Ipswich Unemployed Action.

Campaigning for Unemployed Rights.

Older Workers Face Job Discrimination on Universal Job Match

with 43 comments

I’m sure there’s plenty of people here (cough, cough….) who could confirm this without even stirring.

In fact being a bit ‘Older‘ I was listening to the News at One, drinking me 99 Tea and heard this……

The government’s Universal Jobmatch website is publishing adverts using terms that could be breaking anti-age discrimination laws, the BBC has found.

It also found similar jobs ads posted online by Reed – one of the UK’s biggest employment agencies.

On both sites, hundreds of employers say they want “recent graduates”, which lawyers say implies they are looking for younger applicants.

Many older job seekers say they are being frozen out of the jobs market.

A typical example of wording used in job adverts reads: “My client is recruiting a recent graduate to join their extremely busy team. You should be looking for a career, have good customer service skills and good administration skills including data entry.”

The BBC showed some of the adverts to James Davies, a solicitor from law firm Lewis Silkin, who specialises in age discrimination cases.

“A recent graduate obviously favours younger candidates,” he said. “It would be lawful if it could be justified, but it’s difficult to see why an employer needs a recent graduate when someone who graduated 10 or 20 years ago wouldn’t be equally suitable.”

‘Ambitious young people’

One advert on Universal Jobmatch, which is used by millions of job seekers, was even more blatant.

“We are always looking to recruit talented, ambitious young people who may fit well into one of our progressive thinking departments such as media, including social media, TV, press officer or other departments such as office administration,” it read.

According to Mr Davies the company responsible, Leisure Leagues, based in Warwick, which says it is the UK’s largest provider of five-a-side football leagues, could be breaking age discrimination laws with this wording.

“Here we have a company which is clearly opening itself up to problems,” he said. “An older person applying for a job with this company who fails to get it will be able to point to the term ‘young’ in this advert and will be some way down the line to a successful claim against them.”

The BBC contacted Leisure Leagues to ask them why they were seeking “young people”.

A spokesman said he could see nothing wrong with it because in the leisure industry people needed to be young and fit. He said occasional refereeing duties might be required, although the job advert did not mention this requirement.

The company later emailed to say the advert had been withdrawn and an employee had been disciplined. But a week later, the job advert was still posted on Universal Jobmatch.

On Reed’s website, more than 800 jobs specified “recent graduate”. There were even a dozen adverts looking for a “young graduate”.

Reed told the BBC it agreed such terms were “inappropriate” and as a result of the BBC investigation would be changing company policy to ensure similar terms would not be used in future. Reed also said it would be re-training its staff in equality laws.

However, the Department for Work and Pensions, the government department responsible for Universal Jobmatch, said it did not think terms such as “recent graduate” were discriminatory. “We have thorough checks and balances in place and remove anything which doesn’t meet our standards,” it said in a statement.

‘Unconscious bias’

The government is trying to encourage people to work longer and retire later, but older jobseekers say they often feel ignored by employers.

Simon Silvie, 57, a former senior manager for a national IT firm, from Barrow, Cumbria, said he had applied for hundreds of jobs after being made redundant 18 months ago, but had rarely been invited to an interview.

“I would say it is age discrimination,” he said. “However, it is so hard to prove. I think that the people who are perpetrating this don’t even realise that they are doing it. It’s an unconscious bias against age.”

Ros Altmann, the government’s business champion for older workers, said there should be clearer instructions for people posting job ads, and possibly sanctions.

“We really do need to change our attitudes to older workers,” she said. “There’s no reason why you can’t have talented, ambitious people of any age – they don’t have to be young.”

The government has phased out the official retirement age, and raised the age at which some workers can get the state pension to 68.

The average retirement age for men is 64.7 and 63.1 for women. The Department for Work and Pensions said this week it would like the average retirement age to rise by as much as six months every year.

BBC

An immediate response was this,

Employers should be barred from only advertising jobs for recent graduates, the Government’s business champion for older workers has said.

Ros Altmann said the term was a “euphemism” used to recruit younger people and suggested there should be sanctions against companies that use it in recruitment adverts.

Ms Altmann disagreed with the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) by suggesting the phrase was discriminatory against older jobseekers and should be stamped out.

BBC Radio 4’s World At One discovered that hundreds of job adverts listed on the Government’s Universal Jobmatch website asked for “recent graduates” to apply.

Telegraph.

My only comment is that any change in the form of words these agencies use is not going to make a blind bit of difference.

Advertisements

43 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. ‘Recent graduate’ is a surprisingly common term, used in posts on Universal Jobmatch by a number of companies and organisations.

    Leisure leagues currently have a number of geographically diverse postings for Football Referees. Example https://jobsearch.direct.gov.uk/GetJob.aspx?JobID=10631634 (Archive: http://zois.com/10631634)

    Martin Sullivan

    October 8, 2014 at 4:20 pm

    • Most on here don’t to use UJM, so will not be interested in any links to it.

      enigma

      October 8, 2014 at 8:15 pm

    • This was also shown on the pages of TELETEXT. But Nothing said on the TV News or Channel 4 unless I missed it

      Sleepy

      October 9, 2014 at 8:17 am

  2. Last year I applied for a position of “IT Support Engineer” (18 years of experience in doing) I received a reply from the company telling me that the position was now filled, a few days later I seen the position was still advertised, on looking at the details, the heading was now “Trainee IT Support Engineer” need I say more.

    It is obvious to me and many others that older people have very little chance in gaining employment, even with a lot of experience.

    So we are on the shelf and will end up working for our benefits, many will be for years if not until they retire, what ever that age will be.

    enigma

    October 8, 2014 at 6:12 pm

    • Dwp remove ads that don’t meet their standard? Like sex working jobs?? -haven’t they been posted on there?

      Kat Rehman

      October 8, 2014 at 6:19 pm

      • Sorry I don’t know, I don’t use UJM.

        enigma

        October 8, 2014 at 6:31 pm

    • We’ll never be too old to work for our benefits though will we.

      enigma

      October 8, 2014 at 6:20 pm

  3. Post Offices will never close in Bradford lol – too many wanting to cash their Giros and collect their family allowance; can’t speak a word of English but then why should they when they have signs in Polish, Urdu, Slovakian, Latvian, Punjabi… but hey it keeps the government happy with their utopia of a multi cultural society.

    Bronco

    October 8, 2014 at 10:54 pm

    • Considering giro’s were fazed out ages ago apart from maybe a few special circumstance, jsa etc. get paid into your bank account. And theirs no need for the racism either

      Jester McFail

      October 8, 2014 at 11:58 pm

    • Bronco is obviously a Kipper – doesn’t need awkward things like facts to interfere with his prejudices!

      I see very few, if not none at all, non-English speakers signing on.

      Andrew Coates

      October 9, 2014 at 10:57 am

      • I too have never seen non speaking English in the local job centre.

        enigma

        October 9, 2014 at 11:33 am

  4. You wear your ignorance well Bronco as im nearly half a century old and in all that time have lived in a UK multicultural society in different areas so this notion that immigration is a new phenomenon and a tory creation is pure nonsense.

    Although I cannot state fact, like jester Mcfail also am of the opinion that you are nothing more than a racist.

    gaia

    October 9, 2014 at 7:04 am

  5. The following subject is worthy of a page to itself.

    CORPORATE WELFARE STATE

    £85bn is given to various business companies as a state hand out:

    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/oct/06/benefits-corporate-welfare-research-public-money-businesses?CMP=fb_gu

    Tobanem

    October 9, 2014 at 9:27 am

    • Yep, very true yet try and get a politician to acknowledge it and talking on that fact did you notice unlike most articles no where is it written as to a government response.

      Whats laughable and im not sure whether what government have said or how unknowing even now the public are is the funniest, is that while cutting welfare reduces borrowing, it does completely zip to reducing the over national debt which is the VERY REAL PROBLEM.

      Lets not forget the government is about to spend how much on chasing ISIS ?

      In time to come unless the UK overtakes another’s country resources (war) I fail to see how tax and NI contributions WONT RISE if we are to ever address our 1.2 trillion debt. I wont get technical but this all devalues what you have in your pocket meaning to need to earn more just to afford what you currently do. Its a vicious circle that will make the rich richer and the poor poorer and ever more dependant on the wealthy who as you know wont do anything unless it lines their pockets meaning even more going up with ever less trickling down.

      Unless the public wake up and get a grip, poverty will be all they know.

      KNOW YOUR WORTH AS EMPLOYEES PRODUCE WEALTH, NOT EMPLOYERS AND COMPANY OWNERS,THINK ABOUT IT.

      gaia

      October 9, 2014 at 10:23 am

  6. Tired of seeing provider and government documents suggesting claimants are volunteers when we all know its an OR ELSE ARRANGEMENT.

    After the ILO convention it was agreed any serving the community and that the community benefit from it would not be deemed as FORCED LABOUR. Well despite this fact it still doesn’t give either party (not you) the right to claim any claimant to be a volunteer if the statement isn’t true. Naturally it being a do or sanction arrangement proves its wholly untrue.

    also AND I WILL SUPPLY THE LINK, as you are not and can prove a volunteer, opens up a question in law, a question if not appropriately addressed could see the whole placement dunked. I cannot as every case is different walk you through this but if you can digest what I have supplied and research and understand it, may be pleasantly surprized.

    http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/manuals/esmmanual/esm1112.htm

    gaia

    October 9, 2014 at 10:40 am

    • gaia

      I refer to the ILO Convention which you mention.

      You say “it was agreed any [person] serving the community [and providing] the community [would] benefit from it, [then it] would not be deemed FORCED LABOUR”.

      In ILO Convention 29, Article 2, which lists exemptions from the definition of Forced or Compulsory Labour, it says in paragraph 2b: [Forced or Compulsory Labour shall not include] “Any work or service which forms part of the normal civic obligations of the citizens of a fully self-governing country”.

      As I have said on here already, it is not a normal civic obligation to work for nothing!!!

      Moreover, in paragraph 2e of the above convention it goes on: [Forced or Compulsory Labour shall not include] “minor communal services of a kind…”

      WORKING FOR NOTHING FOR 4 WEEKS OR 6 MONTHS IS NOT A MINOR COMMUNAL SERVICE!!!

      So I still maintain that MWA and CWPs amount to Forced or Compulsory Labour – which is illegal!!!

      Tobanem

      October 9, 2014 at 1:30 pm

      • Hey tobanem, ILO convention or not my personal feeling is its FORCED LABOUR plain and simple.

        As far as im concerned if a person doesn’t consent then its against their will. That said I have to bring up ILO as its exactly what this government is hiding behind which is a joke as the ILO isn’t a regulation/act, it was a meeting of nations, none of which were legally obliged to follow through with.

        Im all for placements and training if and only if the individual needs and desires such but all I see with this MWA/CWP is an excuse to supply FREE LABOUR hence why I posted in the other post the HMRC link not to mention the other day announcing how social non profit enterprises sprung up straight after the tories introduced the work programme.

        I don’t doubt theirs a few employers acting in a genuine I want to help fashion but you will hardly notice these as their drowned out by unscrupulous employers looking to cut costs.

        The real nails in the coffin that confirms this is how neither DWP nor provider care how many claimants each placement gets not to mention the whole scheme lacks diversity and choice.

        The insulting part is the government intends to phase out the work programme in favour of subjecting claimants to 6 months of placement followed by 35 hours a week supervised job search for 6 months, meaning the providers have less responsibility while receiving the same financial incentives.
        What makes that criminal is you have under that scheme only a 15% chance of seeking employment so instead of the 1/3 of claimants get work motto, we have now 1/6 proving the government want you to work for free even if for a short period of time.

        Im VERY well aware of the tory agenda of making profit out of claimants so believe me we are on the same page in this matter and why I toil long and often to try to find a solution.

        gaia

        October 9, 2014 at 5:34 pm

      • gaia

        You say the ILO Convention was a meeting of nations, none of which were legally obliged to follow through with it.

        Well, this country now has recent legislation (in both England and Scotland) which outlaws Forced or Compulsory Labour, and, as I have said already, there does not seem to be any exemptions which allow MWA and CWPs.

        Moreover, the European Court of Human Rights has already said that the ILO definition of Forced or Compulsory Labour is the starting point for interpreting Article 4 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The recent legislation in this country which I have mentioned, grew out of Article 4, so the ILO definition of Forced or Compulsory Labour is also the starting point for interpreting that legislation!

        So there is hope for the victims of Forced or Compulsory Labour!! And don’t forget the “no contract” defence either – don’t sign anything giving consent to your participation on MWA or CWPs!!!

        Tobanem

        October 10, 2014 at 8:45 am

      • Arr yes, a non statutory requirement made statutory through a statutory one. What that means if its an unfamiliar term to you is that the non statutory can be referred to as a preferred code of practice in defence to a statutory requirement. This is not legally binding to said statutory requirement but will be excepted by a court as evidence of competent practice.

        Not signing a providers data processing/privacy declaration still doesn’t prevent the provider from sending you to a placement employer. So and im not saying this will happen but would or should i say could be used to signify INFERRED CONSENT (action).

        This if the case means one would have to have in writing evidence that they are only attending under the duress (threat of a sanction) and that in no way does this action signify consent. That sows up the provider.

        With this placement employer again as I would recommend and you would no doubt prescribe no documents especially surrounding data processing/privacy be signed.

        Now technically this P employer doesn’t need you to sign inorder to work, especially more so if its a small company of so many employees. So the provider gets paid they merely attend once a day to verify the individual is their and that is enough to secure payments to whoever.

        So you see its not as cut and run as one might think hence me looking into relationships like what does the provider represent to the employer (ie did they supply you or introduce you).

        As I said im still working on it like I imagine others are but yes theirs always hope.

        gaia

        October 11, 2014 at 10:43 am

      • gaia

        When I said don’t sign anything when sent to MWA or CWPs, I did not just mean Data Protection waivers, I meant DON’T SIGN ANYTHING! Do not start filling-in and subsequently signing registration forms or anything else at all.

        If you are then referred for a sanction, tell the Decision Maker in writing that you have “No Contract” with the relevant referral agency. You can also say that you have no signed agreement and that you DO NOT CONSENT to give the referral agency any information.

        That should do the trick nicely!

        PS Do you remember “super ted” on here saying he has won all his appeals with the “No Contract” defence?!

        Tobanem

        October 11, 2014 at 3:43 pm

      • Too right, Tobanem, if you don’t sign ANYTHING it fucks up these provider c!”£$ – they don’t even get paid 😀 (Read the guidance: if they can’t prove anything the DWP won’t pay them!) They way to bring down this slave labour shit is not NOT SIGN ANY of the provider’s shit. Oh, but it’s ‘mandatory’ – not it fucking isn’t – DO NOT SIGN!!

        DO NOT SIGN

        October 11, 2014 at 6:42 pm

      • just show the provider the letter from the jcp and ask them where on it does it state i have to sign any 3rd party paper work because it does not.

        it states its mandatory that i go to said provider on said date nothing else.

        if they demand you sign ur name for the bus fair then again show them the letter as it states they must give this to you and does not say anything about signing for it.

        and when they do sanction you for non attendance send a copy of ur bus tickets and that they refused to refund you and have um on that one as well.

        it must be now 9 years since i woke up to there bull shit and have not had to stay and do any off it since then as i will not sign anything from a 3rd party private company and there is no law that they can use to make you sign them its your choice.

        just make sure you have proof that you went on said date and you will win any sanction they try. and they will send one and it will be for non attendance i bet.

        and last off all do not give the jcp your phone numbers email addresses as they will be past to the providers.

        if the jcp ask/mandate you for a cv then show it to them but do not let them keep it or take a copy as a cv is not part of the jsa.

        and do the same with ujm show them a screen shot of ur account or pic on ur phone refuse them access then delete it.

        super ted

        October 11, 2014 at 7:27 pm

  7. I noticed at the jobcentre since i turned 50 attitudes’ stiffened. attitudes like this serve no purpose as age comes to people,including those that take this view will look back in the future too.

    Once again the government has a hand in this,while no doubt trumpeting the law in this case (or keeping quiet),it sets examples are ok to do so. its clear this site is totally unregulated and the government just looks to be going along with it.

    ken

    October 9, 2014 at 2:57 pm

    • If DWP took down every ad that broke the rules or was immoral, their probably wouldn’t be any ken and lets not forget how politicians are the article when it comes to WORDPLAY.

      gaia

      October 9, 2014 at 5:37 pm

  8. REED RECRUITMENT

    YOUNG, DYNAMIC RECENT GRADUATES REQUIRED

    OLD FOGIES NEED NOT APPLY!

    AS SEEN ON UNIVERSAL JOBMATCH

    Reed Recruitment

    October 9, 2014 at 3:28 pm

    • Oh before I forget you can all still apply to these recent grad jobs as I don’t doubt most of the positions don’t legally require such a qualification meaning discrimination not to mention DWP would have to except it as part of your evidence.

      So if your struggling to reach your points per week, use these to flesh it out.

      gaia

      October 9, 2014 at 5:41 pm

  9. This type of description tends to be unrealistic, the last part tends to expect at least 1 but can be up to 5 years worth of experience:

    “A typical example of wording used in job adverts reads: “My client is recruiting a recent graduate to join their extremely busy team. You should be looking for a career, have good customer service skills and good administration skills including data entry.””

    I don’t know where these mythical beings straight out of university with tonnes of experience come from, maybe they make them in factories? Actually I think it means they’ve hired someones son/daughter via nepotism but need to make an advert for tick box purposes therefore they’ve design it to be as exclusive and unrealistic as possible. Or just fishing for data.

    futureindoubt

    October 9, 2014 at 10:43 pm

    • I should add, I laugh at employers who clearly abide by the National Consortium of Right-Wing Emergency Toilet-Papers List of Acceptable Degrees. I’ve seen a fair few cases where what they actually need is a social science grad but want a maths grad cause maths grads are super beings.

      futureindoubt

      October 9, 2014 at 10:56 pm

  10. What I love is the adverts stating trainee this or trainee that yet as soon as you read the part requirements it always states HNC/HND. Whats crazy is the majority of positions don’t require any such level of knowledge nor is it a requirement for regulation.

    As usual its agencies and employers trying to cream from the top of the unemployment pile which is uncovered in later adverts when it gets downgraded to desired. Take marks and spencers warehouses. First they wanted only people with no les than 4 months experience in warehouses yet as soon as they realised this bracket is already happily employed elsewhere and Christmas is coming it gets downgraded to experience not essential, training given.

    Employers and agencies are as full of crap as DWP are so its no wonder the public are turning to self employment. If employers want to say people aren’t educated enough, aren’t experienced enough, don’t have the right work ethics then don’t hire us and do it all yourself.

    Oh that’s right, you cant as your greedy drive for profit would tank what with having but 2 arms and 2 legs.

    gaia

    October 10, 2014 at 7:04 am

  11. ‘Slap in face’ for Birmingham’s youth as apprentice fund is axed.

    The Government funding was combined with cash from the city council’s community chest and the National Apprenticeship Service to form the Birmingham Jobs Fund, which saw small and medium-sized employers receive a grant for taking on 18 to 24 year olds.

    Council cabinet member for jobs Coun Tahir Ali said the council was now considering a judicial review as it only found out about the change from a third party sub-contractor two weeks before the Wage Incentive Scheme was cancelled. There was no consultation with the council or employers.

    Employment Minister Esther McVey insists the Government is still operating a number of support programmes despite axing the Wage Incentive Scheme.

    http://www.birminghampost.co.uk/news/regional-affairs/slap-face-birminghams-youth-apprentice-7906464

    Obi Wan Kenobi

    October 10, 2014 at 9:26 am

  12. Meanwhile…

    There’s an advert on UJM for an “Office Administrator – Short Contract” vacancy.

    Wait for it…the company is called “Flexiworkforce” and the hours of this job are “annual hours” – which means zero hours contract!

    Oh, and the location is at the back of beyond, so your own transport is advisable!!!

    Tobanem

    October 10, 2014 at 9:28 am

  13. 9 October 2014.

    Mitcham JobCentre.

    Disabled woman humiliated after wetting herself in JobCentre because staff wouldn’t let her use the toilet.

    A disabled woman with a weak bladder was left ‘totally humiliated’ when she wet herself in the middle of a JobCentre reception because staff refused to let her use the toilet.

    Rebecca Weston, who suffers from cerebral palsy, wanted the ground to swallow her up after the incident at the JobCentrePlus in Mitcham, south London.

    The former nursery worker for Mitcham Council had to go to the centre for an interview to have a benefits review meeting with a member of staff on September 29.

    But soon after she arrived at the London Road building she quickly realised she needed the toilet.

    She said: ‘I asked the security guard if I could use the toilet and he just said no.

    ‘I told him ‘I’m registered disabled and have a weak bladder which is unlikely to hold’. I asked him to please let me in or else I was going to wet myself on his floor.

    ‘He thought I was threatening to wet myself and he just said ‘you’re not using it.

    ‘He told me to go to the coffee shop next door but I was desperate and I told him ‘I’m not going to make it.’

    Miss Weston attempted to make her way to the coffee shop but before she even reached the JobCentre door she said she could feel urine running down her leg.

    She said other JobCentre clients were left speechless by the incident.

    ‘It is the attitude that upsets me. He (the security guard) thought I was just some stupid little girl being difficult but that wasn’t the case.’

    Miss Weston was diagnosed with her crippling condition at the age of two and suffers poor balance and pain in her legs.

    She said the way she was treated by staff as she stood shaking in the reception was ‘appalling’.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2786318/Disabled-woman-humiliated-wetting-JobCentre-staff-wouldn-t-let-use-toilet.html

    Obi Wan Kenobi

    October 10, 2014 at 9:43 am

  14. Guide To Stopping Harassment From the DWP.

    How to Stop The Harassment.

    The moment that the DWP act in a manner which causes you to feel distressed, humiliated or threatened, you must complain to them in writing that their behaviour made you feel that way and that you don’t wish to be treated in that manner. Send the letter by Recorded Delivery or make sure you get a signed and dated copy and receipt from the DWP if you hand deliver it.

    Once the letter of complaint has been sent, if you experience a second incident which makes you feel distressed, humiliated or threatened, then you need to have ready a Cease and Desist letter ready to give to them and simply hand it to them without telling them what it is and once they accept the letter, inform them that it is a Cease and Desist letter for harassment and that if they breach the terms of the Cease and Desist letter then you will file charges for harassment and get the police involved.

    The important point after the letter has been handed in is to maintain the pressure on them to get the outcome which you require. I will be posting audio clips of my various phone calls where I had to invoke the power of the Cease and Desist letter and you will hear for yourself just how fearful the DWP employees get when confronted with someone who knows their rights, can remain calm and assertive, plus has the power to threaten the DWP employee with a visit from the police if the person in question can be shown to have breached the terms stated in the Cease and Desist letter.

    What to Do if They Don’t Stop the Harassment

    If after the Cease and Desist letter has been handed in they continue their course of harassment, then you are within your legal rights to phone the police and demand that they investigate your claim of harassment against the DWP or the individual in question. Inform the police that you have given them a lawful Cease and Desist letter for harassment and that they have breached the terms of the letter and you now wish to formally press charges against the DWP or named individual.

    If the harassment is solely from one individual, or the same group of individuals, then you can also insist that the police investigate an allegation of Misconduct in Public Office, an offence which can be proven by proving malicious harassment from employees who hold Public Offices, such as Jobcentre Plus advisers. The offence also carries a maximum sentence of life imprisonment.

    It is a good idea to have copies of all evidence readily available for the police to investigate as this will make it appear an easier case for them to look into (harassment is pretty much clear cut in cases involved mistreatment at the hands of an organisation).

    If the police refuse to take your allegations seriously, or refuse to investigate, you should ask to speak to the Duty Sergeant and make a formal complaint about their refusal to investigate a crime despite having proof of said crime.

    http://www.thesanctionedjobseeker.co.uk/guide-to-stopping-harassment-from-the-dwp/

    Obi Wan Kenobi

    October 10, 2014 at 9:55 am

    • This last post is worthy of a page to itself on here – and as many other places as possible!

      I wonder, though, how many people will have the capacity to take on Jobcentre personnel to the bitter end?

      Remember, most people abandon their appeals before they get to the Tribunal stage – even although 90% of cases will win if taken all the way.

      Tobanem

      October 10, 2014 at 10:19 am

      • I agree, it’s provoked a lot of thoughts.

        Given that there are so many cases it’s important to say the least!

        Andrew Coates

        October 10, 2014 at 11:10 am

      • Some people, most unemployed just can’t afford to take things all the way as we know, they would end up homeless, hunger and starvation, those who do end up at a tribunal no doubt had help from family and friends.

        enigma

        October 11, 2014 at 9:58 am

      • Is that crap I smell, yes its definitely crap.

        LISTEN UP CLAIMANTS

        Harassment/abuse is not a civil offence, its a CRIMINAL OFFENCE and as such is totally covered under legal aid which CPS will inform you of should a case be presented.

        This blurring with the practice of fighting a sanction has absolutely NOTHING to do with either using a decease and desist order or reporting/having an advisor arrested.

        Also DWP CANNOT sanction you for such actions either.

        gaia

        October 11, 2014 at 11:28 am

      • And another thing

        Im sure you have all witnessed or even been accused of abusive behaviour at some point while at DWP and as such if put on a incident report form will see the individual receive a letter that any further repetition could result in the police being called.

        WELL, unless you make physical contact with someone they will do NO SUCH THING and I will explain why.

        Only a judge in a criminal court and or jury can decide guilt so any reference to the term abusive behaviour is on DWPs part, written or otherwise a mere opinion. Also as it is not their place period to make any legal judgement if they did call the police they then couldn’t sanction you because of the time honoured RIGHT AND PRACTICE of,

        PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE.

        This would mean that they would have to pay you even for your time in a cell, police station, solicitors and court right up till the verdict is passed. Naturally you would have spent it by then so they couldn’t get it back unless they took you to court again all the while costing them more than it would have to just ignore it. To make matters worse for DWP you simply get your solicitor to get it converted into time and again they still don’t get a bean and it costs the government even more to house and feed you in prison which will be short meaning they still have to pay your housing benefit.

        It will hurt DWP or should I say the tories more to carry out their threat so when or if this happens please insist politely they call the police as I do when they try it on every time their losing an argument which usually forms them lying to a claimant to get something they know only to well they cant do as each and every time the police were never called. To insult them further when they do give me the letter I simply tear it up infront of their faces, laugh then state I will not submit to your hollow threats and unfounded opinions/accusations.

        If they say “so your not willing to follow business rules/policy that you entered into”, simply reply ” thats not what i said, then repeat what I said above about the only person/persons that can (paragraph 3) and until such time view the letter or any further comments as defamatory opinions based on no legal fact.

        Enjoy your weekend claimants

        gaia

        October 11, 2014 at 11:59 am

      • Yes, as I have said on here many times before, what is happening when a Jobcentre advisor becomes abusive and intimidating, is that the recipient is being put in a state of fear and alarm – which amounts to a good old fashioned breach-of-the-peace.

        Get it into your heads that there does not need to be shouting and swearing. All that is necessary for a breach-of-the-peace to occur is for the victim to be put in a state of fear and alarm – and that undoubtedly is happening to most Jobseekers these days in Jobcentres when confronted by aggressive interview techniques.

        Tobanem

        October 11, 2014 at 3:54 pm

      • Of course, it’s much easier said than done for the average Jobcentre claimant to have a Civil Servant charged by the police.

        Can you imagine a young, inarticulate baseball-capped hoodie, possibly with a criminal record, trying to get the police on his side without witnesses – especially when several G4S goons have “witnessed” the Jobseeker being abusive!

        Tobanem

        October 11, 2014 at 4:11 pm

  15. Benefit Sanctions Protest.

    Published on 18 Sep 2014.

    Representatives from a number of organisations turned up to speak out against the Benefit Sanctions including Kirklees Axe the Tax, the Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition and Kirklees Unison. They are attempting to spread awareness and speak out against what they view as the government placing unfair guidelines on the job centres to try and penalise job seekers for minor infractions.

    Obi Wan Kenobi

    October 10, 2014 at 11:08 am

  16. Here’s more discrimination:

    Tobanem

    October 11, 2014 at 4:32 pm

  17. ..

    DO NOT SIGN

    October 11, 2014 at 6:43 pm


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: