Let's hear scoobynets views on this ?
#4
Guest
Posts: n/a
In general a good idea. But "... There will be three key offences: refusing a job, failing to apply for a position when told to do so by a job seeker advisor or failing to turn up for a placement interview. ..."
Two of the *offences* are fine but the second one is extremely dubious as most *job seeker advisors* are a complete waste of space. Job Centres don't get you jobs, they tick boxes and get you to sign on. Full stop.
Dave
Two of the *offences* are fine but the second one is extremely dubious as most *job seeker advisors* are a complete waste of space. Job Centres don't get you jobs, they tick boxes and get you to sign on. Full stop.
Dave
#5
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
Agree with dave about the second "offence".
My eldest hasn't been offered ANYTHING in 9 months out of work, except bits and pieces he's found himself, all short-term temporary. There is a VAST difference, once again, between jobs available in the SE and up here. Despite what that Liar Blair said.
What boils my p*ss around here is that 99% of the jobs at the so-called jobcentres plus are via an agency, and so are paid at around 75% of the going rate, or less.
And as for making people pick litter etc for £60 a week, I look forward to the first person taking the government to court for not paying minimum wage
My eldest hasn't been offered ANYTHING in 9 months out of work, except bits and pieces he's found himself, all short-term temporary. There is a VAST difference, once again, between jobs available in the SE and up here. Despite what that Liar Blair said.
What boils my p*ss around here is that 99% of the jobs at the so-called jobcentres plus are via an agency, and so are paid at around 75% of the going rate, or less.
And as for making people pick litter etc for £60 a week, I look forward to the first person taking the government to court for not paying minimum wage
#6
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: May 2009
Location: www.surreyscoobies.co.uk
Posts: 1,804
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the best one i had in the job centre was them trying to get me to apply as a plumber even though i'm a sparky, i was told there nearly the same you should be able to wing it. so i can see i would of had a strike straight away for that one, not the most thought out idea if you ask me.
Trending Topics
#9
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Scotchland
Posts: 6,566
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agreed about the second "offence"
Drop that.
and also drop the three strikes bollox.
One stike on the other two and you lose your benefits for 3 years.
after that if you have another offence - no benefits for life !
Namby pamby liberals
Drop that.
and also drop the three strikes bollox.
One stike on the other two and you lose your benefits for 3 years.
after that if you have another offence - no benefits for life !
Namby pamby liberals
#10
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Wanting the English to come first in England for a change!
Posts: 2,091
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In general a good idea. But "... There will be three key offences: refusing a job, failing to apply for a position when told to do so by a job seeker advisor or failing to turn up for a placement interview. ..."
Two of the *offences* are fine but the second one is extremely dubious as most *job seeker advisors* are a complete waste of space. Job Centres don't get you jobs, they tick boxes and get you to sign on. Full stop.
Dave
Two of the *offences* are fine but the second one is extremely dubious as most *job seeker advisors* are a complete waste of space. Job Centres don't get you jobs, they tick boxes and get you to sign on. Full stop.
Dave
She expressed that to the "advisor" who told her she was being difficult and to play by the rules or get sweet fa!
I went down there but the "advisor" wouldnt speak to me, the *****!
the sort of people who use the job centre arent massive earners (most under 20k i reckon), who in their right mind would travel 3 hours a day for 1500 a month minus 300 travelling costs?
The criteria is very unrealistic!
#11
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: riding the crest of a wave ...
Posts: 46,493
Likes: 0
Received 13 Likes
on
12 Posts
In general a good idea. But "... There will be three key offences: refusing a job, failing to apply for a position when told to do so by a job seeker advisor or failing to turn up for a placement interview. ..."
Two of the *offences* are fine but the second one is extremely dubious as most *job seeker advisors* are a complete waste of space. Job Centres don't get you jobs, they tick boxes and get you to sign on. Full stop.
Dave
Two of the *offences* are fine but the second one is extremely dubious as most *job seeker advisors* are a complete waste of space. Job Centres don't get you jobs, they tick boxes and get you to sign on. Full stop.
Dave
Al these ****es did was to read the job card out to you and then telephone the employer
#12
This country is certainly not in the position that it can afford to pay people who are not prepared to work. Paying larger benefits than people can earn is a big mistake too of course.
Les
Les
#13
SN Fairy Godmother
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Far Far Away
Posts: 35,246
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If this applies to long term scroungers who make a living out of claiming benefits. I am all for it.
But, I sincerely hope it does not apply to the poor folks, through no fault of their own, are made redundant and struggle to get a job they are used to doing.
A friend of mine lost his job 2 months ago, and he said he is being hounded by the Job seekers allowance folks, to do voluntary work until he gets another job. He has worked all his life and paid his taxes, yet he says he feels like they are treating like a long term lazy ar$e
But, I sincerely hope it does not apply to the poor folks, through no fault of their own, are made redundant and struggle to get a job they are used to doing.
A friend of mine lost his job 2 months ago, and he said he is being hounded by the Job seekers allowance folks, to do voluntary work until he gets another job. He has worked all his life and paid his taxes, yet he says he feels like they are treating like a long term lazy ar$e
#14
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Disco, Disco!
Posts: 21,825
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It will only lead to the feckless and lazy lifestyle unemployed going for interviews and ****ing the interview up or if they get the job being bad at the job, poor timekeeping rude, etc and loosing the job.
something needs putting in place to pick this up and punish accordingly so they are literally forced to work!
something needs putting in place to pick this up and punish accordingly so they are literally forced to work!
#15
Scooby Senior
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Slowly rebuilding the kit of bits into a car...
Posts: 14,333
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If this applies to long term scroungers who make a living out of claiming benefits. I am all for it.
But, I sincerely hope it does not apply to the poor folks, through no fault of their own, are made redundant and struggle to get a job they are used to doing.
A friend of mine lost his job 2 months ago, and he said he is being hounded by the Job seekers allowance folks, to do voluntary work until he gets another job. He has worked all his life and paid his taxes, yet he says he feels like they are treating like a long term lazy ar$e
But, I sincerely hope it does not apply to the poor folks, through no fault of their own, are made redundant and struggle to get a job they are used to doing.
A friend of mine lost his job 2 months ago, and he said he is being hounded by the Job seekers allowance folks, to do voluntary work until he gets another job. He has worked all his life and paid his taxes, yet he says he feels like they are treating like a long term lazy ar$e
tick the box, next !
IMHO
dunx
#17
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: RIP Tam.
Posts: 5,108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
About time but will never happen imo, next the unemployed will want min wage for doing work and all the council workers will be laid off as they can get the work done by the unemployed..
Also if you are unemplyed and doing community work are you then employed because you are working....
Also if you are unemplyed and doing community work are you then employed because you are working....
#18
Very bad idea ,
anyone who's been through the redundancy mill, will know what its like,
All sweetness and light when there advising you of the options..
reach 12 week's, and it changes from what job will suit you and were
helping, to you have to take ANY job.
And all the help and travel costs paid for interviews, yea right, i'm still
£30 down, which i had to take out of my weekly pittance to attend 2 job
interviews i didnt get.
Mart
anyone who's been through the redundancy mill, will know what its like,
All sweetness and light when there advising you of the options..
reach 12 week's, and it changes from what job will suit you and were
helping, to you have to take ANY job.
And all the help and travel costs paid for interviews, yea right, i'm still
£30 down, which i had to take out of my weekly pittance to attend 2 job
interviews i didnt get.
Mart
#19
#20
Scooby Regular
my missus has just had an interview with the job centre cos she is being made redundant next april and they expect her to look for work within a 1.5 hour travelling time from her home address, WTF, no one (except MD's who work a 3 day week for 120k) should be made to travel 1.5 hours to work and the same back again it would cost in the region of 300 quid a month to do the commute, its simply not worth it!
She expressed that to the "advisor" who told her she was being difficult and to play by the rules or get sweet fa!
I went down there but the "advisor" wouldnt speak to me, the *****!
the sort of people who use the job centre arent massive earners (most under 20k i reckon), who in their right mind would travel 3 hours a day for 1500 a month minus 300 travelling costs?
The criteria is very unrealistic!
She expressed that to the "advisor" who told her she was being difficult and to play by the rules or get sweet fa!
I went down there but the "advisor" wouldnt speak to me, the *****!
the sort of people who use the job centre arent massive earners (most under 20k i reckon), who in their right mind would travel 3 hours a day for 1500 a month minus 300 travelling costs?
The criteria is very unrealistic!
#21
the best one i had in the job centre was them trying to get me to apply as a plumber even though i'm a sparky, i was told there nearly the same you should be able to wing it. so i can see i would of had a strike straight away for that one, not the most thought out idea if you ask me.
#22
Very bad idea ,
anyone who's been through the redundancy mill, will know what its like,
All sweetness and light when there advising you of the options..
reach 12 week's, and it changes from what job will suit you and were
helping, to you have to take ANY job.
And all the help and travel costs paid for interviews, yea right, i'm still
£30 down, which i had to take out of my weekly pittance to attend 2 job
interviews i didnt get.
Mart
anyone who's been through the redundancy mill, will know what its like,
All sweetness and light when there advising you of the options..
reach 12 week's, and it changes from what job will suit you and were
helping, to you have to take ANY job.
And all the help and travel costs paid for interviews, yea right, i'm still
£30 down, which i had to take out of my weekly pittance to attend 2 job
interviews i didnt get.
Mart
#23
Scooby Regular
my missus has just had an interview with the job centre cos she is being made redundant next april and they expect her to look for work within a 1.5 hour travelling time from her home address, WTF, no one (except MD's who work a 3 day week for 120k) should be made to travel 1.5 hours to work and the same back again it would cost in the region of 300 quid a month to do the commute, its simply not worth it!
She expressed that to the "advisor" who told her she was being difficult and to play by the rules or get sweet fa!
I went down there but the "advisor" wouldnt speak to me, the *****!
the sort of people who use the job centre arent massive earners (most under 20k i reckon), who in their right mind would travel 3 hours a day for 1500 a month minus 300 travelling costs?
The criteria is very unrealistic!
She expressed that to the "advisor" who told her she was being difficult and to play by the rules or get sweet fa!
I went down there but the "advisor" wouldnt speak to me, the *****!
the sort of people who use the job centre arent massive earners (most under 20k i reckon), who in their right mind would travel 3 hours a day for 1500 a month minus 300 travelling costs?
The criteria is very unrealistic!
Buy her a bike and get her to cycle there and back. It will help her lose some weight in the process
#25
I'm for it. It's about time some of these feckless people take responsibility for their own welfare rather than making a career of relying on the state and it is group who are the main target of the 3 strike rule so I don't see an issue with this 3 strike rule. Don't see an issue with point 2 either, if told to apply for a job by the job seeker adviser, apply for it, doesn't mean you'll get it, but you've fulfilled the requirement, what's the problem with that?
With regards to the minimum wage issue, the state will not cut off benefits as soon as you get a job, you will still receive benefits on top of the pay from the job. The idea being that it will make it less attractive to rely solely on the capped benefits.
Whilst there are many people out there all with differing circumstances, it is impossible to expect a system to cater for everyone. I appreciate that it can be difficult looking past personal circumstances and excuses or reasons why it won't work if you're directly affected, but look at the wider picture of what the Government is trying to achieve and that is changing the ethics of long term benefit claimants to go back into work, even if it means them screaming and shouting about it. and for those contemplating living permanently off benefits a less viable option.
I moved to find work and commute 1.5 hours each way per day and pay over £300 on travel per month.
With regards to the minimum wage issue, the state will not cut off benefits as soon as you get a job, you will still receive benefits on top of the pay from the job. The idea being that it will make it less attractive to rely solely on the capped benefits.
Whilst there are many people out there all with differing circumstances, it is impossible to expect a system to cater for everyone. I appreciate that it can be difficult looking past personal circumstances and excuses or reasons why it won't work if you're directly affected, but look at the wider picture of what the Government is trying to achieve and that is changing the ethics of long term benefit claimants to go back into work, even if it means them screaming and shouting about it. and for those contemplating living permanently off benefits a less viable option.
I moved to find work and commute 1.5 hours each way per day and pay over £300 on travel per month.
#27
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Wanting the English to come first in England for a change!
Posts: 2,091
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We are not used to commuting or the costs involved!
#29
It seems fair on the face of it. The country can't afford to keep throwing mony at the problem and it looks as though the arrangements should cover as well as encouraging those who don't want to get off the settee and away from the plasma to do some work for a change.
We shall have to see if there is any small print that we dont know about.
Les
We shall have to see if there is any small print that we dont know about.
Les
#30
Bizarrely, my mate who's a decorator fell over and bust his shoulder 14 weeks ago.
He's self employed but has been able to claim incapacity benefit to help pay his rent etc.
He's had to go for a 'test' to see if he's capable of work - he failed as he can lift his arm ALMOST level with his chest and therefore is 'able to work'.
Now, he's got lots of customers waiting for him to go and work for them, it's not as if he's sponging - this is the first time in 30 years he's claimed for anything.
He'd rather be working than sat doing nothing all day.
His benefits are now being stopped (or cut - I can't remember which off hand).
Seems this is being aimed at the wrong people.
He's self employed but has been able to claim incapacity benefit to help pay his rent etc.
He's had to go for a 'test' to see if he's capable of work - he failed as he can lift his arm ALMOST level with his chest and therefore is 'able to work'.
Now, he's got lots of customers waiting for him to go and work for them, it's not as if he's sponging - this is the first time in 30 years he's claimed for anything.
He'd rather be working than sat doing nothing all day.
His benefits are now being stopped (or cut - I can't remember which off hand).
Seems this is being aimed at the wrong people.