Ipswich Unemployed Action.

Campaigning for Unemployed Rights.

Up to Nine Of Out Ten Job Portal Adverts Could Be Illegal, Says CAB

with 60 comments

https://i2.wp.com/www.bbc.co.uk/staticarchive/6df6ba4bf5a9ccda0ad21cfe90b9eb5f8d8faf30.jpg

Gizza Job! But don’t Waste my bloody Time!

Like everyone who’s unemployed I spend a great deal of time applying for jobs.

My Job Seeker’s Agreement sentences me, for example, to 3 hours a day in Ipswich Central library – which I spent naturally avidly Jobseeking.

Nothing else…..

And that’s just part of the 35 hours trudging around looking for work, asking everybody I meet about jobs, pounding the pavements, shouting “Gizza us a Job!” and “I can do that……”

Nothing else….

We have posted on this site (by esteemed colleague Universal Job Match) many, many,  reports about bogus job adverts.

This problem has not gone away.

Now we also have this:

Welfare Weekly.

Nearly nine out of ten adverts on job portals fail to adhere to minimum Advertising Standards Agency (ASA) requirements, according to the Citizens Advice Bureau (CAB).

The advice charity warns that 88% of these adverts are wasting the time of thousands of job seekers struggling to find employment.

Vague job adverts are omitting vital information about wages and hours, says the CAB.

This leaves job seekers unable to determine whether a job will pay well enough to put food on the table and settle household bills.

Poor information could increase the likelihood of unsuitable applicants and risk putting people off from applying.

Citizens Advice analysis of 800 job adverts found:

  • 2 in 5 adverts are unclear about whether the job is full or part-time.
  • 1 in 5 adverts don’t tell applicants how much they will be paid.
  • 2 in 5 adverts are not clear if the role is temporary or permanent.
  • 1 in 10 jobs adverts do not specify either an employer or an agency, so applicants don’t know who they’re sending their details to.

The charity also discovered that self-employed jobs are not always advertised as such, with 12% of self-employment opportunities failing to identify the nature of employment.

Citizens Advice is calling on job portals to ensure that ads abide by ASA guidelines. Adding that websites should have clear methods in place for identifying job adverts that don’t meet these standards.

Gillian Guy, Chief Executive of Citizens Advice, said: “Vague job ads risk wasting people’s time and business’ money.

“People seeking employment face a real challenge if job adverts don’t even tell them if they’ll earn enough to keep a roof over their head. Applying for jobs where hours and pay are unclear consuming valuable hours of job hunting time.

“Employers can also have their time wasted as they receive high numbers of unsuitable applications. This can be an inefficient recruitment process, meaning they’re less likely to get the best person for the job.

“Requiring recruiters posting job adverts to include a minimum standard of information would help people decide whether to apply for a role.

“Employers would also benefit from a better matched pool of applicants.”

Thinking about these criticisms I can only say that they ring absolutely true.

Citizen’s Advice Bureau original statement: Vague job ads “wasting people’s time and business’ money”.

Advertisements

Written by Andrew Coates

June 17, 2015 at 3:17 pm

60 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. We were talking about employment today while at the food bank, from the employer being the barrier to not enough jobs, there are too many people, we can see this when hundreds or even thousands of people applying for the same job, there is also the fact that employers more so these days receive many CV’s, while looking for the one who will take less of a wage. if one’s not careful the DWP will find out, – if so one has to take it – and we know the employer knows it. as in the case of the employer not stating in their add “a wage”

    enigma

    June 17, 2015 at 4:20 pm

    • I suspect the problem here is that Job portals have become an industry in their own right.

      They are interested in getting people to click on, apply for, and use their sites, not as much as about recruiting people (for which I assume they get a real payment), but as a way of demonstrating their value to employers.

      It would still be interesting to know if they get any revenue out of the traffic for “vague job ads” or whether this is something to their clients – employers – advantage.

      Andrew Coates

      June 17, 2015 at 4:34 pm

      • Yes, there is that of “our details wanted” too. I remember some time ago someone who advertised on UJM received £1 for every CV.

        enigma

        June 17, 2015 at 4:57 pm

      • Some of the usual commission only door-to-door selling of over-priced junk to confused pensioners firms now just make up an agency name for themselves, and then advertise the ‘jobs’ as selling, retail, delivery.

        Another Fine Mess

        June 18, 2015 at 12:18 am

  2. UJM from the start? We all knew it was crap,yet the DWP paid £25 Million and signed a contract to pay £500.000 per month to Monster to maintain it,somebody got a back hander!

    Other news I actually found a JOB that PAYS REAL MONEY,cheers all around right? I have been threatened with Sanctions if I do not divulge whom my employer is from Prime Providers, Subs and people I do not even know….They provided no help only a hinderance,if they had they would know who my employer is……I sign off tomorrow and the JCP can £uck right off aswell!

    jray

    June 17, 2015 at 4:47 pm

  3. Annual Verification Of Your Claim Form Legality.

    The legal basis for the Annual Verification check in respect of Jobseekers Allowance is provided by Regulations 24 of the Jobseeker’s Allowance Regulation 1996, in conjunction with Regulations 17 and 18 of the Social Security and Child Support (Decision and Appeals) Regulations 1999.

    The Annual Verification letter explains in a straightforward way that under existing regulations the Secretary of State now expects income based Jobseekers Allowance claimants to verify their claim at least every twelve months.

    https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/273962/response/666136/attach/html/3/FOI%202405.pdf.html

    enigma

    June 17, 2015 at 5:22 pm

  4. enigma, ot, what happens now after i have been on the sick for more than 28 weeks?

    do i still need to keep getting sick notes and sending them to the dwp..?

    not heard a thing from atos or maximuss ?

    super ted

    June 17, 2015 at 7:18 pm

    • If your still not fit for work because of your arm then just keep getting sick notes from your doc, then keep sending them in to DWP, if you don’t you know what will happen, so don’t wait for them, I was on ESA between 6 and 7 months when I received a letter from Atos.

      enigma

      June 17, 2015 at 8:15 pm

    • Super ted, I think maybe the 28 weeks was an estimate on how long it would take for your arm to heal.

      enigma

      June 17, 2015 at 11:43 pm

      • well i got another note for 3 months now just i thought after 6 months id get a higher rate of esa??

        super ted

        June 18, 2015 at 7:10 pm

      • so when will i get my wca then? still get the same as on jsa filled in the atos thing start of feb.

        and had nothing back bar send in sick notes.

        so they owe my back pay then ?

        If the assessment takes longer than 13 weeks your benefit will be backdated to the 14th week of the claim.

        super ted

        June 18, 2015 at 11:14 pm

      • Since you’ve so far been on sick for 28 weeks and have been given another sick note for another 3 months, my guess is you will soon receive a letter from Maximus to attend WCA.

        When I was on ESA I received the same amount as JSA, maybe a few pence difference, I was asked if I wanted to claim DLA but I knew I wouldn’t get it, – reality.

        I don’t think you will get any back dated payment. you will soon find out super ted.

        enigma

        June 19, 2015 at 11:36 am

  5. Really, just advertising standards ?

    I thought the CAB had real lawyers but I suppose its just a haven of the worst of the worst.

    The problem is simple, you have a website that doesn’t give a crap about those coming to the sites as all they want is you to make them popular enough to make money from advertising along with passing on your personal data for cash and or favours (I do not mean to whom you apply to).

    Ive already mentioned how claimants can protect there personal data by replacing there CV with a notice to cut out scams. Well this will also effectively wreck these sites potential to gain money when these employers and agencies start crying at them to prevent subscribers from replacing CVs and that’s if they do.

    Naturally they cant even in a legal capacity not to mention a system only recognises file formats so cant tell a CV from any document you type on a word processor like MS office.

    This is the last time im going to say it,

    NEVER EVER upload your CV to any website, in its place put a notice outlining in the interest of privacy and security, it has been temporarily removed until the advertiser of said position contacts them via the supplied email address and has been verified to be who they say they are.

    If for whatever reason you choose not to do this then you MUST except the consequences of your actions. Or in English, don’t be bitching about what companies are doing and concentrate solely on what your NOT doing.

    gaia

    June 17, 2015 at 8:05 pm

    • Incase any poster says DWP will moan and threaten.

      As the data subject in full accordance with the law (data protection act), it is your legal right to abstain when you see fit from giving your legal consent to process any personal and or sensitive data.

      As is clear to see above , you are not failing to apply but merely have added a step for good reasons so if the potential employer or agency takes offence, that is there cross to bare as they chose of there own free accord not to contact you.

      gaia

      June 17, 2015 at 8:18 pm

      • Gaia, what about those on line application forms on employers websites?

        enigma

        June 17, 2015 at 8:31 pm

      • Because people have to put all their details in to apply for the position, with some employers who don’t want CV’s.

        enigma

        June 17, 2015 at 8:47 pm

      • The problem with jobsites is your having to surrender your rights to them all in order to gain audience/connection to an interesting job. On an employers site your dealing with this employer direct. So applying to an employers site produces less exposure than going through a jobsite.

        With this said though, the claimant still runs the risk when using such data online.

        If a persons feels unsafe in using there personal data online then choose another delivery method. Try to get the employer to see your point and again make sure you record it (the best way is email). If the employer says they wont touch any application sent by post then that was there choice which is reflected in the recorded evidence.

        Remember consent cannot be gained by force, threat or by way of deception.

        Also remember how one communicates (ie, post, email, online application, etc) is considered processing under DPA so itself needs legal consent.

        What you must ask yourself is wheres the hardship in this employer opening a few letters, whos exactly being unreasonable here, the one who abstains legal consent or the one unwilling to placate ?

        gaia

        June 17, 2015 at 10:37 pm

    • I’ve got my CV in a few reputable sites, not public – I have to send it on to the employer or agency, …you’ve got to do something.
      If your CV is made public on UJ, the employer is only supposed to be able to see your CV’s job titles, and send you a UJ message. In fact I don’t think they can see anything – I don’t think any of it works!

      Another Fine Mess

      June 18, 2015 at 12:02 am

      • Moving the personal data from as many unnecessary parties doesn’t prevent one from applying for work when really the only one that needs it is the said employer who will be paying your wages and not say monster who profit from it by effectively creating a toll.

        By replacing a CV with a notice that is simply moving the point of communication doesn’t state the person isn’t looking for work.

        Not wishing to fill out an employers online application and sending it via traditional mail again doesn’t mean a person isn’t looking for work.

        What people must remember is this isn’t about having nothing to hide, this is about protecting a persons private data from being marketed to gain money and or favours not to mention not landing in the hands who has no business having it.

        Cybercrime is an ever growing industry that todate has cracked everything they wanted so the notion that it can be made secure is pure myth pedalled by people who either want to sell a product or make a saving.

        Ask yourself this,

        Is a file with your details more safe in one or two offices filing cabinets and only sent by traditional mail meaning a person would have to physically break in to a premise to gain it or online in a cloud somewhere ?

        gaia

        June 18, 2015 at 12:06 pm

  6. enigma

    June 17, 2015 at 9:51 pm

    • I would imagine that any Workfare etc fools, might well as they are acting as subcontractors, find that they might fall under some of these laws/rules – if a civil worker in a police station can be charged with misconduct in public office/position, though they themselves are not a policeman/woman this makes it all the more interesting…

      Gazza

      June 18, 2015 at 11:02 am

  7. Same nonsense in US, but of course.

    “We’ve got to make it our national commitment that we are going to do everything we can to create good jobs that will help people get into and stay in the middle class. I want the middle class to mean something again.’

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3128601/As-Hillary-barnstorms-South-Carolina-talking-jobs-locals-mixed-bring-s-s-President-Obama-me.html

    enigma

    June 17, 2015 at 10:05 pm

  8. Issues and controversies in science & medicine.

    EMDR/CBT

    The scientific approach to understanding the world includes the process of carefully separating out variables and effects. Experiments, in fact, are designed specifically to control for variables. This can be especially challenging in medicine, since the body is a complex and variable system and there are always numerous factors at play. We often characterize the many variables that can influence the outcome in a clinical study as “placebo effects” or “non-specific effect” – things other than a specific response to the treatment in question.

    https://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/emdr-and-acupuncture-selling-non-specific-effects/#more-11803

    and

    https://www.bps.org.uk/events/through-eye-trauma-storm-emdr-treatment-trauma-1

    enigma

    June 17, 2015 at 11:29 pm

    • From the 2nd link, I love this – “EMDR (Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing) is an active, multi-dimensional, empirically validated psychological treatment” – hilarious, it’s nothing of the sort.

      It’s in the same camp as CBT & EFT. EMDR is nothing but crude behaviourism. It causes nothing but harm.

      Psychiatry (and increasingly, psychology too) is best example of ‘The Emperor’s New Clothes’ that we have.

      Lucy

      June 18, 2015 at 9:16 am

    • When any experiment is carried out for the first time it inevitably leaves a whole lot of unknown results. These results are always listed as unknown resultant variables yet when presented in a non science media format are always left out.

      This naturally demonstrates why people reach the conclusions they do if they fail to recognise this.

      Take a die, the common thing mentioned is 1 on 6 yet as we know there are more factors at work so explains why after 6 throws we can still not get the number we wanted. Naturally the more variables we can account for the more accurate the prediction. Now these unknown variables come with there own unknown variables and on the story goes.

      This is why in science we say there is no such thing as a fact, there is only meta theories.

      So making science palatable for mainstream consumption is just not a good idea and yes that includes politicians. Then you factor in sciences funding where by scientists are effectively strong armed to produce certain results inorder to maintain funding not to mention using science math isn’t the best idea when talking economics.

      gaia

      June 18, 2015 at 11:04 am

      • There is little science in psychiatry Gaia, it’s more akin to philosophy than anything else. Psychiatrists know this, but prefer to maintain huge arrogance to ensure their wallets are never empty.

        The cascade of parasites that follow it, the cheap psychologists (not so much the clinically qualified) the counsellors, the therapists and similar, use the same arrogance to protect their income streams.

        The only reason that SSRIs got licenced and took off so well is that several studies showing that these drugs were no better than placebo and caused suicidal ideation, were never published.

        It isn’t always the fault of dumbing down journalists, the pharmaceutical companies are under no obligation to publish any research findings at all. So they cherry pick, and those cherries, brought forth the required licences.

        Lucy

        June 18, 2015 at 1:16 pm

      • I agree with Lucy – in particular I refuse to take the claims of psychometric testing seriously.

        A few seconds on Google can find you enough withering criticisms to spend a month just reading them,

        “In the Cult of Personality Testing, Annie Murphy Paul observed that the MBTI has been embraced by numerous lost souls who experience an “a-ha!” reaction upon learning about their personality type. Their enthusiasm persists, despite research that shows that as many as three-quarters of people achieve a different personality type when tested again, and the sixteen types described by the MBTI have no scientific basis whatsoever. She argues that “the MBTI’s unfailingly positive tone blends seamlessly with the language of corporate political correctness and with our society’s emphasis on promoting self-esteem. The euphemistic blandness of the Myers-Briggs, its mild vocabulary of “fit” and “gift”, is the key to its success”.

        http://theconversation.com/why-workplaces-must-resist-the-cult-of-personality-testing-5540

        Andrew Coates

        June 18, 2015 at 3:03 pm

      • Science is making sense of an observation and to dismiss it has any merit is equally as ignorant.

        This said it doesn’t not imply science is right but more so this is what they think. Yes weve been wrong just look at the invention of the aerosol for instance.

        The problem is science went from a driven passion of discovery to an industry and it is there the problem lies as one person or another attempts to shoehorn a point of view regardless of agenda.

        As for not being answerable to anyone your dead wrong as that process is called peer review. This isn’t full proof but at least stops people coming out with allsorts of babble be it deliberate or not.

        While I don’t disagree with what your saying Lucy, I don’t entirely agree with it in the context you choose to deliver it.

        Cognitive studies isn’t like the other classes of psychology, its the study on how the brain processes signals, more engineering than philosophy. As I said people like Darren Brown use it to trick and amaze people so to say it holds no water is simply untrue.

        The important question is can it help people, should we really be rewiring people without knowing the long term outcomes.

        A matter of ethics, not philosophy.

        gaia

        June 18, 2015 at 3:20 pm

      • Gaia, before you write everyone off as “ignorant”, go look into it in some depth and then tell me that psychiatry is science. It is not science, it never has been and never could be.

        I’d guess you aren’t familiar with the process of research publication and peer review or you didn’t fully comprehend what I wrote. The studies that showed up SSRIs in a poor light were never published. That’s how they remain unaccountable. There are no laws anywhere that state that all research must be published or peer reviewed. That applies to whatever stage researchers are at in the process of gaining a licence for a new drug or treatment.

        There are instances where the research on drugs that are in common prescription use today have never been peer reviewed or only minimally so.

        Also, just for information. There is no regulation in the UK for psychotherapy, applied psychology or counselling. None, zilch, nada.

        The trade associations such as the BACP have no legal standing, no power, they are just a paid for entry register. Yes a practitioner can be struck off of the register, but no, that won’t stop them practicing, legally.

        Psychiatry and psychology are different spheres of study and expertise.

        Psychiatry is philosophy because there is no provable, no tangible, physical object to represent the mind. The mind is not measurable in any meaningful way other than via the expression of emotion. Even that measure is subjective and invalid when viewed through the fakery of psychiatry (and psychology too)

        You like computers Gaia, try thinking of the mind & emotions as the operating system & software that drives us, what keeps us alive. That will help understanding.

        Authors that know their onions on this subject – Jeff Masson, Dorothy Rowe, Alice Millar, Bob Johnson, Lucy Johnstone, Joanna Moncrieff….

        Lucy

        June 18, 2015 at 4:15 pm

      • As you say Lucy, nobody has yet to peer into the human mind and explain how language works, and its ‘laws’ – comparable even remotely to physics etc – for starters.

        Source for this observation: Through the Language Glass: Why the World Looks Different in Other Languages): Guy Deutscher: 2011.

        Nobody has a truly measurable law-like explanations connecting the ‘mind’ to human behaviour.

        That does not mean that it’s rubbish, but when people begin citing the authority of science to explain the kind of things we’re talking about – Psychometric testing, use of psychologists in Job Centres – they should have scientific credentials by the bucketloads.

        They don’t.

        Andrew Coates

        June 18, 2015 at 4:21 pm

      • We can see why the heading is named,

        “Issues and controversies in science & medicine”

        enigma

        June 18, 2015 at 5:16 pm

      • Standards of Conduct, Performance and Ethics
        British Association for Behavioural & Cognitive
        psychotherapies.

        http://www.babcp.com/files/About/BABCP-Standards-of-Conduct-Performance-and-Ethics.pdf

        Improving Access to Psychological Therapies

        http://www.iapt.nhs.uk/silo/files/data-set-v15.pdf

        enigma

        June 18, 2015 at 5:46 pm

      • Lucy I don’t believe my statement using the word ignorant was aimed at anyone but more the premise of being to easy to be dismissive.

        Most people don’t have an interest or knowledge in science so often react just as you have when you seemed to imply unless you wish to correct me that psychiatry is not a science.

        Science as I said is fundamentally and foremost quantifying an observation so at this point it is immaterial whether or not it is correct. This stage is a hypothesis warranting further investigation.

        The problem always starts when people miss this very important point so assume science is only science when it is vindicated which is wholly untrue.

        What peer review does is attempt to achieve this vindication by trying to tear apart the hypothesis and experiments using various methods.

        Now even if vindicated, this doesn’t mean as I like to call it that it isn’t short sighted but what do you do if something cant have all the variables neatly explained, strike it off, wait for it as if we did I can tell you, we wouldn’t be where we are now if that was the case.

        Many people are making a song and dance about this but as usual didn’t react until it just landed in there lap like yesterday.
        You see anger, frustration and then the dogged pursuit of any scrap of evidence they can find to discredit it. Not one of them attempts to find a balance of evidence.
        I’m sorry but that’s doing exactly what the Tories are doing so wont get the claimant anywhere as the burden of proof is on he who declares, not on he who denies. This is called presumption of innocence. Had claimants had the foresight to see it coming, this burden would have been placed on the government meaning yet again claimants are a day late and dollar short.

        If people spent time reading white and green papers this wouldn’t be the case but they don’t so react on cue the same ways every time.

        I commend your effort to help others I really do but you can only do so much before those you help have to pick up sticks and stay with you pound for pound which there not.

        To finish off on what Andrew says, I wouldn’t go around taking masses of qualifications as a sign of credibility as I’ve met loads of those people who turned out to be complete non science contributing twats. As I always do, replicate the controlled experiment, yeh its not going to help you in the case of right about now but at least you will then have first hand experience so can easily bat with the best even if you don’t have a PhD or whatever.

        Oh before I forget I’ve only been studying cognitive psychology along with other medical sciences at my local university for near 8 years now. I’m not an attending student but in the interest of my field am looking into the possible viability of an energy source. Naturally there’s no go to section so I have to mill through the rest which is actually a very interesting field and is the reason why i know about it in the first place not to mention also in an engineering field I spend time on is working on organic electronics so nailing how the brain does actually process data is crucial to developing next gen CPUs.

        I also think like you two that particular P test is stupid but what bothers me is the stuff that does work that is extremely dangerous if the subject doesn’t know what’s happening or what to expect.

        It might shock you but some of the best material on cognitive responses actually comes from records kept from various experiments carried out while torturing prisoners.

        Oh one last thing for Lucy, while your computer analogy is apt its actually the hardware and software as the operating system is actually software so no need for and software. Also strangely we actually don’t come persay with an operating system, its more so like firmware on and the bios whereby we test our bodily equipment and the operating system part is more about what our senses take in and absorb which over time forms a more comprehensive stack that makes us respond as we do so uniquely not to say we don’t have common responsive traits but that’s another story. Computers lack awareness of self (consciousness) and the ability to rationalise without instruction or parameters. Computers are still dreaming of being us but it will happen eventually once a certain equation gets solved. If you fancy a go, the first person to solve it gets a million dollars reward not to mention the other trappings that come with it.

        gaia

        June 19, 2015 at 1:22 am

  9. Frank Field wants DWP committee to look at making benefit sanctions fairer.

    The committee must therefore seek to work with the Department for Work and Pensions to yield improvements in the delivery of benefits. Indeed, if the Department could set itself the goal of delivering benefits promptly, and move toward a fairer system of applying sanctions, then the numbers of people needing to go to food banks would be halved. The gains to poorer people from making progress on this front are therefore huge.

    Monitoring the development of universal credit.

    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2015/jun/18/wind-farm-subsidies-to-be-abolished-earlier-than-planned-politics-live#block-5582ac21e4b0c09f64bfa8dd

    enigma

    June 18, 2015 at 12:43 pm

  10. Disabled people’s rights threatened by government cuts, campaigners warn

    A letter signed by more than 100 charities and the Mencap president, Brian Rix, said decades of advances for those with learning disabilities could be lost
    “Basic rights of people with a learning disability are threatened by welfare cuts”

    http://www.theguardian.com/money/2015/jun/17/government-cuts-mortgage-support

    enigma

    June 18, 2015 at 1:03 pm

  11. Government cuts mortgage support

    161,000 people claiming the support will lose out on means-tested benefit from July 2015

    http://www.theguardian.com/money/2015/jun/17/government-cuts-mortgage-support

    enigma

    June 18, 2015 at 1:05 pm

  12. Thatcher’s brats get £1m knocked off their Mother’s Inheritance Tax bill:

    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/jun/18/margaret-thatchers-papers-donated-in-lieu-inheritance-tax

    That’s probably one of the things paid for by the cut in Mortgage Support 😉

    Lucy

    June 18, 2015 at 1:19 pm

  13. Statistics: 65,380 People Claiming Universal Credit, but it’s yet another stat.

    http://www.welfareweekly.com/statistics-65380-people-claiming-universal-credit/

    enigma

    June 18, 2015 at 6:15 pm

  14. Homelessness in the capital has risen by 16% in the past year, compared with a rise of 1% a year earlier, a report has found.

    The rise comes despite London Mayor Boris Johnson’s promise to eradicate rough sleeping by the end of 2012.

    A total of 7,581 people slept rough during 2014 and 2015, 5,107 of whom were new sleepers, according to the Greater London Authority (GLA).

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-33187698

    enigma

    June 18, 2015 at 6:56 pm

  15. Thanks to Kayess for the link.

    17th June, 2015

    Over the last week or so there have been several media reports about the use of therapy in job centres. A number of our members, and other mental health professionals, have raised their concerns about these reports.

    Andrew Reeves, Chair of BACP, responds:

    “At BACP, we oppose the mandatory use of psychological therapies in the delivery of workfare programmes that link unemployment to psychological deficit. Ethically, counselling and psychotherapy shouldn’t be imposed upon anyone, but must remain a choice which is freely entered into – we wouldn’t support anything else. Benefit claimants shouldn’t be expected to have therapy under the threat of their benefits being stopped – it is unethical and potentially harmful.

    http://www.bacp.co.uk/media/index.php?newsId=3742

    enigma

    June 19, 2015 at 8:54 am

    • “enigma”

      The quote from BACP are mere words devoid of any legal substance – as “Kayess” pointed out!

      Without any legal protection, the great danger is unscrupulous babblers taking over at Jobcentres. No one of any true professionalism would have anything to do with CBT without consent.

      Tobanem

      June 19, 2015 at 9:13 am

      • I know Tobanem, I just posted it on the here for people to see what the response was from BACP.

        enigma

        June 19, 2015 at 9:19 am

    • That is useful to hear Enigma.

      I think it needs broadcasting widely.

      Andrew Coates

      June 19, 2015 at 3:27 pm

  16. According to the “Communications Act 2003” it is an offence by “sending or causing to be sent, by means of a public electronic communications network, a message or other matter which is grossly offensive”.

    A Christian in Northern Ireland has been charged recently under that Act for describing Islam as “heathen”, “satanic”, and “a doctrine spawned in hell” in a sermon put out on the Internet.

    The Internet is a big place. No one will be able to have any view at all without it being deemed “grossly offensive” by some objector!

    People are free to raise their objections to comments made on the Internet or other media. But to charge a person with a criminal offence for saying what he believes is another matter altogether which seriously challenges the principle of free speech!

    Tobanem

    June 19, 2015 at 9:46 am

    • The only thing to do which is in the best interest of anyone is to not comment on the internet or anywhere else for that matter about anything offensive.

      enigma

      June 19, 2015 at 10:38 am

      • “enigma”

        Who is the great arbiter of what is offensive?

        Tobanem

        June 19, 2015 at 1:12 pm

  17. CBI head calls for GCSEs to be scrapped.

    The head of the CBI says a date must be set in the next five years to scrap GCSEs and introduce an exam system with equal status for vocational subjects.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-33190028

    enigma

    June 19, 2015 at 12:55 pm

    • So scrap GCSE’s… hhhhmmmm…. so say you are a young person, and you have set you sights on say becoming say a doctor, how will “Vocational Skills” replace GCSE English, Mathematics, Biology / or another example Carpenter, Woodworking/Mathematics [I am using Doctor as an example here] – why do I get the ultimate aim is to have dumb workers?

      Gazza

      June 19, 2015 at 1:57 pm

  18. Gaia, I had a skim through what you have written in reply to me up there. However, you don’t convince me that you have a clue about either psychology or psychiatry, despite informal “study” for 8 years.

    You have put quite a lot of effort in your post assuming that you have superior knowledge to me on this subject. Your arrogance is astounding considering that you don’t seem to have a clue what science actually is.

    Science is an ideology.

    Everything that is done in the name of science is ideological. Ergo, it’s prone to be utterly and totally wrong in many instances and right in others. Whether it’s wrong or not, the results will always be driven by an ideological framework.

    I gave you names of some serious authors on the psych subject, have a read, you may be astonished.

    If you don’t want to go out and find books, the work of Dr Malcom Kendrick is online, he has a blog. It gives a very good overview of the medical bunkum we are fed in the name of ideology.

    Your claims for the wonders of cognitive science based on some aged transcripts of human torture is totally fallacious. What is a torture situation if not the application of ideology?

    Sheeesh!

    Lucy

    June 19, 2015 at 2:04 pm

    • So how is few books a comprehensive guide to a topic, how is that not cherry picking data to fit an ideology Lucy?

      Anyone who only reads only a few books cannot claim in any capacity to be knowledgeable so either you yourself are a practicing licenced psychologist or psychiatrist or not which if the latter hardly makes you any more an expert than anyone else who comes to the forum.

      As I made quite clear I have no interest to be a doctor, I come from a family of engineers stretching back generations meaning I have to have extensive knowledge in my chosen field, meaning I have to apart from engineering study both science and math to a very high degree otherwise I cannot possibly design something from theory. I think like science you don’t fully grasp what an engineer really is so probably base it on those guys who come around your house to fix your leaky tap once in a while.

      You cant study any form of engineering or medicine without tackling both science and math, its the fundamental principles that under pin both practices. Even college students must study these two as nothing is created without them.

      You know for someone who speaks as you do I find it highly surprizing your using technology to do it, surely that’s the devils work to a person like you, maybe witchcraft perhaps ?

      Either way its still going to go on like it has for millions of years no matter what you think.

      gaia

      June 19, 2015 at 6:07 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: