Ipswich Unemployed Action.

Campaigning for Unemployed Rights.

Breaking News: Flexible New Deal Cost £31,284 per job!

with 14 comments

Work Programme Network can reveal that the Flexible New Deal has cost £31,284 per job outcome!

Add Future Jobs Fund jobs that some providers claimed for (TNG!), costing taxpayers almost £4k per job for the employee salary/wages. This job creation exercise has cost up to £35,000 per an unsustainable National Minimum Wage job.

Think this is bad? Some people are still waiting referral back onto Flexible New Deal although the providers are happy enough to cash in the top heavy service fees.We need to investigate the Flexible New Deal Fraud!


Written by Universal Jobmatch

November 18, 2010 at 11:30 am

14 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. My local Jobcentre seems to be trying to run New Deal down now.

    Since the heady days of my New Deal work placement in June (when I worked as an unpaid archive assistant) I’ve ben told that there are no plans to send me out on anything until next year.

    It’s obviously the calm before the storm!

    Squiddly Diddly

    November 18, 2010 at 11:47 am

    • These costs are outrageous.

      We all knew that the Flexible New Deal Placements were a matter of putting bodies on Placements to get them out the way, but there’s obviously a lot of money to be made out of unemployed people.

      No doubt the Work Programme will give more dosh to the Unemployment Bizniz.

      Andrew Coates

      November 18, 2010 at 12:02 pm

      • Well, the Government are still saying there will be no service fees etc. and only result based payments… This wont happen of course.

        Some organisations have bidded for as many as thousands of jobs under the Future Jobs Fund. I know that TNG in Ipswich were pimping participants onto the scheme so they can claim an outcome bonus.

        The “job interviews” were literally a basic 5 minute chat that would never happen in a REAL job interview, with a copy of your CV. The rest was left to a “prioritised shortlist” where people were checked for eligibility (Although no participants were told it was a Future Jobs Fund job- including the temporary nature of it).

        I am not sure how many FJF jobs they were… (https://intensiveactivity.wordpress.com/2010/02/05/flexible-new-deal-in-ipswich/#comment-1878) I think it must be above 100 (£35,000 x 100 = £3,500,000)

        And TNG are not referring everyone back with that cashflow… damn!

        Work Programme

        November 18, 2010 at 12:45 pm

  2. Can anyone help? I have just started attending the Job Centre since losing my job. I am keen to join the Work Programme now. My adviser said that I will have to wait. Is this true or can I start early. Thanks in advance. Fx

    F Kendall

    November 19, 2010 at 12:17 am

    • You will be waiting 8 months+

      I dont recommend it unless you want to become a longterm unemployed benefit claimant

      MP Expenses Scandal

      November 19, 2010 at 8:44 am

      • Yes, I’m beginning to think that putting a Work Placement on your CV is the kiss of death for any chance of a job.

        Andrew Coates

        November 19, 2010 at 3:52 pm

  3. Why not look at Romanian Bulgarian And Hungarian Jobsites. They advertise jobs in England. I am white ENGLISH and I have an interview from it.



    November 19, 2010 at 9:13 am

  4. Apparently it cost £1650 to organise each (unpaid) “job placement” (because a work placement is not politically correct if shortening it to “a job” whereas a “job placement” is a (unpaid) job.

    To stick it into perspective it approx works out at National Minimum Wage for 22 hours a week (assuming 13 weeks as quoted although MWRA is only a month as a minimum requirement).

    So how did it cost so much to organise a ******* work placement?!

    Now, assuming that they worked 40 hours a week for an entire 13 weeks, were providers paying just over half the then NMW to give people “experience”, are they completely sh*t with money or did Jobcentre Plus pick up the bill?

    It isn’t as simple as free labour = minimum/zero costs. With exception to the biggest exploiters… small businesses etc. that could do with extra resources to expand (thus allowing the trial period as a test period, with the possibility of taking the people on) might not have adequate workplace.

    The only real way of guaranteeing work placements is a workhouse style system – which is bad news.

    Work placements are a poor attempt at “second best” methodology. This deteriorates when “employers” jump in to take advantage of the free labour without the participants getting a chance of a job from it. People want a sustainable job. When these don’t exist or in such small numbers – emphasis begins on keeping people in the work discipline and gaining new experience/keeping current.

    The problem is, to make this significant there has to be a scheme…. a big framework enabling some form of equality of opportunity for all. Employers then realise its compulsory and dismiss the relevance of it – they don’t know whether the participant was forced or genuine – but more to the point shows the length of unemployment.

    The flaw is, work placements should never be any longer than 2 weeks, with one week being ideal. People then should rotate between different employers etc. – this achieves all the aims. Then the employer may do a work trial… but stick the money where their mouth is. A month rolling temporary contract at National Minimum Wage – which sucks when you want sustainable work – but atleast you are getting your fair return for genuine hard work.

    Work Programme

    November 19, 2010 at 5:07 pm

  5. these are seriously bad figures,this continues to put the spotlight and lord freud and his continued fitness to hold a role where a figure of half a billion pounds has been wasted,with dismal outcomes’.

    how many of the 16,200 are still in employment at this stage is another question,the claimed sustainable employment has gone strangely silent,now it appears a flexibility the ability to move into and out benefits quickly appears to be the aim,however this does nothing to address the situation of outside costs ie council tax where demands for a months payment can make short term work not in a persons’ interest.

    attitudes within job centre plus locally at least suggest a toughened attitude amongst staff to the long term unemployed,this is not the customers fault,they seem to beleave that somehow traveling distances will cure all problems’,this too is untrue given the costs in fares,the wages paid the figures dont add up,the ability to realistically access a location by foot at the destination,the employers attitude to long distance commutes on low wages “all the way from” typical,they prefer local people as they are likely to be more reliable.

    the sick and disabled are being sent into this environment as well as having disability benefits cut,these are the first group to fall foul of jobseekers laws,a case of depression has the potential to be interpreted as lapse lazy and disinterested,someones illness isnt their fault,this will all add to additional costs in gps time medication costs’,all this is a big mistake,the worse the attitudes get towards people the worse they become and areas such as mental health begin to suffer,people should not be made to feel its their fault when its not.this was exhibited on new deal where this method of bullying has detrimental effects leaving a person ever more likely to continue on benefits’ and make them even less employable because of their health,not everyone is so vulnerable but many are.

    the new rules proposed highlight a new desperation to try and tackle long term unemployment,it continues on the old theme its somehow your fault,the conservatives old tricks of division driving a wedge further between those in work and those out flaming resentment,poll suggesting support for tough measures,however as seen these are the first people to demand all the sympathy shout for benefit changes/increases when they become affected,the old “how can i be treated like this”.suddenly finding yourself in this group and being made out to be the bad guy comes as a great surprise.


    November 20, 2010 at 1:02 pm

  6. […] to Work community needs to take responsibility With recent breaking news of Flexible New Deal costing £31,284 per job outcome (or as much as £35,000 including the […]

  7. I’ve been attending a provider of the Flexible New Deal scheme for almost 12 months and I’m disgusted at the poor service they provide.

    It’s very difficult to complain about them too. One internal complaint saw me threatened with sanctions. I want to go over their heads with it but having a hard time finding out who i need to contact.


    December 17, 2010 at 10:13 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 )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: