Ipswich Unemployed Action.

Campaigning for Unemployed Rights.

Sanctioning the Jobless.

with 13 comments

The truth behind ‘sanctioning’ the jobless.

This important article is from today’s Morning Star.


“As a former manager in Duncan Smith’s Jobcentre Plus I have first-hand experience of seeing how easily damn lies become statistics.

The Work and Pensions Secretary is no stranger to being economical with truth. In recent weeks he has made some pretty unbelievable statements.

Like anyone who has worked for Jobcentre Plus over the last few years, I was amused, if not surprised, by the recent denials from Duncan Smith that staff had been given targets for sanctioning claimants.

“Sanctioning” is one of those popular weasel words. For the claimant it means losing your benefit.

Over the last few years I attended many meetings where instructions from above were passed on and we managers had to order staff to sanction or disallow more claimants because the office stats didn’t look good.

Managers were usually careful not to use the word “target,” especially in an email. The thesaurus must have been consulted on many occasions before they finally settled on another weasel word – “expectation.”

They do say: “If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck the chances are it is a duck.” It doesn’t matter what terminology was used, everyone knew what these were. They were targets.

Staff were told that there was an expectation that they would refer more cases for dismissal or disallowance. Put simply it meant more folk would lose their benefits.

No targets? Oh no. But if staff failed to achieve a required percentage, they could find themselves in line for discipline.

I worked in the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) for the best part of 20 years and the vast majority of my colleagues were motivated by a desire to help people in the most difficult of situations.

People working in your local jobcentre will live in the same community as the claimants they try to help.

Many, like myself, would have been claiming benefit immediately prior to working for DWP and had first-hand experience of life the other side of the counter.

This government’s attempt to bully the most vulnerable in society is not confined only to those who have no job.

Jobcentre staff complete an annual anonymous survey. Over the last few years 13 per cent of them have stated that they have been subjected to bullying in the workplace.

this constant pressure on staff and claimants may be counterproductive for the government.

Nearly three-quarters of DWP staff are members of the Public and Commercial Services union and PCS members have taken more action in the last few years than almost any other group of workers.

Today they are also working alongside claimant organisations to provide a united fightback.

We all know bullies only get away with their bullying by isolating their victims.

Our present Con-Dem government knows all about bullying. They have proved themselves a gang of bullies, and none more so than Duncan Smith.

That fightback need to start on both sides of the jobcentre counter. Public servants and those on benefits have exactly the same enemy.

Only by us all working and fighting together can Cameron, Clegg and the despicable Duncan Smith be dumped on the dole queue of history where only they belong.

  • John Andrews is a pseudonym to protect the author’s identity.

Last year this appeared in May.

Margaret Hodge, the chair of the public accounts committee, is to demand why a senior official at the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) denied that staff at jobcentres were being given targets to enforce sanctions on benefit claimants’ money.

This comes as the Guardian publishes another set of evidence of a targets culture; internal documents show evidence of this at more than a dozen jobcentres around the country. Civil servants had said previous cases were isolated incidents.

But the mounting documentary evidence and reports from staff suggests that across the country, on the ground these “scorecards” result in targets and pressure on staff.

By October the 22nd sanctions were toughened up,

  • Higher level sanctions (for example for leaving a job voluntarily) will lead to claimants losing all of their JSA for a fixed period of 13 weeks for a first failure, 26 weeks for a second failure and 156 weeks for a third and subsequent failure (within a 52 week period of their last failure).
  • Intermediate level sanctions of four weeks for a first failure, rising to 13 weeks for a second or subsequent failures (within a 52 week period of their last failure) may be applied following a period of disallowance for not actively seeking employment or not being available for work.
  • Lower level sanctions (for example for failing to attend an adviser interview) will lead to claimants losing all of their JSA for a fixed period of four weeks for the first failure, followed by 13 weeks for subsequent failures (within a 52 week period of their last failure

No surprise that in March this year we learn this,

The government has launched an inquiry after it was forced to admit that jobcentres have been setting targets and league tables to sanction benefit claimants despite assurances to parliament this week that no such targets were being set.

A leaked email shows staff being warned by managers that they will be disciplined unless they increase the number of claimants referred to a tougher benefit regime.

Ruth King, a jobcentre adviser manager, discloses in the email that she has received “the stricter benefit regime” figures for her area, adding: “As you can see Walthamstow are 95th in the league table out of only 109” – the number of jobcentres in London and the home counties. The employment minister, Mark Hoban, had assured MPs on Tuesday: “There are no league tables in place. We do not set targets for sanctions. I have made that point in previous discussions.”

The league table could only have been drawn up through information provided by senior managers in the Department for Work and Pensions.

Hoban had told MPs that decisions on sanctioning claimants “need to be based on whether people have breached the agreements they have set out with the jobcentre, and there are no targets in place”.

Faced with the email, the DWP said: “We are urgently investigating what happened in this case. If a manager has set a local target for applying sanctions this is against DWP policy and we will be taking steps to ensure these targets are removed immediately.”

Labour claim they did not vote against the Jobseeker’s Bill because an independent review of sanctions will take place,

Liam Byrne MP, Labour’s Shadow Work and Pensions Secretary, responding to reports in the Guardian of a major scandal in the DWP’s sanction’s regime, said:

“This is why we took difficult decisions on the Jobseekers’ Bill to secure an independent review of sanctions. We knew there were sanctions targets and now we’ve secured an independent report to Parliament to put right a regime in Job Centres that’s running out of control.

It cannot have escaped anybody’s notice that the idea of forcing people to use the Universal Job Match site provides an opportunity not just to snoop on the unemployed, and harass them, but to give another pretext for sanctions.

I have asked, when signing on,  what the local targets for making people penniless were.

Denial, denial and flat denial, that these exist.


Written by Andrew Coates

April 20, 2013 at 2:53 pm

13 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. These targets do exist, I was the victim of it myself. People across the country are finding the same thing happening to them so how can it not be an official policy when it happens everywhere in Britain??
    There is no such thing as a fair decision when those deciding are either Businesses making money out of it or Staff threatened with sanctions of their own if they don’t obey!

    Philip Warrillow

    April 20, 2013 at 3:12 pm

  2. So, Liam Byrne sells off the security of thousands of wronged claimants just for an ‘independent review’? What a useless twat.

    Ghost Whistler

    April 20, 2013 at 8:46 pm

    • Hi GW,
      You’re right – Byrne is a useless twat but even more dangerous since he represents everything that is wrong with the Labour Party, In many ways he is Labour’s version of IDS and indistinguishable in policies or speeches. I don’t now which is worse – the scumbag Tories who are so arrogant they make no pretence to hide their oppression of the weakest in society, or the Nu Labour hypocrites who have hi-jacked a once great movement and now pander to Mondeo man and Daily Wail readers.


      April 21, 2013 at 7:56 am

  3. If it were the general public that behaved like this toward the unemployed it would be seen almost as hate crime, but yet the government see it as ok to have the unemployed terrified over benefit sanctions. Some would see it as financial and emotional abuse.


    April 20, 2013 at 10:47 pm

  4. An independent review of sanctions? What utter bullshit. It was Labour who introduced Benefit sanctions in the first place! They won’t be getting my vote.

    Landless Peasant

    April 21, 2013 at 12:38 pm

  5. what can one do,work cleaning toilets as i do with a 0 hour contract,no job security im just like the shit i clean the way fckin torys want it aye.

    david cunningham

    April 21, 2013 at 6:52 pm

  6. Here is another sanctions tool used by the DWP, this one devised by a “US Torture Guru”:



    April 22, 2013 at 8:59 am

    • I did one of these ‘personality tests’ once.

      It came out with the startling news that I am unconventional and have views outside the mainstream.

      Andrew Coates

      April 22, 2013 at 11:03 am

  7. What did this manager get sacked for? Not reaching “expectations” (targets)!? Seemed ok getting paid taxpayers money to undertake this before why the sudden change of heart and change of job? The problem was exactly the same under Labour.

    The targets and rephrasing exercises is nothing new or unknown. I recall a (Ipswich JCP) manager tripping up and disclosing this verbally back in 2009.

    Universal Jobmatch

    April 22, 2013 at 11:42 am

  8. everyone needs to keep on their toes’ when dealing with the job centre,dont give them the opportunity to sanction.keep proof of everything and watch what they are doing when filling out jobseekers agreement’s, most of these changes are unexplained as the wording changes on the printed sides often.make sure you read all sides of their paperwork before signing anything.i have never had a problem following these steps.

    none of this comes as a surprise especially as far as duncan smith is involved,he just puts his foot in it everytime and shows what he is.


    April 22, 2013 at 11:58 am

  9. Hmmm. I’ve been sanctioned and everything about it is very odd. Can anyone help please. The brief details are as follows : I was due to sign on , on a thursday, and left it to late in the day to do it. I went in the next day(fri) and was told to fill in a form(non attend)and come bk on Monday. I returned form and was told I would hear from them. I went bk to JC on the Friday and told them I haven’t heard anything . They then told me they had forgot to send it!
    The following week I got a sanction for not looking for work. I told them this was incorrect as I was late for my sign on ,of which had nothing to do with looking for work. I typed a letter and submitted more evidence proving they were incorrect. I was told to fill in a rapid reclaim form . All my benefits were stopped inc hb. Two weeks later some money appeared in my bank account. It appeared they had reconsidered and given me my benefits bk. I had no letter , I had to ring up and ask what was the money for. However I was then informed that they have now sanctioned me for the original non attend instead (which is over 4weeks ago now)The sanction is for 4 weeks. I just went to sign on again last thurs and was given a letter dated October 2012 informing me of new sanctions and what happens. First time I got one. What the hell is going on ? Surely I’m supposed to get the letter about sanctions and changes before I get a sanction. Is this legal.


    May 7, 2013 at 6:57 pm

  10. My daughter is on jobs seekers allowance and has two teenage boys still at school. She has been sanctioned a few times but recently she has been sanctioned for no reason. One adviser tells her one thing another tells her its wrong. What is she supposed to do? People are being sanctioned for looking for a job, is this not what they are meant to do? If it wasnt for the “bank of mum” she would be on the streets. These people in the job centre shouldnt be allowed to treat people like that. I hope they are never in that situation. People are stealing when they get their money stopped, they get spoken to like dirt from some of the advisers. The whole thing stinks and should be stopped or reviewed.


    August 1, 2014 at 10:45 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 )

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: