Ipswich Unemployed Action.

Campaigning for Unemployed Rights.

Name and Shame Workfare Exploiters!

Refuted carried this information yesterday,

Court orders DWP to name and shame workfare exploiters

View full decision: “The DECISION of the Upper Tribunal is to dismiss the [DWP] appeals” https://docs.google.com/file/d/0Bwd25z9g2tFPNzZfbVdQSFRZM3JwZzVwX1hDS01Kc0R0V05z/edit?pli=1 (download as a PDF) and the full history of one of the FOI request’s of 25 January 2012, concerning the names of Mandatory Work Activity placement hosts. This tribunal decision concerned DWP appeals against three ICO decision notices (FS50438037,FS50438502 and FS50441818) all requiring the DWP to name workfare placement hosts.

Above via https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/successful_bidders

On the 15th of July we carried this on the notorious SEETEC (which ‘delivers’ workfare in the Eastern Region, including Ipswich).

We are interested in approaches from all organisations which feel may be able to offer project or placement opportunities. We have expert supervisors in place to manage and run projects but we are also happy to discuss existing projects which have supervisors already in place.

Of particular interest are opportunities which exist within Local councils and Housing Providers to increase numbers on existing projects or to create new projects of benefit to their residents and the local area they serve.

Examples of such projects include estate maintenance and local renovation, groundswork, horticulture, recycling as well as administration, customer service and sales, warehousing, distribution and cleaning services. The list of potential projects is almost endless.
If you are interested in working with Seetec to develop innovative and engaging ideas for the delivery of CWP please e-mail in the first instance to: bizdev@seeetec.co.uk or call Peter Walkerley, Business Development and Partnership Manager on: 01702 201070 Ext. 8262.

Alternatively, if you would like to offer support in the form of venues, projects or placements please call Seetec on freephone: 0800 65 25 414.

Who are the exploiters SEETEC operates with?

We want to know!


Meanwhile Boycott Workfare has its own list of workfare exploiters here.

41 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Will the DWP comply, or will they defy the ruling and rewrite the law yet again? We shall have to wait and see.

    jj joop

    July 23, 2014 at 11:11 am

  2. Problem is, IDS will just refuse to abide by the ruling.

    ghost whistler

    July 23, 2014 at 11:14 am

    • If he fails to abide the court ruling then the court will hold the DWP in contempt, – that could see IDS, McVey and all the other DWP cronies arrested.

      Obi Wan Kenobi

      July 23, 2014 at 2:08 pm

  3. You know volunteering is such a good thing so it saddens me to see it reduced to a whipping machine for a governments pleasure.

    Its just so counter intuitive to force individuals to commit to something that should be entered into in a freely spirited way. It makes me think that at least labour called it what it was “a work camp” when they named it MWA unlike the Tories touting it as helping the community when all along it was a wolf dressed up in sheep’s clothing. That all along the community labour they spoke of was to be identical to the punishment handed out to convicted criminals.

    Its hard not to see unemployment as a crime these days under the Tories but so as not to leave them out, labour wasn’t much better at treating them any different either.

    We do see the odd gem though like under Blair’s new deal when under the roof of JCP setup various courses attached to employers that most ended up taking the keen claimant on. This period marked the lowest long term unemployed figures reported in the modern era.
    Instead now we get if qualifications attached too lower levels to allow the claimant to prosper from it on the labour markets with no guarantees besides an interview. Its even been reported that claimants are being deselected on grounds of decades old crimes with nothing significant their after not to mention ostracising those with drug issues with some like pot smokers having absolutely no issues at all. These training centres/colleges are hiding behind and twisting current laws so as to appease the potential employer so as to line their own pockets rather than train and help those wishing to learn and work.

    I would like to say work programmes and work experience are a good thing which I still do believe, its just sad the ideology is crippled by single minded selfish individuals more interested in government hand-outs than helping the person their being paid for while being allowed to practice in said fashion by those that seek to crush the very sprit of public services so as to rectify an issue brought about by the banking sector. I’m not saying we don’t need to cut back, I’m just saying this global crash has so made it very easy to bring in things the public would normally never digest let alone tolerate.

    I have to wonder how long before we privatise politicians, MPs maybe the very government itself ?


    July 23, 2014 at 12:11 pm

  4. When Labour get back in to No 10 they really need to start re-nationalising everything, they have already stated they will put the Work Programme on hold and with all the talk from Labour regarding how unfair sanctions are, they need to abolish those too.

    Obi Wan Kenobi

    July 23, 2014 at 2:20 pm

    • Wow and you believe that? Conservative maybe a bunch of tos*ers but Labour were the same, or have you forgot. They ruined the country because Labour can’t run sh*t. You may need another screen name as your current on suggests enlightened intelligence and if you support Labour, well you’ll need you head checking.


      August 25, 2014 at 7:22 am

  5. Boycott Workfare today says,

    “It’s great news. Once again the DWP has been wrong-footed: the great work of everyone campaigning against workfare continues to pay off. The judge defended people’s right to challenge schemes with effective democratic action.

    However its not over just yet: there are still a few more delaying tactics available with further avenues for appeal that the DWP might use. Frank Zola, one of the people who put in the original requests for the names of workfare placement providers, says:

    “The decision of the Upper Tribunal, on the names of Mandatory Work
    Activity (MWA) hosts, has taken two and half years and throughout this
    period the ICO issued 3 similar decision notices that the DWP should
    disclose the names of MWA workfare hosts and the Work Programme . It
    seems clear to me that the DWP has been using these appeals to frustrate
    the public’s right to know who hosts workfare placements, more as an
    affront to the right-to-know principles of the Freedom of Information
    Act and the rights of campaigners, bloggers and members of the public
    to free speech and legitimate democratic protest.”


    They have a list of workfare exploiters on their site.

    Andrew Coates

    July 23, 2014 at 3:25 pm

  6. Reblogged this on Britain Isn't Eating.


    July 23, 2014 at 3:31 pm

  7. DWP access to Universal Jobmatch now lawful?

    A slightly off message, but related request for information on account of IDS continually changing the law. A Ms N McAllister has been given a Jobsseker Direction by her JCP adviser ordering her to give them access to her UJ account. Do we have to do this now.

    I thought this was optional.



    July 24, 2014 at 8:34 am

    • Rawhide, I would guess it’s just the adviser. It seems quite common that they tell people ‘its now mandatory’, to give access, but still isn’t. I haven’t seen,read or heard of any chances to now allow this.


      July 24, 2014 at 10:24 am

      • I most certainly do not allow access, they have enough Nosey Parker information already when you give an account of your job search and print outs.

        The regulations have not changed.

        Andrew Coates

        July 24, 2014 at 4:34 pm

  8. No prizes for guessing who has got the contract for the enforced 3 month, 35 hour-a-week job search in East Anglia. It’s our old friend, Seetec.


    jj joop

    July 24, 2014 at 9:04 am

  9. HELP!

    What is a “My Work Plan” booklet and is it mandatory? Will it effect my claim for JSA if I refuse to fill it in and sign it? Any help will be gratefully appreciated. Thanks.


    July 24, 2014 at 6:31 pm

  10. Claimants may also be asked to sign the ‘My statement’ section of the My Work Plan booklet
    to confirm they understand and agree with their requirements to look for work. However this is
    not mandatory.


    super ted

    July 24, 2014 at 6:47 pm

  11. Information request
    Is it a condition of Jobseekers Allowance or Universal Credit to complete a My
    Work Plan booklet ?
    Can completion be refused without sanctions being imposed ?’
    DWP response
    It is not a condition of Universal Credit to complete a My Work Plan. Under
    Universal Credit, claimants who are capable of work are required to take all
    reasonable steps to find: work, more work or better paid work.
    As regards Jobseeker’s Allowance please find below an extract from JSA
    Claimant Commitment guidance which, in our opinion, provides an answer to
    your question (you may find the final sentence of this extract of particular
    The expectation is that Work Coaches and Assistant Work Coaches will work
    with their claimants to actively use the My Work Plan booklet. The Work
    Coach and Assistant Work Coach should actively encourage the claimant to
    use their My Work Plan booklet to record their plans as it will help them to
    better plan, manage and review their work search activity. It will also provide a
    strong basis upon which the Work Coach can determine whether the claimant
    is meeting their requirements for actively seeking work and make it easy for
    the claimant to provide evidence that they are undertaking reasonable steps
    to secure employment.
    There may be times when the claimant has recorded their activities to the
    same standard in a different format. In cases like these, the Work Coach and
    Assistant Work Coach should then encourage the claimant to revert to use of
    the My Work Plan booklet. However, this booklet is not a mandatory product
    for demonstrating evidence of work search and claimants have the right to
    demonstrate what they have done to look for work through whichever means
    they deem suitable and most effective.

    Click to access foi-500-2014.pdf

    tell um to shove it up there ass and just fill in ur job search form as normal on paper and they cant do jack shit about it 😉

    super ted

    July 24, 2014 at 6:56 pm

    • Thanks for that super ted. I’ll be seeing the adviser next week and I will stick it to them. I’ll let you know what happened.


      July 25, 2014 at 8:04 am

    • People with certain learning difficulties/disabilities will have problems filling that useless tripe in.there is no “work plan” for people with disabilities or for the majority. The jobs are simply not there. They (jobcentre plus) continue to say there are plenty of jobs. their ridiculous “jobmatch” which does not do even do that, that shows differently.and certainly little to nothing sustainable.

      jobcentre plus should be offering support.instead they are not,doing this and are looking for easy sanctions,giving people the runaround,using pointless schemes after branding people as idle and lazy to the outside world creating the wrong impression to those that people are. and providing no evidence as such. this department faces irretrievable loss of confidence in its actions leading to its inevitable bleak future. with post work programme scandal which is used to waste peoples time and somehow hope the bullying works to get rid of claimants.

      jobseekers rules do not specify how evidence should be presented,and their foi tells that it cannot be specified.they however, seek to gain total control over how to.thankfully a few Eu laws have terminated that.


      July 25, 2014 at 11:52 pm


    There are frequent remarks being made on here about fake jobs.

    Well, here is your chance to tell a journalist about it. A Mr Robert Moore, from the Clydebank Post wants recent information on fake jobs – especially on Universal Jobmatch.

    Contact him by email: rmoore@cfpress.co.uk

    Helping Hand

    July 25, 2014 at 9:28 am

    • Firstly helping hand channel 4 already proved that without a shadow of a doubt.

      Secondly as is the law in the UK NO ONE is allowed to process personal and or sensitive data prior to

      A: Being registered with ICO or fulfil exemption requirements.
      B: Clearly displaying their DATA PROTECTION POLICY PRIOR TO (with contact details of how to gain further clarity of the businesses intent in regards to processing) CONSENT.

      Im not saying these businesses are not registered, im stating fact often than not NO policy is advertised along with the job prior to the claimant sending a CV. This practice is immoral as one sending a CV without actually knowing the facts has just given INFERRED CONSENT.


      July 25, 2014 at 10:14 am

    • Where did you see him asking this?

      There’s lots of info here of course.

      These get through to UJM

      Another Fine Mess

      July 25, 2014 at 12:16 pm

  13. The first question every claimant should ask themselves is what is so important that would make DWP resort to the drastic measure of issuing a jobseekers direction for access to a claimants UJM account ?

    I can only think of two, one of which is mute if the claimant unticks the option of people (ie employers and recruiters) looking at their profile and CV.

    One reason would be to see if you are benefiting in the best way from it. I mean have you used the right words in your profile and CV. Basically the words you use generates leads so often advisors try to persuade claimants to adjust these. Incase any don’t know, they cannot force you to change this if you choose not to.

    The second would be to check entitlement to benefit. I mean they will be looking for evidence to use against you like for instance your agreement might state you must check said account daily, now if their not monitoring it as they claim they don’t, they wouldn’t have a clue unless the claimant granted them access. Look at it the same way you would when you put in for housing benefit where a person usually comes around to your house to check your details of not co habiting are correct.

    To be honest im noticing that DWP are targeting certain people so it strongly leads me to believe that they already have had access so know the case before they even see the claimant to issue a direction for access. If it was any different we would all see a blanket cover stating a change of rules meaning after a period the tick box for access would be removed to all UJM accounts granting free access just like we see in the UJ act that as a condition of receiving benefit a potential claimer must open up a UJM account.

    This is only one option but the data controller of UJM (one DWP) could pass on counting data non personal) to a claimants file (your usual data file that DWP have when you sign on including subfolders) that the advisor has access to like for instance how many search results were generated as a result of your searches while logged in or generated based on your uploaded CV or completed profile or the entry exit times and dates to accounts.
    You see a nominated data controller has unfettered access to all DWP files be it personal or otherwise, only those outside of the data controller DO NOT have this privilege and as such would make it an offence to do so.

    Claimants need to get into the habit of asking WHY ?

    Don’t listen to the its procedure crap, ask them WHY IS IT PROCEDURE THEN ?

    If they cannot answer its highly likely they never had the grounds to issue a jobseekers direction in the first place.

    Basically you need to hammer away until they admit the exact grounds for issuing a JD in the first place. If they mention the word suspicion then also ask on what grounds is this suspicion based on ?

    BEFORE any ask, YES your advisor will go on the offensive followed by an attack or try to provocate you so as to fabricate grounds to go on the attack.

    No great victory has ever been scored without sacrifice, just ask Cait Reilly.


    July 25, 2014 at 9:44 am

  14. FAO Another Fine Mess

    Do you have any positive evidence that the link you posted featuring Recruit8.com is advertising fake jobs?

    Note, the journalist wanted RECENT information, whereas the other link you posted about fake jobs part 1, is from back in February!

    Helping Hand

    July 25, 2014 at 3:11 pm

  15. FAO Andrew Coates

    Did you post a list of fake jobs part 2?

    Helping Hand

    July 25, 2014 at 3:14 pm

  16. Errrr…….

    We have changed the Agreement for users of Ipswich Unemployment Action (see User’s Direction paragraph 265).

    Andrew Coates

    July 25, 2014 at 4:49 pm

  17. Iain Duncan Smith’s DWP in ‘Massive Cock Up’

    Vulnerable jobseekers in Sheffield have wrongly had their benefits stopped in the past six months, a new report has claimed.

    Sheffield Citizens Advice and Law Centre has published a new report stating it has dealt with individuals with learning difficulties and mental health problems incorrectly having their benefits stopped.

    Its report said one woman with severe bipolar disorder who had recently been rehoused because of family abuse had her benefits stopped for 12 weeks for allegedly giving up a job voluntarily – despite the fact she has never been in work.

    Another case involved a man in his mid-50s with learning disabilities who cannot read or write being sanctioned for not doing ‘enough’ jobseeking, despite him getting regular support from a local job club.

    The report also said one man had been sanctioned more than once because his Work Programme provider had sent incorrect information about non-attendance to the Jobcentre.

    Acting chief executive Clare Lodder said: “The evidence of our clients is that for many the punishment, that is to say ‘the sanction’, is often out of proportion to the offence.


    Obi Wan Kenobi

    July 26, 2014 at 9:44 am

    • For any who haven’t twigged yet this is whats meant by sanctions are a last resort.

      A: We want you to do this (advisor)
      B: Oh you disagree and have a logical and reasonable point, here have a jobseekers direction (advisor)
      C: Oh still don’t want to listen to my impractical ideas, well lets let the decision maker decide (decision makers are DWP employees who litigate DWP responsibility and to create a false sense of fairness to a rigged process)
      D: Right the decision maker thinks im right, wont prove it but stands by me, here have a sanction.

      Is that what you mean by a competent process then IDS ?


      July 26, 2014 at 11:36 am

      • Gaia:

        Couldn’t have put it better – Hey Mcvey your so fond of quoting the phrase ‘Sanctions are a last resort’ – Your full of Sh*t.

        They have just tried this with one of my friends, but they have made a grave error.

        They have sanctioned him on the basis that he had not done enough jobsearch for the 2 week period between signings, his JSA Agreement states 7 jobs per week (in the period in question he had done 29) but the adviser still referred him for a sanction.

        Big Mistake.

        He has her name and has consulted with another higher level adviser, and was told that the adviser concerned couldn’t refer him for a sanction on the basis that was given.

        He has now been to see his MP and has been told by the same MP that what she has done is beyond her remit as an adviser. The MP was not amused and will be following this up – big time.

        Sanctions are used against any person the Jobcentre adviser thinks is stupid enough to let them get away with it.

        Obi Wan Kenobi

        July 26, 2014 at 12:39 pm

      • By the way the Jobcentre in question is Eastbrook Court JCP in Bradford, West Yorkshire.

        Obi Wan Kenobi

        July 26, 2014 at 12:49 pm

      • Good on your mate as that phrase of “your not doing enough” is sure doing the rounds at my local office lately and these claimants to are saying “but im just following my agreement”.

        It seems clear to me that DWP need to establish an agreement on whats enough as basically in my eyes an advisor saying this is basically saying the last advisor was wrong yet we don’t see them get called over to explain do we ?

        Out of interest did they try and push a claimant commitment on him ?


        July 27, 2014 at 5:57 am

      • Letting advisers decide if you are “doing enough” or not is a recipe for arbitrary treatment.

        Andrew Coates

        July 27, 2014 at 11:44 am

  18. Updated: 15:53, 5 July 2014.

    The Brazil Nut strikes again: IDS anger as former Marxist Raquel Rolnik attacks his benefit cuts.

    In a 22-page letter, they claim that cuts introduced to tackle the huge budget deficit left by Labour may break Britain’s international treaty obligations to the poor.

    The move follows an ‘investigation’ by the UN’s controversial Brazilian housing ‘rapporteur’, Raquel Rolnik, a former Marxist nicknamed the ‘Brazil Nut’ for her eccentric views. She is one of three poverty ‘experts’ who have signed the letter.

    Last night Iain Duncan Smith reacted furiously to the ‘absurd and unwarranted intervention’ last night.

    According to concerned sources, the package of austerity measures enacted could amount to retrogressive measures prohibited under the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, ratified in 1974

    The report will be discussed at a meeting of the UN Human Rights Council in New York, in September.



    Hopefully you will be.

    Obi Wan Kenobi

    July 26, 2014 at 9:59 am

  19. National Online Recruitment Awards 2014:

    Remember the Wooden N.O.R.A. that the DWP won last year because the Universal Jobmatch website was so bad, well here’s another chance for them to win it again this year,
    Maybe the words ‘Mongrel, Breaks All The Rules and Terrible’ will be used again.

    The Finalists for the 2014 National Online Recruitment Awards will be announced here: http://norauk.com/finalists-2014/ on Monday 6th October.

    Our Winners will be revealed at our awards event, held on Wednesday 12th November, at Sway, Covent Garden, London.


    Obi Wan Kenobi

    July 26, 2014 at 10:41 am

  20. To anyone who has been sanctioned:

    Start naming the Jobcentre in question (i.e. the full address of the JCP) and if you feeling really pissed off, name the adviser concerned and the floor they work on.


    Start naming and shaming advisers personally and the JCP’s they work at.

    Obi Wan Kenobi

    July 26, 2014 at 1:11 pm

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: