Cuts to Benefits?
From the Daily Telegraph, (here)
Yesterday, the Treasury set out the framework for a review of all government spending. The official document stated it would “comprehensively examine areas such as social security, tax credits and public service pensions”.
Plans for “savings and reform in these areas” would be unveiled later this year.
It is the first time that the welfare system – such as child benefit, disability payments and unemployment benefits – has been identified as a target for cuts. Freezing all benefit payments would save more than £4 billion a year.
As Flexy has pointed out here the real levels of benefits are lower today than they were twenty years ago.
Ipswich Unemployed Action. 
Just to add: I spent a charming morning down at the Housing Benefit Office worting out my Council Tax Benefit.
Since having done my weeks of job placement I have had endless problems getting back on standard JSA.
On Flexible New Deal when you do your placement they put you on some kind of ‘training’ benefit and you have to reapply to get your JSA back.
Thought that was finally worked out.
But no.
Today I got a letter from the Council demanding hundreds of pounds in unpaid tax.
Now I’ve storted it (hope so) but if they’re going to cut more people from the Councils expect even worse problems.
Andrew Coates
June 9, 2010 at 4:12 pm
I wonder how many others are finding exactly the same experiences as you!
Its terrible. All the hoops you have to jump through etc. its a wonder why employers dont pick unemployed people to work for them after them having to going through such procedures… oh, wait, they dont know about them!
The experiences you are receiving are absolutely pointless. If you can move from JSA to Training Allowance without a termination in claim, you should be able to change back, without having to reclaim – its not for 13 weeks, its for 4 weeks and FND is for 12 months – this shouldnt be happening.
I understand their technique of why they do this – its clear how pissed off we all get with the stress, worries and cash flow problems, but it actually costs the Government more to deal with this so it doesnt actually have a real benefit for them. Its unlikely for people to give up claiming in the last 2-3 years period – so discouraging people wont work so easy as it used to. I am sure there are many victims still though.
Flexible New Deal
June 9, 2010 at 6:19 pm
Our resident Clinician – Dr Shrink – would say that it was an “external pressure” designed to stress us out.
Pete
June 9, 2010 at 6:27 pm
heard one of digby’s chums from the cbi this morning on the radio 4 today programme calling for creative lol benefit cuts. also said that the public sector should be slashed and if we reduced business costs they would find work in the private sector… in workfare?
ron
June 10, 2010 at 8:21 am
and the interviewer said that if we cut peeps benefits that surely that meant that they just had less money in their pockets…? not if its done creatively lol
ron
June 10, 2010 at 8:24 am
i had a lot of problems also after signing back on after new deal with council tax. a cock up at the benefit office meant i was paid the wrong class of benefit and that started it at the council tax,no problem said the job centre the council did not see it like that and warranted looking in to in their eye’s countless visits’,threats of fines because of the cock up they thought i had been working.it took some time to sort the problem out and caused a lot of stress.
it was all totally unacceptable the attitude at the call centre was “do you want a job” and was totally degrading in tone.
a freeze on benefits tell that to supermarkets with 20p+ on one item.
ken
June 12, 2010 at 11:58 pm
I have had (a lot lesser but not too different) problems after transferring from the Training Allowance back onto the Flexible New Deal. My reward for working for free….
Though at least I was spared the visits.
I’m sorry to say but with these cuts coming I can see the situation getting worse.
Andrew Coates
June 13, 2010 at 9:43 am
I agree benefits have not risen for twenty years or stayed nearly the same. I may be wrong but I recall in the late 1980’s – 1990’s I think there was an add on benefit called EARNINGS RELATED BENEFIT. I think you got this for a year along with what was then unemployment benefit. This was during the time when everybody signed weekly. I think it the ERB was scrapped when they went onto fortnightly signing. So in fact there has been a considerable decrease in the ammount of benefit paid. Both to the unemployed and those on incapacity and dla benefits etc.
annie nonimous
June 9, 2010 at 4:20 pm
How to SAVE money… dont spend.
* NO BENEFITS
* NO MILITARY SPENDING
* NO AID TO THIRD WORLD
* NO EU MEMBERSHIP
* NO PUBLIC SECTOR JOBS
* NO NHS
Obviously… to solve the problem isn’t to stop spending money, so I hope to hear less rumours about cutting benefits.
They are already doing this… sticking disabled people on JSA because its cheaper.
Flexible New Deal
June 10, 2010 at 9:57 am
And notice how they try and confuse the words debt and deficit, as if they mean the same thing and are interchangeable, all this talk about cutting the deficit. Well, I’ve got rather a large deficit too, running to £180,000,000 – that’s how much cash I’m short of to buy a Boeing 747 aircraft. Now, if I had borrowed £180,000,000 for said aircraft, I would owe £180,000,000 – you see a debt. So, I really need to make inroads into cutting my deficit, any ideas?
Jeff T
June 10, 2010 at 10:34 am
Yeah, wanna go half and share the deficit?
(emphasis on this idea that doesn’t actually help either of us solve the problem, as my deficit would also be 100%)
Flexible New Deal
June 10, 2010 at 2:52 pm
IMPORTANT NEWSFLASH – The Work Programme
A Ministerial Statement regarding the future of welfare to work contracting has been released today. All affected providers are being written to and are promised one to one discussions to discuss what this means for them.
Key information is that:
The Work Programme will be introduced nationally by Summer 2011
The vehicle for bringing the Work Programme into being and handling all work-focussed services (and related commissioning) will be a new framework of preferred providers.
This framework, “The Work Programme Framework”, will be used not only for the Work Programme but for “other future Welfare to Work requirements” and will be accessible by other public service commissioners who may wish to commission work-focussed services.
Selection on to the framework will be based on a provider’s ability and capacity to deliver job focussed services over the lifetime of the framework
The framework competition will commence at the end of June 2010, identifying framework providers by November and placing contracts in the first half of 2011.
There will be an event in July for providers interested in the framework
All current competitions are superseded. There will be no fND2, Invest to Save, Personalised Employment Programme or Community Task Force
fND1 providers are being given immediate twelve months notice of the end of fND1 contracts
The intention is to achieve maximum continuity of service and to minimise disruption
All fND1 providers are encouraged to bid in to the framework for a managed move on to the Work Programme
There is no decision yet on Work Choice but the statement gives a commitment to “supporting severely disabled people”
No decision has yet been made about how Work for your Benefit will fit within the Work Programme
Current New Deal, Pathways and EZ contracts will be extended in fND2 areas then will roll in to the Work Programme.
The Ministerial statement closes by signalling the significant new opportunities for contractors from the private and voluntary sector within the Work Programme to deliver “truly flexible and personalised support”, the importance of building of appropriate delivery partnerships and the crucial role of the voluntary sector in tackling worklessness.
Further details about the design and implementation will follow.
Martin Dunford (Chair of the Association of Learning Providers and CE of Skills Training UK – an fND1 prime provider) gave the following comment:
“The new Government has not said or done anything that it did not say in Opposition and since it came to power. The possible surprise to some will be the termination of fND1 contracts but if one considers that there may be changes in geographical areas one can understand why they would want to open up a competition on a new geographical basis. They have made it clear they value the high performing parts of the infrastructure, and that is good. However, if too many variables are changed at the same time and we get a different result from the experiment it will be unclear what variant effected the change: longer periods of sustained employment; a new financial structure or different geographies – to name a few.
In terms of investment decisions, people, if they don’t already, will regard all 5 year or longer contracts as really only as long as the termination clause in the contracts, as with 12 months termination within fND1 contracts. It is also worth noting that by the time the Work Programme starts there will only be a maximum three and a half years left of the Government’s term to run.
There are many good things about the Work Programme and that, combined with a high regard by the Government for the industry infrastructure, one hopes bodes well for the future.”
Rob Murdoch, Chair of the Employment Related Services Association (ERSA) welcomed the further clarity given today by the Government on how existing welfare to work schemes will be replaced by the single Work Programme saying:
“This is a significant step, and will help employment services providers to help many more thousands of long term unemployed people get off benefits and into work. Introducing the Work Programme next year allows adequate time to put the new scheme in place and manage the transition. ERSA will continue to engage positively with Government to ensure that this transition is managed smoothly and to achieve the greatest possible value from a single scheme.
We encourage the Government to create maximum flexibility, by allowing other Whitehall departments and local authorities to pool their budgets with DWP spending and deliver services through the single Work Programme.
In honouring the 12 month notice period that ERSA negotiated as part of Flexible New Deal, we welcome the Government’s recognition that, should contracts be terminated, a full year’s notice is necessary to ensure a smooth transition and stability within the sector, in the best interests of jobseekers and long term value to the taxpayer.”
Jeff T
June 10, 2010 at 11:30 am
A Ministerial Statement regarding the future of welfare to work contracting has been released today. All affected providers are being written to and are promised one to one discussions to discuss what this means for them.
Key information is that:
The Work Programme will be introduced nationally by Summer 2011
The vehicle for bringing the Work Programme into being and handling all work-focussed services (and related commissioning) will be a new framework of preferred providers.
This framework, “The Work Programme Framework”, will be used not only for the Work Programme but for “other future Welfare to Work requirements” and will be accessible by other public service commissioners who may wish to commission work-focussed services.
Selection on to the framework will be based on a provider’s ability and capacity to deliver job focussed services over the lifetime of the framework
The framework competition will commence at the end of June 2010, identifying framework providers by November and placing contracts in the first half of 2011.
There will be an event in July for providers interested in the framework
All current competitions are superseded. There will be no fND2, Invest to Save, Personalised Employment Programme or Community Task Force
fND1 providers are being given immediate twelve months notice of the end of fND1 contracts
The intention is to achieve maximum continuity of service and to minimise disruption
All fND1 providers are encouraged to bid in to the framework for a managed move on to the Work Programme
There is no decision yet on Work Choice but the statement gives a commitment to “supporting severely disabled people”
No decision has yet been made about how Work for your Benefit will fit within the Work Programme
Current New Deal, Pathways and EZ contracts will be extended in fND2 areas then will roll in to the Work Programme.
The Ministerial statement closes by signalling the significant new opportunities for contractors from the private and voluntary sector within the Work Programme to deliver “truly flexible and personalised support”, the importance of building of appropriate delivery partnerships and the crucial role of the voluntary sector in tackling worklessness.
Further details about the design and implementation will follow.
Martin Dunford (Chair of the Association of Learning Providers and CE of Skills Training UK – an fND1 prime provider) gave the following comment:
“The new Government has not said or done anything that it did not say in Opposition and since it came to power. The possible surprise to some will be the termination of fND1 contracts but if one considers that there may be changes in geographical areas one can understand why they would want to open up a competition on a new geographical basis. They have made it clear they value the high performing parts of the infrastructure, and that is good. However, if too many variables are changed at the same time and we get a different result from the experiment it will be unclear what variant effected the change: longer periods of sustained employment; a new financial structure or different geographies – to name a few.
In terms of investment decisions, people, if they don’t already, will regard all 5 year or longer contracts as really only as long as the termination clause in the contracts, as with 12 months termination within fND1 contracts. It is also worth noting that by the time the Work Programme starts there will only be a maximum three and a half years left of the Government’s term to run.
There are many good things about the Work Programme and that, combined with a high regard by the Government for the industry infrastructure, one hopes bodes well for the future.”
Rob Murdoch, Chair of the Employment Related Services Association (ERSA) welcomed the further clarity given today by the Government on how existing welfare to work schemes will be replaced by the single Work Programme saying:
“This is a significant step, and will help employment services providers to help many more thousands of long term unemployed people get off benefits and into work. Introducing the Work Programme next year allows adequate time to put the new scheme in place and manage the transition. ERSA will continue to engage positively with Government to ensure that this transition is managed smoothly and to achieve the greatest possible value from a single scheme.
We encourage the Government to create maximum flexibility, by allowing other Whitehall departments and local authorities to pool their budgets with DWP spending and deliver services through the single Work Programme.
In honouring the 12 month notice period that ERSA negotiated as part of Flexible New Deal, we welcome the Government’s recognition that, should contracts be terminated, a full year’s notice is necessary to ensure a smooth transition and stability within the sector, in the best interests of jobseekers and long term value to the taxpayer.”
Newsflash
June 10, 2010 at 11:33 am
Summer 2011?
As for breaking up bigger contracts into smaller areas… this wont have that much effect.
All organisations compete against each other like any traditional business, however, there are forgotten about factors. Big boys like A4e only win contracts after doing so badly over previous ones as they are in bed with the Government.
It is difficult for new businesses to enter welfare-2-work sector. They can only apply as a subcontractor if they are very lucky. Therefore, most providers are providers of previous schemes thus all competition-with-smaller-contracts means is providers maybe able to get a foot in a different geographical location although all in all with the grand total of contract values… its no real difference between a big contract and smaller ones.
One main difference. It will be very difficult to administer say a thousand small contracts compared to 25 big contracts. The Government wants cut backs… how can this happen?
Obviously smaller contracts individually require less resources per a contract (a large contract area will require more resources) but for major areas like COMMUNICATION (try telling TNG about that) it becomes a nightmare and will cost much more.
A 12 month notice period is pathetic. I understand how to a business this would be important but the new contracts are likely to be won pretty much by the same businesses (A4e, RiP, Serco, TNG etc.) even if locations are slightly shuffled.
Flexible New Deal
June 10, 2010 at 2:28 pm
Flexi I totaly agree with your bit about big boys like A4E get contracts becouse they are in bed with the government, but remember we now have a new government, and this might now be a case of payback time to those previous providers like A4E who were in bed with the old reigme way too far, as bunging Blunkett is not going to do them any favours now and I think their association with him has sealed their fate. As I just can’t see them being allowed to continue.
Lowestoft's Finest
June 10, 2010 at 3:24 pm
Very valid point LF!
I think the Labour party were following in the con-servative shadow. Although I also think the strong bonds will be weakened – I dont think the chain will be broken.
“Dave” appears all nu-skool – just pr spin. It is possible a fairer tender system could be developed so none of the big providers have a majority and all have the same number of contracts to almost an equal value – but the big boys wont be going anywhere soon.
I dont think YMCA Training will stand much chance of becoming a prime contractor (instead of just subcontractor) but if any of the small organisations were successful they would be one of them.
The perfect developed system would have no interest from many providers – Dave still thinks providers will negotiate to 0% service fee and 100% job outcome payments per a client – this wont happen, providers know their poor track record, so the high £££ from outcomes isn’t enough without the security of a service fee – as the high outcomes alone isn’t an bigger enough incentive.
Flexible New Deal
June 10, 2010 at 5:13 pm
I seem to recall these ‘providers’ had a presence at the last Conservative Coference – hedging their bets.
Actually I think YMCA Training are not interested in workfare (aka work for benefits). But may be wrong.
Andrew Coates
June 11, 2010 at 9:59 am
Hi Andy,
Was referring to the Work Programme and NOT the workfare scheme.
Flexible New Deal
June 11, 2010 at 1:07 pm
“The possible surprise to some will be the termination of fND1 contracts but if one considers that there may be changes in geographical areas one can understand why they would want to open up a competition on a new geographical basis.”
How will this affect the Pilots in East Anglia and Manchester?
That’s the issue.
Andrew Coates
June 10, 2010 at 12:48 pm
Simple, the providers wont give up (there is still job outcomes available) but they will be cutting resources… service fees were top heavy (that is they negotiated a high amount for first year, and it should have decreased down the term of the contract… it wont now) so expect a lack of administration services available to you (you wont notice a change at TNG).
If they can save money, it will increase their profits, there is no longer any requirement in particular to meet contractual targets (termination notice has been raised and they have 12 months left), to get a good ofsted report (I doubt FND providers will have their report done) or to improve efficiency over the remaining term of the contract as it has been cut.
Its rather an implosion of the framework structure. Too bad, in order to save a few million quid, the con-servative Government has decided that regardless of the high unemployment rate, services can be cut… the problem is in order to make cuts, you have to make savings, I think for each £1 they are trying to cut from welfare schemes (“save”), it is atleast having a £3 loss to the economy (“losses”)… including from loss taxes from those who can gain employment through the scheme (yes FND wasnt as good as thought out to be) and continued expenditure of benefits.
The problem is, it isn’t as simple as changing your electricity supplier trying to save money. The Government should look at the bigger picture, different changes can have disasterous effects in different areas.
So if for each £2 spent you make £12: if you are trying to save money, spending only half (assuming its linear) will only make you £6 for each £1 spent.
This “saving” results in a “loss” of £5 per unit. You must always look at the bigger picture.
Flexible New Deal
June 10, 2010 at 2:45 pm
Greetings, why not get Ipswich Council to give some special help to your many ugly unemployed mingers like we do in the Nederlands?
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article7147122.ece
Jan Van Weasel
June 12, 2010 at 12:20 pm
Why don’t you all get a life. Instead of slagging your Government and the training providers that are trying their best to help you. If you paid as much attention to what your training providers are saying to and trying to teach you, and spent as much time listening to them and acting on it, rather than on this site. You will soon have a job and self respect. There is NO NEED for you to be disrespectful and liabeleous on this site. There is NO NEED for this site. I refer to the likes of YOU Mr Andrew Coates and ‘Mr New Dealer’ and Lowestofts Finest. LISTEN UP GUYS. MUZZELLTOFF you just make things bad for the rest of us. so SHALOM and lets hope this site is down soon. I will be watching
The Hobbit
June 12, 2010 at 1:57 pm
Hey Hobbit
Watch your mouth. If you wanna come round these parts you wanna mind your manners and learn some respect.
Scarface
June 12, 2010 at 2:04 pm
If you want to make something of yourself. Have money that you have EARNT. Pride in that you can now at last support your self [and maybe a family] and give yourself something to be proud of. You will stop wasting time on sites like this and pay more attention to your provider and pa. You will soon have a proper job and no time to waste on sites like this. Infact then there will be no need for sites like this. Please consider all lof us who are on F.N.D and on placements with providers or work boost etc. We too are suspects on this site and we don’t want to be. Please have consideration for those that don’t want sanctions and stop this vile crap. Oh yes Mr scarface. I do have respect for everybody MUSLIM JEW CHRISTIAN HINDU but not for numb nuts who make idle threats from the ‘saftey’ of a computer keyboard.
The Hobbit
June 13, 2010 at 9:19 am
”For what hath man of all his labour, and of the vexation of his heart, wherein he hath laboured under the sun? For all his days are sorrows, and his travail grief.” (Ecclesiastes 2.22-23)
HRH King Soloman
June 13, 2010 at 9:27 am
From Wikipedia,
“Hobbits as fond of an unadventurous bucolic life of farming, eating, and socializing, although capable of defending their homes courageously if the need arises.
“They would enjoy at least seven meals a day, when they can get them – breakfast, second breakfast, elevenses, luncheon, afternoon tea, dinner and (later in the evening) supper. They were often described as enjoying simple food—such as bread, meat, potatoes, tea, and cheese—and having a particular passion for mushrooms.”
“Hobbits also like to drink ale, often in inns”
“Hobbits also enjoy an ancient variety of tobacco, which they referred to as “pipe-weed”, something that can be attributed mostly to their love of gardening and herb-lore. They claim to have invented the art of smoking pipe-weed, and according to The Hobbit and The Return of The King it can be found all over Middle-earth.”
We have many Hobbit members of Ipswich Unemployed Action – made redundant after the smoking ban in pubs.
I assume The Hobbit is not a Hobbit but a Nazgûl in thin disguise out to defend the Dark Lord who runs the Flexible New Deal.
Andrew Coates
June 13, 2010 at 9:39 am
To Whom It May Concern.
I am a client of F.N.D in Ipswich and am on stage 4. I am quite happy to be on this stage of the programme, as when I do get a work placement. Like ALL those in training you start at the bottom and work your way up. NOBODY has the right to demand something for nothing in this life. I mean you are really [HOUSING BENEFIT IF ENTITLED TO IT ALSO COUNCIL TAX BENEFIT AND MONEY IN YOUR POCKET]. You are technically living free at the tax payers expense. I heard about this site and it’s links through a rumour at my provider. I have made the aware of this and A4E. It is disgusting that people are trying their hardest to help you into a job and SELF RESPECT and that you are throwing it back in their faces with continued insults on sites like this and it’s associated links. Mr Coates, I must agree fully with the person called Hobbit. There are now plenty of us on F.N.D that are happy for the chance this programme is giving us. It is the likes of you taht causes problems for the rest of us as Hobbit says. We don’t want to be sanctioned or be classed as contributors to this site. Some of the things that have been said can leave you open to libel actions. I only hope that this is soon. A4E and affiliates as I have said have been made aware of this site. I only hope that Google will listen to these complaints and remove the site.
I hope F.N.D goes to compulsory 6 Hours a day for 5 days. That way you won’t have time for sites such as this.
Mr James Middlesex
June 13, 2010 at 10:41 am
haha,
A4e + FND in Ipswich. You must be with Reed in Partnership, find it funny if you are enjoying it, but if you are then I am pleased for you.
A4e don’t have “affiliates”.
A4e have tried the libel route before with me, several times, all attempts failed. I don’t have a penny to my name, they have a multiple million turnover business.
Anyway, it is so sad for A4e employees to be leaving comments of this kind, you first start off saying you are a happy client then you state it should be longer in duration, and its clear that you haven’t yet found a job.
How can you be happy on FND Stage 4 when a provider hasn’t helped you secure a job?
haha, more to the point, have you ever been to Ipswich, as A4e don’t deliver FND here, its all subcontracted out to Reed in Partnership.
Sorry to hear about your complaints to an internet search engine isn’t getting listened to. Firstly, they can only deal on copyright infringement cases (not libel) and as I know from my own websites, Google loves browsing the pages to include in its index.
Just to confirm, nothing here is LIBEL (perhaps look it up in a dictionary?) – I personally take great pride in deleting all comments which are libel, but in this case, I am choosing not to remove your libel statement, to show you how silly you are as its unsubstantiated allegations that is impossible to be taken seriously.
Flexible New Deal
June 13, 2010 at 11:04 am
As regards threats of libel action, a blog hosted on Google would be subject to California state laws, so UK law would be invalid.
Funny A4e Photos
June 13, 2010 at 8:44 pm
Quite right. Furthermore, search engines have vast exemptions to legislation anyway as they are not seen under US law as publishers to material.
After all Googlebot (the Google Search Engine Spider – which gathers the internet to use in its website) follows millions of websites to index billions of pages absent to the prior knowledge of any human as it is all automated by computer.
Therefore it is high likely that a small percentage of pages included in the index (which only is an insight into website content via a snippet rather than publishing a copy – except for Google Cache which again is automated) might infringe the rights of others.
It must also be understood that there are different types of offences – A serious crime in America is called a felony – this is criminal law. Alleged libel etc. is a civil case.
Similar to how in England, a serious crime (murder, rape, assaults etc.) is in the remit of the police to prevent, detect and investigate and for the CPS to prosecute.
All civil cases are subject to the county court (not magistrate or crown court – both criminal courts) and it depends on the claimant as to whether or not to take on a case (known as “to sue”) as unlike a crime the police don’t have the remit to arrest for such alleged offence.
Flexible New Deal
June 14, 2010 at 10:24 am
Shoplifters of the world, unite and take over 😀
Stephen Morrissey
June 13, 2010 at 3:48 pm
James: Dedicated individuals and groups will always find time to expose the reality of what really goes on all these taxpayer funded job programs run by a bunch of money grabbing chancers AKA providers and post details on sites like these.
I for one am glad you posted, it proves this site really upsets them.
And for your information, you seem to forget that many of the claimants on these job programs have also worked and paid tax.
Funny A4e Photos
June 13, 2010 at 8:27 pm
Just Seen Your Comment
Oh biddy biddy biddy. Try a paper bag over your head if you are that ugly
The Hobbit
June 13, 2010 at 10:48 am
I was looking for a job, and then I found a job and heaven knows I’m miserable now 😦
Stephen Morrissey
June 13, 2010 at 3:44 pm
James I hope you do get a job. This does not look easy but you may well get one – no doubt as a footman in one of the Great Halls.
We recount very different experiences of the Flexible New Deal. Self-respect is not a word I’d use for it.
I understand than you don’t like people criticising authority. Blimey being rude about those in charge – shouldn’t be allowed!
As for living for free, well I suppose you’d like us living in the gutter if we don’t knuckle down. Then the state would spend even more money dealing with us – no doubt eventually in prison.
Please explain the libel bit btw.
I can assure you we will have time for this site even if they make us sit in an office for eight hours a day staring at screens looking for jobs that aren’t there.
And you are a ‘contributor’ to this site.
Andrew Coates
June 13, 2010 at 10:58 am
Good points 🙂
Andrew, sadly some people have no chance of getting a job. Fully happy to comply and suck up to FND providers, no friends so going to FND provider a few times a week becomes their social life, and after 12 months is up before they are forced onto workfare (known from here on by James as a physical social event) aren’t clever enough to realise the reason why they don’t have a job within that period isn’t because of high unemployment, because James is a self-confessed saddo or that he was just unlucky, but he was screwed over by his provider – they are paid for his attendance via a top-heavy service fee, him complying is ticking boxes they can show to DWP to say they are helping him and the friendly staff are a front of dishonesty (you know, friendly to your face, but not willing to help you by doing their job of finding you a job).
The sad element is, James is clearly the person, who is too dumb to realise that workfare is forcing him to do a job for under NMW which he could be doing for full wages at least 3 times as much money as the benefits he is scrounging whereas he wont be paying tax on his “earnings” and making a zero contribution; however, James, will consider the work like service in the Community as his contribution to society being happy he is still leeching from the state, making friends, not be lonely and have a representative from the provider supervising him that he can get some recognition from (“Woah James, you are really good at painting that fence! You are the best worker here by miles, keep it up! You will soon get a job from the hard work you are putting in”) so taking ownership as a mug for his slavery, increasing effort because he is too stupid to realise the provider employees are still screwing him without him knowing it and being a smug twat thinking he is the best there (obviously everyone else is sticking in less effort deliberately).
People like me on the other hand, knows when we are being lied to and done over. I don’t want to claim benefits an extra day that I have to, and although in an ideal world I would prefer not paying taxes, I am happy to contribute like everyone else has to. I also have to control my own destiny – they might have 12 months to try different things to get me a job but I don’t. If they are not doing what they promise, I will raise it with them. If they don’t like that then they should raise expectations.
Who is the dole scrounging scum? The one who complaints when service is worse than mediocre so has no chance of getting a job (someone like me) or the goodie-two-shoes teacher pet who shuts up and complys without complaint and ends up claiming for 2 years at taxpayers expense before deciding to start a mass murdering spree or commit suicide?
Flexible New Deal
June 13, 2010 at 11:32 am
oops… should read: “If they are not doing what they promise, I will raise it with them. If they don’t like that then they shouldn’t raise expectations.”
Maybe harsh but true. Shows a negative point about complaining and a positive point about complying in society. I am personally the worst kind – or so it is perceived – but these other people are solely reactive jobseekers and not pro-active job hunters.
Also, to point out I am not basing the intelligence element I mentioned above on academical qualifications – I didn’t do well at school back in the day – but I know by results (or lack of) how things are going.
If someone says to me “I have submitted you to several jobs”, I don’t assume that as I not heard anything back from any of them that they are simply rude and not interested. As you have to chase up jobs… I have to question it. If I then ask who the employers were, contact them and they return back saying they never got my CV or application… (or have no record of such) thats something I will have to raise with my provider.
If those several jobs are “hidden job market” applications they have failed me and hindered my opportunity of getting the jobs by not applying on my behalf.
If those several jobs are not hidden job market vacancies, then if I am recommended to them before I personally make an application, I have to rely on theirs, as I can’t submit twice for the same job. If I then find out they haven’t put me forward for them then them saying they had, has ensured I didn’t apply and lost me the chance of getting such vacancies.
Flexible New Deal
June 13, 2010 at 11:54 am
Surely, surely, slumber is more sweet than toil, the shore
Than labour in the deep mid-ocean, wind and wave and oar;
Oh rest ye, brother mariners, we will not wander more.
Alfred, Lord Tennyson
June 13, 2010 at 3:11 pm
“Nobody, including the Tories, wants to see genuinely needy, genuinely poor, genuinely unable to find work/unable to work at all people being made even poorer.”
Wrong. Go and read the comments by right wing nutters. Go and talk to anyone who works in Tory central office. Go and read the Daily Mail. Go and talk to George Osborne or Michael Gove or Nick Clegg or any of the other neo-cons in this government.
The multi-millionaire neo-cons who make up this government don’t understand the genuinely needy (and who gets to define genuine BTW?) and the genuinely poor. They can’t do. The concept of being poor is utterly, utterly alien to people like this who’ve inherited millions, lived lives of luxury and been told all their lives that this is right and proper. They don’t understand the poor and the needy and the unemployed and that ignorance breeds fear and hatred. They are backed by people who actively want there to be more poor and needy and unemployed because this drives down labour costs and standards of living, which in turn means less money needs to go to those at the bottom and can go to those at the top.
It’s not to use your terms “conspiracy theory fantastical idiocy” it’s what is happening right now, right in front of us! Who will these cuts hurt the most? Yes that’s right the poor and the needy. Who are the only people who benefit? Why look it’s the already extremely well off. Who are going to be the benefits of tax breaks? Here’s a clue, it ain’t the fucking poor and needy. What was the Con-servative’s flagship policy on tax before the election? Yes that’s right reducing Inheritance Tax. Who benefits from that? Here’s another clue it’s not the unemployed.
Do I need to spell out in 50 foot neon letters what is happening right in front of you?
It’s a war on the poor and the needy and the Tories trying to undo everything that has happened since 1945 and the inception of the welfare state. The evidence is right there in front of you.
Ipswich Warrior
June 20, 2010 at 6:39 pm
You seem to imply equality is possible. Where is your evidence?
Professor Plum
June 20, 2010 at 7:02 pm
Only Tony Blair and his Red Guards can save us now….They are all about equility and would narrow the gap between rich and poor, they would never bring in slave labour workfare, fiddle expences or lose touch with real people, or only listen to big buisness bungs.
The reality is the horse bolted 13 years ago and the stable door has been wide open ever since. The colours might have changed but don’t be fooled the same cronies who went to the same private schools with the previous crowd remain.
Don’t worry yourself it’s just (Big) Buisness as usual.
Same
June 20, 2010 at 7:57 pm
From somewhere in East Anglia.
If anybody wants to have a good laugh, go to the google website click on the video icon and then enter A4E in the tool bar. It will take you to YOUTUBE. Worth a look though
mystery contributor
June 21, 2010 at 8:07 am
at least robin hood robbed the rich to feed the poor.now they rob the poor to feed the rich.the goverment send money to non existant children abroad.they have it in for the poor and needy.tax the rich.what a life.people flock here like moths to the light because of our welfare system.the goverment wont treat unemployed and needy right but they will fling cash at the immigrants?what do you call 1 hundred tories at the bottom of the sea? a bloody good start.
a.victim.
October 20, 2011 at 12:56 pm
Another good Conservative joke,how many conservatives does it take to change a lightbulb? None,they will make somebody else do it for nothing.
ck
October 20, 2011 at 4:35 pm