrew Coates

    May 5, 2010 at 8:54 am

  5. Do you Ipswich lads think Chris Mole will be looking for a new job after tomorrow’s election?

    Funny A4e Photos

    May 5, 2010 at 11:10 am

    • Gordon Brown and Duncan Bannatyne visited Lowestoft to launch the hillariously titled “Labour Seaside Manifesto” but bizarrely Gordon Brown seems to have thought he was in Ipswich (which isn’t even on the coast) saying:

      “I am delighted that Duncan Bannatyne has agreed to lead a review on this, working with seaside towns up and down the country to fulfil their own aspirations. With the right support of an active Government, places like Ipswich and Great Yarmouth, which I am visiting today, can be a new riviera on the North Sea and all our coastal towns can go from strength to strength.”

      and more Bizarrely the Labour Seaside Manifesto seems to think Ipswich is at the seaside.

      lowestoft's finest

      May 5, 2010 at 1:32 pm

    • Hopefully a new home/town lol

      Flexible New Deal

      May 5, 2010 at 2:22 pm

  6. Bob Blizzard MP – does he put the wind up you?

    Funny A4e Photos

    May 5, 2010 at 4:09 pm

    • Direct action? Like Greek style? I’ll tell you what though, the cunts that take jobs with these EVIL organisations know that they are doing EVIL! They are TRAITORS to the WORKING CLASS! Karma will catch up with these cunts. Watch out for the Workfare porter when you land up in hospital you cunts. May they live in interesting times! ..

      Abolish Workfare

      May 6, 2010 at 11:53 am

      • You must have a hotline to the almighty.

        As I just heard Mr. “Work for your Dole UKIP’s Nigel Farage” has been hurt in an election day plane crash, though the Doctors described his injuries as “not serious” still have not been able to remove his head from up his own arse.
        (Best he looks out for the Workfare Porters)

        lowestoft's finest

        May 6, 2010 at 4:03 pm

      • NO we can’t do the Greek style action.

        Us being turned into slaves isn’t like the Slave Trade – they didn’t have a choice, we do… even if that means we have nothing to live on. We are concerned about starving to death and people killing themselves over it… it would be stupid to riot and kill others (even if not intended).

        Its about living, so what you saved several people from dying hungry… but ended up killing few times more innocent people there by coincidence or your fellow workfare peeps… no one has the right to displace people like that.

        Ipswich Unemployed Action has always been about empowering the unemployed, giving them rights.. paying us more so we can have a life, getting real training… (not shams like Dencora House detention centre) all to help people get out of unemployment.

        No one is proud of being unemployed or wants to be.

        Flexible New Deal

        May 6, 2010 at 5:56 pm

      • LF:- I thought that was a joke… but its true! hehe

        Flexible New Deal

        May 6, 2010 at 10:16 pm

  7. Watch out. “refusing to take up reasonable job offers” will be a catch all, as corrupt DWP staff / contractors will define what is “reasonable”.

    Setting people up to fail by stuffing them into jobs they are wholly unsuited to and incapable of doing, then sanctioning them for “refusing to work”, is a common fraud technique now. It is only going to get worse.

    Of course, if people had the bottle to take direct action..?

    Dan Owen

    May 5, 2010 at 4:10 pm

  8. “hospitality and leisure industries” here we go again “service sector”,these are not backbone industrial investment which France and Germany have.

    these “opportunities” which have attracted former eastern bloc eu labour that the uk government is powerless to stop which offer poor pay atrocious conditions’ and working hours that do not pay a decent living wage to live today ,also its fed the illegal immigrant back of an articulated lorry at Calais attempts as all have seen.it is also a very volatile hire and fire due to its very nature and does nothing for “sustainable employment” sending job centre advisers’/outside bodies’ into companies in an attempt to keep them out of dole offices’if things go pear shaped,this all sounds very unlikely.

    as for benefit sanctions’ a miserly £1 a week rise when the cost of living continues to rise continually fueling poverty and trapping many in this system.
    this also festers many illnesses such as anxiety and depression despite claims that improving peoples lives which just is not true.

    walk on to any of these “schemes'” and they don’t like people on medicines’ and living off doctors prescriptions’ to get them through the day,that just does not match their rose tinted view and cannot be right,no that’s the reality and publishing/quoting PR misleading statements cannot hide the truth.

    this is all a sorry state thats continued the “gap’s” in society canyons’ would be a more appropriate term.


    May 6, 2010 at 1:14 am

  9. I voted Labour in the local elections (they are not a bad lot on the Borough of Ipswich, and we know what the Tories and Liberals are like since they are in power here). But, Green, ’cause they at least have some pro-unemployed policies (and want to renationalise the railways, which is important to anyone suffering from the trains at the moment) in the national. Mind you I’ve plenty of reservations about them – guess.

    Chris Mole backed Workfare, not just silently but in a public statement (which we published here).

    Andrew Coates

    May 6, 2010 at 8:22 am

    • I hope Ipswich sends him on his way. The CONservative bloke here has much more publicity support than Labour man…

      (I dont like conservatives but rather he is elected than Chris Mole out of principle)

      Chris Mole has resulted to the desperate attempt of the unlawful advertising at bus stops in the town.

      If it doesn’t piss you off with the bus services cuts, the delayed services etc. the fact of missed out buses, very late buses and even buses that come early… it is no fun standing at a bus stop with the huge writing CHRIS MOLE on them.

      Ipswich Buses are soon to be sold – I am one of the very few who agree with this. A council owned bus company is a great idea but in Ipswich it didn’t work.

      First IBC remove toilet facilities from a lot of parks (they are there but closed/locked) and in town charge for them all. Now they have (just 2 from many different cases) over the last few years attacked bus services to the extreme whilst pushing up prices and wasting a lot of money warranting a reason to sell the company.

      A private business with any sense will reduce prices and make them more frequent… more convenience, greater capacity (i.e. not overcrowded) and better value for money. A win-win for both parties: more people using the buses means more income and people actually having faith in using the bus service.

      I think Labour’s lust for control of Ipswich Buses – buses are typically for the poorer people who cant afford cars or dont drive – goes hand-in-hand with the new Jobseeker sanctions for being late.

      Call it a public service, but at the end of the day, its not from Council Tax, its from the bus fares you pay… I would rather pay money to a private company (not to confuse that Ipswich Buses is a private owned company… by council) that can get me to Jobcentre on time, than the current setup where I am paying pretty much the same amount and then losing 2 weeks benefit because it is so poorly run!

      Green party … the Dr bloke who been working in Ipswich for about 20 years who I have never heard of (actually I can recall his name from the leaflet I got but before that never knew of his existence)… was a funny leaflet… about how he wants to be here for Ipswich, however, the entire leaflet was solely NATIONAL issues and nothing local.

      The Green party are just wanting to gain as many seats up and down the country as possible… and political parties have to bullshit to get your trust… of course they want more seats, they all do, but the idea of having an MP is more than the national picture (someone try telling Chris Mole that!)

      A man who is a Dr and been here for 20 years… couldn’t even pick up a few issues, perhaps steal a few from Conservative and Labour… thats a piss poor attempt.

      I also thought that the Green party are still focused on their roots… they have realised it has to be more about the environment etc. such as other areas: education, employment/unemployment, housing, taxation etc. I also have many reservations about trusting them: if in the impossible scenario that they had a second majority… they would push forward strongly with their policies from their roots… however, I doubt the other stuff they would care about.

      You dont know how much pleasure it would give me to see Chris Mole on Workfare…that would never happen though. if his career in politics came to an end, he would only do the Motivational Speaker/Conference route… a lot of money to be made (not as much as an MP and expenses though) or at worse case scenario working at the Tescos in town (the proposed one where B&Q once was).

      Flexible New Deal

      May 6, 2010 at 9:17 am

      • Seconded, Flexy really needs to get back on track. This drift to the right is really quite disturbing, spewing right-wing rhetoric about dole scroungers isn’t doing the cause any good. We need to stick together on this one. Flexy needs to think what they are are saying, and stop believing everything that they read in the Daily Mail or on a Benedict Gummer election pamphlet; their thought processes are becoming infected. Think Benny Gummer has been putting something in those Ipswich burgers.

        Concerned Reader

        May 29, 2010 at 4:27 pm

  10. It is the Tory-Liberal Group that runs Ipswich Council, and the Buses, not Labour. It doesn’t work well at the moment because they have been running it into the ground. If you believe Ipswich Buses will be better sold off then you are living in cloud cuckoo land – this has never happened in the past in any town where it’s happened, and will not happen now.

    As for charging for public toilets – I suppose the poor should have to pay to have a piss, they deserve more punishment.

    You have lost the plot Flexy.

    See you on the Benedict Gummer Chain gang.

    Andrew Coates

    May 6, 2010 at 10:17 am

    • That’s what they are doing – running it into the ground to prime it for privatisation – the oldest trick in the book!

      Free Buses

      May 6, 2010 at 10:49 am

    • They are really only three bus companies in the UK – First, Stagecoach and Arriva. And their fares are sky-high with continual price hikes.

      Free Buses

      May 6, 2010 at 10:51 am

      • But if you don’t take up your Workfare placement, Flexi, I’ll stop ALL your benefits. What you going to do then.

        Yours Benny

        Benny Gummer

        May 6, 2010 at 11:42 am

      • Kill you. lol

        Flexible New Deal

        May 6, 2010 at 5:35 pm

    • Hi Andy – I meant its Labour who wants to keep it Council owned. Also, its a different system between Local and National Government, but National Government has power to overrule local.

      As for toilets… Its me who is silly to not take any money with me when going to Jobcentre. I only take money when I am going to buy something. Rather silly, but atleast I don’t have the risk of theft, card fraud, ID theft etc.

      As for selling the bus company… maybe so. It takes me approx 30 minutes to walk into town… getting a bus including waiting for one takes around 25 minutes and longer during busy times. I don’t like waiting around so rather keep myself occupied by walking.

      I don’t see one of the big 3 bus companies as a really good deal for Ipswich – Ipswich Buses has long had a monopoly over routes in the town – only a few routes are run by the likes of First and other operators and mostly are rural.

      Ipswich I feel needs some competition between bus services – break up routes between different companies. I feel that an operator such as Beestons/Constables would be better suited for the job than say one of these larger lot.

      My point is as things are currently… a very bad deal is created for the service users. It would be unlikely that if ownership is kept that it would become improved.

      What also needs to be understood that Ipswich Buses (although owned by – majority) are not the council – it has been long run as a private affair (not just the requirements under privitization) as a business without the council having any say over the running of it (with exception to a few specifics)

      The bus company under Malcolm “Rob-some (more money of people)” Robson has major management issues and the council (as shareholder) should have pushed them a long time ago. But the council wanted to remain mostly at “arms length” from the company as less work to do. Now it wants to wash its hands from it.

      GoAhead must have been delighted to hear that a multi-million pound proposal has gone ahead to replace 2 bus stations, and improve the services… I am sure this is the “sweetner” of the deal.

      I do, however, favour new management to this council owned business rather than selling it. The problem is no MP had enough braincells to require such services being sold off (from council to private ownership) to be debated by the public. It is solely a private matter between teh company and the buyer. It goes deeper… “Should councils be allowed to sell significant assets without public consultation or vote?” I dont think so.

      As for workfare, no chance am I doing it!

      Flexible New Deal

      May 6, 2010 at 11:33 am

      • The one big plus point with Labour’s approach is that it “buys more time”.

        Raw Deal

        May 6, 2010 at 1:26 pm

    • Seconded, Flexy really needs to get back on track. This drift to the right is really quite disturbing, spewing right-wing rhetoric about dole scroungers isn’t doing the cause any good. We need to stick together on this one. Flexy needs to think what they are are saying, and stop believing everything that they read in the Daily Mail or on a Benedict Gummer election pamphlet; their thought processes are becoming infected. Think Benny Gummer has been putting something in those Ipswich burgers.

      Concerned Reader

      May 29, 2010 at 4:29 pm

  11. Both Labour and Tory embrace Workfare; the only difference is that the Tories have promised to “push it harder and faster”. A lot of people are going to be in for a shock if Cameron is in 10 Downing Street come Friday.

    Raw Deal

    May 6, 2010 at 10:31 am

    • Well, I’ve done my bit to keep Cameron out by voting today. The question is have you?

      Funny A4e Photos

      May 6, 2010 at 11:44 am

      • You make a good point, Flexi.

        Labour’s approach is a lot more subtle and sinister, by slow and gradual step-by-step training it will over time feel quite “normal” to put in a full weeks work for a dole check. Labour are a lot more patient and far-sighted in this regard…

        On the other hand, the Tories have a tendency to “push the envelope” far too fast, not allowing sufficient time for changes to be absorbed and taken on board. Maybe, they just can’t help themselves 🙂

        You really don’t want to wake up a Workfare-drone in a Dystopian-nightmare society. If you are in that position, it is really better if the whole edifice comes crashing down. But our Lords and Masters don’t want to live in a city that in “on fire”, hence the gradual step-by-step re-adjustment towards a docile, easily manageable army of slaves.

        Raw Deal

        May 6, 2010 at 12:26 pm

      • True, you are not really voting FOR Labour, but AGAINST CONservative.

        Raw Deal

        May 6, 2010 at 12:31 pm

      • Not yet 🙂 ….

        Raw Deal

        May 6, 2010 at 5:46 pm

    • Is it all a bad thing?

      Labour will do the pilots mild, then overtime along with spin etc. will make it more extreme… (“passive receivers”… although people been working 30 hours a week for their benefit etc.)

      CONservatives will begin with the extreme and cause a riot. Apart from any avoidable deaths resulting from this, people wouldnt have adapted to the change, a big shock to the system and it being refused.

      With Labour people will gradually begin to accept it. Take New Deal for example… free labour and no new skills gained? Does it really help the unemployed? That was for 13 weeks – now under Flexible New Deal its for less duration (minimum) but without any top up and instead requires longer attendance and increased sanctions.

      This (FND) might sound reasonable… less work to do, less free labour, but while you are happy about that increased sanctions regime and no topup.

      New Deal was less sanctions and more free labour. Somewhat balanced in certain respects.

      Now workfare is more free labour (this time without any say in the sort of work to do) and greater sanctions (verbal jobseeker directions included).

      This said for the well-being of everyone everywhere we cannot let CONservatives get back into power.

      Sadly, a state of a corrupt nation. People vote Labour to stop the CONservatives… when really, deep down, I doubt the majority of voters would even want to vote either of them.

      Flexible New Deal

      May 6, 2010 at 11:48 am

    • Not yet 🙂 ..

      Raw Deal

      May 6, 2010 at 5:44 pm

    • Not yet 🙂 __

      Raw Deal

      May 6, 2010 at 5:45 pm

  12. Talking of buses. Back in the old days (when Blunkett was in charge!) South Yorkshire used to run free buses! Sheffield had the City Clipper – hop on and off for free. You could travel all the way from Sheffield to Barnsley for the princely sum of 2p. (the MAXIMUM fare!) Now that is how to run a bus service! And to think that we believe we are making progress!

    Free Buses

    May 6, 2010 at 10:44 am

  13. I seriously hope conservatives don’t get in.

    Everyone should protest solely on the party who gets into power!

    Flexible New Deal

    May 6, 2010 at 5:46 pm

  14. To Whom it Concerns

    I have never ever read the Daily Mail. I actually dont read any newspapers or tabloids much… buying one every day takes too much of my Jobseekers up…

    …yes I am a jobseeker and I am not sure why the use of “they” in such comments.

    Flexible New Deal

    May 29, 2010 at 4:51 pm

  15. Thanks-a-mundo for the blog.Much thanks again. Much obliged.

    Lacey Jonas

    February 7, 2012 at 8:12 am

  16. Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I really appreciate your efforts and
    I will be waiting for your further post thanks once again.

    instant loans for unemployed

    December 18, 2012 at 11:42 pm

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: