Sanctions, Should We Film the Process? Video example.
Yesterday the Guardian published reponses to its report on the sactioning of David Clapson.
‘Even the sight of a CV would give me an anxiety attack’: Guardian readers on benefit sanctions
Our story on David Clapson, who died after his benefits were stopped, prompted a deluge of stories from Guardian readers struggling with the benefit payment sanctions regime.
We wonder if videoing when people get sanctions is the right, and permitted, response?
And if not, why not?
Here is an example (from regular poster Tobanem).
Ipswich Unemployed Action. 
The above incident resulted in the police being called. Regrettably we don’t know what happened thereafter – there was no “part 5” video posted.
Maybe claimants should contact the police first and get them to film the proceedings from the outset!
Let’s face it, many people are being harassed in Jobcentres everyday, and most are reluctant to speak out. If people feel scared, what is actually happening in legal terms is that they are being “put in a state of fear and alarm” – and I will argue that it is not possible for Jobcentre personnel to intimidate claimants – as they do everyday – without these claimants being provoked and “put in a state of fear and alarm”.
So, yes, report the matter to the police if you feel you are being provoked and are being put in a state of fear and alarm. Remember, the person who is putting you in a state of fear and alarm is committing a breach-of-the-peace!
Tobanem
August 7, 2014 at 11:50 am
I attended a CWP induction. They handed out a big folder of paperwork for us to fill in/tick box/sign. I signed/filled in/ticked absolutely nothing and I mean NOTHING!! Can they still send me on a placement. And can I be sanctioned for not filling in/ticking/signing these forms? Anyone know.
CWP Victim
August 7, 2014 at 12:02 pm
Did you film it?!
Tobanem
August 7, 2014 at 12:13 pm
No I didn’t, should I have?
CWP Victim
August 7, 2014 at 12:19 pm
For CWP Victim
My question was slightly tongue-in-cheek, given the context of the main subject!
You could of course argue that you do not have a CONTRACT with the CWP provider. You could also say that you have no SIGNED AGREEMENT with them. And you could add that you do not CONSENT to supply them with any information. You would have a strong legal position here.
You could also argue that you are being made to perform “Forced or Compulsory Labour”, which is now a criminal offence. I think it might be worth repeating here the definition of “forced or compulsory labour”. It’s defined as:
“All work or service which is exacted from any person under the menace of any penalty and for which the said person has not offered himself/herself voluntarily”
Mind you, all that might not stop the Jobcentre imposing a sanction! Are you able to survive a period with no income while you fight your appeal – which could take months?
You will have to answer that question for yourself. Print my comments and take them to a solicitor. I like your fighting spirit!
Tobanem
August 7, 2014 at 12:32 pm
Thanks Tobanem, will have to wait and see what happens. If they try and sent me out on some shit-shovelling “placement” or whatever.
The thing that really got my back up was when I first entered reception. I was greeted with the sight of a poor girl in tears because she was being “sent back to the jobcentre to be sanctioned” all because she was a split-second late for her bullshit appointment. And I thought, what kind of people are these C!”£%S – are they even human! How can they just plunge a human being into dentition without even blinking an eye, like something you would expect of a Nazi concentration camp guard – and another time, another place it would be these c!”£%S And I thought fuck you you bastards you are pure fucking scum!!
CWP Victim
August 7, 2014 at 3:22 pm
So they still give a folder full of useless paperwork? – Most people usually end up chucking it in the bin.
Obi Wan Kenobi
August 7, 2014 at 12:44 pm
Reblogged this on seachranaidhe1.
seachranaidhe1
August 7, 2014 at 12:14 pm
@Tobanem “The above incident resulted in the police being called. Regrettably we don’t know what happened thereafter – there was no “part 5″ video posted.”
Look at the comments on video 4. She was put on postal signings for 3 months. No more going into the Job Centre. That’s a punishment I think quite a few wouldn’t mind. LOL
AntonZ
August 7, 2014 at 12:28 pm
For AntonZ
Several people in the comments section on YouTube are still wondering what happened next – especially about any police action on the “blackmail” which had already taken place.
I couldn’t see any reference to a 3 months postal signing – the word “postal” does not appear in the YouTube comments section – and even if I have missed that one, it still doesn’t explain what happened next about the “blackmail”!
In any event there was no “part 5” video. Perhaps the original film-maker might see these latest comments on this site here, and produce “part 5” after all!!
Tobanem
August 7, 2014 at 12:48 pm
You missed it , it does
sean superstud
4 months ago
did they charge the prick
Reply
·
7
Hide replies
Honey Trap
4 months ago
Did they frig!!!!! After i had shown them the video my phone battery died on me so that’s why there is no part 5. Anyway i said to them is him (the manager) saying that he won’t let me sign on until i remove my video not blackmail? and they responded with some bollocks saying – and i quote – ”no it’s not blackmail because he doesn’t gain anything from it” (????????) I mean what the actual fuck is that psychobabble supposed to mean.? Christ on a bike…….
growls
August 7, 2014 at 4:41 pm
Thanks “growls”
I did not hit the down arrow to “view all 3 replies”!
It’s a pity about the foul and irreverent language, though I can understand why some people respond that way under these trying circumstances!
Tobanem
August 7, 2014 at 6:33 pm
For “growls”
In fact, I had to hit another “down arrow” even further down the comments page to get the bit about the 3 months postal signing!!
Tobanem
August 7, 2014 at 6:37 pm
Extensive Tips on JSA and ESA sanction appeals and claiming Hardship Payments.
(updated 6/8/14)
“Your chances of winning an appeal are better than 50-50“
Content
1) JSA or ESA claimant and sanctioned?
2) Mandatory reconsideration (Appeal first stage)
2.1) Reconsideration time frame
3) Written statement of reasons
3.1) Be wary of the telephone
4) Second opinion
5) Complain to your MP
6) Hardship payments
7) Housing Benefit and Council Tax Reduction/Benefit
8) Keep claiming
9) Jobcentre adviser is abusive?
10) Tribunal (Appeal second stage)
10.1) Appealing to the Tribunal
11) Sources of advice
http://refuted.org.uk/2014/08/06/sanctionstips/
Obi Wan Kenobi
August 7, 2014 at 1:04 pm
4) Be wary of the telephone Too right! If you are stupid/naive enough to have given the JCP your ‘phone number the “decision maker” will ‘phone you to try and catch you off-guard. Also expect unsolicited calls from other pond-life such as the BIC (Benefit Integrity Centre)
Say NO to JCP
August 7, 2014 at 3:09 pm
For “Say NO to JCP”
Have you had a telephone call from the DWP who use the number 08000 232 635?
Be careful if you dial it yourself – you get a recorded message saying “you were called by the DWP but were unavailable, if we still need to contact you, we will try again later”!
I believe this number needs much more investigation!
Tobanem
August 7, 2014 at 3:42 pm
Channel 4 News: 7 August 2014 – Universal Jobmatch – Latest.
Government website plagued with bogus and duplicated job ads.
The risk of fraudulent, misleading and confusing ads appearing on the government’s Universal Jobmatch website is higher than private equivalents, according to the National Audit Office.
‘No formal guidance’
Now, we have exclusively obtained a 10-page document by the National Audit Office (NAO) entitled “The Universal Jobmatch system and bogus and non-compliant postings”, which states that “there is no formal guidance on the depth or nature” of the checks performed on firms advertising on the Jobmatch service.
The terms and conditions which govern posting ads on Jobmatch ban fake, unclear, and duplicate ads, as well as those that require up-front investment, yet Channel 4 News continues to discover examples of these.
Channel 4 News also found that Monster, the firm running Jobmatch on behalf of the government, has itself posted duplicated ads – more than 1,100 in a single week in July. The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) pays Monster £365,000 each month for providing the service.
http://www.channel4.com/news/universal-jobmatch-bogus-misleading-ads-nao
Obi Wan Kenobi
August 7, 2014 at 1:25 pm
“Fraudulent jobs are rare on the site; it is estimated that fewer than 0.1 per cent”
Seems to be slightly less than our estimates. LOL
Another Fine Mess
August 7, 2014 at 2:58 pm
365k a month to run the site!
Monster are laughing all the way to the bank and IDS don’t give a shit.
ghost whistler
August 7, 2014 at 9:14 pm
Have you asked yourself the question WHY?
Why spend millions then a further 365’000 a month when we already have TONS of FREE jobsites ?
Why spend god knows how much on installing PCs in local offices along with utilising providers devices WHEN we already have FREE places to go to like the library for instance not to mention the likes of connections and so forth ?
Wasn’t GOVERNMENTS claim to reign in expenditure, theirs millions of videos quoting it precisely so why go against the grain when it seems so unnecessary ?
Why in the wording for the legal documents on this 35 hour jobsearch did they choose “not getting interviews” as grounds to instigate a claimant to do such. I mean its never been up to the potential applicant to decide HOW interviews are arranged and WHOM with. Its always been under the total control of the potential EMPLOYER.
WHY are GOVERNMENT NOT approaching these employers who turn down CV after CV?
Why do GOVERNMENT KEEP UJM in place KNOWING full well its littered with duplicate jobs with some advertising the same position up to five times in a SINGLE day?
WHY when UJM is just another INDEED type site that links itself to other more dedicated jobsites and has no original content of its own ?
gaia
August 11, 2014 at 8:58 am
So just to put the cost to date that the bloody useless Universal Jobmatch website has cost the Taxpayer.
Initial set up cost via Monster = £15,000,000
Monthly cost to date (from UJ going live on 19/11/2012)
(20 Months X £365,000 = £7,300,000
Universal Jobmatch total cost to the ‘Taxpayer’ to date = £22,300,000 – WASTED.
Obi Wan Kenobi
August 7, 2014 at 1:37 pm
Over £22 million pounds?
This is a scandal in itself.
How much does it cost to aggregate job ads from other sites?
And it is the least user-friendly site around.
We should make a short film showing what a load of cack it is…..
Andrew Coates
August 7, 2014 at 4:15 pm
07/08/2014.
Jobcentres ‘Do More Harm Than Good’ – Whistleblower.
Jobcentres have faced huge criticism over the last few weeks, and now an insider has come forward to tell his story of how management and the government, together with some dodgy frontline staff, are ruining the service from within:
I have worked on the frontline of a jobcentre for ten years, and despite everything you have heard, it is even worse here than you think.
Reading the regular coverage of these issues you may believe advisors feel more scrutinised than ever. You’d be right – we are watched over all the time, but it is our managers we worry about, not the media, and we fear sanctioning claimants too little, not too much.
The government claims there are no targets for the number of sanctions handed out, but how does Iain Duncan Smith explain that to the staff in my office who have been disciplined for not doing ‘enough’? If there is no target why have I seen advisors crying after walking out of our managers’ offices having been told there will be no bonus for them this year because of their low sanctioning rates?
Most staff don’t think about the devastating effect sanctioning has on people, even though it would take little effort to find out and we are faced with some obviously desperate people every day. To find the real culprits though we need only look up; to be frank, I cannot think of a line manager, or senior manager who gives two hoots about the unemployed. They are only there to meet targets and box tick.
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/nick-stephenson/job-centre_b_5654364.html
Obi Wan Kenobi
August 7, 2014 at 2:18 pm
At the risk of being unpopular, I’m not sure the camerwoman in the above is doing herself any favours. I don’t disagree that she has the right to record how these people treat her because we all know they don’t give a shit, but unfoprtunately they hold all the keys. If they refuse to let her sign on (i haven’t watched it all yet) then what are you going to do? You’re just hurting yourself.
it’s a shit situation, but I think you need to know how to pick your battles. The best way surely would be a hidden camera and then obscure the incriminating details that way they can’t identify you as the camerawoman.
When i posted clips of my conmversations with the Salvation Army on my blog I altered the pitch of the voices (mine and the provider). It sounds a bit munchkintastic, but noone else will be able to identify who we are.
Even though many of these jobsworth DWP types are just implacable cunts, you have to respect their privacy. I don’t think charging around with a camera reeling off a list of your rights (rightly or wrongly!) is going to help in any case. It will just antagonise them and again they hold all the keys!
I’m sure this won’t be a popular thing to say and no disrespect intended to the camerawoman, but there are a lot of people on youtube going around claiming they know the law and they know their rights, and many of them end up making fools of themselves. Especially these freeman on the land types who are just completely wrong!
ghost whistler
August 7, 2014 at 3:21 pm
The word beginning with ‘c’ is normally banned from this Blog, but in this case, in view of what Ghosty has suffered, it is wholly appropriate.
Andrew Coates
August 7, 2014 at 3:23 pm
Sorry, i don’t follow, What word are you referring to?
I’m certainly not defending the DWP! I’m just concerned that people aren’t putting themselves, even with the best of intentions, into situations they end up getting sanctioned for.
The DWP don’t need much of an excuse these days!
ghost whistler
August 7, 2014 at 5:19 pm
Nice to see that you have such high standards, Andrew. On Johnny Void’s page it’s a veritable free for all, including death threats.
See You Next Tuesday
August 7, 2014 at 6:15 pm
Bollocks! Johnny Void doesn’t even allow the f-word for fuck’s sake. One of the commentators received a life-time ban for using the word “bum”. Fuck knows what would happen if you called Iain Duncan Smith a c!”£. The Void is like a fucking Sunday school picnic!
Into the Void
August 8, 2014 at 3:19 am
Heres the problem with what your saying ghost whistler
The people that don’t take a stand are the ones getting sanctioned, Just yesterday I witnessed yet another claimant being lied to by an advisor about jobsearch evidence.
He completely ignored the fact it is the claimant who decides how they present evidence along with trying to insist that this woman MUST apply through UJM. This poor woman could barely speak good English yet despite all this the advisor came down on her like a ton of bricks, he didn’t even consider a lot of the employers and agencies on UJM leave their contact details without the need to apply through the site.
Trust me an advisor might do something to save their job BUT they wont put this job above having their shameful behaviour being plastered all over the net for all to see.
I don’t recommend masking voices as it devalues the creditability of the recording and does lead some viewers to believe even if that’s the conversation that was being had or took place.
Im sorry ghost whistler but unless a person wants to become a victim their just going to have to learn to make a stand or face the consequences, its as simply as that as DWP are simply NOT GOING TO CHANGE THEIR WAYS SO THEY NEED TO BE FORCED TO.
gaia
August 9, 2014 at 11:31 am
FAO Gaia
Well said.
Any bully will continue to get away with it until effectively challenged – and Jobcentre personnel know few claimants will effectively challenge them.
Lies and trickery are a fickle foundation for the subsequent intimidation and sanctions which take place every day in Jobcentres up and down the land – activity which can only flourish because few people raise any defence.
By the way, the woman who filmed the incident, lost the contest on points, for the simple reason that she was not allowed to sign-on that day – which is what she wanted to do in the first place. She did gain a small victory though, by being given a 3 month postal vote. And also note, she was not being “blackmailed”, she was being INTIMIDATED by not being allowed to sign-on that day unless she took down the video footage she had posted on YouTube.
It, my view, as stated earlier on this page, it is not possible to intimidate someone without putting them in a “state of fear and alarm”, and she should have brought that ingredient to the attention of the police.
As I also said, few people have the will and capacity though, to EFFECTIVELY challenge the DWP!
Tobanem
August 9, 2014 at 3:07 pm
Fucking disgusting. The Uk is a Fascist State.
Landless Peasant
August 7, 2014 at 3:52 pm
i have managed to piss of every adviser to the point none of them wil now deal with me and have a warning letter about my behavior to boot and now just sign n go, they tried everything to try and sanction me but i win every time 🙂 for now it looks like they have given up trying to sanction me and now leave me alone it seems as they cant handle me telling them the rules and regs on what they can and cant do.
the work programmer is mandatory, never done 1 day at the dump. was sanctioned for not showing up multiple times and one them all, no exit report either.
mwa is mandatory was sent home cos i posted on there fb page that they used slave labor at the store and was sent home, had a sanction doubt for no show and one again.
super ted
August 7, 2014 at 4:24 pm
I don’t think anyone will do their case any good by using foul language. It would be paradoxical if complaining of being intimidated if you are using foul language yourself.
Relatively few people have the will and the necessary capacity to take on the DWP successfully – and the DWP know it. That’s why they get away with it most of the time.
It appears “superted” is one of the few on here who have consistently won victories over sanctions – he should know all about the effectiveness of the “no contract” defence!
Tobanem
August 7, 2014 at 6:20 pm
they did get me on 1 sanction years ago now mind and was banned from the dwp and had to go in to the main 1 in town since then.
super ted
August 7, 2014 at 7:09 pm
When someone has a go they come in for scrutiny.it gets so bad this is the result.if someone is turning around and having a go about the law it puts the whole situation in a different picture.
No wonder they don’t want cameras’ and the results ending up on youtube.
tv licencing is another example of not wanting to be exposed by this form of publicity.and has often had videos removed of their activities.
ken
August 12, 2014 at 7:23 pm
we never have paid for a tv licence as we use the net and watch on demand ect so no need for one as we dont watch live tv anymore for a long time now. there is a cctv cam @ the front door tho, bailiffs soon change there tune when i say its live and recording and they soon stop demanding there money and will phone the police ect load of bollocks they come out with lol.
i had 1 come out for 10.50 then started demanding his fee of 200 pounds for getting it and then started demanding we pay it or they will take all our stuff and charge us more for that on top just cos he can by law so pointed to the cctv and asked to see his warrant to enter my property and what items he will be taking for his fee n soon fooked off.
day later they had the 10.50 as it was paid on time anyway by db card just was not updated on there system yeah right
super ted
August 12, 2014 at 9:07 pm
Nothing more to say! It is no longer a offence to not have a tv licence. The police will not follow it up.
http://www.bbctvlicence.com/
Ed
August 12, 2014 at 10:11 pm
Channel 4 News.
Jobseeker shocked as her data obtained via govt jobs website Universal Jobmatch.
Obi Wan Kenobi
August 7, 2014 at 6:45 pm
what was she specifically referring to? Did someone hack her account or something?
ghost whistler
August 7, 2014 at 8:58 pm
Don’t get it either, Ghosty! Would have helped if you ever has posted this had posted the full clip instead of edting in the Channel 4 log at the beginning – tosser! As this clip stands it’s just nonsensical.
What's this all about
August 8, 2014 at 3:05 am
BOLLOCKS
On the subject of foul and irreverent language, some of you might be interested in the derivation of the word “bollocks”. You might even be surprised or shocked at me mentioning this apparently very rude word.
Recently, a police officer ruled the use of “bollocks” on someone’s t-shirt at a demo was a criminal offence:
http://speye.wordpress.com/2014/08/04/gonads-to-the-spare-room-subsidy-the-lady-doth-protest-too-much/
Interestingly, the word “bollocks” originates in The Bible, as you will see from the article above. Previous court cases have ruled the this word not to be obscene.
Tobanem
August 7, 2014 at 6:45 pm
Even the police now think the bedroom tax is BOLLOCKS – more or less!:
http://www.24dash.com/news/housing/2014-07-31-Police-warn-that-relentless-bedroom-tax-is-pushing-people-into-the-arms-of-loans-sharks
Tobanem
August 9, 2014 at 7:56 am
well i dont foul language at them much as thats the fastest way out the door bar hitting them but i will never sign anything involving a contract with a 3rd party end of or give them any of my personal details as by law i dont have too.
also the dwp have my name address and a phone box number n thats it as by law thats all they need for my jsa claim, and they dont even need a phone number anyway.
i also make it quite clear that they are not there to help me and never were and just trying to find ways to stop my benefits any way they could and failed every time by using there own rules against them n they dont like it why i prob got a letter cos every one in there hears what i am saying to them and they dont like it.
like mwa for me was to gain some recent work experience when in there tool kit says it can not be used for this but got sent anyway and was sent home as i posted on there fb page they were using mwa at there store and reported them to boycott work fair and also ben has copy’s of my letters for mwa as well and proof i won it.
ot my jcp has now removed all phones now and put out of order on all of them, ill ask next time i go when the boards with the paper cards are coming back with jobs on them 😉
super ted
August 7, 2014 at 6:52 pm
The Jobcentre have had my phone number from the get-go, but they’ve never called me. And I’ve only had one letter from them to my home address in four years. And that was to warn me that I am now regarded as a potential threat to their staff and that the “Local Authority” may be advised that my record may have been marked (whatever that means).
See You Next Tuesday
August 8, 2014 at 7:23 am
For “See You Next Tuesday”
It appears they were trying to do a “Community Notification” on you.
In another “blacklisting” case – this time involving a local Council – a woman had her name added to a blacklist because she was ‘a thorn in their side’ and the council thought the move would mean no-one would take her seriously.
The technique is part of something known as “Gang Stalking”, and I have mentioned this sinister activity on here several times before. It needs more airing.
See this report for more details – and note the astounding number of parties who were notified:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1195399/Woman-branded-potentially-violent-council-complaining-damaged-flowerbed.html
Tobanem
August 8, 2014 at 7:44 am
Hi Tobanem,
Thanks for the heads up. I read the link and it was rather unsettling. I am going to write to the manager and ask him exactly what he means by labelling me as a potential threat to his staff and exactly who he has written to, as well.
See You Next Tuesday.
August 8, 2014 at 9:15 am
For “See You Next Tuesday”
It appears if you “annoy” any official these days, you could easily be put on a “Community Notification” blacklist for being a “thorn in the side” of officialdom!
You could also mention your case, and the one reported in the Daily Mail, to your local Press – although any action might make things worse because of the nature of this particular type of community blacklisting!
Tobanem
August 8, 2014 at 9:23 am
For “See You Next Tuesday”
What’s it coming to when even an argument with a binman could result in being blacklisted!
Tobanem
August 8, 2014 at 9:25 am
“Blacklists”
Here is an interesting comment from a member of the public, responding to a newspaper report about Council blacklists:
“All public bodies have black lists. My brother made a formal complaint against the actions of an Ambulance crew who were mistreating a pensioner. He was approached later by two of them who warned him not to call them as they would take the long way round. He has been taken once by ambulance since that threat and they made it very uncomfortable even dropping the stretcher.Then they told the A & E staff who left him alone in a cubicle for 6 hours. He now has a necklace with the instruction Do not take by ambulance. Wherever you go if you upset a public body your life is made a misery”.
Full report here:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2015332/Thousands-secret-council-blacklists-Personal-details-kept-residents-dare-complain.html
Tobanem
August 8, 2014 at 9:15 am
Could this be the reason that some people are having great difficulty getting work.
I have made complaints in the past and I DON’T give up until I get RESULTS
Mr Middlesex
August 8, 2014 at 9:32 am
For “Mr Middlesex”
I have it said that ensuring some people are made unemployable by blacklisting is part of the “Gang Stalking” world!
Also, look for the expression “providing information that kept certain individuals out of work” in the following report:
http://www.theguardian.com/business/2013/oct/12/police-blacklist-construction-workers-watchdog
Tobanem
August 8, 2014 at 9:41 am
Hey Tobanem:
My Jobcentre has also stated that they will no longer accept emails from me. I still send them to my adviser anyway and I also copy them to the manager and the complaints and resolution team as well, if only to ensure that I have some evidence to back me up should they decide to plead ignorance.
See You Next Tuesday
August 8, 2014 at 10:32 am
Channel 4 News 7/8/2014.
HIGH LEVELS OF BOGUS JOBS on Universal Jobmatch.
Obi Wan Kenobi
August 8, 2014 at 1:34 pm
We all know Universal Jobmatch ain’t worth a hill of beans. The problem is getting IDS and the government to admit it.
On the subject of threatening letters from the Jobcentre, I had one a couple of months ago as well. They seem to be handing them out like smarties. The Jobcentre will brook no dissent.
Gerald Whinfrey
August 8, 2014 at 1:43 pm
Have heard reports from people on Workfare in Ipswich (SEETEC), another subject for filming?
Andrew Coates
August 8, 2014 at 3:09 pm
Good to see workfare-exploiters TSCO (Tesco) shares plunging like a packet of out-of-date value pasta 🙂 Bond rating cut – now BBB – just one notch from junk. When it goes to junk their share price will turn to value mushy peas. At this rate Tesco could be on the way out. Another workfare-exploiter MRW (Morrison) is also plummeting like can of value baked beans.
Surrey Stockbroker
August 8, 2014 at 5:36 pm
Expect a dividend cut soon… 🙂
High Frequency Trading Bot
August 8, 2014 at 5:46 pm
Son left college last September. Claimed jobseekers. Had it about 8 weeks in total inbetween sanctions and a few £35 hardship payments. Was a easy target and provoked. Has had zero money for 3 months solid.
I’m supporting him. His dad…48 wks liver treatment. Claimed pip last august. 1 year since pip claim…..still not even appt for assesment. Car untaxed 6 months unaffordable …struggling to hospital 20 mile away on bus. Not just destitute now……completly numb.
h murray
August 9, 2014 at 7:49 pm
ABC of an application
Did you know that when applying through UJM you freely consent to hand over your private data to not 1, not 2 but 3 businesses and that doesn’t include all the third party cookies along the way.
Do you know any company including recruitment agencies MUST detail a privacy policy PRIOR to gaining and processing a persons personal and or sensitive data, HOW often do you see this privacy policy under each job ad on UJM?
Are you aware that prior to even that, that any businesses unless they can demonstrate exclusion MUST be REGISTERED with ICO, how many job ads do you see displaying a reg number or detailing exclusion prior to you applying?
Are you aware that any business HAS to have a FIRM LEGAL BASIS for requiring every bit of your personal data, How often do you have a company after rejecting your application state their destroy your personal data ?
I could go on and on about how claimants are being USED for others GAINS but it seems to me most claimants are content with this, content that why they fester penniless, others are routinely profiting from their data , not to mention in the case of DWP how for many its been detrimental after being slapped with a sanction.
gaia
August 11, 2014 at 9:24 am
Gaia
So what you are saying is if a person with a new mobile phone number (one week old), puts that number on a CV and then receives a call from the DWP on 08000 232 635 just a few days later, after having sent the CV to just two employers via Universal Jobmatch, then Universal Jobmatch is not trustworthy – especially when one of these job applications was sent via Company Confidential!
What would you do if you were the “victim” of this “CV farming” or Data Protection Issue – or whatever else it is called?
Are the various ” anonymous agencies” which use Company Confidential also implicated in “entrapment”? Does the DWP use Company confidential?
outraged
August 11, 2014 at 10:11 am
Mobile phone numbers get reused 6 months to 2 years after they’ve been cut off. I’ve had 2 brand new PAYG sims that get incoming calls and ppi texts.
The calls people get from the dwp number are often random, people not claiming any benefit sometimes get them.
The Company Confidential postings are rarely a 1 off posting, they’re usually spammed all over the place – makes tracing them easy-ish.
Over to gaia.
Another Fine Mess
August 11, 2014 at 11:01 am
For a start im afraid you cant call it entrapment because you consented to it the moment you signed up for a UJM account. The rules clearly stated DWP reside as the data controller and this person my friend has full access to any data as is stipulated in the data protection act, this includes any potential employers that decide to advertise on the site.
I have already explained in numerous old posts to this site what people can do, like for instance as the data subject (original owner of personal and or sensitive data,thats you) has the legal right to control the flow of said data in respect to both second and third parties. With this you can alter or remove any personal data as you see fit.
So to avoid CV farming as you call it (its all just called data mining) I advised removing full names (use only fore or surname but not both), remove home address, remove phone number (leave an email address). Also remove company names and dates where you worked previously, any qualification certificated numbers, colleges,schools, uni addresses or date attended.
An alternative and a better practice is obviously to limit this datas exposure so for say UJM (could be done on every jobsite) I would replace the CV all together with a privacy notice that once sent informs the potential employer (the only person who really needs the data) why the information is restricted and how if they contact you at your preferred email address that you will engage them, form a bond and will happily supply them with a proper more informative CV.
Now with agencies its a little different as with them you must first findout what sort of agency they are. This is decided by who is actually paying you like for instance if you were with HAYS they use an umbrella payment system so would mean they have a legit reason like the employer why they would need to process your data. If its an agency that merely takes a fee for finding a client and runs then you restrict it and say your be happy to hand all the personal data to this potential employer during a physical one to one interview. At this point its up to you to decide whether or not you chose to restrict this potential employers rights to convey any of this data to a third party, namely the agency.
gaia
August 12, 2014 at 7:54 am
PS: Forgot to mention to replace the home address with your area so for instance if you live in Manchester and this job is in Bradford, put Manchester instead of house number, street name, etc. In the case of a job within Manchester and you living their put the area instead like say Trafford for instance.
gaia
August 12, 2014 at 8:01 am
I can concur with Another Fine Mess. Posted Today At 11:01. I found 3 numbers I know nothing about in the ”diverted too” calls in my phone. Turns out that the number I have now has had TWO previous owners before I got it in 2008. So Gaia as A>F>M says. Over to you
Greenford
August 11, 2014 at 11:20 am
IDS in cloud cuckoo land…again!
Welfare reforms driving the “jobs miracle” must continue, says Work and Pensions Secretary Iain Duncan Smith.
In a speech in London, he said that changes so far had played a key role in getting people back into work and ending a welfare dependency culture.
But they needed to go further as the UK faced challenges from other countries.
Rachel Reeves, Labour’s shadow work and pensions secretary, said: “David Cameron’s government has failed to control social security spending and is set to overspend on welfare by a staggering £13bn.
“The government’s flagship welfare reforms are in chaos.
“Millions of taxpayers money has been wasted on the £12.8bn universal credit, which less than 7,000 people are claiming.”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-28735336
Obi Wan Kenobi
August 11, 2014 at 5:02 pm
I would like to know how IDS intends to address social housing rent rises dew some time soon as some have declared it will be quite some hike which is no doubt down im sure to recovering losses from the existing housing benefit arrangement.
From the unemployment benefit side of things including housing I cant see where besides mass sanctioning, this government will be able to introduce further cuts.
I suspect apart from a disincentive to claim, the 35 hour jobsearch brought in or to be was probably introduced on the thin notion of one of my favourite subjects, yes you guessed it “the law of averages”, so you know what I have said and proved in the past when it comes to that notion.
The work programme an already tried and failed scheme is merely kept about so as to dilute employment figures and thus deceive the working public along with cap and other schemes.
I hate to say it but the only three places one of which is still off the table is
Pensions
Family and children
Ill and incapacitated
As I said before, you can get everyone into work BUT this will do very little to effect the overall cost of welfare and its annual rise dew to poor wages meaning most will still be dependant on welfare in addition to an earned wage.
gaia
August 12, 2014 at 9:29 am
Families n children already hit. My working n child. Tax credits only up 1% this year n child benefit rose by 30 p.this year after 3 year. Freeze ( I’m a single, working mum)
kat rehman
August 15, 2014 at 11:23 am
On another tach, I truly believe Iain Duncan Smith is scared to death of moving or being moved (in a reshuffle) to another government department.
The reason being is that he would be under more scrutiny than he is now and his shortcoming’s as a minister would become all too apparent very early in his new role.
In other words it would become very clear that the pathetic excuse for man has never had any vestige of an idea of what he’s actually doing and has no idea how to do it.
Obi Wan Kenobi
August 11, 2014 at 5:16 pm
You know of all IDSs talk, I have yet to hear how he intends to help those who for one reason or another cant get an employer to hire them no matter how many interviews they sit.
More than ever employers and agencies are barring applicants on the basis of old criminal convictions spent but have to be declared under the ever abused CRB (name has changed), barring applicants dew to admissions of drug and or alcohol related past times, particularly drugs what with their being zero tolerance so no permissible level like alcohol.
Now to add some scope on this drug and alcohol testing it would mean you would fail a test if say you had consumed one joint of cannabis be it first time or not at 10 oclock last night and attended an interview a day later where as with alcohol your allowed so many units.
Moving on another instant fail with employers is any long periods of unemployment, say a year and onwards.
These hard to help claimants as I will call them would actually need jobs created for them and im not talking volunteering what with employer after employer rejecting them.
What is IDS going to do about that then because if he can solve that by which I mean actually help and not sanction or reduce benefits, he could solve anything.
So IDS, put that in your pipe and ponder on it ?
gaia
August 12, 2014 at 9:50 am
Gaia, you’ll find this an interesting antidote to the venom of IDS:
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/aug/12/iain-duncan-smith-welfare-reform-benefits
Tobanem
August 12, 2014 at 12:21 pm
And this one should vividly challenge the rampant delusional lunacy prevailing in the insane world of welfare “reform”:
http://voxpoliticalonline.com/2014/08/12/amputee-veteran-told-to-get-a-job-despite-having-no-way-to-get-to-it/
Tobanem
August 12, 2014 at 12:59 pm
Don’t Forget:- In some cases Housing Associations {Social Landlords NOT Local Authority} can compete with the PRIVATE SECTOR and charge rents accordingly. You would still get HB and CT help-,NOT as much if you were in LA housing* * This has been mentioned by others here in the past.
Philip
August 12, 2014 at 9:54 am
The original question at the start of this particular post was: “we wonder if videoing when people get sanctions is the right, and permitted, response. And if not,why not”?
It looks as though there is no definite answer here! It’s almost like the Scottish Independence referendum, yes or no – a lot of people are bewildered and simply “don’t know”?
Going by life’s practicalities, most people don’t video incidents at the Jobcentre, and even at the best of times, the battery might run out – as it did in the case illustrated! That is why there was no part 5 in this case!!
Meanwhile, it’s business as usual at the sanctions factory.
By the way, Gaia, if I can digress from the main subject here, you first mentioned the subject of “entrapment” in relation to the DWPs controversial 08000 232 635 number. Any more comments on that one?
Tobanem
August 12, 2014 at 11:44 am
Sorry Tobanem, lifes hectic right about now.
Ok if any remember the last post to this ” we wonder if videoing when people get sanctions is the right, and permitted, response. And if not,why not”. I made it pretty clear im all infavour and openly encourages others to record,take statements and the likes providing they know how to navigate the situation.
My point of view aside it only stands to reason that the moment people ever get caught out on camera all but guarantee’s an end to whatever they were doing. Shows like panorama and all the rest of the media have not only proved this case in point but have actually made a living out of it.
As I aptly put on that post “how does a verbally abused spouse prove shes been verbally abused”. She wont have any marks will she and because of such a complex situation is why a judge will often entertain the notion. Also don’t forget if a person breaks the law, the second they do they instantly forfeit their right to privacy under the data protection act.
As for entrapment i recall mentioning it while covering a please leave our property post but never actually got into it as to be honest its a difficult subject to cover if we considering giving people a good grounding in it. Put it this way its an extremely difficult case to make.
gaia
August 12, 2014 at 4:22 pm
What about the signs on the doors and walls of the Jobcentre that state NO MOBILE PHONES or PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR PHONES ?
Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2014 at 5:22 PM
Philip Brown
August 12, 2014 at 5:07 pm
What about the prohibition signage?
ISO 7010:2011 prescribes safety signs for the purposes of accident prevention, fire protection, health hazard information and emergency evacuation.
All official signs regulated under law must conform to this standard and purpose.
So they cant point to the sign and then say its because you might record something as that has NOTHING WHATS SO EVER to do with the signs official capacity.
Neither does playing videos, games or surfing the net to give but a few of the many things smart devices can do these days.
The NO MOBILE sign is behind the times as smart devices are anything but a simple cellular phone and to put context to this I could be in the local office with a Bluetooth laptop using SKYPE, yet they couldn’t use the sign on me. This is exactly what a smart device is but very much smaller.
You have to remember that with todays phones that the cellular part is just one little part so by description cannot be branded as a mere mobile phone, especially if its not being used as at the time.
gaia
August 13, 2014 at 7:14 am
It looks as though everyone’s batteries have ran out on this page!
I might be proved wrong, though!
Tobanem
August 12, 2014 at 2:28 pm
Government even the deceased brother set about trying to debunk welfare reform as reason for suicide as the death toll rises.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-28738208
DWP say “There are often complex reasons as to why people may commit suicide and we would not comment further”, oh what a surprize ?
gaia
August 13, 2014 at 7:18 am
Gaia
I’m sure you’ll find the following quote of interest after your comment on the “Bedroom Tax” suicide case.
“The substantive issue: A DWP statistical release in 2012 showed that more than 200 people were dying every week as a result of Iain Duncan Smith’s changes to assessment procedures for incapacity benefits – either they were put into groups where unreasonable demands were placed on them or the stress and anxiety of constant re-assessment was too much for their bodies to take. MANY WERE DRIVEN TO SUICIDE”.
Article here:
http://voxpoliticalonline.com/2014/08/12/foi-or-just-fu/
And I haven’t even mentioned the soaring rates of suicide in Britain’s increasingly overcrowded prisons!
Tobanem
August 13, 2014 at 8:49 am
Guilty of Corporate Manslaughter in the Bedroom Tax suicide case?
“Organisations including government departments are GUILTY OF CORPORATE MANSLAUGHTER if the way in which their activities are managed or organised causes a person’s death, and amounts to a gross breach of a relevant duty of care owed by the organisation to the deceased.
An organisation is GUILTY OF AN OFFENCE if the way in which its activities are managed or organised by its senior management is a substantial element in the breach”.
Article here:
http://voxpoliticalonline.com/2014/08/12/government-should-face-corporate-manslaughter-charge-after-suicide-verdict-on-stephanie-bottrill/
Tobanem
August 13, 2014 at 9:01 am
Here is another interesting video at a Jobcentre – a Jobcentre where public telephones have been removed:
http://blueannoyed.wordpress.com/2014/08/13/disabled-man-attacked-by-g4s-security-at-newcastle-jobcentre/
Tobanem
August 13, 2014 at 12:40 pm
MURDERED BY THE PCS UNION!!
PCS UNION ARE SCUM!!
RIP DAVID CLAPSON
August 13, 2014 at 10:27 pm
Not all Jobcentre Civil Servants belong to the PCS Union!
Tobanem
August 14, 2014 at 8:07 am
Tobby. Don’t Forget The Mangers COULD Be Division 1 Civil Servants Depending Or Staffing Rank.
Greenford5000
August 14, 2014 at 10:49 am
Too right! Most of them belong to the SCUM!!
Jobcentre Staff Are SCUM
August 15, 2014 at 1:18 am
Talking of notices any have a sign put up recently
stating if a claimant doesn’t have the JS booklet or ID, that they will be refused entry to sign on.
Youd expect to see this at the door but in my local office, you have to actually enter the building to see this notice ?
While talking notices in my last post I mentioned signage and the exacting ISO codes it must follow inorder to be deemed official.
WELL, if in your local office they have used a print out for a sign like NO MOBILES for instance, then this sign IS NOT A OFFICIAL NOTICE AND YOU DONT HAVE TO COMPLY.
If we have to stick to the rules then let us at least make sure they stick to theirs as after all the civil service code/oath/obligation THEY must SIGN PRIOR to employment states they MUST OBEY AND ENFORCE THE LAW.
Finishing off and this just may only be one of my local offices but I have seen a notice strapped to the old jobpoints that quotes the following
“Give respect, get respect”
which I assume is aimed at the under 24s.
Well young claimants this is utter nonsense and the correct phrase is
“you don’t give respect, you earn it”
Respect is built over time on trust and honour, so tell me, how many people do we say we just trust even though we don’t know them or have just met them ?
Also if we go by their phrase, then what is DWP displaying everytime they ask for your jobsearch evidence, wheres the trust then, how respectful is NOT taking someone at their word?
Theirs no law that states we have to trust or even be polite, why do you think in the case of being polite you had to agree to it as part of your original agreement to getting benefit in the first place?
gaia
August 14, 2014 at 7:36 am
Hey Gaia, there you go on again about “standing up for your rights”. If you stand up for your rights in the jobcentre the fucking jobcentre will fucking get you one way or the other. The more you stand up for your rights the more of a target you make yourself. The jobcentre hold the upper hand and all the power. They will fucking break you. So stop talking fucking shit, Gaia cos you are fucking full of it
Gaia talks shit
August 14, 2014 at 7:38 pm
i stand up for my self and have not lost yet and won every sanction i have had from the dwp and providers, ur name says it all, the last part anyway 😉
super ted
August 14, 2014 at 8:43 pm
But ted, you do give the impression that you can “afford” to get sanctioned, it’s more like a big game to you, ted. But not everyone is in that fortunate.
Anjam
August 14, 2014 at 11:50 pm
Seriously ted, anyone can tell the jobcentre to fuck off if you manage without your benefit money.
Anjam
August 14, 2014 at 11:53 pm
With all due respect, ted you sound as if you still live at home with your parents. And if you don’t mind me saying so, you come across as being very young and immature. Jobcentre Plus DO have a policy of crushing ‘dissent’. The more a jobseeker ‘resists’ the more arrows they place in their back and the more they will be singled out for victimisation. It is jobseekers who are challenging the jobcentre who are being placed on the most brutal schemes imaginable. And, by the way, I do not believe for one minute that “Gaia” is an actual bona fide jobseeker.
Jobcentre Mole
August 15, 2014 at 6:16 am
I have some of gaia’s posts. I think I may have worked with this person in the old Inland Revenue and then the old DHSS. I also have a hunch they are working for the dwp still.
mr nervous norman
August 15, 2014 at 8:11 am
most of my jsa goes in rent so cant afford any sanction of my benefits and the dwp know this and still try to sanction me anyway i fight them and win every time and have done it for more than 10 years and never lost.
super ted
August 15, 2014 at 9:35 am
Too fucking right, Jobcentre mole… challenge the fucking Jobcentre and they will fucking PUNISH you…. in fact, they will break your fucking back – literally.
Verti Brae
August 16, 2014 at 10:59 am
I must say I’m quite flattered that I impressed you so much you just couldn’t resist naming yourself after me, it brings a tear to my eye.
That said please refrain from using full text for swear words as this site is open to the viewing of any age group so lets not teach them anymore than they already know.
gaia
August 17, 2014 at 10:30 am
To Jobcentre mole and Mr nervous Norman
I hate to rob you both of your presumed originality but you have just joined a very long list of others who have tried that chestnut and failed miserably.
I will be the last person to stifle free speech but trust me when I say “your wasting your time lads, I will still be here long after you have gone”.
gaia
August 17, 2014 at 10:37 am
This page started off as a piece about videoing in Jobcentres.
Well, here is an AUDIO recording starring IDS himself on why he has no regrets about Welfare Reforms:
https://audioboo.fm/boos/2392874-iain-duncan-smith-tells-lbc-he-has-no-regrets
WARNING: May induce rage in any person connected to the real world!
Tobanem
August 14, 2014 at 9:17 am
INTERESTING VIEWING COMING UP
Well, well, well, Benefits Street’s “White Dee” is scheduled to speak at this years Conservative Party Conference!
IDS will be in attendance! White Dee hopes to take David Cameron out for a drink later!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/11027409/Benefits-Streets-White-Dee-to-speak-at-Conservative-Party-Conference.html
Tobanem
August 14, 2014 at 9:28 am
RED CARD FOR LIB DEMS IN 2015
Meanwhile, The Guardian has a piece on the Lib Dems silly “Yellow Card” for benefit claimants.
In the “comments” section at the end, the first commentator shoots this piece of drivel down in flames by saying: “The electorate will be showing the Whigs the red card in 2015…” That’s one of the best comments I have ever heard!!
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/aug/13/lib-dems-yellow-card-benefit-rules-warning
Tobanem
August 14, 2014 at 9:43 am
How long before we will be told that we must power down phones etc before entry to Jobcentres
Greenford5000
August 14, 2014 at 10:57 am
Jobcentre adviser: “The reforms have been designed to hide the numbers of unemployed.”
We interviewed a Jobcentre adviser to ask about their experiences of welfare reforms since the coalition came to power. Having seen the changes and effects of unprecedented reforms, we wanted to know how their job experiences and demands had changed.
In the first part of this interview we talk about changes to welfare since the coalition and how the number of unemployed is remaining hidden under reforms.
http://realfare.wordpress.com/2014/04/29/interview-with-a-job-centre-advisor-the-reforms-have-been-designed-to-hide-the-numbers-of-unemployed/
Jobcentre Adviser: “I am unable to emphasise enough, what a massive con and waste of taxpayer’s money the Work Programme is.”
In the second part of our interview with a Jobcentre adviser we talk about sanctions and the Work Programme.
Have you ever experienced any use of target culture for sanctioning? If not, what are you told about sanctioning? If yes, how are you told to sanction and by who?
http://realfare.wordpress.com/2014/04/30/job-centre-adviser-i-am-unable-to-emphasise-enough-what-a-massive-con-and-waste-of-taxpayers-money-the-work-programme-is/
Obi Wan Kenobi
August 14, 2014 at 11:57 am
Part two of this interview is most interesting so I will put the whole thing up on here.
In the second part of our interview with a Jobcentre adviser we talk about sanctions and the Work Programme.
Have you ever experienced any use of target culture for sanctioning? If not, what are you told about sanctioning? If yes, how are you told to sanction and by who?
“This is the type of thing that would not be out of place in the novel ‘Catch 22’. We are constantly told by managers ‘there are no targets, only expectations.’ However, the expectations are based on the highest performing local offices or Districts. So, say I work with a colleague who sanctions because they get some sort of sick power kick from it (I do know some people like this, there are some in every office). They might refer 7 people for a ‘doubt on their actively seeking’ per day. In your team meetings or one-to-one, it will be mentioned, and staff will be asked why they haven’t got as many. Regardless of what the DWP official line is, nobody is ever reprimanded for referring too many. The only time that would come up is if a large amount of the referrals were allowed (not sanctioned) by the Decision Maker because they were poor quality – i.e. the evidence sent over was poor or the person had actually shown they had done sufficient searches for their Jobseeker’s Allowance. Some staff are getting scared that they aren’t doing enough and they will be marked in the ‘must improve’ category. Enough warnings and you could be out of a job. So Iain Duncan Smith will tell you that there are no targets and if any manager is still using the term target they will get a reprimand. However, I have seen the District tables which clearly show the direction an office is travelling in with regards to sanctions and referrals. Offices which are lower than the highest performing office will be told they must aim towards similar numbers or else. They are too crafty to put anything in an email, or at least most of them are.”
What have been your experiences of the success/failure of the Work Programme? Have you referred many people onto it?
“I have referred hundreds. I am unable to emphasise enough what a massive con and waste of taxpayer’s money this is. Daily, I speak to those poor souls on this mad scheme and many who have returned after a 2 year stint. How journalists have not scooped this, I do not know. The payment by results contract is an incentive to do nothing. Look at it like this; you are a private company paid to get people into work. You have a financial investment. Who do you invest that money in? Mr Jones who is highly educated and has only recently been made redundant? Or Mr Simpson who has been out of work for years and needs everything from numeracy and literacy training to PC skills? Mr Jones may only need a £50 interview suit or most likely no intervention at all – he will find work on his own. Bingo! The Government will pay you £2,500 if he starts work and stays there for 6 months. You could invest a hell of a lot of your staff resources and profits in getting Mr Simpson to a job ready state, but it’s a huge gamble. You get a higher reward but your losses are higher if he doesn’t find work. Private companies do not like this kind of risk. This is why it is now without question that Work Programme providers ‘park’ the harder to help customers. I have seen this relentlessly for the past couple of years and I do not think anyone could deny this is what happens. I ask customers what the WP is doing for them and they tell me they are lucky if they get a phone call every few months. But, if this person finds a job on his own (which does happen) the WP provider could get £12,000+.”
Obi Wan Kenobi
August 14, 2014 at 12:09 pm
Part two – Continued:
Are you told to give a full description of the help the jobcentre can provide in the form of money for travel expenses to job interviews, or courses that are available? If so, how many take this help up? If not, why not/by who?
“It is not advertised openly. The hope is that the jobseeker will fund expensive training themselves. If they ask then we will put the case forward to pay it. The District fund for this is finite so each case must be looked at on merit. Sometimes the procurement process is so slow the jobseeker will borrow the money from relatives to gain the training they need. The travel to interview expenses have never been openly advertised, as it is hoped that they will fund this themselves. I must say that the chances of funding from DWP are a lot better than for those on the WP.”
What one policy would you change to help jobseekers?
“A tricky one. I couldn’t nail it down to one thing as so much is currently wrong. You see most of the things we do are dictated by Ministers and Senior Civil Servants. At most, they pop in to sit by you for an afternoon to see what you do. They then think they know how to improve or change things but they don’t. It’s all half-arsed hair-brained back of a beer mat type stuff. No one feeds back up the line when something is not working. The DWP is full to the brim of yes men. Take Universal Jobmatch; staff have been saying that it’s garbage since it was introduced. Staff locked out of it, jobseekers and employers cannot use it. It’s loaded with duplicates and non-jobs but we are told by DWP Press Office that it has revolutionised the way people look for work. We are told we must use it and must sell it to Jobseekers.”
“But back to your question, I would scrap the Work Programme. I would invest the millions spent on this into real training for Jobseekers.”
http://realfare.wordpress.com/2014/04/30/job-centre-adviser-i-am-unable-to-emphasise-enough-what-a-massive-con-and-waste-of-taxpayers-money-the-work-programme-is/
Obi Wan Kenobi
August 14, 2014 at 12:11 pm
Jobcentre Adviser: “I am unable to emphasise enough, what a massive con and waste of taxpayer’s money the Work Programme is.”
Those of us who have done, or are currently doing, the WP already know what a massive con it is. I spent two years on it. I did a two hour unsupervised jobsearch every fortnight, and that was it. My once a month review coincided with my jobsearch and all it consisted of was my adviser glancing at my job logs and telling me what a good job I was doing. I had several advisers while I was there. And I didn’t have an exit interview either; the adviser was a no-show on that day.
jj joop
August 15, 2014 at 7:27 am
Fuck these jobcentre “advisers” and their feeble attempts to blame “management”, “IDS”, “the Government”, whoever, whatever. Take responsibility for YOUR OWN actions you cowardly C****. And let us not forget that you DO relish throwing jobseekers into destitution – and that’s a FACT. You will pay for YOUR CRIMES Mr/Ms “jobcentre adviser”. FUCK YOU – C!”£$!
Jobcentre "advisers" are fucking SCUM!!
August 17, 2014 at 10:10 am
Delusional Iain Duncan Smith claims we are all “better off” but figures disagree.
Iain Duncan Smith yesterday sparked fury by claiming people are “better off” under cruel Tory reforms that hit the poor and vulnerable when the figures say otherwise.
Duncan disorderly: IDS is way off the mark.
The deluded Works and Pensions Secretary’s own department revealed the number of disabled or sick people suffering harsh benefits sanctions has soared by a shocking 700% in a year.
But Mr Duncan Smith stunned those struggling to pay bills, feed families and keep a roof over their heads by going on radio and bragging: “The Government’s plan to build a fairer society is working.
Mr Duncan Smith used a rise in employment figures to launch his gloating claim that things have improved. But he failed to mention the Tories have also cut tax credits and hiked VAT, hitting millions of people in the pocket.
For Iain Duncan Smith to claim people are ‘better off’ in the face of these figures shows just how out of touch this Government is.
Jobcentre whistleblowers have told how staff are under pressure to find any excuse to stop people’s payments for weeks at a time.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/delusional-iain-duncan-smith-claims-4047213
Obi Wan Kenobi
August 14, 2014 at 12:32 pm
There was a time when I used to get very angry whenever I read Duncan Smith’s comments, saw his picture or heard his voice. I don’t do that anymore. I just take the view the fucker’s a dellusional nutbag, and that’s it.
jj joop
August 15, 2014 at 7:30 am
Good story, nice find as always Obi Wan
gaia
August 17, 2014 at 9:54 am
It could be [ALLEGEDLY]. The Tories are getting into a panic as with the Scottish Independence Vote just 5 weeks away, they know that it’s quite likely the newly independent country will scrap sanctions their side of the border.[?]. IF that were to happen, then the pressure would be on before the next General Election THIS side of the border. Come on Mr Salmond. What are the proposals on sanctions YOUR SIDE of Hadrians Wall.
Philip
August 14, 2014 at 12:40 pm
Meanwhile one thing that gives me heart is that this is around (I am not joking – it really perks me up) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-6YLi0GNBTk
Andrew Coates
August 14, 2014 at 3:36 pm
VIDEO INTERVIEWS – IN TRIPLICATE?
Anyone heard of Tazio? Apparently they specialise in video interviews.
Tazio have been appearing on Universal Jobmatch. One job vacancy (there may be more that you know of) has been TRIPLICATED by three different companies – including Company Confidential! The other two companies in this case being “Job Heaven” and “Strike Jobs”.
The vacancy, for an Administration Assistant in “Scotland – Polmont”, requires applicants to initially complete a form (via Universal Jobmatch) requesting their name and email address, then the application procedure goes on to the creation of an account where a name and postal address is required. All this activity is powered by “Tazio” – although they are not at this stage asking you to upload a video – not at this stage, anyway!
At the time of writing (14 August 2014) this one triplicated vacancy can be found on Universal Jobmatch under 3 different Job IDs: 9539452 (Job Heaven), 9520318 (Company Confidential), and 9538112 (Strike Jobs).
Can you imagine what life will be like when video interviews become the norm?
Wouldyoubelieveit
August 14, 2014 at 4:46 pm
Note: in the second part of the application procedure above, a postal address and TELEPHONE NUMBER is requested! Applicants have already supplied their name and email address in the first part!
Wouldyoubelieveit
August 14, 2014 at 5:01 pm
One of the girls who started on my CWP forced labour placement had a sick line from her doc but the fucking jobcentre still made her do it. What the fuck is that all about. And it is brutal back-breaking work. Time this fucking bullshit country sank into the fucking sea!
End Unpaid Work
August 14, 2014 at 7:34 pm
The reason the podiums and jobpoints are being removed from jobcentres as well as seating being removed is to make way for banks of computers. This is for the new 35 hour a week jobsearch. You can expect to see BIG changes in the next couple of weeks.
Jobcentre Insider
August 15, 2014 at 12:59 am
I thought this 35 hour a week jobsearch business was being farmed out to the pimps, i.e. Seetec, etc.
jj joop
August 15, 2014 at 7:19 am
JJ Joop:
It was supposed to be farmed out to Private Providers as you say, but I think this stupid idea has been kicked into the long grass.
If it was going to happen it would be in full swing by now, plus can you imagine any Private Provider actually agreeing to it, I think they learn’t their lessons last time when we had to do the 13 weeks when it was New Deal.
I can’t see any Private Provider wanting to go though that again as we all now know a lot more about DWP/Private Provider rules and regulations (what they can and can’t legally do).
Obi Wan Kenobi
August 15, 2014 at 9:04 am
Plus the fact if they’re being paid according to results: they’ll get Jack Shit!
jj joop
August 15, 2014 at 11:01 am
But it IS happening – you check out your jc in the next couple of weeks.
Spot the Difference
August 17, 2014 at 10:26 am
Well gaia what have YOU to say on this
Philip
August 15, 2014 at 1:58 pm
the 35 hr js will not happen at the jcp it will be the providers that will get the contracts for it and will be a complete waste of time like it was b4 offices rammed full of ppl just to get the fee, they will not care what you do as long as you go and they get paid like it was 10 years ago 😉
super ted
August 15, 2014 at 4:09 pm
super ted:
Sounds just like the WP. You just turn up, keep your head down and do fuck-all.
jj joop
August 15, 2014 at 4:20 pm
you got the idea then lol 6 week waste of time all for the benefit of the providers to line there pockets with tax payers cash fkn cash converters da lot of um.
ill go sign in and out n fuck off back home like i did 10 years ago @a4e and others as that will free up a space for another mug to sit there all day. 😉
super ted
August 15, 2014 at 4:30 pm
super ted:
I thought the supervised jobsearch was going to be 13 weeks not 6.
jj joop
August 16, 2014 at 7:38 am
id not be surprised if it was for that long tho forget the supervised bit prob be 30 job seekers per 1 member off staff at each office like it was 10 years ago ;0)
super ted
August 16, 2014 at 7:24 pm
UGLY MUGS
Earlier there was some talk on here about the controversial DWP phone number 08000 232 635. A lot of people were getting nuisance calls. Some people suggested the DWP could have obtained recycled telephone numbers belonging to someone else in the past – hence the reason for receiving calls out of the blue.
But here is another scheme, a database called UGLY MUGS, which is intended to protect sex workers by allowing them to check out the telephone numbers of clients to see if they are on the “bad list”.
But this scheme could so easily be abused – either by old telephone numbers, or someone maliciously putting your number on it.
https://uknswp.org/um/
Any comments?
Mr X
August 16, 2014 at 8:35 am
Good Anti-Workfare video from Thurrock Council:
Mr X
August 16, 2014 at 8:58 am
To “Gaia talks shit” and “Jobcentre Mole” :
Listen up, you two. Your attacks on gaia and super ted are unwarranted and without foundation. When dealing with the Jobcentre, jobseekers have two choices: they either step up or they get stepped on. It sounds to me like you two are advocating the latter, i.e. you are suggesting we should all just roll over and letter the Jobcentre wipe their boots on us. In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if you two aren’t Jobcentre advisers.
Oh and just for the record, I have stepped up.
jj joop
August 16, 2014 at 4:25 pm
Thanks for the vote of confidence jj joop and your post hits the nail right on the head.
Talking of hitting the nail on the head have you noticed how these mysterious posters only ever show up when something very poignant is mentioned, when if you like a call to arms is mentioned.
If any of these trolls as lets face it, that’s exactly what they are had any true credibility, they would back their claims up with fact, yet as usual we get zip from them.
gaia
August 17, 2014 at 10:14 am
Fair enough Gaia… if you have the means to survive permanently on hardship…. to quote Gaia “it’s only money” 🙂
Earth Maiden
August 17, 2014 at 10:31 am
PS Gaia if the jc think that you are not too bothered about sanctions they will think that you are working on the side/have an (undeclared) partner with a good income/have savings/some sort of other income…. cue an investigation by the DWP Fraud Squad.
Earth Maiden
August 17, 2014 at 10:34 am
… just be careful when they hit you with a 3 year sanction for “failing to attend” CWP or some shit and you just shrug your shoulders…. 🙂
Earth Maiden
August 17, 2014 at 10:36 am
Anyway, Gaia, even if you do genuinely sign-on it is obvious to anyone reading this blog that in the unfortunate event of you being left with no income that you have a pound or two to fall back on; it is not like you would be heading to the nearest food bank. Why do you think the DWP is so obsessed with discovering if jobseekers have hidden means of support (and then cutting it off). They want their prey to be as weak and vulnerable as possible, they want to crush their victims, they want to destroy people, they want to tip people over the edge so that they commit suicide. The DWP/JC is pure unadulterated evil. I am sure you will agree on that, Gaia.
Earth Maiden
August 17, 2014 at 10:45 am
For a start Earth Maiden ive never needed hardship payments as ive never ever been successfully sanctioned.
Just out of interest as its sunday and im feeling like I cant be bothered but could you do us a favour and point out the post I said as you quote “its only money” so I can see in what context I used it as im sure you would know exactly where it is sir, if you could be so kind.
The DWP already know only to well im not bothered by sanctions or anything else and have plenty of time to spy on me if at all they ever have as I have no secret life that I don’t already declare on a B7 form.
I’m no longer eligible for WP so that’s not going to happen and besides im old school so am up a 4 am every morning sir so never fail to attend anything whether I want to go to it or not.
All that said though I do appreciate you trying to look out for me but my ship sails just fine with me at the helm thanks
gaia
August 17, 2014 at 10:51 am
Too right…. it all boils down to money.. the only way for jobseekers to effectively resist the nazi jc is have the financial means to take them on. And DO NOT SIGN…. this is how the jc nazi collaborators obtain their payments from the dwp… DO NOT SIGN their shit…
Earthworm
August 17, 2014 at 10:57 am
I do the admin for a CWP/MWA provider i.e. it is me (not the adviser) who has to sign the DMA Referral form to be sent to the DWP decision maker for jobseekers to be sanctioned. I will let you into a secret – if the paper work is not all in order i.e we have proof that the jobseeker has started the provision, completed health and safety etc. the dwp will not pay us – the DWP will use any excuse to get out of paying. If jobseekers want to scupper these schemes I would advise not to sign anything at all 🙂
Insider
August 17, 2014 at 11:03 am
Yeah, it’s jobseekers who already have a job on the side that don’t give a shit about sanctions and the jokecenta know this. Think about it, if you are earning a few hundred knicker on the side a week are you going to give a shit about a sanction. And if they think you are working on the side they stick you on MFA (More Frequent Attendance). Jobseekers who they think are working on the side are also a target for MWA. When the jc mention the word ‘sanction’ you have to look kind of scared but not too scared, just scared enough, not like I couldn’t give a shit cos I earn a few hundred knicker on the side, my partner makes a bomb, I had a good job and saved up a fortune…. the jokecenta aint daft.
Cash-in-Hand
August 17, 2014 at 1:46 pm
But the best thing for jobseekers to do would be to try and make a few knicker on the side and fuck the jokecenta. Bollocks to all that doing the right thing shite – look after number one or the bastards will fucking destroy you.
Cash-in-Hand
August 17, 2014 at 1:49 pm
I know 2 and 2 make 4 but if I was earning a ton on the side I wouldn’t bother to sign on and take all that stick as theirs just nothing to gain by tormenting advisors who once tormented you and don’t forget when you sign off in the middle of a sanction that the sanction gets frozen until you sign on again which im sure you would agree would suck if it happened to be the 3 year one.
Im pretty sure anyway most claimants don’t have something on the side as IDS seems to suggest they do. Either way though just like in business if you do your just towing the political line which is CAPITALISM IS IT NOT?
That said these scams are mostly the reserve of the working who consistently fiddle tax and expenses on a regular basis not to mention claiming WORKING TAX CREDIT which is abused loads by working class people who don’t really need it and lets not forget CHILD TAX CREDIT TO when considering the top tier to be eligible.
Every squirrel needs a nut and that’s precisely why so many people do it, politicians included and quite frankly see it as perfectly natural.
This could all be minimised of course if politicians got off their FAT BACKSIDES and fought for the people for a change instead of buttering up to the people that lobby them, the very people who consistently keep wages low while they simultaneously profit from pushing prices up.
If you think their loaded now, wait till inflation rises as you haven’t seen nothing yet.
gaia
August 17, 2014 at 6:31 pm
Thinking about your last post earth maiden isn’t that reason enough for claimants to push back, for sites like this to exist so we can all form a unified front to stifle their practices and false claims ?
As for earthworm and insiders comments, your spot on as this does screw things up. Take these skills conditionality and work academy schemes, both rely on SFA funding so if you don’t fill in the paperwork they wont lift a single finger to take you on as they aint getting paid. How your know its SFA funded is that they will ask you for proof that you are on benefits despite you being referred by DWP.
So you all know DWP have recently but not to recently referred to not describing work academies as such so what may appear as training with a guaranteed interview from a single source would most likely be an independent academy.
Lastly if you thought benching was the reserve of the work programme then think again as these academies, their associated colleges and even businesses are using excuses like old spent crimes through using falsely the vulnerable persons act, drug and alcohol use and even homelessness as reason to deselect claimants. BUT get this, as I believe theirs also a DWP ploy behind this to come, they are trying to get you to fill out consent for processing your personal and or sensitive data first.
IMPORTANT NOTICE
You cannot be sanctioned anymore for refusing to give lawful consent as is your right under law anymore than they can sanction you for refusing to put in for housing benefit so WILL resort to cheap tricks to get you sanctioned and that’s precisely why I know WHY super teds approach works and exactly why he never gets sanctioned.
OH: DONT under any circumstance sign a compliancy agreement if you know whats good for you as again as has been already demonstrated on this very site YOU LEGALLY DONT HAVE TO.
gaia
August 17, 2014 at 7:12 pm
compliancy agreement?! what is that?
Wormhole
August 17, 2014 at 10:19 pm
Sorry earth worm and everyone
The official title is
Claimant Commitment
gaia
August 17, 2014 at 11:24 pm
Hey jobseekers 🙂 like we say in our family: “the only protection is £money£ 🙂 ” If you wanna survive the jcp you need the £money” 🙂
The Godfather
August 17, 2014 at 12:35 pm
Gaia, I will refresh your memory, you DID comment that it would be better for jobseekers to refuse to comply and take a sanction, as it was possible to survive on hardship: “may not be all the money you would like” and “after all, it’s only money.” Not saying I agree or disagree with you just saying what you said. PS I think the comment by “Insider” is spot on. How many times do you see ” Funded by European Social Fund” on the forms you are expected to sign. And slave labour pimps won’t get paid unless they have proof the jobseeker has started and done all the health and safety stuff. And another point is that a lot of these pimps add the “DWP” logo to their forms when it has nothing to do with the DWP – surely this is misrepresentation. Superted could be on to something.
Wormhole
August 17, 2014 at 10:14 pm
Thanks earth worm but i would still need to read this post of mine along with the other around it otherwise i wont be able to put it into context as im not one to speculate. If you could give me the date i posted this post it would be most helpful earthworm.
That aside super ted, yourself and insider are bang on and i do the same self thing. As for the DWP logo it all boils down to DWP as they own the copyright and in all likely hood even if they weren’t aware wouldn’t rock the boat as it wouldn’t look good on them. To make this even funnier DWP are no stranger to using other peoples logos without permission also but that’s another story for another day.
Providers like the work programme use multiple sources of funding as if they didn’t they would never be able to stay in business on just the initial DWP payment or any follow ups, you only have to do the math to see that. The trick is knowing what funding their try for and why like for instance the one i mentioned regarding the SFA.
Its not enough to know just what funding, you need to know how one is eligible for said funding, the rest from their is plain sailing. Also that’s not the only thing that trips up these providers or even DWP like for instance not consenting to the processing of ones personal and or sensitive data. To put this simply
IF THEY NEED YOUR SIGNATURE IT MORE THAN ALWAYS IMPLIES THEY NEED YOUR LAWFUL AND FREELY GIVEN CONSENT, AND THIS BEING THE CASE MEANS THEY CANNOT OBTAIN IT BY MEANS OF FORCE OR THREAT.
This is why when and if people get sanctioned for it, its never mentioned as the cause of the sanctioning (they usually use phrases like enforcement of business rules) as if it was the sanction would be overturned the moment your CAB solicitor first contacts them (usually claimants don’t represent themselves). This is why claimants are goaded for a reaction, tricked or even lied about as is always the case.
gaia
August 18, 2014 at 12:16 am
PS I am not 100% certain that this has been going on but there has to be a reason that the wording was added to the forms.
Former worker for a provider
August 19, 2014 at 5:21 pm
I am ashamed to say that until recently I used to work for a ‘provider’. Just before I left I noticed that the forms had been changed to add “the signature is genuine and a true likeness of the individual concerned”. I asked a colleague about this and she said she thought it was something to do with the DWP refusing to pay because the forms were failing their ‘validation’ checks due to a ‘mismatch’ in the signatures. Just thought I would let you all know 🙂
Former worker for a provider
August 19, 2014 at 5:12 pm
What I am hinting at is if you so *sign* a form and you use a signature which does not correspond to what the DWP have on file – i.e your signing-on signature, the dwp can use this an excuse to avoid paying the provider 🙂 Gaia is spot on when s/he says that the only way to stop this abuse is to cut off the funding. All these providers are interested in is in making as much money as possible. They sanction jobseekers without a second thought – so why not ‘sanction’ them 🙂
Former worker for a provider
August 19, 2014 at 5:19 pm
and thats why if i had to sign anything in the past id print my name in the book or my first and last letters of my name and never sign my sig on anything even for my bus fair back at providers since 2005,
super ted
August 19, 2014 at 5:28 pm
Even printing your name might be dodgy, ted. A signature can be anything but generally it would be expected to include at least your first initial and surname to make it legally valid. You are asked to print your name because your signature might be invalid and because without a printed name there is no way of tying the signer to the signature. Initials are generally used for agreed changes to a documents – initials could belong to anyone.
Legal Eagle
August 19, 2014 at 5:38 pm
Just to be safe, ted, I wouldn’t go any further than printing my initials and even then I would make it completely illegible.
Legal Eagle
August 19, 2014 at 5:39 pm
i wont sign anything from providers now since 2005 not even my initials as by law i dont have too the dwp send all the info they need for me to the providers anyway and im not entering in to any contract with them ever thus making me worthless to them. done same with the wp refused to sign anything and that was that was there 20mins in 2 years 😉
super ted
August 19, 2014 at 5:48 pm
You know super ted and others, maybe its time to NOT not sign these providers documents but to instead issue them with an official declaration informing them that you DONT GIVE CONSENT to process your personal and or sensitive data and that any breach will be reported instantly to ICO.
I say this as how do we know they aren’t or haven’t in the past forged signatures to secure funds (I laugh when I say this).
Its up to the data subject but the person could quite literally have a provider contact them every time they wish to process this data so imagine not giving them a number meaning they would have to send a letter via post, meaning they would get nothing done. That’s the control a data subject has under law.
Now this wasn’t always the case for some claimants on the WP but when they administer a MWA they would have to send personal data otherwise how would these MWA people know who you are. This is why myself, super ted and any who didn’t sign any provider paperwork NEVER got sent on a MWA.
gaia
August 24, 2014 at 8:31 am
That’s fine by me. I have carpal tunnel syndrome anyway. I often have too re register my signature with the bank etc etc
Greenford
August 24, 2014 at 9:06 am
That’s NOT true, Gaia. The Jobcentre will send your personal data to the MWA provider regradless and even if you DO NOT SIGN the provider paperwork you will STILL be sent on MWA. Of course if you DO NO SIGN or otherwise invalidate any of the provider placement the provider may no get paid. Same goes for the placement provider. Someone need to confirm but I have heard that placement providers get paid £15-20 a day per MWA/CWP placement victim.
Jools
August 24, 2014 at 9:57 am
We have heard reports that SEETEC is up and fully running a workfare scheme in Ipswich.
Andrew Coates
August 24, 2014 at 11:55 am
…”DO NO SIGN or otherwise invalidate any of the provider paperwork”…
btw Gaia, superted HAS been sent on MWA
Jools
August 24, 2014 at 9:59 am
Also Gaia if you don’t turn up for the MWA ‘induction’ the provider will STILL send out a placement. I think the jobcentre will probably arrange it though since you haven’t given the provider permission to share your personal information. However, all the subsequent paperwork that that jobseekers are asked to sign e.g. Health and Safety etc. are to enable provider to secure payment from the DWP and ‘timesheets’ etc.possibly so that the placement provider can secure their ‘cut’.
Jools
August 24, 2014 at 10:04 am
Universal Jobmatch shown to be complete and utter joke……yet again!
THE Government’s job search website has been branded a farce after officials refused to post an advert for a candidate who can “speak excellent English” – because it breached the Equality Act.
Company boss Paul Scully, told how his hopes of employing a personal assistant were thwarted after he fell foul of politically correct bureaucrats.
Mr Scully turned to the Department for Work and Pensions’ Universal Jobmatch website to fill the position at his corporate affairs and communications firm called Nudge Factory.
His entry was rejected and he received an email demanding to know “why the applicant needed to speak a particular language”.
Mr Scully – who is standing as the Conservative candidate for Sutton and Cheam in next year’s general election – has now withdrawn the ad and is advertising the £18,000-£24,000 position elsewhere.
The furious boss said: “I would have thought it was obvious why a communications company needs someone to speak excellent English.
“When I heard back from Universal Jobmatch they told me that in order to comply with the Equality Act I would need to explain why the successful candidate would need a good command of English.
“It’s political correctness at its worst, if they are met with these sorts of questions and barriers it’s not really worth the effort.”
The site, developed at a cost to the DWP of £17 million which forks out £6 million a year to run it, has become a laughing stock since it was launched in 2012.
Among the jobs listed on the site previously included a hitman for the secret service, which stated that an “MI6 target elimination specialist” was needed.
Other ads included “international couriers” for CosaNostra Holdings, also known as the Sicilian Mafia, as well as listings from pornographic websites and prostitutes.
The jobs website has also been slated for hundreds of thousands of repeat or fake job ads.
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/497124/Government-job-search-refuse-to-post-advert-because-it-breached-Equality-Act
Obi Wan kenobi
August 18, 2014 at 12:28 pm
i dont get what the 500000 a month goes on tbh i can get a 400gbit/s for 85k a month and that site has no where near that sort of speed/ bandwidth as that’s the speed for a hole data center.
employers can upload the vacancies them self so no cost there they can charge extra for.
seems all this cash is for monster uploading the jobs of there site and site maintenance of ujm.
is there any foi request as to what all this money is being spent on as it dont add up at all none of it.
or is ujm going to start streaming 4k hd uncompressed date down the net pmsl.
ot my local jcp has now removed every phone from the place and now just white empty walls n in there place, so asked if the job boards was coming back with paper job adds on them n got 1 dirty look lol
asked to see my so called adviser next time and got an appointment woohoo last time i said my phone bills were getting high and said to come to the jcp and use the phones there as they were free.
they gone walkies now.
lets see what tune they sing about that 1 now the twats or ill prob get a letter to cancel my appointment, they can send me down stairs to just sign ill send my self back up stairs and make my own appointment for it 😉
super ted
August 18, 2014 at 1:27 pm
Jobcentre Plus:
The 11 most senseless benefit sanction decisions known to man:
Benefit sanctions, where a job centre can suspend or dock a claimant’s welfare payments, are becoming increasingly controversial.
In the wake of a diabetic ex-soldier dying after his benefits were sanctioned and three disgruntled ex-DWP civil servants going rogue to help welfare claimants who believe their payments have been wrongly docked, we look at the most ridiculous reasons for sanctioning benefits yet.
A man with heart problems who was on Employment and Support Allowance (ESA) had a heart attack during a work capability assessment. He was then sanctioned for failing to complete the assessment.
Via Debbie Abrahams MP.
A man who had gotten a job that was scheduled to begin in two weeks’ time was sanctioned for not looking for work as he waited for the role to start.„
Via the Guardian.
Army veteran Stephen Taylor, 60, whose Jobseeker’s Allowance (JSA) was stopped after he sold poppies in memory of fallen soldiers.„
Via the Daily Mirror.
A man had to miss his regular appointment at the job centre to attend his father’s funeral. He was sanctioned even though he told DWP staff in advance.„
Via Political Scrapbook.
“
Ceri Padley, 26, had her benefits sanctioned after she missed an appointment at the jobcentre – because she was at a job interview.„
Via the Daily Mail.
A man got sanctioned for missing his slot to sign on – as he was attending a work programme interview. He was then sanctioned as he could not afford to travel for his job search.„
Via Citizen’s Advice.
Sean Halkyward, 24, said his benefits were sanctioned because he looked for too many jobs in one week.„
Via Pontefract and Castleford Express
Mother-of-three Angie Godwin, 27, said her benefits were sanctioned after she applied for a role job centre staff said was beyond her.„
Via Get Reading.
Sofya Harrison was sanctioned for attending a job interview and moving her signing-on to another day.„
Via the Guardian.
Michael, 54, had his benefits sanctioned for four months for failing to undertake a week’s work experience at a charity shop. The charity shop had told him they didn’t want him there.„
Via the Guardian.
Terry Eaton, 58, was sanctioned because he didn’t have the bus fare he needed to attend an appointment with the job centre.„
Via the Guardian.
http://i100.independent.co.uk/article/the-11-most-senseless-benefit-sanction-decisions-known-to-man–x1dmkd2_Me
Obi Wan kenobi
August 18, 2014 at 12:58 pm
You forgot about the guy who turned up 10 mins early for his appointment and was sanctioned because he should have been there 15 mins early.
ED.
August 18, 2014 at 3:27 pm
But you are supposed to look on the jobpoints before your appointment time for like half an hour. That’s what I was told when I was sanctioned even though I arrived on time for the appointment.
Jen
August 18, 2014 at 4:56 pm
Jen – There are no Jobpoints left, DWP were too tight to upgrade the operating systems, they have all been ripped out.
Obi Wan Kenobi
August 18, 2014 at 7:26 pm
at my jcp if you arrive early say 20 mins b4 ur interview or sign they make you wait out side till 10 mins b4 then will let you in the place yet if you are 10 mins late you will get a sanction doubt.
they have 2 chairs and a small desk inside to wait at but im always told to wait out side till 10mins b4 i sign on even if its pissing down with rain or freezing cold outside.
super ted
August 18, 2014 at 6:55 pm
Government’s mandatory placements abuse of senior aged unemployed people.
Published on 8 Aug 2014. Terence Morgan.
This video is about the irresponsible abuse of senior aged people in the government’s mandatory placement scheme which has resulted in a long term or permanent injury to a senior person by forcing him to work in unaccustomed heavy manual labouring.
Obi Wan Kenobi
August 18, 2014 at 7:58 pm
In 1986 I was on the then so called community programme. Ditch digging and grave yard clearing etc. It resulted in me having a heart attack at the age of 29. This was attributed to the so called training scheme. I was in King’s Lynn at the time. and the event to place in Wareham just outside Downham Market. I had been on the scheme for 6 months, It should have been a year. When I was eventually told I could not go back on the scheme, I was ”paid off” with the ”wages” I would have received should I have stayed on the scheme
Northolt Boy
August 19, 2014 at 7:51 am
You know even though im not sixty (late 40s) I have to agree with this gentleman. You would think both DWP and Providers alarm bell and common sense would kick in when faced with such a situation, especially when you consider these days boths employees by far and large seem to have one and two permanent injuries themselves from pushing the boat to far.
Just like squinting as opposed to eyes wide open its always going to be hard to see the bigger picture which you would have thought the public let alone the government would recognise and why I say governments are an out of date idea and no wonder is as so often levelled at them out of touch.
What do I mean
We have 64.7 million people in the UK, so if I placed you on level ground with them that, no matter how I shifted them about, you still wouldn’t be able to see them all.
When we shift view to speech the odds become even more non existent when we consider chatting to them all.
The famed ATOS tests are no different as who only walks up a few steps once or walks so far once let alone the other ridiculous tests involved.
This big picture says undeniably that the governments claim to want to help people into work is an extremely false statement. This in turn means the working public are playing the same game or better put complicit in the UKs biggest ever lie because if it isn’t the only alternative is pure ignorance and laziness on the grandest scale by the very people accusing us of such.
gaia
August 19, 2014 at 6:53 pm
This video also highlights how sexist these schemes are. Because guys are ALWAYS given hard, back-breaking manual labour. ALWAYS! It is GUARANTEED! The worst a girl will be given is standing about in a charity shop or maybe stacking shelves a la Cait Reilly. You could also argue that a young woman was more capable of the hard-labour this 60-year-old guy was given. But no matter what a guy’s background it is straight into hard manual labour.
Nuala
August 19, 2014 at 9:10 pm
DWP accused of hiding universal credit failings: why is IDS still in a job?
Iain Duncan Smith’s universal credit roll-out has come under repeated fire.
Iain Duncan Smith is under further scrutiny as the public accounts committee accuses his department of obscuring problems with the universal credit scheme.
And it seems problems with the scheme and its delivery are never-ending. Only today, parliament’s public spending watchdog, the public accounts committee, has accused ministers at the department of hiding the extent of universal credit’s problems.
According to the Guardian, Hodge said: “We are particularly concerned that the decision to award a ‘reset’ rating to the universal credit project may have been an attempt to keep information secret and prevent scrutiny.”
I expect Duncan Smith still has his job because he is still working on rolling out the scheme – once it’s done, and the unpopularity of his department is compounded, he will become expendable to David Cameron, as happened with former health secretary Andrew Lansley and his department’s controversial NHS reforms. There’s no reason to burden a fresh cabinet minister with a bad reputation for the ongoing mess of their predecessor.
Obi Wan Kenobi
August 19, 2014 at 11:09 am
Sorry forgot the link – http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2014/08/dwp-accused-hiding-universal-credit-failings-why-ids-still-job
Obi Wan Kenobi
August 19, 2014 at 11:10 am
David Cameron said that “nothing is more important than family” yesterday, as he promised to focus on families and gave an extra £10 million to a fund for relationship counselling.
But judging from his four years in office, Cameron wants to help some families more than others. Here are the families the Tories are not so interested in:
The 42% of UK families with kids are worse off since 2010.
The 3.1 million UK families with unmarried parents are worse off.
The 1.9 million UK families headed by single parents are MUCH worse off.
Despite what Tories say about family values, the 7.7 million UK families who have dependent children are worse off than when Cameron came into office. And the 2 million families headed by a single mum or dad are suffering most.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/david-cameron-wants-help-families-4070233
Obi Wan Kenobi
August 19, 2014 at 11:26 am
Hello Obi Wan.
This is off topic again but i think i got the info from you some time ago. (apologies if i am mistaken)
We were discussing about getting returned to the work program and other useless courses.
I think there was a time limit of one ‘work related course’ per year. Not sure if you remember. They tried to say that the WP was not regarded as a work related activity but did not get away with it as i have found the FOI that says it is.
Can you point me in the right direction for this info or give a link if possible please. I would love to know what the situation is at this current moment in time.
Any help on this issue would be much appreciated.
Ed
August 19, 2014 at 2:29 pm
Once you have completed the Work Programme you can never be referred to it again, as for the MWA’s I still believe they can only put you on 3 maximum in any one year.
Check with http://www.whatdotheyknow.com or http://www.refuteduk.org
Obi Wan Kenobi
August 19, 2014 at 3:15 pm
Thanks OBK. The links do not help, sorry The first one takes me to the first page (search) and the second says it does not exist??? any ideas?
Thanks
Ed
August 19, 2014 at 8:52 pm
ed if you dont sign the paper work the provider gives you to fill in then they dont get paid as said by gaia me and others on here b4 as it a contract with a 3rd party private company and under uk law you dont have to sign anything, they can mandate you to go but not sign there paper work as thats up to you at the end of the day.
when i was so called on the wp i got a sanction for non attendance 1 time and sent it back with i have no contract with the stated wp provider and won my sanction doubt just with that on it.
over the 2 years i never went to the place they still tried to sanction me tho but 1 every single time they tried it 😉
super ted
August 19, 2014 at 9:19 pm
Thanks super ted.
Unfortunately you are preaching to the converted. lol
I was just looking for some written info so i could keep and use if needed. Thanks again.
Ed
August 19, 2014 at 9:50 pm
if i knew then what i have learnt from here now then i would not be here. Isn’t knowledge wonderful (especially when you see the advisor’s face!!!)
Ed
August 19, 2014 at 9:54 pm
i cant find anything on it as to how many times they can send you on mwa per year, ill not be going again that’s a sure fact lol but id say if your soft in the head they will try and put you on it as many times they can get away with it imo.
i had a 6 week back to work course b4 my mwa ref and i never went to that only to refuse to sign any thing because they wanted me to check of the health and safety part of it and never even shown us where the fire escapes ect was in a massive building on the 3rd floor fkn joke.
and b4 that i was sent to a 4 week course where they said i was guaranteed a job interview at a local service station run at the local collage and was told i lived in the rong area and will not get an interview so refused to sign anything and was told to leave the collage, got a sanction for non attendance again and won that as well as i had kept my bus tickets and the sticker that the collage gave me was also dated.
i could go on but u get the idea 🙂
super ted
August 19, 2014 at 10:08 pm
Really strange what happens when they try and f**k with you and your head and you don’t have a contract with anyone isn’t it!!! lol.
The wheels of the bus go round and round!!!!!
love it super ted. (respect) how do you get icons on here?
Ed
August 19, 2014 at 10:23 pm
how do you get icons on here?
what do you mean that square thing on the left??
super ted
August 19, 2014 at 10:44 pm
No. Your smile on the right.
Ed
August 19, 2014 at 10:53 pm
: ) ; ) just dont leave a space
super ted
August 19, 2014 at 10:58 pm
Try these:
http://refuted.org.uk/
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/body/dwp
Obi Wan Kenobi
August 20, 2014 at 8:06 am
are there any more now that we have brought up this pertinent topic!
Ed
August 19, 2014 at 11:03 pm
not to sure on that one lol ask Andrew where the icon /smiles are located 😉
super ted
August 19, 2014 at 11:13 pm
What!!! There is a ask Andrew button as well!
Ed
August 19, 2014 at 11:18 pm
: ) ; )
Ed
August 19, 2014 at 11:18 pm
just ask him when he drops a post 😉 🙂 no space
super ted
August 19, 2014 at 11:21 pm
LOL
Ed
August 19, 2014 at 11:29 pm
In reference to sanctions but slightly off topic!
Now that the new rail fares have been announced for next year, 3.5%+ 1% above the RPI. Would we still face sanctions for NOT going by the 90 minute rule. I think nobody not even those in work would be able too afford this amount. How are those of us on benefits going to be expected too find the fares for journeys ”out of area” for interviews etc. BTW if our interview [IF WE GET ONE] is out of town, are we required on pain of sanctions to notify our Jobcentre that we are ”away from home”. Even if it’s only for say 2-3 hours?.
Northolt Boy
August 19, 2014 at 12:01 pm
Some ones switched on, I like that Northolt boy, very astute.
gaia
August 19, 2014 at 6:54 pm
Thank You Gaia. Hope You Enjoyed The Footy ? ;0)
Northolt Boy
August 20, 2014 at 7:31 am
BTW Where Is POLICE OFFICER \ WAYNE
northolt boy
August 20, 2014 at 11:14 am
Hopefully earning a good wage while putting dole life behind him I hope?
gaia
August 20, 2014 at 2:37 pm
Indeed, as Iraq burns and the world goes to hell, that is the question we have all been asking!
Andrew Coates
August 20, 2014 at 3:37 pm
Ok, time for another disappointing discovery folks.
Now you may have noticed lately that DWP has got into bed with recruitment agencies under the banner of work academy. Now you should think great, im going to get a job and while I should imagine a few will, I believe this isn’t just a single mission for DWP, meaning be forewarned for even more stringent policies.
As things currently stand DWP have absolutely no legal rights whats so ever to
A: know your criminal past
B: Know whats in your bodies system
Despite this fact, this information is being deliberately passed on them by these recruitment agencies so I thought I would not only give you a heads up but also a guide to ensure this DOES NOT HAPPEN. What I will prescribe next is COMPLETELY LAWFUL.
First off work academies of this nature are being advertised as jobs with training on the DWP system (not UJM yet I believe) and once you agree its MANDATORY. These jobs with training make NO MENTION WHATS SO EVER of criminal record checks (spent and unspent convictions) and drug and alcohol testing.
So when the advisor puts one of these forward ask them do they carry out these tests. Now I will tell you for a start they will say they don’t know so ask them who the agency/training centre is so you can contact them for more information before you could possible say if or not you would be suited to it. Do this away from DWP AND DO NOT DISCUSS EITHER YOUR CRIMINAL PAST/PRESENT OR ANY DRUGS AND OR ALCOHOL YOU MAY TAKE NO MATTER HOW INNOCENT A PAST TIME THIS IS WITH THEM.
If your unfortunate not to do this then do the following when turning up for this SELECTION DAY as I tell you now they WILL get you to fill in paperwork giving your personal data rights away PRIOR to bringing up either test.
Before filling in any paperwork (this prevents them talking to DWP) ask will any part of this day include discussing the tests I just mentioned. When they say yes as its fraudulent to say otherwise tell them im sorry but I lawfully decline to discuss criminal records or what drugs or alcohol may or may not be in my system. The day will instantly end their I strongly suspect.
Also the training is vocational meaning NVQ, meaning its SFA funded. Like benefit its your choice to claim it or not (tell tale currently is them asking for proof of you claiming benefits).
This is another and may I say softer choice of ending this day if you don’t fancy doing the above one.
Lastly don’t forget my usual which is lawfully refuse them the right to process your personal and or sensitive data.
(Im off to watch football now so any concerns or questions any may have will be addressed tomorrow evening so just leave a post and I will get back to you then).
gaia
August 19, 2014 at 8:03 pm
Not sure what you mean gaia? you say point A: and then point B: IN THE SAME BREATH!
do you not differentiate between drug takers and non drug takers??? I presume this is what you are getting at. (forgive me if i have read wrong, please) can you explane this a bit better for us non dependants please.
As i say i may have miss read this but this is what it sounds like???
Regards
Ed.
Ed
August 19, 2014 at 9:15 pm
Don’t get it either. Surely the jobseekers without a criminal record/drug use/alcohol abuse (and thus ‘nothing to hide’) will willingly submit to checks/tests – this the the way of such things. Though this does kind of remind me of when A$E were forcibly taking samples from their female victims ostensibly to test for sexually transmitted diseases.
Chino
August 20, 2014 at 12:49 am
Hi Ed and Chino
You both have already answered your own question hence why I didn’t feel the need to title it FAO drug, alcohol takers and ex cons as it speaks for itself that it wouldn’t matter to those that don’t fit the mould as so to speak.
I started looking at drug and alcohol testing when it was first started in the states quite a while ago and was quite shocked at how it effected workers lives. Naturally I only followed it for a while as usually what happens their happens here and sure enough it began showing up in the early 2000s on a small scale. Naturally like the misuse of CRB by employers I just knew this would follow suit for various reasons.
The laws surrounding this and vulnerable people are to say the least vague and clash with a persons right to a private life.
In addition Studies on both have proved their actually ineffectual as say in the case of CRBs, most convicted pedos don’t tend to have prior convictions hence the abundance of cases witnessed almost daily in the UK.
With regard to D and D testing if say a subject took coke or speed (get up and go drugs) for instance, it wouldn’t decrease their ability to perform nor put them or others at risk when we consider health and safety yet if you were to test positive (zero tolerance on drugs unlike alcohol units), you would be refused the position. The joke in this is the taker would actually out perform someone who didn’t take such.
Now the biggest cause of accidents in the workplace when we cover this subject is actually alcohol yet providing you don’t go over so many units its perfectly ok (if I remember it takes 1 hour for every unit consumed to leave the blood stream but other factors could change this quite easily). Now if we say consider weed if I may call it that, If you smoke a single joint say 9pm the night (so out of work and in your own time) before unlike alcohol it will still be in your system even though your nolonger feeling its effect (calming) at 9am. If I remember correctly it stays in the system for 14 to 16 weeks. This also will see the person get refused the position.
Now where this fits into DWP is in the states and it was proposed over here and as yet hasn’t been concluded, a person cannot have benefits if they test positive for drugs or alcohol which around my local office is quite a few, most of which are currently homeless. Now the proposal is to get them help if they have an addiction over here but the thing is most recreational takers of both don’t have addictions yet the proposal is to sanction anyone who refuses to take treatment then or fails the test if currently on benefit. Any new entrants if it came in would be refused benefit day one until treated and proved clean. Then if we consider only addicts, the common problem is relapse so would deal a further blow to such a person if say they got a job and then failed later as their then subject to waiting 13 weeks before benefit.
Im no supporter of people either taking large amounts of substances or becoming dependant but the thing is its their body so I have no right to demand they shouldn’t as what they do in their own time, what is in their body is their own business and not mine.
Its a very difficult subject as their are good instances to have such so its a pros and cons matter but as usual no good will come from it if abused to fulfil another agenda which is so easily done under current practices.
I will leave it at that for now but am still open to any questions anyone may have and as im busy today do guarantee to reply at some point soon if you don’t get an answer straight away which is highly likely if im being honest today.
gaia
August 20, 2014 at 8:02 am
Summary conclusions of the Independent Inquiry into Drug Testing at Work
http://www.jrf.org.uk/publications/drug-testing-workplacesummary-conclusions-independent-inquiry-drug-testing-work
gaia
August 21, 2014 at 6:09 am
Alcohol is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay more dangerous than weed, man… imagine if alcohol has just been invented and we were trying to legalise that shit maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaan lol
It's a gas man.................
August 22, 2014 at 11:15 pm
Actually that very point was covered sometime ago and the conclusion was that if it was indeed just created, it would be branded as an illegal substance and against the law.
Your also absolutely correct in that the number one toxin behind many in work accidents is indeed alcohol yet as I highlighted above your legally within reason allowed to have it in your system where as you cannot even have trace (tiniest hint of chemical) when it comes to cannabis ?
This is what happens when you allow people who have no addiction or past time habits to dictate policy and procedure.
gaia
August 25, 2014 at 8:02 am
Scottish independence: UK department denies advising ‘No’ vote
A Whitehall department has denied advising its staff to vote “No” in the Scottish independence referendum.
A memo issued to employees at the Department of Work and Pensions was described by unions as “badly worded”.
Written by permanent secretary Robert Devereux, it described as “legitimate and necessary” civil servants’ support for the UK government’s position.
A spokesman for the DWP said “of course” staff in Scotland had not been told how to vote.
The memo said: “It is important that, as civil servants, we understand why the Scottish independence referendum is different from elections such as a UK General Election or a European Election.
“This is because the UK Government has a clear position to maintain the Union and so it is legitimate and necessary for UK civil servants to support the Government in this objective.”
A spokesman for the DWP said the letter simply set out referendum guidance.
[DWP Memo]
But a Whitehall source told the BBC: “It is very badly worded. It’s meant to be about what staff might be asked to do in their day job – writing a brief or commenting on policy.
“But you can understand why some, perhaps more junior civil servants, in the DWP in Scotland might think they were being advised how to vote.
“It would be read very differently in Whitehall, but it just shows that the department needs to be more aware of the sensitivities of this issue.
“It’s typical of the lack of understanding in Whitehall departments on this issue. I’m surprised that they issued this the way it is written.”
A Scottish government spokeswoman said: “”As part of the Edinburgh Agreement, both the UK and Scottish Governments have committed to restrictions on publications in the 28 days before the referendum.
“The restrictions mean that in this period, publications and public-facing activity on referendum issues will take place on a campaign or party footing, and not through government.
She added: “Civil servants continue to operate normally, serving the government in line with the Civil Service Code.”
A spokesman for the Yes campaign said: “If information being handed down to civil service staff by senior colleagues is being interpreted by them as being told how to vote in the referendum then clearly it would be wise for the information to be reviewed.”
Scottish independence: UK department denies advising ‘No’ vote
BBC
August 20, 2014 at 12:40 am
Yeh I caught that chestnut on the BBC this morning.
If you want to know why it is a notice of you must vote against leaving the UK, just look at the civil service oath regarding ministers of departments and how civil servants must operate with them and the government of the day as so to speak.
gaia
August 20, 2014 at 8:09 am
Update:
Claimant Commitment – ‘The My Work Plan Booklet’ Guidance:
From: Operations FOI Requests.
Department for Work and Pensions.
14 August 2014.
9. There may be times when the claimant has recorded their activities to the same standard in a different format. In cases like theses, 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.
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/222973/response/550469/attach/html/8/Annex%205.pdf.html
No Change.
Obi Wan Kenobi
August 20, 2014 at 8:24 am
Didn’t you or someone else already post something like this before.
Their again I suppose if some things worth saying , its worth repeating.
gaia
August 20, 2014 at 8:44 am
Yeah I did but as you know Gaia the DWP change the goal posts from time to time, so current up to date information is essential to successfully know where you stand.
Obi Wan Kenobi
August 20, 2014 at 8:48 am
Cant argue with that sound logic sir.
gaia
August 20, 2014 at 8:55 am
JSA Hardship Award: – Guidance Queries and Help.
From: Operations FOI Requests.
Department for Work and Pensions.
12 August 2014.
Conditions for receiving a hardship award:
10. Three conditions must be satisfied before a hardship award can be made. The claimant must:
apply for the hardship award in the appropriate manner; and
be in one of the prescribed circumstances for receiving an award; and
show that they, or a member of their family, would suffer hardship if an award was not made.
Appropriate manner of application:
11. The appropriate manner of application is for the claimant:
to complete and sign the hardship application form JSA/ESA10JP; and
to attend an interview face to face with the Band C Hardship Officer in
the Jobcentre; and
the hardship interview must be within 24 hours of hardship being requested, the appointment is made the same day or the next morning if contact is made by the claimant after 2.30pm and there are no same day appointments available.
For lots more stupid conditions on this – follow the link below:
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/224214/response/549494/attach/html/3/WDTK%203536%20Hardship%20Guidance.pdf.html
Obi Wan Kenobi
August 20, 2014 at 8:45 am
Help to Work package (for JSA claimants whose Work Programme Completer Interview is on or after 28 April 2014)
Background
From: Operations FOI Requests
Department for Work and Pensions
12 August 2014
1. The Help to Work (HtW) package is help and support, based on a claimants individual circumstances. It is comprised of three distinct elements
Mandatory Intervention Regime (MIR)
Daily Work Search Reviews (Daily WSR)
Community Work Placements (CWP)
2. The HtW package of support applies to Jobseekers Allowance (JSA) claimants whose Work Programme Completer Interview (WPCI) is on or after 28 April 2014.
3. Where the WPCI date is prior to 28 April 2014, the previous JSA Post Work Programme Support (PWPS) guidance must be followed.
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/224058/response/549488/attach/html/4/FOI%203548%20HtW%20guidance.pdf.html
No Change.
Obi Wan Kenobi
August 20, 2014 at 9:20 am
Post Work Programme Support (JSA claimants) Guidance Queries and Help.
From: Operations FOI Requests
Department for Work and Pensions
12 August 2014
Important note: WP completers must not be re-referred to the WP at any
time or under any circumstances.
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/224058/response/549488/attach/html/3/FOI%203548%20PWPS%20guidance.pdf.html
Obi Wan Kenobi
August 20, 2014 at 9:26 am
But it WILL HAPPEN won’t it (?)
Northolt Boy
August 20, 2014 at 9:43 am
JSA Claimant Commitment – Everything you need to know.
From: Operations FOI Requests
Department for Work and Pensions
11 March 2014
7.FOI 779 response.pdf
10K Download View as HTML
Attachment 7c.Clerical JSA CC guidance.pdf
12K Download View as HTML
Attachment 7d.JSA Claimant Commitment Marker.pdf
17K Download View as HTML
Attachment 7e.Making Effective Plans.pdf
51K Download View as HTML
Attachment 7f.Claimant Commitment.pdf
69K Download View as HTML
Attachment 7g.Initial Work Search Interviews guidance.pdf
627K Download View as HTML
Attachment 7h.Conducting split Initial Work Search Interview guidance.pdf
39K Download View as HTML
Attachment 7i.Rapid Reclaims.pdf
25K Download View as HTML
Attachment 7j.Work Search Reviews guidance.pdf
46K Download View as HTML
Attachment 7k.Follow up Work Search Interviews.pdf
37K Download View as HTML
Attachment 7l.My Work Plan guidance.pdf
159K Download View as HTML
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/jsa_claimant_commitment_2014#incoming-492061
Obi Wan Kenobi
August 20, 2014 at 9:42 am
Remember spin doctor grayling?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28810439
Well it looks like his lies have caught up with him again as he’s forced to admit undeniable facts but even then insists prisons are not in crisis.
Tell me, if I threw boiling fat in your face, would you call it an issue?
Was the savage attack on Paul Kohler just an issue, was catching his attackers just a challenge ?
Chris grayling really needs to choose the right words instead of worrying about failed tory polices and next years elections.
And anyway, what is someone who has no background in law and justice doing in this position, especially if you consider like Cameron, he to was caught fiddling his expenses ?
gaia
August 21, 2014 at 6:25 am
Back to the day job: Cameron returns to holiday in Cornwall less than 24 hours after returning to Downing Street for emergency talks over ISIS beheading.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2730574/Back-day-job-Cameron-returns-holiday-Cornwall-24-hours-returning-Downing-Street-emergency-talks-ISIS-beheading.html
This just reaffirms the callousness of this inept government – even Cameron ‘The Big Cheese’ thinks of himself before others.
Parliament should have been recalled over this ISIS beheading – but no, the Coalitions MP’s holidays are of utmost importance.
Obi Wan Kenobi
August 21, 2014 at 3:53 pm
I said a while back that the welfare reforms would cost the taxpayer a lot more when cases of malnutrition and crime rise. Well for starters malnutrition is rising
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-28883892
Well crime is up despite stats, remember this
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/398952/Crime-is-going-up-say-police
How about shoplifting in particular
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-28242348
Shoplifting is on the rise all over the UK with FOOD topping the list of the most stolen product.
So it appears yet again the stats don’t match reality so the question is if the Tories are not stupid, then why make welfare cuts when the costs would merely transfer to other public services and cost a great deal more. It cost far, far less to have someone sign on than it is to treat them for one visit to hospital, less than the cost to arrest, detain, and judge one single criminal act ?
Want to know more or already know the answer ?
gaia
August 22, 2014 at 5:08 am
I will just add with 1.1 million people claiming unemployment that if they did all commit crime it would still only represent 1.7% of the total population. So with 1067 cities and towns that represents an average of just over a 1000 cases of shoplifting per area.
Naturally we know most benefit claimants don’t shoplift or at least not yet anyway and thus gives the figures reported by the police and shops from area to area without the crime rate being effected.
Now you might say aren’t I downplaying it then, well no as total crime figures are irrelevant as we are talking a specific crime, just one and that proportionally it has risen while others have fallen and so minuses itself out in the overall declaration of “crime is down”.
Also remember a lot of crime goes unreported and in some cases undetected.
gaia
August 22, 2014 at 7:38 am
IF DWP CAN MAKE YOU REGISTER WITH UJM WHY DOES IT STILL REQUIRE YOUR CONSENT ?
Why don’t they just open an account behind your back and upload your personal and or sensitive data. then when you come in simply hand the password over and say “here, your using this from now on” ?
Why do claimants not get sanctioned for not signing providers induction paperwork, why if it didn’t require your lawful consent do they even bother presenting such documents?
Its bad enough claimants are unaware of their rights as regards their personal and or sensitive data (notice how you see freedom of information pamphlets yet no data protection ones in your JCP) , its dire when you include the fact most don’t realise they give that very consent i mention above the moment they register to make a UJM/gateway account.
REMEMBER WHAT I SAID, YOU CANNOT GAIN CONSENT UNLAWFULLY, THROUGH FORCE OR THREAT. LAWFUL CONSENT MUST BE FREELY GIVEN.
To further cement this fact, written in the policy for the upcoming UC, a prospective claimant will have to have a UJM account prior, to be eligible to receive benefit payments.
DWP know under current JSA regulation they cannot force a claimant to part with their personal and or sensitive data so are manipulating regulations to trick new or fresh claimants into believing its a requirement when infact even under UC, your consent is still legally required so they are attempting to suggest its necessary in delivering benefits (issuing a payment) which holding a UJM account is most certainly not a part of and is easily demonstrated by not having a UJM account and using other jobsites otherwise it would put forward the notion that no one can get a job without a UJM account. Now add the fact we have been issuing benefit for decades without the need for a government jobsite and we have case closed.
Claiming benefits is a mind field so be careful.
gaia
August 22, 2014 at 7:11 am
Heres another question
If its legal for DWP to force a consent for personal data out of you then why when they clearly have a greater reason and warrant for such data can the police not?
gaia
August 22, 2014 at 7:46 am
here their commenting on the restricted use of electronic media in jobcentres.
· any number or all of the screens/pages detailed in paragraph 86 from their Universal
Jobmatch account if they have access to the internet on a smartphone. Districts will
need to consider the guidance on Restricted Use of Electronic Media in Jobcentres
although paragraph 7 in this guidance enables offices to allow claimants to use their
mobiles for this purpose
Click to access FOI%203354.pdf
Given whats happening in jobcentres today,recording is potentially a very potent tool in the showing what is happening in the way interviews are conducted,more so to disabled people.the way advisers are deliberately acting as if they have god given rights.
Strange also is that wifi is being installed if devices are not permitted.
ken
August 22, 2014 at 11:11 am
Notice how on the FOI DWP have opted to use the wording, DWP have access or DWP dont have access rather than explaining in addition which is very clear earlier in the toolkit chapter 3 that ITS THE CLAIMANT GIVES DWP ACCESS or THE CLAIMANT DOESNT GIVE ACCESS.
Now don’t get me wrong both wordings, theirs and mine are both in the toolkit BUT unless you have a copy which MOST claimants don’t, they could be easily fooled into thinking that the FOI implied or could imply a means of access that doesn’t require LAWFUL CONSENT.
Yet more wordplay by our dear government and their servants.
As for recording like I said, whether you tell them or not that you are, THE MOMENT THEY LIE, THEY HAVE EVEN AS EMPLOYEES TO THE GOVERNMENT COMMITTED WILFUL FRAUD WHICH IS A CRIMINAL OFFENCE AND AS SUCH LOSE ALL RIGHTS TO PRIVACY UNDER LAW, meaning they cant do jack diddly about it.
As for wifi, its so as to keep us away from their network as even though ITS FACT that Ethernet is more secure than wifi, it would be extremely dangerous to have someone with my skillsets which is a few up and down the country having access. I wish to point out im NOT saying others are hacking the government, im only implying it wouldn’t be much trouble for this particular group to pull off.
So you could say they don’t give a CRAP about you losing your personal and or sensitive data while using JCP computers as long as it doesn’t look bad on them who todate and not just the DWP public department, have been officially slammed left right and centre for a few years now for continual data breaches. For the record DWP and INLAND REVENUE have the highest count of breaches of all government departments.
gaia
August 22, 2014 at 12:23 pm
Oh also if you notice these claimant computers are being kept well clear of where the advisors sign on claimants, often usually right next to the entrance.
gaia
August 22, 2014 at 12:25 pm
Hapless McVey hasn’t got a clue and is totally disconnected from reality!
Youngsters ‘give up trying’ to find work because of Labour’s ‘relentless negativity’ about the economy, says Jobs Minister Esther McVey.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2730617/Youngsters-trying-work-Labour-s-relentless-negativity-economy-says-Jobs-Minister-Esther-McVey.html
Esther keep on swallowing the Bullshit that your master IDS orders, let him lead you to ruin.
Would you jump off a cliff if he ordered it?
Obi Wan Kenobi
August 22, 2014 at 12:32 pm
What a load of tosh as while their might be jobs out their, these employers are overlooking the unemployed, especially those with no work past, experience, qualifications not to mention anyone who has been unemployed longer than a year.
To mask this very true fact, government skew the figures by sticking claimants on training courses and placements as they are then listed as employed.
gaia
August 22, 2014 at 12:49 pm
Talking of wordplay, if describing low yield devices as weapons of mass destruction (Boston bombing), the yanks I now quoting biblical terms.
Gen Dempsey, the chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, said IS was “an organisation that has an apocalyptic, end-of-days strategic vision and which will eventually have to be defeated”. (taken from a BBC article)
Is their no depth governments wont sink to inorder to strike fear in the minds of ignorant (unknowing) people so as to gain credence to commit more war crimes along with imposing whats best described as military law on public streets like the other day in Ferguson, St Louis, USA.
According to the article where the above comment was taken from they also said
“They are beyond just a terrorist group. They marry ideology, a sophistication of strategic and tactical military prowess, they are tremendously well-funded… this is beyond anything that we have seen.”
Again trying to drum up fear. I wonder what silly name they come up with next, how about the killer of worlds, that has an over the top feel to it don’t you think?
gaia
August 22, 2014 at 12:35 pm
The DWP are good at word-play too; in fact they bastardise the English language – “help”, “support”, “opportunity”, “activity”…
Newspeak
August 23, 2014 at 8:37 am
DWP DEADLY WORK PROGRAMMES
Greenford
August 23, 2014 at 8:39 am
On another note as predicted spies rat out spy organisations to TOR as government again resumes to try and record every member of the publics data.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-28886462
gaia
August 22, 2014 at 12:43 pm
The UK government appears to have become the first country to face a high-level inquiry by a United Nations committee, as a result of “grave or systemic violations” of the rights of disabled people.
Only last month, a new report, Dignity and Opportunity for All: Securing the Rights of Disabled People in the Austerity Era, laid bare the coalition’s failure to meet its international human rights obligations under both UNCRPD and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR).
That report – published by the Just Fair coalition, which includes Disabled People Against Cuts and Inclusion London – suggested that the UK had gone from being an international leader in disability rights to risking becoming a “systematic violator of these same rights”.
So far, the Conservative minister for disabled people, Mark Harper, has failed to comment on the CRPD inquiry.
http://disabilitynewsservice.com/2014/08/uk-is-first-country-to-face-un-inquiry-into-disability-rights-violations/
Obi Wan Kenobi
August 22, 2014 at 12:58 pm
It will be interesting to see how that develops ?
gaia
August 23, 2014 at 6:49 am
Tied of facebook, Twitter and the constant intrusion by government while being experimented on by the social site itself, then may I introduce DIASPORA.
https://diasporafoundation.org/
Take a read of the page I linked to, see it covers your needs regarding freedom and privacy.
gaia
August 23, 2014 at 6:57 am
I am just waiting for airport style security at Jobcentres. I bet then we will be made too POWER DOWN devices or HAND THEM IN before seeing the advisors. Never say it can’t happen here. They thought we would never have a woman as Prime Minister. Even she said. It would not be in her life time
Greenford
August 23, 2014 at 7:48 am
To be honest I always turn my phone off before entering the JCP, mainly because I don’t want them to know I have a phone.
If asked ‘Do you have a mobile phone’ the answer I always give is ‘No’ and I don’t want one!
Obi Wan Kenobi
August 23, 2014 at 8:30 am
I’ll turn my off when I go in from now on. However as they know I have one, I’ll tell them I left it at home
Greenford
August 23, 2014 at 8:33 am
The only time the Jobcentre have called me is when I’ve specifically requested a callback.
jj joop
August 23, 2014 at 2:51 pm
G4S AND SERCO USING CHEAP LABOUR
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/aug/22/immigrants-cheap-labour-detention-centres-g4s-serco
Tobanem
August 23, 2014 at 8:17 am
Just a thought. Maybe just maybe. The new security guards at jcp will be seetec mwa victims. It could NEVER HAPPEN could it
Greenford
August 23, 2014 at 8:20 am
Its called conflict of interest hence why DWP themselves don’t use MWA candidates.
gaia
August 23, 2014 at 1:16 pm
BUT they wouldn’t get SEETEC to do it as sub contract would they ?.
Greenford
August 23, 2014 at 1:37 pm
Technically I don’t see the harm in it providing that’s what the MWA claimant wants to do but its how it would look to public that I feel makes it not already the case (ive never met one yet). In addition do remember that although security don’t have access to the PCs it doesn’t mean they wouldn’t witness everything else that goes on and later use it against DWP, just imagine how damaging it would be to DWP with security defending a claimants account of events.
Lastly as is the buzz word lately, its hardly performing a service for the community.
gaia
August 24, 2014 at 8:10 am
What the common folk forget is that the legal definition of a word and it’s meaning in common usage are frequently two different things entirely i.e “extremist” we would think of a suicide bomber with explosives strapped to their body not someone disagreeing with government policy on a website. Same with “child”, we don’t picture an 18 year-old but this can be the legal definition. As if says in the Devil’s Advocate the world will be taken over by lawyers.
The Devil's Advocate
August 25, 2014 at 5:08 pm
Word to the wise
Some may have read that the home secretary is planning to introduce laws to combat extremism. Now in the articles read, also what was mentioned was that extremism didn’t have to have terrorist connections or intent.
This being the case means SO WHAT DOES EXTREMISM CONSTITUTE, HOW LONGS A PIECE OF STRING ?
I have a suspicion that any dissident action even in just a verbal statement towards the government of the day will constitute as such If we the public don’t keep an eye on this.
gaia
August 24, 2014 at 8:42 am
Yes I agree with this Gaia. Many people do tend to forget that if you have an argument say in a shop or other place of business and you use certain words or gestures etc. The chance is that you will have committed an offence under a Section 5 Public Order, using words or behaviour LIKELY to cause FEAR ALARM DISTRESS OFFENCE OFFRONTARY Etc.
Greenford
August 24, 2014 at 9:11 am
You wont need to worry about section 5 anymore when this comes in as it wont make a difference what decibel its broadcast at or how one articulates gestures as you could literally present it like the pope and still be arrested even though you made no mention of taking up arms.
You name it, snooper charter, changes to the laws on protesting and strikes, media regulation imposed on online posters/bloggers and now laws on extremism, if people cant see their freedoms being sliced away by one excuse or another then their is no hope for a man to live their life without being constantly nannied or threatened, something claimants current endure and know only to well.
To show how naïve the public are, a member of the public once said to a news channel during the saga of an electrician suspected of being a terrorist, “I think people should give up their liberty for freedom”. This market stall owner also suggested without a shred of evidence that this person was an illegal immigrant aswell as other totally incorrect information.
DONT ACT AT YOUR PERIL.
gaia
August 25, 2014 at 7:22 am
gaia:
Extremism, according to the governement anyway, is anyone who has the temerity to disagree with official policy. That means you, dear gaia, and everyone on this posting. We’re all extremists. Praise Marx and pass the ammunition.
jj joop
August 25, 2014 at 7:04 am
Oh its already worse than that jj joop as I mentioned a while ago that what you or I post online is now subject to media law meaning say the wrong things and you could actually witness the police come to your door, even if necessary arresting you.
Oh how we foolishly surrender our freedoms under the pretext of incidents that are liable to never happen to most folk.
gaia
August 25, 2014 at 8:08 am
By the way I should have added that any Security Guard or Street Ranger can nick you for this too
Greenford
August 24, 2014 at 9:14 am
Re Seetec and Workfare Ipswich It MAY have something too do with a Garden Centre in the Whitehouse Area of Town
Info
August 24, 2014 at 1:03 pm
Check this out:
29 page briefing on DWP JSA and ESA sanctions stats 13 Aug 14. Not exactly bedtime reading but interesting to dip in to.
http://refuted.org.uk/2014/08/24/sanctionsstats/
jj joop
August 25, 2014 at 6:51 am
Ive only read a few pages so far but, very interesting and confirms what all we have been saying for time.
Nice one, top one their jj joop.
gaia
August 25, 2014 at 7:51 am
GREENFORD, Gaia, etc…
You would do well to read the report I posted on this page back on 8 August in reply to someone known as “See You Next Tuesday” – a person who it appears was put on a “Community Notification List” after falling out with a Jobcentre manager:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1195399/Woman-branded-potentially-violent-council-complaining-damaged-flowerbed.html
Any argument, gesture, word, slogan or deed, used in public could so easily end up with you falling foul of legislation which is intended to deal with terrorists and serious criminals!
Tobanem
August 25, 2014 at 9:59 am
I remember when it was first posted.
This dictates a very much real us and you regime.
I cant wait to see how the government are going to withdraw citizenship from people who fight in any of these eastern wars as its not like any other country will take them in. I think the presumption is the country their in will take them but considering it will be in disarray, this would only end in the individual being even more invisible than they were.
This added with the fact your effectively creating hate will only lend to creating the terrorists they try and fear us with.
gaia
August 26, 2014 at 6:53 am
gaia
You might like to read this excerpt:
“It’s a Catch-22. According to this logic, anyone returning from a country where terrorists are active who claims they are not a terrorist must be – according to the authorities – a terrorist.”
From here:
http://voxpoliticalonline.com/2014/08/26/boris-johnsons-catch-22-get-rid-of-the-presumption-of-innocence/
We’ll all be terrorists soon!
Tobanem
August 26, 2014 at 12:38 pm
Like I said, slicing away our freedoms, out rights except here instead of having to prove with oh I don’t know EVIDENCE, their resorting to getting away with just labelling you.
We have all seen how councils abused the terror laws so you can just imagine how abused this would be and how over time would be applied to other criminal acts.
We as a society are not evolving, were de-evolving to a system reminiscent of centauries and centauries ago.
gaia
August 27, 2014 at 4:58 am
AMES IS NOW DESTITUTE FOLLOWING A SANCTION: ‘IT’S BULLY BOY TACTICS’, HE SAYS.
August 27, 2014 · by foodbankhelper · in LondonFoodbank · 5 Comments
James Dearsley, 60, receives a three-month sanction while on the Work Programme
James Dearsley, 60, receives a three-month sanction while on the Work Programme
A vulnerable 60-year-old has been left penniless and dependent on food bank support after his Jobseeker’s Allowance (JSA) was sanctioned at the end of July while on the Work Programme. South-east Londoner James Dearsley received a letter from the Department for Work and Pensions (below) telling him that he had been sanctioned from July 29 and that his JSA would not be reinstated until October 29. James, who is already in arrears with his council tax, has spent more than three weeks without social security. This withdrawal of money means that he’s already been forced to use Greenwich food bank twice.
More here: http://annmcgauran.org.uk/2014/08/27/james-is-now-destitute-following-a-sanction-its-bully-boy-tactics-he-says/
Andrew Coates
August 27, 2014 at 4:09 pm
You know, had he had been on universal credit, the sanction would also had applied to his housing benefit in which case he would have definitely been homeless.
No one can convince me that this can ever be helping someone move forward.
gaia
August 27, 2014 at 9:03 pm
a dog has more rights to life and a home and food than someone on jsa/benefits.
if i starved one to death outside id get locked up for cruelty to animals.
yet the staff at the job center are more than happy to make humans starve to death and make them homeless to boot and want paying for there service they provide.
rip out all the phones and job points to make it as hard as possible to find a job and give you a jsa that is impossible to complete each week so an easy sanction for them and thats called help.
super ted
August 27, 2014 at 9:59 pm
Yes and all those recently convicted child abusers will to.
gaia
August 28, 2014 at 7:35 pm