Ipswich Unemployed Action.

Campaigning for Unemployed Rights.

Help to Work a Failure.

with 168 comments

As many of us are on schemes for the unemployed, not to say long-term unemployed, and know the insides and outsides of these programmes all too well, this comes as no surprise.

Before reading it bear in mind that the prospect of adding cognitive behavioural therapy to the list of tortures – which include having to listen to people  unable to provide any actual offers of work – they make us undergo is becoming more and more probable.

The picture above, of somebody forced to attend the Jobcentre every single day, and workfare, illustrates why people hate the system as well.

Figures prove Help to Work doesn’t help and doesn’t work

Reports Sentinel News.

  • Compulsory government welfare-to-work scheme has no effect for most people
  • Huge levels of failure to meet targets by companies delivering the programme
  • Help to Work was launched despite a pilot scheme failing

By Chaminda Jayanetti

Newly released government figures show that Help to Work, its flagship welfare-to-work programme for the long-term unemployed, has only seen one in five of the people referred to it progress into even remotely secure jobs.

Help to Work, which includes three intensive schemes, was launched in April 2014 as a compulsory programme for those who had been unemployed for more than two years.

At the time, David Cameron said: “This scheme will provide more help than ever before, getting people into work and on the road to a more secure future.”

But figures published yesterday by the Department for Work and Pensions reveal that of the people referred to Help to Work between April and December 2014, less than half – just 44 percent – went on to spend any time in work at all during the year following their referral.

Thirty percent went on to complete at least 13 weeks in work, and barely 20 percent made it to 26 weeks of work – half a year – in the year after their referral.

In other words, four in every five people referred onto the scheme did not progress to even medium-term work.

It is the first time the DWP has published data on the amount of time spent in work by those on the Help to Work programme. The statistics exclude those who became self-employed, but the figures are nevertheless dire.

Three schemes, all failing

Help to Work comprises three separate schemes, with each long-term Jobseekers Allowance claimant forced on to one of them. If they refuse, their benefits can be docked. The schemes are:

  • Community Work Placements – six-month compulsory unpaid work experience placements of up 30 hours a week, plus up to ten hours of “supported job search activity” every week
  • Mandatory Intervention Regime – claimants receive “intensive support” from Jobcentre staff, who can refer them to other local services and training
  • Daily Work Search Review – claimants have to attend the Jobcentre every single day for up to three months to discuss the job applications they have made

The three schemes saw tens of thousands of people forced onto them between April 2014 and December 2015 – 80,000 on Community Work Placements, 47,000 on Daily Work Searches, and nearly 100,000 on the Mandatory Intervention Regime (which can include people who completed one of the two other schemes).

But nearly two years on from their launch, all three schemes are failing to have a meaningful impact. Under both the Mandatory Intervention Regime and the Daily Work Search Review, around 45 percent of the referred claimants found any paid work (excluding self-employment) in the year after their referral. About 30 percent found 13 weeks of work, and one in five found six months of work.

CWP at the DWP

The worst performance, however, was in the Community Work Programme. Given that this includes six-month placements, it is perhaps unsurprising that only 18 percent of claimants had time to fit in an additional six months of paid work in the year following their referral.

But barely a quarter completed 13 weeks in paid work, and less than two in five of all claimants undertook any paid work at all, excluding self-employment.

The Community Work Programme is the only one of the Help to Work schemes that is delivered by private companies – and their performance has been terrible. Just one of the 18 regional contracts met its target for “short completions” in 2015 – that is where a claimant completes between 12 and 21 weeks of employment after being on the programme.

Just three of 18 contracts met the target for “long completions” – between 22 and 26 weeks of employment – with ten contracts falling well short of expectations. Six of the 18 contracts met the target for job outcomes, where claimants found more than 26 weeks of work.

Seven companies hold the 18 contracts between them – led by G4S with six and Seetec with five. Ten of the contracts – more than half – missed every single target.

A bad idea from birth

The DWP conducted a fully-fledged pilot scheme in 2013, which was widely seen as a failure – almost as many people who undertook the pilot help to work schemes were still on benefit two years later as those who’d had no support at all. Despite this, the government decided to bring forward implementation of the full Help to Work scheme.

Interestingly, the programme was expected to cost £300m a year, but has in fact come in at £190m in 2014/15 and £230m in 2015/16. This may be because the private companies on the Community Work Programme were paid by results – an initial payment for claimants starting a community work placement, but further payments only if employment outcomes were met. The failure of so many providers to meet their targets may have reduced the scheme’s cost – although the annual burden on the taxpayer remains in the hundreds of millions.

The government announced last year that the Community Work Programme would be abolished from 2017 along with the controversial Mandatory Work Activity programme, which is outside the Help to Work scheme. These will be replaced by a new scheme, the Work and Health Programme, targeted at both disabled people and the long-term unemployed. The conflation of health and work is likely to be the source of ongoing controversy.

Advertisements

Written by Andrew Coates

March 23, 2016 at 11:28 am

168 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. I’ve just come off 4 weeks Mandatory Work Activity.

    I spent 7 hours a day steam-ironing second hand clothes in a charity shop with no chairs.

    As if that was ever likely to get me a job. And I had to pay travel expenses which were not refunded by Seetec.

    So I am now out to cause the DWP as much trouble as possible.

    septimus plantpot

    March 23, 2016 at 12:08 pm

    • Exactly.

      It’s degrading and makes people resent their treatment.

      Some Help to Work!

      Andrew Coates

      March 23, 2016 at 12:26 pm

  2. Andrew Coates

    March 23, 2016 at 12:25 pm

  3. Reblogged this on sdbast.

    sdbast

    March 23, 2016 at 12:38 pm

  4. THE BIG WHIP

    The link at the end of the above article to the new Work and Health Programme reveals that this new Programme is abbreviated to WHP. It is almost instinctively pronounced WHIP. Interesting.

    I also like the expression at the end which says: “The conflation of health and work is likely to be the source of ongoing controversy”. Yes, indeed – ill people will be treated as well, and well people as ill.

    By the way, the new Ipswich Unemployed Action site does not show hyperlinks in colour. Great pity. The above article has many hyperlinks within it, but you could easily overlook them.

    Tobanem

    March 23, 2016 at 12:39 pm

    • I will get round to changing that….

      Thanks.

      Andrew Coates

      March 23, 2016 at 1:16 pm

    • What about agency workers who are not protected from non payment of wages optima site solutions, and site master PLC refer to Gerry mcaffee

      Buck Rodgers

      April 19, 2016 at 3:24 am

  5. Hey Andrew,

    I like the new layout. So much better than the previous one, which I have to say was very distressing on the eye, especially to read.

    jj joop

    March 23, 2016 at 1:43 pm

    • I was working on the supermarket managers’ principle, periodically re-arrange all the distribution of the goods on the shelves, and let the customers get lost in the hope they will find new wares to buy.

      It was not a good idea.

      It is not a good idea.

      This is only a newer version of the original format….

      Andrew Coates

      March 23, 2016 at 5:04 pm

      • That’s what I like about it, mate. The original format was more eye-catching.

        jj joop

        March 24, 2016 at 1:18 pm

  6. When I was on the WP at Seetec, they had a rolling-agreement with local retailers. They would get some poor sucker in on an MWA under the pretext that the company would take them on. No chance. Once the Rube had served their purpose, they’d place the next one. What a world.

    jj joop

    March 23, 2016 at 1:50 pm

  7. i have been sent on all of it but never had to do any of it as will not sign there contract when i had to go to jcp every day they soon stopped that as cost to much in travel costs.

    work programme lasted 20 mins and was out the door. reported to jcp manager as had no exit report, not interested.sanctioned 5 times for non attendance and one them all.

    mwa turned up at store and was told i was not wanted as i was a smelly tramp reported to jcp and not interested. also sanctioned for non attendance. and one.

    daily signing lasted 1 week as cost 25 quid in bus fair and was out of pocket as paid 3 days later same as benefit no cash at jcp.

    sent on cv course and told can not help as i have nothing to put on it and ref back to jcp was sent on another 1 and got told the same and back to jcp.

    hit squad adviser was funny had 1 after the after to try find a way to sanction me, all failed.

    they had no exit report to go off so stuffed from the start.

    superted

    March 23, 2016 at 3:36 pm

    • superted

      DESTINATION EMPLOYMENT!!! SKILLS CONDITIONALITY!!!

      I’ve just been told by my adviser that I will have to attend a 2 and a half day Skills Conditionality course called Destination Employment. It’s being run by the local council under their Adult Learning & Skills umbrella.

      Can I decline to fill in any of their paperwork and avoid a sanction? And does anyone know what the jobcentre will do to me if I decline to sign? Is local government a provider like seetec?

      tommy

      March 24, 2016 at 2:37 pm

      • Tommy,

        The skills condionality scheme relies on SFA funding so destination employment do need your legal consent which cannot be gained through force, threat or fraud.

        Legal consent CANNOT BE CONSIDERED AS A FAILURE TO PARTICIPATE.

        That said you still have to attend your start date which while doing so can kindly and calmly decline to give legal consent. If this place says you can leave then, do remind them that according to your agreement with DWP, that you must attend so cannot leave unless this place wants to put in writing why they want you to leave so you can then straight after leaving them go and hand it in at DWP.

        DO NOT leave without some evidence even if it requires this place to call the police.

        Remain calm and collective throughout the whole process (very important) as its highly likely that people running this place will try to trip you up and the same can be said for DWP.

        You see when legal consent is required it means in layman terms that the decision rests on the person,not the place seeking it and hence why it cannot be gained through various means as i listed above which a sanction would clearly classify as.

        You see while you have under agreement consented to participate in DWP schemes, giving or declining legal consent cannot on legal grounds form a part of this.

        With this said though, its a harmless course and theirs nothing to say you couldn’t benefit from it in one form or another if say as an example your math or English isn’t great and you would like to improve it. With that said your probably find this place also offers sector based schemes whereby you are mandated to attend a job of no pay for i believe 4 to 6 weeks working for say sainsburys for instance so navigating this conditionality course isn’t straight forward meaning you could be ambushed if you don’t have your wits about you and do remember if you did lack math or English that their are plenty of other places offering these courses that you don’t have to be mandated to.

        Despite following what i say do bare in mind DWP may just regardless put through a sanction but be rest assured if you pursue an appeal even if to the point of a tribunal, it will be overturned on the basis of the point i made above which is clearly enshrined in law. Also remember you DO NOT have to explain your reason behind abstaining from granting legal consent because its irrelevant as DWP cannot get over as i have said the point i made above. DWP can insist what they want but are like us subject to obeying and enforcing the law as is enshrined in the civil service code of practice so simply put to them, “are DWP refusing to observe and obey the law”, (you dont need to produce said law to prove your point).

        This means it puts DWP in a position of knowingly disobeying the law prior to a sanction.

        Hope this answers your question.

        doug

        March 25, 2016 at 9:12 am

      • Tommy,

        The problem with many claimants and some do go gooders is they often stray from the point in legal matters which as any solicitor will tell you want help the case. They would advocate being short and concise (to the legal point) like say in your case,

        Does participation include one giving up all legal right to make an informed decision under law ?

        One law cannot trump another unless said exemption is in place which in claimants cases is not.

        Did or did not DWP break the law by sanctioning you all because you declined to give legal consent.

        Remember informed legal consent cannot be gained through force, threat or fraud (deception) so in this case if DWP pursued a sanction we would have a case of definite force and threat.

        doug

        March 25, 2016 at 9:42 am

      • That Skills Conditionality is a complete waste of time,however you are mandated to attend.

        None of these programmes’ have ever been of any value,they have only been used as an excuse to have a go for no reason and have to be viewed on with suspicion as to true motives’,no employer has gone “wow” you’ve been on a government scheme or ever likely too, but sanctions have spiraled.

        The job market in the UK is so measly its hardly surprising the dependency on the welfare state is so great,statements cannot afford the welfare state should be cannot afford to be without it as shows necessity.The government has squandered billions on pointless benefits such as universal credit that hardly anyone is eligible because of their circumstances, PIP creating bad publicity and fly by nights money has been thrown down the drain.

        One thing about universal credit it highlights how weak the job market is by endlessly needing to increase hours’.

        ken

        March 29, 2016 at 2:23 pm

  8. Whatever ones experience was & currently is on those schemes the up coming one known as the work & health programme will no doubt be a lot worse.

    enigma

    March 23, 2016 at 3:58 pm

    • they will be going after the disabled found fit for work thus the name of it so for me will be like same as b4 same rubbish different name and will not sign anything.

      even if i went it will just be a waste of time job search at there office so they can get paid from the dwp and will get it if i go or not.

      my esa case has gone to court and waiting for a date 😉

      superted

      March 23, 2016 at 4:17 pm

      • Superted,

        The DWP has been given £22 million to recruit presenting officers in an effort to reduce the number of claimants winning their personal independence payment (PIP) and employment and support allowance (ESA) appeals.

        http://www.benefitsandwork.co.uk/news/3481-dwp-recruits-180-presenting-officers-to-cut-esa-and-pip-appeal-success-rates.

        If they get their way they will go after everyone weather the disabled are fit for work or not.

        enigma

        March 23, 2016 at 5:02 pm

      • did see that 😉 tho when i went back on jsa they told me i was not fit for work and put me on 13 weeks extended sick leave.

        i sign on every 2 weeks by phone atm last 2 times never even bothered to ring only to find out i get paid anyway call or not as sick note covers it.

        just more bs from the local jcp.

        if my adviser doctor and physiotherapist say im not fit for work and atos says i am ill let the court decide ,not that i can lose anything as get same as on jsa anyway.

        i have yet to find a job lifting empty card board boxes.

        superted

        March 23, 2016 at 5:16 pm

      • Has anyone tried contacting MSF UK (doctors without borders) to see if they would help with this very real crisis known as the work capability test.

        I have to wonder when government mentioned 5 years ago the rhetoric of people on benefits that have never worked, that infact the broad base of whom they mentioned were disabled and ill who even now routinely fail to secure employment dew to employer stigma.

        doug

        March 24, 2016 at 11:42 am

  9. What about creating something like a national employment registry, a central state-run hub for employers to post job listings and for prospective employees to find jobs? Every time an employer wants to fill a position or an employee wants to find a position, they go to 1 website first (I guess it would be sorted or organized by location).

    That to me seems like a sensible, practical solution to the problem of both employers and employees utilizing dozens of different websites and other media to find one another and it would put an end to “help to work” schemes once and for all since they are a waste of taxpayer money whose only purpose is to allow politicians to pretend like they are doing something to help people find jobs and a major time-waster (and source of humiliation) for working people.

    PW

    March 23, 2016 at 4:01 pm

  10. These schemes never had any real purpose but to put pressure on the unemployed, particularly the long-term unemployed. All in accordance with the idea that they are deliberate ‘skivers’ who need tough action to make them realise that things are not going to be very pleasant for them if they don’t sign-off and go away.

    Jeff Smith

    March 23, 2016 at 4:28 pm

  11. Live BBC news report banned while on air!!!

    A BBC news report was prematurely stopped during a live broadcast in Westminster today. Noisy demonstrators angry at recent disability cuts launched a protest at the same time as Prime Ministers Questions.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/pmqs-disability-cuts-protestors-esa_uk_56f29ccfe4b04aee1b6fd824?ymrc0udi

    I wonder if we will see or hear anything about this uproar on the main BBC news tonight?

    Tobanem

    March 23, 2016 at 4:57 pm

    • By the way, billions of pounds of welfare cuts are still going ahead despite the PIP U-turn:

      http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/mar/23/pip-u-turn-billions-of-pounds-welfare-cuts

      Tobanem

      March 23, 2016 at 5:00 pm

      • yep 12 billion, so many more people will suffer.

        enigma

        March 23, 2016 at 5:07 pm

    • Indeed.

      I was looking for pictures of our Ipswich activist – who was/is there – and was disappointed that unlike normal protests I can’t see Martin there.

      Andrew Coates

      March 23, 2016 at 5:06 pm

    • Funny that, the last time no one came up to spout rules. Government does seem hellbent on closing down on free speech, especially the voice of the disabled and ill.

      I can only imagine because certain ministers have taken to support them and thwart government on certain issues that now government seeks to limit peoples exposure to a real crisis going on here in the UK.

      No doubt government will maintain that people have a right to free speech but will now tag to it that it must be done in a office far away from others ears.

      doug

      March 24, 2016 at 11:35 am

  12. Is it a fake?

    Fake Brussels YouTube videos prove ease of digital disinformation.

    Misleading video and photos are becoming increasingly common on Facebook and Twitter, making verification vital.

    As goes for many other things, as we all know.

    http://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/mar/23/fake-youtube-videos-brussels-attacks-facebook-twitter

    enigma

    March 23, 2016 at 5:40 pm

    • I suspect as others have said that we may well all witness a false flag attack on the UK within the coming year.

      As you are all witnessing, every time an attack takes place in Europe, instantly the respective government locks down on liberty whether or not it has anything to do with terrorism.

      doug

      March 24, 2016 at 11:29 am

  13. YOU CANNOT MAKE A FIRST CLAIM FOR PIP AFTER 65

    And you thought working-age benefit cuts were harsh!

    This is yet another illustration from the bottomless pit of absurdity regarding benefit cuts.

    If a person becomes unable to walk at 64, PIP is claimable, including a mobility component (assuming the stringent rules are successfully passed)! But if a person becomes unable to walk a year later, no mobility component is payable!!

    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/mar/22/disability-benefit-cuts-that-ruin-peoples-lives

    Tobanem

    March 24, 2016 at 10:45 am

    • Ah

      the first shoots of the hidden cuts I said was buried in the regulation….

      Why am I not surprised.

      Gazza

      March 24, 2016 at 5:16 pm

  14. superted, and anyone else.

    DESTINATION EMPLOYMENT!!! SKILLS CONDITIONALITY!!!

    I’ve just been told by my adviser that I will have to attend a 2 and a half day Skills Conditionality course called Destination Employment. It’s being run by the local council under their Adult Learning & Skills umbrella.

    Can I decline to fill in any of their paperwork and avoid a sanction? And does anyone know what the jobcentre will do to me if I decline to sign? Is local government a provider like seetec?

    tommy

    March 24, 2016 at 1:01 pm

    • +

      March 24, 2016 at 1:54 pm

      • SKILLS CONDITIONALITY – A Dubious Scheme Past and Present!

        Lo and behold, there is nothing new about the “Skills Conditionality Course. Labour introduced a similar mandatory scheme in 1929. Conditions were much worse, though. Some of these “training centres” were residential work camps located in the countryside – more like certain other camps in Europe a few years later to deal with the long-term unemployed or Arbeitsscheu.

        Quote from a recent Ofsted report on Skills Conditionality: “…Nor did Ofsted mention the rather larger issue of whether adults can be compelled to learn. Taking the long view, we have been here before. Between 1929 and 1931, for example, the Labour Government introduced mandatory attendance at training centres – some of them residential work camps, others local day centres – as a condition of benefit for long term unemployed young men. It was such a failure that it was abandoned as soon as Labour left power, and was recalled with horror by civil servants and trainers for the rest of the decade.

        https://thelearningprofessor.wordpress.com/2012/07/12/skills-conditionality-can-adults-be-made-to-learn/

        Tobanem

        March 24, 2016 at 3:04 pm

      • & future.

        enigma

        March 24, 2016 at 3:25 pm

    • Tommy:

      Check out this link to a Freedom of Information request by P Baker. In his annotations he will tell you what to say and what the likely outcome will be.

      https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/cwp_participation#comment-65958

      http://postimg.org/image/o55os0grh/

      A person cannot be sanctioned for simply refusing to sign documentation drawn up by a provider. You should, however, make it crystal clear that you are willing to fully participate in course.

      Hope it’s of help.

      jj joop

      March 24, 2016 at 3:31 pm

    • they can not sanction you for not signing a 3rd party contract buy a private company. just keep proof you turn up and that will win any sanction.

      if they do try a sanction doubt it will be for non attendance even if you do show up so keep proof and will be fine.

      done it many times 😉

      superted

      March 24, 2016 at 4:11 pm

    • Tommy

      as others have stated, you do not have to SIGN any paperwork [signing stuff in this case is a contract – it is YOUR choice if you wish to sign. It is illegal to try to force/coerce anyone to do that and could/would lead to criminal charges of fraud just for that.] Threatening a sanction is fraud for illegal gain against yourself – DWP cockroaches or anyone else i.e. external providers.

      If you have to log into a office for attendance purposes – PRINT your name, no signature.

      If anyone states you must sign state you are ‘confused’ and please put that in writing.
      It is advisable to Record all dealings with anyone connected with DWP

      Gazza

      March 24, 2016 at 5:13 pm

    • Thanks for the advice everyone. As its only 2 and a half days I think I might as well just do it, and its only just down the road from where I live anyway. But even so, these fkn courses just do my fkn head in. Just what’s the point of them? They’re a total waste of time and public money.

      tommy

      March 24, 2016 at 5:43 pm

      • thus why you turn up and dont sign anything as they will not get paid with out a signed contract.

        the more ppl that refuse to sign will put these scum bags out of business.

        superted

        March 24, 2016 at 5:54 pm

      • tommy:

        I repeat, a person cannot be sanctioned for simply refusing to sign documentation drawn up by a provider. You should, however, make it crystal clear that you are willing to fully participate in course.

        Agreeing to participate, but declining to sign any of their paperwork will confound them.

        And like superted said: the more ppl that refuse to sign will put these scum bags out of business.

        jj joop

        March 24, 2016 at 6:42 pm

      • And they’re not just scum bags, either. They’re parasites as well. They take, take, take but give nothing back in return. They’re fucking leeches.

        jj joop

        March 24, 2016 at 6:44 pm

      • in 10 years i have had no help at all regarding REAL training or what help that they will provide me in writing as there is none. so why would i sign a contract??

        at most you will be in a office looking for work and thats it, so a complete waste of time and the only ppl that benefit is the providers bank balance.

        go by all means but do not sign anything as will just make it worse for everybody.

        superted

        March 24, 2016 at 6:56 pm

      • another thing to remember ppl is when you sign that contract it gives them permission to process ur personal information so if you miss 1 day will give them a easy way to sanction you.

        they will also sell this on when finished with you as you gave them permission, so dont sign anything.

        if they ask you to sign the fire register then print name only never sign it.

        superted

        March 24, 2016 at 7:07 pm

      • superted:

        Does the fire register count as provider paperwork and will declining to print your name on it constitute failure to attend or non-participation?

        jj joop

        March 24, 2016 at 7:40 pm

      • superted:

        Did you ever sign the fire register?

        jj joop

        March 24, 2016 at 7:48 pm

      • the fire reg is for the building but i just put a x or first last initial ST or just a x.

        the reason for not signing it as b4 at a4e they was lifting them from it and using it to compleate there paper work to be paid.

        and no i have never signed anything since 2005 😉

        superted

        March 24, 2016 at 8:01 pm

      • superted:

        “and no i have never signed anything since 2005”

        Good for you, mate. If more ppl followed your example, providers would be totally screwed. And rightly so!

        jj joop

        March 25, 2016 at 7:25 am

      • Tommy,

        I gave/left you the legal answer under your 1st post you posted on this course if you really don’t want to do it.

        doug

        March 25, 2016 at 9:15 am

      • doug, yeah thanks for that mate. I did read it. I’m caught between a rock and a hard place. if I don’t do it I will almost certainly get a sanction which will be overturned on appeal. which means a lot of hassle. But if I do do it I may get ambushed, as you say, and put on other things like Sainsburys. which means a lot more hassle. what a world eh. these fuckers are supposed to be there to help you. Jobcentre want to sanction you and the provider wants to pimp you like a fkn leech.

        tommy

        March 25, 2016 at 10:51 am

      • Tommy,

        I like others know your pain well so i totally understand why you may make the decision you have, especially if you do not feel comfortable using the law to defend yourself.

        DWP get away with most of what they do because many a claimant feels dew to money and perhaps how they convey themselves that standing up against these bullies and liars is best not practiced.

        At the end of the day its your life,your decision, but im sure you value this when i say, it wont stop, it never does unless DWP know you are no push over and coming here as well as other sites is a good start to changing this trend.

        I have to go now but i wish you all the best and hope you find work soon as its a breath of fresh air to get away from DWP even if only for a few weeks.

        doug

        March 25, 2016 at 3:26 pm

      • Sign the fire register but properly vary your signature so it really doesn’t look like the one you use to sign on with.

        This will cast serious doubt on any official form that the Private Provider uses, should they try to photocopy it or scan it onto a computer to copy and paste it on a form they need to get paid from the DWP.

        In other words the signatures won’t match and they won’t get paid.

        Obi Wan Kenobi

        March 26, 2016 at 10:45 am

      • tommy:

        This link may be of interest to you. It is for DWP provider guidance:

        https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/dwp-provider-guidance

        jj joop

        March 27, 2016 at 10:06 am

      • A ‘signature’ can be anything:

        ‘V’ for Vengeance 😀

        Zorro make the mark of the ‘Z’ 😀

        Zorro

        March 27, 2016 at 10:49 am

      • Or a simple ‘X’ marks the spot 😀

        Zorro

        March 27, 2016 at 10:50 am

      • Ah, me ‘earties, a simple ‘x’ does indeed mark the spot… 😉

        Long John Silver

        March 29, 2016 at 8:32 am

  15. Tomorrow, Friday 25th March, a leading disabled activist is to meet with the police to call for IDS and Grayling to face criminal charges of misconduct in public office relating to the “countless” benefit deaths over the last six years.

    Keep a close on the outcome of this one:

    http://www.disabilitynewsservice.com/duncan-smith-and-grayling-must-face-criminal-probe-over-wca-deaths/

    Tobanem

    March 24, 2016 at 2:39 pm

    • As much as i want to see DWP punished, the police very much do often refuse to act when talking DWP so i hope this activist puts them in a legal position they cannot get out of.

      Personally in this case i cant see it happening but who knows.

      doug

      March 25, 2016 at 9:18 am

      • “Doug”

        I believe the legal position is one of “Corporate Manslaughter” or Corporate Homicide as its known in Scotland.

        Organisations – including government departments – are guilty of corporate manslaughter/homicide 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.

        Of course, to be able to LEGALLY prove theses cases in court is another matter!

        Tobanem

        March 25, 2016 at 9:40 am

  16. OT: Information Act SAR Request update – stuff to know

    DWP has claimed at being unable to supply original documents mentioning the SAR rquester. Lie.
    DWP can only supply information requested in paper form. Lie.
    DWP has 40 days to supply information and cannot speed up delivery date. Lie. [they can phone call the firm supplying the information]
    DWP cannot change what is requested from original SAR request. Lie.
    DWP will claim that information can only be supplied in paper form [Clerical Records]. Lie.
    DWP will claim that as different computer systems involved some can only be in paper form. Lie.
    DWP will claim unable to supply further information other than what supplied if it appears something missing which is supplied by them. Lie.
    DWP might claim will supply via ordinary post. Lie. Can and in my case supplying via registered post.

    I will after receipt of my little bundle update on why insisting on original docs.

    Gazza

    March 24, 2016 at 5:05 pm

  17. Tobanem

    March 24, 2016 at 6:51 pm

  18. Tobanem:

    A very interesting piece of social history. I believe these were in existence for a while during the depression, weren’t they?

    jj joop

    March 24, 2016 at 7:45 pm

    • jj joop

      You might like to look at the following link which gives an account of what happened during the not too well known Scottish Potato famine of the 1840s. Nothing new under the sun, right enough!!

      Here are some excerpts:

      “Relief supplies re-started but this time the Board bowed to criticism of their previous efforts and made people work for their rations. [ cf modern day workfare]. If they would not or could not, their meagre allocation of food was reduced. [cf modern sanctions]. ‘Dependence on charity is not to be made an agreeable mode of life,’ said the government. [cf the end of the something for nothing culture nowadays]. An army of bureaucrats and overseers was employed to administer the ‘destitution test’ [cf modern conditionality] and to ensure that each man worked, and worked hard, for eight hours a day. The labour was often futile, constructing unneeded piers, building walls, digging ditches and destitution roads. [cf modern mandatory work schemes].

      “Relief money ran out in 1850 and the burden of providing for the population fell back on the landlords”.

      “…there was also a wave of compulsory clearances as owners sought to remove those they feared might become a financial burden. They were bundled onto ships and sent to Nova Scotia”.

      http://www.scotlandmag.com/magazine/issue64/12010418.html

      Tobanem

      March 25, 2016 at 8:55 am

    • Even sinners like to be seen as saints while sinning.

      doug

      March 25, 2016 at 9:20 am

  19. Frontline social work training scheme .

    The controversial Frontline fast-track training programme for children’s social workers has won a “mostly positive” independent evaluation – but not a full endorsement.

    Nicky Morgan, pre-empted its findings in January, when she announced a £100m investment in fast-track training schemes, including Frontline, and declared that one in four children’s social workers would qualify in this way by 2018.

    Questions remain about the appropriateness of the approach, the durability of those who qualify and their impact on children and families, the team warns.

    http://www.theguardian.com/social-care-network/2016/mar/24/frontline-social-work-training-scheme-evaluation

    enigma

    March 24, 2016 at 8:22 pm

    • Remember why your teacher use to say “walk, dont run” ?

      Our society thinks of nothing but moving faster yet what you will find is mistakes, just take the rise of product recalls and how frequent products break down or refuse to operate after only a short period.

      Slow is sure and steady but society refuses to act responsibly, especially politicians with their short term answers they pathetically trade as long term.

      doug

      March 25, 2016 at 9:26 am

      • The lack of nurses, trades men/women, police, the list goes on so we can expect many more schemes which are going on , all which will be fast tracked.

        enigma

        March 25, 2016 at 3:57 pm

      • Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn will use a speech to the National Union of Teachers to attack the “forced” academisation of England’s schools.

        Mr Corbyn will accuse the Conservatives of shutting parents out of a say in how their children’s schools are run.

        Meanwhile the lack of teachers.

        “The pressure of work forced more teachers to quit last year than ever – over 50,000 – and the government has now missed its trainee teacher recruitment targets for the last four years in a row,” he will say.

        “One in four schools are increasing their use of supply teachers, one in six are using non-specialists to cover vacancies and more than one in ten are resorting to using unqualified staff to teach lessons.”

        http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-35891011

        Nicky Morgan under fire over Mumsnet post on academisation

        Hostile reaction from parents to education secretary’s guest post, with her plans condemned as ‘horrifying’

        http://www.theguardian.com/education/2016/mar/21/nicky-morgan-under-fire-over-mumsnet-post-on-academisation

        enigma

        March 25, 2016 at 4:22 pm

      • I know what you mean enigma as if i pull up my area in a jobsearch, im instantly presented with, nurses,GPs,engineers,teachers,care workers required. This is evident even on UJM and laughably i attended a DWP arranged job fair the other day open to even non claimants and surprisingly their was one teachers stall and one care stall and engineering. What made it laughable was they didn’t advertise this (i heard by word of mouth) so as you can imagine at attendance that 99% of everyone their was a benefit claimant. How often do you see an unemployed teacher,care worker or engineer with all the papers ?

        Naturally by far and large these stalls didn’t get much attention leaving only recruitment agencies and training providers who either get you on the books but never call you or in the provider case, merely get you on board to get SFA funding for qualifications too low to really help the person find work and at best can only offer short temp work ranging from a day to maybe a few weeks work if your lucky.

        In the case of nurses, government has had six years to train up unemployed people who show an interest as they have with regards teaching yet never lifted a finger despite knowing they were about to rock the boat to such an extent that such practitioners would and are leaving in droves.

        Government simply refuse to invest time and money in any trade/course that doesn’t see the person qualified in a matter of weeks or a few months. Take I.T much the business these days but again not supported by DWP despite being the inevitable future of working what with any investment going, going purely into this sector now days. To further prove this is case in point, government removed concessions for unemployed, low earning people to attend college for more worth while and prosperous trades.

        In short, government is full of sh*t with their lies to pacify the public for what really is since 2010, a very slow down depression still waiting in the wings to bite us all,even the working.

        doug

        March 25, 2016 at 4:25 pm

      • Academies aren’t any better, that’s utterly absurd for government to suggest such a thing and time will prove it.

        These places are deliberately excluding those they know will present the end of year figures as no better than a state school. Lets make it that no school can exclude a child no matter what they do or how they are (so if needed an extra special class maybe needed) and see what the figures say then.

        We privatized the railways, water supply, electric supply naming just a few and look what happened their in terms of current cost, service and coming back for handouts just so their investors can stay monetarily fat at the public expense twice over.

        doug

        March 25, 2016 at 4:45 pm

      • Eh, doug!? Jobcentre Plus offer jobseekers a Certificate in Dish-washing and a Diploma in Manual Handling. The much sought after by employers Certificate of Employability is also on offer.

        JC Service User

        March 25, 2016 at 7:22 pm

      • JC service user

        I much enjoyed your post as regards what DWP are prepared to offer. For a start a certificate is not a recognized qualification, its a bit of paper that says you attended a short course.It carries no gravity with regards employers. Diploma in manual handling, i would like to see how they padded out that course to justify it warranting a recognized diploma that quite frankly i suspect if indeed they do call it such considering where it fits into the qualification spectrum.

        Your absolutely right though,these are the troughs they put out as credentials that will help you gain employment. Employers are not idiots and this is why they keep making stuff up to get government to do what they want which has nothing to do with hiring unemployed people what with not being able to abolish the min/living wage.

        If you notice the on off flows assuming you read DWP data, anyone over a year unemployed or disabled are seen by employers as having a disease of some kind so go all out to ensure they don’t have to hire you while appearing to government that they are in it to help out.

        Any chance claimants had of being hired long term was shot to crap the day government labelled them as skivers hellbent on not working, think about it, if you were an employer and someone told you a certain person was coming for an interview who they said was lazy, would you hire them considering we are supposed to trust government ?

        I’m not saying its impossible to possibly escape the cycle, just that its highly unlikely any government will ever get everyone off the dole no matter their circumstance.

        I don’t know if you saw employable me the other day but an employer who i commend for his honesty wrote in a lettered reply he doesn’t view work experience as a job reference, this is a view shared by all employers who also have an aversion to voluntary work and one being in their own business who now no longer is.

        Another funny thing i heard was on an apprenticeship TV programme where somehow an employer managed to get an approved apprenticeship for being a chip fryer, i kid you not.

        Anyway that’s it so happy Easter break or as best as one can have if unemployed.

        doug

        March 25, 2016 at 10:39 pm

      • SEETEC gave us lots of certificates for our time there.

        They were rather pretty documents, one for each day course – about 7 in all, covering everything from ‘eath and safety to (laugh not) management.

        Since I binned them immediately I have nothing to show people on the Blog.

        Andrew Coates

        March 26, 2016 at 12:54 pm

      • Accreditation system for teacher training to be approved by head teachers – scrapping the current “qualified teacher status”.

        http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-35899478

        enigma

        March 26, 2016 at 11:52 am

      • That would be the Seetec “Employability with Management” half-day “course 😀

        BS

        March 26, 2016 at 2:18 pm

      • Obviously we have lot of highly qualified graduates of SEETEC commenting here!

        Andrew Coates

        March 26, 2016 at 4:21 pm

  20. Many people still living in their own little bubble, so not knowing what is going on.

    British workers are ‘alarmingly’ unaware of the new state pension just days before the scheme launches, a survey revealed today.

    A majority could not put an accurate number on the weekly amount, while a large minority have no idea if they have paid enough contributions to qualify for the full amount, retirement firm Aegon UK found.

    The findings come a day after accounting watchdogs accused the Government of leaving people in the dark about key state pension changes that will make an estimated 50,000 worse off in the first year of reforms.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/news/article-3509271/British-workers-alarming-ignorance-new-state-pension.html

    enigma

    March 25, 2016 at 3:15 pm

    • The National Insurance Fund – paid into via NI contributions – for pensions and other welfare support was over £100 billion in credit last year, yet the austerity-crazed Tories persist with the idea of cutting pensions.

      THE government has announced a review of state pensions premised on the belief that present levels cannot be afforded.

      The move amounts to another piece being put into place — amid the landscape of austerity — to justify removing welfare support altogether from those who cannot afford to pay.

      The idea of cutting pensions while extending the retirement age points to a time where pensions and retirement in reality won’t exist at all for many people.

      http://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/a-d03e-Government-readies-to-pick-pensioners-pockets#.VvXAuDEniSp

      enigma

      March 26, 2016 at 3:03 pm

      • And the biggest CON is that we are all living longer! Utter horseshit!

        Methuslah

        March 26, 2016 at 3:13 pm

    • Osborne and Co never mention the National Insurance Fund. They never mention the fact that the Government takes in more in National Insurance contributions than the pay out in benefits. They are taking in twice as much in NI than the whole “benefits budget”. What a SCAM!

      It's a SCAM!

      March 26, 2016 at 3:16 pm

    • enigma

      it’s nice to see the ConCons continuing with their old traditions:

      “Just 13% of people reaching state pension age in the first year of the overhauled system will receive the new flat rate, they found.”

      Stuff everybody else as long as I’m sitting pretty.

      from:

      “Too few people understand new state pension, MPs warn”
      http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-35904417

      “[The Work and Pensions Committee] said 55% of claimants would get less than £155.65, mainly because of contracting-out or contribution gaps”

      “The amount a claimant receives can be higher or lower than the £155.65 weekly rate depending on an individual’s National Insurance record and they will need 10 qualifying years of contributions.
      Around one third (32%) are expected to receive more than £155.65 after building up additional state pension under the current system.
      By 2040, the proportion of people receiving the full flat rate is expected to exceed 80%, the communication of the new state pension report found.”

      So much for “Workie”

      Gazza

      March 27, 2016 at 12:30 am

      • Doesn’t this also mean that the low wage poor and long term unemployed will be hit excessively hard by this new ploy which on the surface looks to simplify the system, but actually long term will have the opposite effect when the numbers of people caught out starts to climb to unsustainable levels.

        Well done ConCons, well done.

        Gazza

        March 27, 2016 at 12:34 am

      • You know when you peddle so many untruths, its only a matter of time before you forget yourself.

        This is why i thank the internet that immortalizes everything we ever say, as pick any countries government, any leader, they have all contradicted themselves countless times over and its time the public sat up and took notice.

        I particularly enjoy watching these Trump and Hillary characters who even though i can tie with the same lie brush, Hillary in particular is quite the evil snake, infact and its hard to separate all of them but is more than possibly the most dangerous politician i have ever witnessed in the annuals of American history.

        doug

        March 27, 2016 at 11:49 am

      • Millions will no doubt have to work, for an allowance, whatever that may be in the future.

        What will the work & health programme involve.

        enigma

        March 27, 2016 at 6:03 pm

      • What will the work & health programme involve.

        i know lets change the name move all the providers around so it looks like its a new programme and carry on as b4.

        park the long term unemployed and disabled and rake in the fee from dwp for doing fook all.

        superted

        March 27, 2016 at 7:25 pm

      • I know what you mean superted but how many people know how the DWP work, inc all those who are still employed and have been since before 2010, many of which will be laid off, – the nmw starts next week.

        enigma

        March 27, 2016 at 8:08 pm

      • best hope they find this site and fast 😉

        superted

        March 27, 2016 at 8:12 pm

  21. Homeless children dying from neglect and abuse after families moved out of their local areas.

    Exclusive: Investigation reveals effect of Government welfare cuts on children who fall through the net

    Children in homeless families who have been shunted out of their local areas by councils trying to save money on accommodation are dying from neglect and abuse, after disappearing from support services during their moves.

    The legacy of the housing crisis and the Government’s cuts to welfare is proving deadly for some of the most vulnerable people in the country, an Independent investigation has found. Evidence suggests that the transfer of homeless families to other parts of the country could have resulted in suicides and miscarriages..

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/homeless-children-dying-from-neglect-and-abuse-after-families-moved-out-of-their-local-areas-a6952766.html

    enigma

    March 26, 2016 at 6:52 pm

    • You know even if he is being genuine, creating another system is no change from an old system, its still a path decided by others and that its folly.

      doug

      March 27, 2016 at 11:40 am

  22. Increasing numbers of pupils are coming to school hungry, anxious and unable to concentrate because of family financial pressures, a teachers’ union has said.

    The NASUWT union said growing numbers of teachers and schools were providing food, equipment and clothes for pupils.

    Over a third had seen pupils leave school mid-term because they had lost their homes.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-35873541

    enigma

    March 27, 2016 at 11:51 am

    • Theirs very little difference between poor and near poor, something free market capitalist supporters deliberately overlook.

      Having a job does not imply one can afford all the necessary things and to get in before government open their pie holes again, this living wage is i guarantee you going to get swallowed up by the cost of things (stagnant or slight rise in inflation) so will mean absolutely nothing in real world terms besides giving the appearance that this government is changing the UKs fortunes (cooking the books) much like allowing the housing bubble and personal debt not to mention proceeds of crime to boost GDP.

      The public by far and large don’t know it but their being mathematically tricked and anyone who understands advanced math knows this to be true.

      doug

      March 27, 2016 at 12:18 pm

  23. EU judges in Luxembourg could limit key powers in UK surveillance laws just weeks before Britain votes on its EU membership.

    An emergency hearing on the bulk interception of communications data has been scheduled for 12 April at the European court of justice (ECJ), whose rulings are binding on UK courts. Its final decision could have a decisive impact on the powers of GCHQ, the Cheltenham-based monitoring agency, and could come shortly before Britons decide whether to remain in or leave the EU on 23 June.

    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/mar/27/eu-judges-could-limit-uk-surveillance-powers-before-referendum

    enigma

    March 27, 2016 at 6:19 pm

  24. Clarification on whether jobcentre staff are permitted / authorised / encouraged to ignore published DWP guidelines and apply their own interpretation to unemployed “clients”

    A – there is no immediate scope for Jobcentre staff to ignore DWP policy

    https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/clarification_on_whether_jobcent#comment-67920

    enigma

    March 27, 2016 at 6:39 pm

    • enigma

      Good one mate, beat me to it.I spotted it too over at Refuted’s Twitter feed.

      Any Civil Servant who wilfully ignore departmental policy is:

      committing Gross Misconduct by assuming powers they do not have
      abusing their position/power as a civil servant in carrying out whatever action contravenes said policy

      under the code this would fall under the tests of :
      – ‘integrity’
      – Honesty
      – objectivity

      Each one of the above is a Gross misconduct charge. 2 and you’re sacked – Ooops.

      Gazza

      March 27, 2016 at 7:52 pm

      • I need to inform my new so call adviser (power hungry) and will do very soon.

        enigma

        March 27, 2016 at 8:23 pm

      • I think its high time people stop hiding under the tree, expecting the storm to pass.

        What the world let alone the the UK is experiencing is in basic terms easily likened to one leaving the plug out of the bath while hoping that if we pour enough water at such a rate, that somehow, calcium will form to replace the plug.

        People including governments need to accept the world has changed in such a way that if it continues to maintain its current practices that we all will be consigning ourselves to a certain conclusion.

        We all hear and read terms like QE, borrowing, cuts, extending pension age and so forth but seldom do most contemplate its bigger question. Its obvious we are preparing for a future where less will fill all aspects of our lives and absolutely no one has an answer on how to advert this impending predicament.

        In short while we continue to cling to current free market capitalism, we are adopting the pose of a child warned not to do something, who despite the taboo, will do it anyway.

        Things like Redcar were and are inevitable when we have certain factions hellbent on farming out trades and production all for the sake of gaining more profit. We are told we should be proud to support overseas transference of trades yet all we see long term is only a very slight lift in that countries fortunes and large losses from where it came from.

        I say in the case of textile trade (sweat shops) that if the UK wanted it back, that they would have to take a cut lower than the country who currently have it so for example if a person in India was paid a bowl of rice a day that we would have to accept half a bowl a day which considering the west when we factor the cost of living and regulation can never happen. You see the model behind say sweat shops for example is pronounced as a win win meaning owner and customer benefit which in turn means more profit and cheaper prices. This sadly leads when talking employees to low wages and less than stellar conditions.
        As we are witnessing now in places abroad producing what was once our trade is employees striking and protesting for better more secure wages and safer, cleaner conditions meaning eventually cost will be as it was here and thus cancelling out the consumers benefit of cheaper prices all because the owner values its profits more.

        We’ve all seen that in say a country like China that an oppressed country with many people is more productive than say our system which should set off alarms in ones brains that this is what is creeping into the UK way of life. The theme is more for less, evident by the persistence to air the productivity puzzle, less long term contracts and so forth.

        So in parting imagine a glass of water in that the longer you leave it, the more the level lowers dew to evaporation and that unless the process is reversed and directed, the water will never return to the glass.
        Now consider the wealth gap.

        doug

        March 28, 2016 at 8:29 am

      • There will be alot more of this.

        Almost half the world cooking as if it were the stone age, WHO warns

        http://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2016/mar/21/half-world-cooking-stone-age-world-health-organisation-report-dr-maria-neira

        meanwhile

        Welcome to the robot-based workforce: will your job become automated too?

        From waitstaff to care companions and legal researchers, the future of the machine worker is here. But where does that leave humans.

        http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/mar/19/robot-based-economy-san-francisco

        enigma

        March 28, 2016 at 12:59 pm

      • More than six million workers to be stripped of take-home pay under stealth tax raid.

        The new system, introduced next month, will see millions of workers face paying more tax through increased national insurance contributions.

        http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/georgeosborne/12205602/More-than-six-million-workers-to-be-stripped-of-take-home-pay-under-stealth-tax-raid.html

        enigma

        March 28, 2016 at 1:34 pm

      • It’s only obvious where we’re going.

        enigma

        March 28, 2016 at 1:50 pm

  25. Forget about the articles regarding pensions above.

    Tories propose end of retirement, scrapping pensions and volunteers to replace NHS doctors.

    If you want to know what’s in store for us in the next wave of Tory ‘reforms’, ……
    ……………………..

    https://tompride.wordpress.com/2016/03/26/tories-propose-end-of-retirement-scrapping-pensions-and-volunteers-to-replace-nhs-doctors/

    enigma

    March 27, 2016 at 10:37 pm

  26. UNIVERSAL JOBMATCH – IS THIS ANOTHER SCAM?

    Here is a post form “TedatHome” – which appeared recently on Ipswich Unemployed Action under the page “Universal Jobmatch List of Fake Employers”. Apparently the job advert in the link shows a photograph of a “Careers Manager” which turns out to be that of a dead man:

    “Joined Universal Jobmatch last week and got this over the weekend, is it real?

    “We have come across your CV online as it shows you are actively looking for work
    and are also interested in Warehouse positions.

    We require somebody to start with our company as a Warehouse Operative.

    We held interviews a few weeks ago but somebody has just let us down due
    to another job offer and our new warehouse is due to open shortly in your area.

    We really liked your CV and would very much like to speak to you.

    – We pay 15.50 per hour.
    – Offer an immediate start if possible for you.
    – Great extra benefits.
    – Friendly team and great warehouse location.

    I have arranged Charlie Ferriss, one of my recruitment team to have a brief chat with you
    on the phone.

    If you can use the below link to view the full job details and then click on the button
    on that page to book in a day and time with Charlie Ferriss,

    He will then give you a call to go through the job in more detail.

    TO VIEW JOB DETAILS AND TO BOOK THE INTERVIEW: Click Here
    http://dbfuk.com/careers/Warehouse-Operative.html

    Kind Regards,

    Jonathon Booth
    Recruitment Manager

    DBF Logistics Limited

    Celebrating 7 years of business – 01823 429863 – Web: http://www.dbfuk.com“

    TedatHome

    March 23, 2016 at 9:02 pm”

    ——————————————————————-

    See these links also:

    http://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/essex-office-worker-dies-in-snow-after-night-at-the-pub-8547784.html?dxwIndex=1&quot

    http://dbfuk.com/careers/Warehouse-Operative.html

    Poster

    March 28, 2016 at 9:54 am

    • Third of a Million UJ ads are fake:

      http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/fraud-investigators-called-in-as-a-third-of-a-million-vacancies-listed-on-governments-jobmatch-site-9171582.html

      Take note that the scam alleged in the post by “TedatHome” did not involve a fake advert directly. Instead, he received an email inviting him to arrange a telephone interview after the “employer” had initially read his public CV which he posted on Universal Jobmatch.

      Bogus job adverts are bad enough, but that kind of technique is another layer of data mining!

      Poster

      March 28, 2016 at 10:04 am

    • From an hours worth of digging this is what i have found thus far dear poster.

      According to company house DBF logistics does exist at the address given in Taunton however ICO’s registry doesn’t recognize such a company on its system and infact as far as Mary house or even post code goes, again the ICO registry doesn’t list them amongst all the companies that reside their.

      Interestingly one company at this address is called EXPLOIT THE WEB LIMITED when you only enter the post code not that this necessarily means anything.

      According to company house,DBF’S directors are Ben Bayer, David Charles Bayer and Ursula Bayer. also these people are listed to have traded under the name BAYSCHEME LIMITED but i cannot get anything up currently regarding this and it ran only between 22 Jul 2008 to 19 Aug 2008, so about the same time DBF launched.

      https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/06653236

      Also interestingly they are all tied to the following companies, D B Foods (Holdings) Limited, D B Foods Limited, Brookfield Farm (Dorset) Limited as well as a few others after further more extensive searches.

      So at this current juncture their are more questions than answers so in the first instance ring them up and ask them for a ICO registration number (they must supply this if asked although allow them some time to produce it) as this proves they have followed the law and registered to have the legal right to process your personal data.

      Then go to this link below and enter it,

      https://ico.org.uk/esdwebpages/search

      Its illegal to process personal data as a data controller if your not registered although do bare in mind at this juncture, you did of your own free will send your CV meaning if you do attend then any information given by yourself their after despite the law is done under your own consent. It doesnt mean they cant be punished for not registering if thats the case but it does mean you personally wont have any recourse yourself.

      I must admit the picture of the dead man showing up is intriguing but its not necessarily proof positive without consulting both company and paper as media are often known to show false images and company web pages can contain errors.

      Good luck and so you know im starting a new job tomorrow so wont be able to take this up again with yourself.

      doug

      March 28, 2016 at 1:53 pm

  27. Holyrood 2016: Parties focus on closing skills gap – with apprenticeships.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-35910739

    enigma

    March 28, 2016 at 4:34 pm

  28. All:

    New CWP amd MWA provider guidance was published on the 3 and 14 March 2016, respectively.

    I thought these schemes were being knocked on the head, end of April 2016.

    https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/dwp-provider-

    jj joop

    March 28, 2016 at 4:44 pm

    • They will continue until 2017, the day before the new one starts.

      enigma

      March 28, 2016 at 5:57 pm

    • What you talking about, enigma? Word on da street is that the last referrals to MWA/CWP are on 31 MARCH 2016 . If you haven’t been referred by that date you can’t be put on the scheme!

      Blexley Heath

      March 28, 2016 at 6:06 pm

    • continuing to provide a range of employment support through Jobcentre Plus, the Work Programme (until 2017) then Work and Health Programme

      https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/dwp-single-departmental-plan-2015-to-2020/dwp-single-departmental-plan-2015-to-2020

      enigma

      March 28, 2016 at 6:07 pm

    • “Page not found” on that link, jjloop!

      Blexley Heath

      March 28, 2016 at 6:07 pm

    • Just found this shit – shit Community Work Placements provider guidance

      From:
      Department for Work and Pensions
      First published:
      27 May 2014
      Last updated:
      3 March 2016, see all updates
      Part of:
      DWP provider guidance

      Blexley Heath

      March 28, 2016 at 6:11 pm

    • The update might be to say that the scheme is ending 😉

      Blexley Heath

      March 28, 2016 at 6:12 pm

      • CWP Referrals
        1.07 For those JSA claimants returning from the Work Programme, JCP advisers will adopt
        a triage approach, supplemented by information from a Work Programme exit report, to
        establish claimant suitability.

        o dear i never got 1 of those cos i never went pmsl

        superted

        March 28, 2016 at 6:23 pm

      • I fkn hope so, I really do.

        jj joop

        March 28, 2016 at 7:34 pm

    • MWA provider guidance has also been updated on 16 March 2016

      shit

      Blexley Heath

      March 28, 2016 at 6:20 pm

    • @ Enigma, You are getting mixed up with the ‘flagship’ Work Programme and MWA/CWP!

      Blexley Heath

      March 28, 2016 at 6:22 pm

  29. On Monday 18 April MPs will take part in a debate on a motion relating to the Introduction of the National Living Wage and related changes to employee contracts.

    ‘That this House agrees with the Chancellor of the Exchequer that Britain deserves a pay rise and commends his introduction of the national living wage; notes, however, that some employers are cutting overall remuneration packages to offset the cost of its introduction, leaving thousands of low-paid employees significantly worse off; and calls, therefore, on the Government to guarantee that no worker will be worse off as a result of the introduction of the national living wage.’

    http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/backbench-business-committee/news-parliament-2015/mps-debate-introduction-of-the-national-living-wage-and-related-changes-to-employee-contracts/

    enigma

    March 28, 2016 at 4:56 pm

  30. h/t to Refuted

    This tells you of the shit storm that is coming via tax credits.

    https://t.co/q6SREByBKO
    “Universal Credit: In work, part time claimants sanctioned for taking holidays… and working..”

    No holidays for you peons…

    They’ve winnowed [“They Came for …”] as much out of JSA/UC claimants and the sick, now they’re after Tax Credit claimants. After that it’ll be “Then they Came for…”

    From above webpage – This is so not good:

    And …. Hardship Payments under Universal Credit:

    David Webster, an Honorary Senior Research Fellow (Urban Studies) at the University of Glasgow has stated that:

    “The UC regime has similar lengths of sanction to those of JSA for the various ‘failures’, but there are some critical differences.

    – Sanctions are lengthened by being made consecutive, not concurrent.
    – Under Universal Credit hardship payments become repayable. Given that repayments are made at the rate of 40% of benefit – the same as the amount by which a hardship payment is lower than the benefit – this means that for claimants receiving hardship payments, UC sanctions are in effect 3½ times as long as their nominal length.
    – All sanctioned UC claimants must also demonstrate ‘compliance’ for 7 days before applying for hardship payments, and must reapply for each 4-week period.
    – The 80% hardship rate for ‘vulnerable’ claimants is abolished.”

    Gazza

    March 28, 2016 at 5:06 pm

    • It looks like they’re really determined to drive as many people as they can off benefits. It’s not looking good.

      jj joop

      March 28, 2016 at 7:40 pm

      • jj joop

        hope you’re well.

        As for the not allowed Holidays, I think someone made a big big boo boo there. Health and safety wise I can see this being successfully overturned in the courts.

        Also as Employers denying people taking Holiday is illegal under contract law (& for H&S reasons etc etc) I can not see how this can stand if challenged in court for the other reason that it is discriminatory – I have a suspicion Terms in any Contract which, despite DWP denying it is [I would point to the Tribunal Ruling from October last year which made it clear that it is] that are wrong in multiple ways as UC currently stands are null and void and defaults to the previous contract – if one exists, in this case JSA.

        Me I’m looking forward to DWP standing up in court and explaining how it isn’t discriminatory.

        This is Just my read.

        Gazza

        March 28, 2016 at 8:12 pm

      • Gazza:

        I’m doing just fine at the moment. Although I think a referral to a Skills Conditionality course is in the wind.

        jj joop

        March 29, 2016 at 11:37 am

    • There will be many suicides as a result of this as we know.

      Last week in the JC, a lot of people, signing up to UC, many with kids, I know I’ll see most of them if not all in the food bank.

      enigma

      March 28, 2016 at 8:09 pm

  31. “The government announced last year that the Community Work Programme would be abolished from 2017 along with the controversial Mandatory Work Activity programme, which is outside the Help to Work scheme. These will be replaced by a new scheme, the Work and Health Programme, targeted at both disabled people and the long-term unemployed. The conflation of health and work is likely to be the source of ongoing controversy”

    enigma

    March 28, 2016 at 7:48 pm

    • Why do you keep on persisting in posting this crap Enigma? You are DELIBERATELY spreading disinformation! You are maliciously causing jobseekers unnecessary stress and anxiety! What is YOUR agenda. For the umpteenth time, the last referral dates to MWA and CWP are 31 March 2016

      Here is is from the horse’s mouth:

      Memo ADM 5/16
      UNIVERSAL CREDIT – END OF MANDATORY WORK
      ACTIVITY (MWA) & COMMUNITY WORK PLACEMENT
      (CWP) SCHEMES
      Contents
      Paragraphs
      Introduction
      1 – 2
      MWA scheme ending
      3 – 4
      CwP scheme ending
      5 – 6
      Early termination
      7 – 8
      Sanctions
      9 – 11
      Compliance condition for low-level sanctions
      12
      Varying the compliance condition
      13 – 14
      Annotation
      Contacts
      INTRODUCTION
      1 This memo is to inform UC DMs that the Mandatory Work Activity (MWA) and the
      Community Work Placement (CwP) schemes are coming to an end.
      2 This memo is also to provide guidance on how the closure of those programmes
      affects DMA action and sanctions for failures to participate in those schemes for UC
      claimants.
      Note:
      For guidance on the MWA scheme see ADM Chapter K3
      (Higher-level
      sanctions) and for the CwP scheme see
      ADM Chapter K5
      (Low-level sanctions).
      MWA SCHEME ENDING
      3 The MWA scheme will end on 31.3.16. Therefore the cut-off date for claimants starting
      MWA provision is 31.3.16 which means there will be no claimants taking part in the scheme after 27.4.16.

      Note:
      The last date a claimant can participate in the MWA scheme is 27.4.16.
      4 As MWA providers have 20 working days in which to start the claimant on a
      placement, the final date for work coaches to refer a claimant to the MWA scheme,
      including for any ‘balance of time’, is 1.3.16.

      Example
      Leo is referred to the MWA scheme and is required to participate in a 4 week
      placement on 22.2.16.
      Leo fails to participate in the scheme on 7.3.16.
      The DM determines Leo has a good reason for the failure to participate in the scheme
      on 7.3.16 due to illness.
      There is no sanctionable failure and although the claimant has only completed 2
      weeks of the 4 weeks placement Leo cannot be referred to the scheme to complete
      the balance of time as it is passed the deadline of 1.3.16 for referrals to the MWA
      scheme.
      CWP SCHEME ENDING
      5 Unless paragraphs 7 and 8 apply, the CwP programme will end on 27.10.16. The final
      date a work coach can refer a claimant to the CwP scheme is 31.3.16 and the last
      date claimants can participate in the CwP scheme will be 26.10.16.

      6 Claimants referred to the CwP scheme prior to 31.3.16 will, generally, participate for
      the 30 weeks allotted time on the scheme. The exception is those claimants who
      either do not attend their initial engagement meeting or do not start the placement
      offered. Those claimants will be required to attend a standard work search interview to
      discuss the next steps to move the claimant closer to or into work with their advisor.
      Early termination
      7 Referrals to the CwP scheme in certain areas will end early, i.e. at the close of
      business on Monday 29.2.16. Accordingly, the corresponding referral opportunities will
      also end at 6pm on that date and the last date a claimant can participate in the
      scheme for a provider affected by early termination will be 25.9.16.
      8 The areas affected by early termination are:
      1.
      CPA1 (Seetec) – covering East Anglia, Essex, and Bedfordshire & Hertfordshire districts
      2.
      CPA 8 (Learn Direct) – covering all districts in Scotland
      3.
      CPA 10 (Seetec) – covering Kent district
      along with the Surrey & Sussex sides
      of Berkshire, Surrey & Sussex district
      and
      4.
      CPA 14 (Seetec) – covering Black Country and Birmingham & Solihull districts.
      Note 1:
      Referrals to the CwP scheme in these areas will not be made after 29.2.16.
      Note 2:
      All CwP scheme providers, including those with early termination, are contractually obliged to deliver the provision, in full, for those claimants referred on or before the final referral date.

      Memo ADM 5/16
      UNIVERSAL CREDIT – END OF MANDATORY WORK
      ACTIVITY (MWA) & COMMUNITY WORK PLACEMENT
      (CWP) SCHEMES
      Contents
      Paragraphs
      Introduction
      1 – 2
      MWA scheme ending
      3 – 4
      CwP scheme ending
      5 – 6
      Early termination
      7 – 8
      Sanctions
      9 – 11
      Compliance condition for low-level sanctions
      12
      Varying the compliance condition
      13 – 14
      Annotation
      Contac
      ts
      INTRODUCTION
      1 This memo is to inform UC DMs that the Mandatory Work Activity (MWA) and the
      Community Work Placement (CwP) schemes are coming to an end.
      2 This memo is also to provide guidance on how the closure of those programmes
      affects DMA action and sanctions for failures to participate in those schemes for UC
      claimants.
      Note:
      For guidance on the MWA scheme see
      ADM Chapter K3
      (Higher-level
      sanctions) and for the CwP scheme see
      ADM Chapter K5
      (Low-level sanctions).
      MWA SCHEME ENDING
      3 The MWA scheme will end on 31.3.16. Therefor
      e the cut-off date for claimants starting
      MWA provision is 31.3.16 which means ther
      e will be no claimants taking part in the
      scheme after 27.4.16.
      Note:
      The last date a claimant can partic
      ipate in the MWA scheme is 27.4.16.
      4 As MWA providers have 20 working days
      in which to start the claimant on a
      placement, the final date for work coaches
      to refer a claimant to the MWA scheme,
      including for any ‘balance of time’, is 1.3.16.
      Example
      Leo is referred to the MWA scheme and is required to participate in a 4 week
      placement on 22.2.16.
      Leo fails to participate in the scheme on 7.3.16.
      The DM determines Leo has a good reason for the failure to participate in the scheme
      on 7.3.16 due to illness.
      There is no sanctionable failure and although the claimant has only completed 2
      weeks of the 4 weeks placement Leo cannot
      be referred to the scheme to complete
      the balance of time as it is passed the
      deadline of 1.3.16 for referrals to the MWA
      scheme.
      CWP SCHEME ENDING
      5 Unless paragraphs 7 and 8 apply, the CwP
      programme will end on 27.10.16. The final
      date a work coach can refer a claimant to
      the CwP scheme is 31.3.16 and the last
      date claimants can participate in the CwP scheme will be 26.10.16.
      6 Claimants referred to the CwP scheme prior
      to 31.3.16 will, generally, participate for
      the 30 weeks allotted time on the scheme. The exception is those claimants who
      either do not attend their initial engagement
      meeting or do not start the placement
      offered. Those claimants will be required to attend a standard work search interview to
      discuss the next steps to move the claimant cl
      oser to or into work with their advisor.
      Early termination
      7 Referrals to the CwP scheme in certain
      areas will end early, i.e. at the close of
      business on Monday 29.2.16. Accordingly, the corresponding referral opportunities will
      also end at 6pm on that date and the last
      date a claimant can participate in the
      scheme for a provider affected by ear
      ly termination will be 25.9.16.
      8 The areas affected by early termination are:
      1.
      CPA1 (Seetec) – covering East Anglia, Essex, and Bedfordshire &
      Hertfordshire districts
      2.
      CPA 8 (Learn Direct) – covering all districts in Scotland
      3.
      CPA 10 (Seetec) – covering Kent district
      along with the Surrey & Sussex sides
      of Berkshire, Surrey & Sussex district
      and
      4.
      CPA 14 (Seetec) – covering Black Country and Birmingham & Solihull districts.
      Note 1:
      Referrals to the CwP scheme in these areas will not be made after 29.2.16.
      Note 2:
      All CwP scheme providers, including those with early termination, are
      contractually obliged to deliver the provision,
      in full, for those claimants referred on or
      before the final referral date.
      SANCTIONS
      9 DM action should be undertaken as normal following current processes for
      considering a sanction for any failures to participate in either the MWA or CwP
      scheme received with a date of failure to participate on or before
      1.
      27.4.16 for MWA
      or
      2.
      26.10.16 for CwP
      or
      3.
      25.9.16 for CwP providers with early
      termination (see paragraphs 7 and 8).
      Note :
      Full guidance for failures to participate in the MWA scheme is in
      ADM Chapter
      K3
      and failures to participate in employment schemes, such as the CwP scheme, is
      covered in
      ADM Chapter K5
      . Guidance on the general principles for imposing
      sanctions is covered in
      ADM Chapter K1
      .
      10 The period of any sanctions applied will not
      be affected by the end of provision date.
      The appropriate sanction period is applied to the next available Assessment Period
      and/or added to the TORP in the usual way.
      It is the date of failure which is the
      important date for the DM to consider and that
      must
      occur on or before the last date
      for participation in the relevant scheme (see paragraph 9).
      Note:
      For further guidance on applying sanctions see ADM Chapter K1 (General
      Principles – Sanctions).
      Example 1
      Mark is referred to the MWA scheme and is required to participate in a 4 week
      placement from 29.3.16.
      Mark fails to attend to start the placement on 29.3.16.
      On 7.4.16 the DM decides that Mark cannot show a good reason for the failure to
      participate on 29.3.16 and a 91day sanction is appropriate as this is Mark’s first
      higher-level sanctionable failure.
      The 91 day sanction is applied to the next available Assessment Period.
      Example 2
      Brie was referred to the CwP scheme on 30.3.16.
      The provider is not one with an early termination date.
      On 26.10.16 Brie fails to attend an appoint
      ment with her CwP provider by way of
      participation in the scheme.
      The compliance condition is to contact t
      he provider and agree and attend the first
      available appointment.
      Brie makes no contact with either the provider or the UC outlet.
      On 15.11.16 the DM considers Brie cannot show a good reason for the failure to
      participate in the CwP scheme on 26.10.16.
      As the last date Brie can participate
      in the CwP scheme is 26.10.16, the open ended
      sanction begins and ends on 26.10.16 as the date of failure and the date of
      compliance would be 26.10.16 (see further guidance on compliance conditions at
      paragraphs 12 and 13).
      A 7 day fixed low-level sanction is approp
      riate as there have been no previous low –
      level sanctions in the 364 days immediatel
      y before the date of the current failure.
      The 8 day sanction is applied to t
      he next available Assessment Period.
      Example 3
      Alejandro is referred to the MWA scheme and
      is required to participate in a 4 week
      placement on 15.2.16.
      Alejandro fails to participate in the scheme on 22.2.16. The DM determines Alejandro
      has good reason for the failure to participate in the scheme on 22.2.16.
      On 1.3.16 the work coach refers Alejandro to the MWA scheme to complete the
      balance of time on his placement starting on 31.3.16.
      Alejandro fails to participate in the scheme on 11.4.16.
      On 28.4.16 the DM determines Alejandro cannot show a good reason for the failure to
      participate in the MWA scheme on 11.4.16 and a 182 day sanction is appropriate as
      there has been a previous higher-level
      sanctionable failure in the 364 days
      immediately preceding the current failure.
      The reduction period for this latest sanctionable failure is added to the TORP.
      11 Any sanction referrals received with a date of failure to participate in the scheme
      after
      the last date a claimant can participate
      in the specific scheme (see paragraph 9)
      should be cancelled.
      Compliance condition for low-level sanctions
      12 Where a claimant has been referred to the CwP scheme and a failure to participate
      results in an open-ended part of a low-level sanction being imposed, the date the
      open-ended sanction
      must
      end is on
      1.
      26.10.16
      or
      2.
      25.9.16 for CwP providers with early termination (see paragraphs 7 and 8)
      unless it can end sooner (see
      Example 2
      at paragraph 10 and further guidance at
      paragraph 13 to consider varying the compliance condition).
      Example
      On 20.10.16 Asif should have attended an appointment with his CwP provider.
      The provider is not one with an early termination date.
      He has no good reason for the failure.
      The compliance condition is to contact t
      he provider and agree and attend the first
      available appointment. Asif makes no contact with
      either the provider or the UC outlet.
      The open ended sanction will run from the date of the failure 20.10.16 and end on the
      last date the claimant can participate in
      the CwP scheme, i.e.
      26.10.16. The fixed
      period low-level sanction will
      be imposed from 27.10.16.
      Varying the compliance condition
      13 Where the claimant
      1.
      makes enquiries to end the open-ended sanction before the end date of the
      scheme
      and
      2.
      it is no longer reasonable or appropriate for the claimant to participate in the
      CwP scheme
      the work coach should set a revised comp
      liance condition that is reasonable and
      achievable before the end date of the scheme.
      14 The revised compliance condition could be, for example, to attend an interview with
      the work coach to discuss next steps. The e
      ffective date of compliance would then be
      1.
      the date the claimant complies with
      the revised compliance condition
      or
      2.
      26.10.16
      or
      3.
      25.9.16 for CwP providers with early
      termination (see paragraphs 7 and 8)
      whichever date is the sooner.
      Note 1:
      The open ended part of a low-level sanction cannot run beyond 26.10.16 for a
      failure to participate in the CwP scheme
      or 25.9.16 for CwP providers with early
      termination (see paragraphs 7 and 8). It
      must
      end on the last date a claimant can
      participate in the scheme (see paragraph 9).
      Note 2:
      See further guidance on compliance conditions in
      ADM Chapter K1
      .
      Example
      Alicia has received a letter telling her she is to be sanctioned as she failed to attend an
      appointment with her CwP provider on 3.10.16.
      The provider is not one with an early termination date.
      Alicia does not have a good reason for failing to participate in the appointment on
      3.10.16.
      On 11.10.16 she phones the UC outlet. Her or
      iginal compliance condition is to contact
      the provider and agree a date for future attendance and attend a re-arranged
      appointment. However as the last date a claimant can participate in this CwP provision
      is 26.10.16 this is no longer appropriate as the provider has told her there are no more
      appointments available.
      The work coach makes an appointment to discuss next steps with Alicia on 12.10.16
      and advises her that this is her new compliance condition and the open-ended
      sanction will end if she attends the interview.
      Alicia attends and participates in the intervie
      w with the work coach on 12.10.16. Alicia
      can therefore be treated as having compli
      ed on 11.10.16, the date she made contact
      with the UC outlet.
      The open-ended sanction will run from 3.10.
      16 (the date of the failure) until 10.10.16
      (the day before the date of compliance).
      ANNOTATIONS
      Please annotate the number of this memo (ADM Memo 5/16) against DMG
      paragraphs: K1046 (Heading), K3038 (Heading) and K5031.
      CONTACTS
      If you have any queries about this memo, please write to Decision Making and
      Appeals (DMA) Leeds, 1S25, Quarry House,
      Leeds. Existing arrangements for such
      referrals should be followed, as set out in
      Memo DMG 03/13
      – Obtaining legal advice
      and guidance on the Law.


      DMA Leeds: March 2016
      The content of the examples in this document (including use of imagery)is for illustrative purposes only

      https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/506236/adm5-16.pdf

      DMA Leeds

      March 29, 2016 at 8:00 am

    • 6 Claimants referred to the CwP scheme prior
      to 31.3.16 will, generally, participate for
      the 30 weeks allotted time on the scheme. The exception is those claimants who
      either do not attend their initial engagement
      meeting or do not start the placement offered. Those claimants will be required to attend a standard work search interview to discuss the next steps to move the claimant closer to or into work with their advisor.

      Only 3 (THREE) days until these schemes bite the dust 😀 If you haven’t been referred yet better get your skates on and asked for an urgent appointment with your cock roach in order to take advantage of this fantastic, once-in-lifetime OPPORTUNITY 😀

      Dead and Buried

      March 29, 2016 at 8:16 am

    • “The content of the examples in this document (including use of imagery)is for illustrative purposes only” 😀

      'Zac' and 'Sarah'

      March 29, 2016 at 8:20 am

    • “7 Referrals to the CwP scheme in certain areas will end early, i.e. at the close of
      business on Monday 29.2.16. Accordingly, the corresponding referral opportunities will
      also end at 6pm on that date and the last date a claimant can participate in the
      scheme for a provider affected by early termination will be 25.9.16.
      8 The areas affected by early termination are:
      1.
      CPA1 (Seetec) – covering East Anglia, Essex, and Bedfordshire & Hertfordshire districts
      2.
      CPA 8 (Learn Direct) – covering all districts in Scotland
      3.
      CPA 10 (Seetec) – covering Kent district
      along with the Surrey & Sussex sides
      of Berkshire, Surrey & Sussex district
      and
      4.
      CPA 14 (Seetec) – covering Black Country and Birmingham & Solihull districts.
      Note 1:
      Referrals to the CwP scheme in these areas will not be made after 29.2.16.”

      A lot of jobseekers are already out of the CWP woods 🙂

      Wolf Creek

      March 29, 2016 at 8:45 am

      • 😀

        We Spit on Seetec and Learn Direct's Grave

        March 29, 2016 at 8:52 am

      • I’ve have a ‘helping you back to work’ appointment tomorrow (31 March 2016) at 5.59pm. Anyone know what that could be for? 😀

        Worried Jobseeker

        March 30, 2016 at 5:26 am

    • “the final date for work coaches to refer a claimant to the MWA scheme,
      including for any ‘balance of time’, is 1.3.16. ” – MWA has already snuffed it 😀

      Static

      March 29, 2016 at 10:40 am

  32. Government spends £100,000 on lawyers to defend the bedroom tax.

    The DWP is fighting a rape victim and the family of a severely disabled child.

    Ministers were told that the under-occupancy charge – which mainly affects disabled people – was “unlawful” and “discriminatory” by the Court of Appeal in January.

    The Government had been taken to court by the parents of a severely disabled child, who were forced to pay the charge on a room slept in by overnight carers and used to store specially adapted equipment.

    A rape victim who was also being forced to pay the charge on her police-installed panic room was also successful in her case against the Department at the same time.

    Ministers rejected the court ruling and said they would get it overturned at the Supreme Court, however.

    As previously reported, around £50,000 of taxpayers’ cash was spent fighting the vulnerable people’s claims up to the point the Court of Appeal ruled against the Department.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/government-spends-100000-on-lawyers-to-defend-the-bedroom-tax-a6956886.html

    enigma

    March 28, 2016 at 8:32 pm

  33. Tobanem

    March 29, 2016 at 9:36 am

  34. Quote:

    “One interviewee who had an appointment at the Jobcentre, but got called into work. He phoned up the JobCentre to rearrange his appointment, they told him it couldn’t be rearranged and then he was sanctioned because he didn’t go. “So he was actually working and they took £70 off him because he wasn’t there.”

    Another has said: ‘I was working at the time…it was something like,‘we’re going to charge you £10 a day for seven days’ and I said, ‘What, you’re going to fine me £70 for missing an appointment that I couldn’t even ring you to tell you that I’d be late?’ (UC recipient)

    Tobanem

    March 29, 2016 at 9:46 am

    • Clearly, the madness continues…!

      Tobanem

      March 29, 2016 at 9:46 am

      • Stop the world, I want to get off!

        jj joop

        March 29, 2016 at 11:53 am

  35. All:

    Just got this off whatdotheyknow.com

    The final date for referrals to Community Work Placement is 31 March 2016.

    https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/last_dwp_referral_date_to_commun#incoming-788550

    jj joop

    March 29, 2016 at 11:39 am

  36. The disability benefit cuts you haven’t heard about.

    PIP cuts have been scrapped but 500,000 will lose nearly a third of their employment and support allowance next year.

    http://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/mar/29/employment-and-support-allowance-the-disability-benefit-cuts-you-have-not-heard-about

    enigma

    March 29, 2016 at 12:49 pm

  37. GET THE SICK BACK TO WORK CAMPAIGN

    There are no public toilet facilities in Jobcentres – and that’s not all!

    More details here:

    http://voxpoliticalonline.com/2016/03/29/the-embarrassing-reason-the-dwp-wont-get-the-sick-and-disabled-back-to-work/

    Tobanem

    March 29, 2016 at 1:37 pm

    • Name changing of benefits as goes for other things that some of us know about.

      The biggest barrier disabled people face is a prejudiced government.

      The very act of renaming incapacity benefit support for sick and disabled people “employment support allowance“signalled the political intent to make that support precarious, with an aim of pushing people previously exempt from work on medical grounds from lifeline social security support into work on political grounds, regardless of the consequences. The word “allowance” means the amount of something that is permitted, especially within a set of regulations or for a specified purpose. This language shift signalled the increasing contingency of support for disabled people.

      However, changing the name and making the eligibility criteria for support much more stringent has not helped sick and disabled people into work. It has simply created circumstances of further disadvantage, hardship and distress for many people.

      https://kittysjones.wordpress.com/2016/03/29/the-biggest-barrier-disabled-people-face-is-a-prejudiced-government/

      enigma

      March 29, 2016 at 1:47 pm

    • I know somebody who had terrible problems with that when he had to go to his fit for work (ATOS) interviews.

      Andrew Coates

      March 29, 2016 at 1:53 pm

    • In the photograph above, we see a pair of electrodes at the ready. In this case it is a defibrillator to resuscitate someone with a cardiac emergency, but I wonder how long it will be before we see electrodes at the Jobcentre to administer Electro Convulsive Therapy to cure the mental condition of employment resistance syndrome?

      Only joking!

      Tobanem

      March 29, 2016 at 2:19 pm

  38. did see that😉 tho when i went back on jsa they told me i was not fit for work and put me on 13 weeks extended sick leave.

    i sign on every 2 weeks by phone atm last 2 times never even bothered to ring only to find out i get paid anyway call or not as sick note covers it.

    just more bs from the local jcp.

    if my adviser doctor and physiotherapist say im not fit for work and atos says i am ill let the court decide ,not that i can lose anything as get same as on jsa anyway.

    i have yet to find a job lifting empty card board boxes.

    Thats an important point Superted,many people might no realise this. Jobseekers Allowance is far from dead.

    the policy still is to harass people onto Employment Support Allowance for no reason even though a Gp says no to signing off also this wastes public money on assessments there is obviously no regard to this,there’s no mention of sickness time on JSA.the priority is just to remove people regardless of whats being published.

    If you are sick and not fit for work you can keep claiming JSA if you have: two short periods of sickness of up to 14 days in any jobseeking period, or within each successive 12-month period if your jobseeking period lasts longer
    than 12 months, or a third or longer period of sickness of up to 13 weeks in a fixed 12-month period starting from the first date of your sickness.We call this an “Extended Period of Sickness”. You must have medical evidence if you are sick for longer than two weeks, and you can only have one Extended Period of
    Sickness in any 12-month period.

    https://search3.openobjects.com/mediamanager/reading/enterprise/files/130415_esp_claimant_leaflet.pdf

    Ken

    March 30, 2016 at 1:00 pm

    • It was Thatcher, who in order to mask the true unemployment figures, ‘encouraged’ the unemployed to claim the then Invalidly Benefit. Unemployment Benefit Offices/Labour Exchanges actively ‘encouraged’ the unemployed to go on the sick. The result was that the numbers on Invalidity Benefit dwarfed those is receipt of Unemployment Benefit/Supplementary Allowance; Thatcher had ‘solved’ the unemployment crisis at a stroke.

      Historian

      March 30, 2016 at 1:49 pm

  39. superted, jj joop and every one else

    SKILLS CONDITIONALITY

    listen up guys. Just got my call up papers yesterday for sc. Starts next week. Bloody short notice.

    The letter says there will be an intial assessment followed by training. It says that the provider will issue me with a learning agreement. I won’t be filling in or signing any of there paperwork.

    To get around this they may fill in there paperwork by asking me questions. Do I have to share any of my personal data with them verbally when they are filling in there forms???

    andy

    April 1, 2016 at 6:27 am

    • Andy

      No you don’t as that’s no different to filling in the paperwork yourself and is their way of trying to get around the legal requirement of lawfully gaining your consent which you will be doing if you offer any personal and or sensitive information about yourself verbally.

      Personal information and or sensitive information as defined under law is any two or more pieces of information that could be used to clearly define you as you (so cant be mistaken with anyone else) so for instance, giving your name and say where you last worked would legally constitute as personal information.

      You only have to answer questions not relating to this in order to qualify as participating under DWP conditionality so if they insist you are failing to participate, they are in fact wholly incorrect.

      Remind them that legal consent to be lawful cannot be obtained via force, threat or deception and that if they do, that they will in effect make such consent non in void. If they do not know this or say they don’t then state you will allow them time to learn to become familiar with the law so they do not allow themselves to unknowingly become a party to deception.

      Hope this helps.

      doug

      April 1, 2016 at 2:33 pm

      • “You only have to answer questions not relating to this in order to qualify as participating under DWP conditionality so if they insist you are failing to participate, they are in fact wholly incorrect.” Eh! Questions not relating to what? Anyway, the ‘provider’ has got what they have been given them from the jobcentre, and you are not in a position to confirm or deny it, nor add to it. The jobcentre send a full data dump right from the beginning of your claim (including ‘conversations’) to the ‘work programme’ (not sure if this applies to ad hoc ‘courses’ but defintely the ‘work programme’ )The only piece of data from that the jobcentre do not pass on to a ‘provider’ is your date off birth.

        Ficko

        April 2, 2016 at 8:40 pm

      • The only piece of data from that the jobcentre do not pass on to the ‘work programme’ is your date off birth. Not sure what is sent to ‘providers’ of other ‘courses’/programmes. But is a FACT that the ‘work programme’ receives a full data dump.

        Ficko

        April 2, 2016 at 8:42 pm

      • Top-tip: Always say as little as possible and NEVER volunteer anything!

        Ficko

        April 2, 2016 at 8:43 pm

      • That’s the reason they rabbit on etc. to get you to open up and talk.

        Ficko

        April 2, 2016 at 8:44 pm

  40. doug

    very interesting, thanks. the jc have put me on this course at the last minute.

    andy

    April 1, 2016 at 4:24 pm

    • Hi again Andy

      You see its our own duty to be fully aware of the laws that effect us and considering how many their are in existence its hardly surprising we don’t.

      Now DWP know this and play a game on that very point so as a result, i and others offer up what we know in how far DWP can actually go not that their the only ones that behave that way.

      So coming to sites like this is helpful to those that DWP all to often pray on so if you or anyone you know are experiencing this then please feel free to ask questions as theirs many people here including its owner who are dedicated to the cause of keeping claimants and anyone interested informed.

      Now if i may add to my last post, its important to remember that when dealing with DWP or a provider to remain clam and collective as even raising someones voice will end up as a weapon they will use against and even knowing your stuff doesn’t mean they will relent but at least it means your no push over they can pick on any time they feel like it.

      Well i will leave it at that but like i said, visit this site and the others any time you need to and remember it free so don’t pay anyone as this is not what its about.

      doug

      April 2, 2016 at 4:16 pm

    • “Andy”

      I hope they don’t fine you 10p or the like for dissent – or send you back to the Jobcentre early in disgrace to face a sanction for non-compliance!

      Tobanem

      April 2, 2016 at 4:28 pm

  41. Jobseeker’s shock at DWP ‘work for benefits’ scheme.

    A JOBSEEKER has told of his shock at being asked to work a 36-hour week in a care home in return for less than £75-a-week in benefits as part of a DWP “work experience” scheme.

    David McGregor, 50, from Paisley, said he attended an interview in the hope of securing a job at a care home.

    But he then discovered it involved having to go on a “work placement” of six weeks, where he was expected to work three 12-hour shifts a week in return for his Jobseeker’s Allowance payment of £73.10 a week.

    The Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) insists it is a voluntary scheme known as a “sector-based work academy”, which offers benefit recipients a chance to gain work experience with the possibility of a job at the end.

    meanwhile

    A letter sent to him states in certain circumstances benefits may be stopped if the claimant, without good reason, does not “take the opportunity of a place on an employment programme or training scheme”.

    http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/14400600.Jobseeker_s_shock_at_DWP__work_for_benefits__scheme/?ref=mr&lp=6

    enigma

    April 3, 2016 at 10:31 am


Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

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: