So by getting people to sign on everyday will put a strain on the job centre. And when the job centre is out of town, they have to pay petrol or bus fare to get there, money they can't afford in the first place.
Plus it will limit the time people are available for interviews
Another scheme for the "long term" unemployed rather than everyone then.
The long-term unemployed will only receive their benefits if they sign on at a jobcentre every day or commit to a six-month stint of voluntary work under the Government's new Help to Work scheme.
...
The voluntary work could include gardening projects, running community cafes or restoring historical sites and war memorials.
The placements will be for up to six months for 30 hours a week and will be backed up by at least four hours of supported job searching each week.
...
Voluntary work for thirty hours plus four hours looking for (possibly non existant) work, but at least your CV won't have a big, empty gap anymore.
What happens after the six months if you haven't found a job?
Signing on daily or back to the weekly / fortnightly sign on until the next six months voluntary work.
Or are the hoping people will take their new found skills and become self employed gardeners or continue doing voluntary work.
You either must sign on, every day (bit different from once a fortnight)
or do six month voluntary work
Or exactly what my brother will do who hasn't worked since he was 17 and is now 55: Sign off for 6 months, live on savings that he actually makes from JSA and then sign back on as a new claimant.
So it doesn't matter what the scheme is, he will do exactly the same as he has been doing for 38 years!
That's because you're optimistically assuming the aim is to get people into work. The actual aim is to have fewer people claiming JSA, especially long term. If they make it hard enough, expensive enough and stressful enough, people will stop claiming and live off family and friends, or commit crime, or die young from extreme poverty. Or, like Jesse says, come off JSA for a bit and go back on - which means the long-term employment stats look better.
If you assume the aim is to make the stats look better, the policy makes far more sense.
Ah OK. I think they will have to pay bus fares, as they do when the unemployed attend other schemes. It must cost a lot more to the tax-payer in the long run.
That's because you're optimistically assuming the aim is to get people into work. The actual aim is to have fewer people claiming JSA, especially long term. If they make it hard enough, expensive enough and stressful enough, people will stop claiming and live off family and friends, or commit crime, or die young from extreme poverty. Or, like Jesse says, come off JSA for a bit and go back on - which means the long-term employment stats look better.
If you assume the aim is to make the stats look better, the policy makes far more sense.
Yes it is just like the policy they had in the 80s to take people off the unemployment statistics and onto Disability related statistics.
Ah OK. I think they will have to pay bus fares, as they do when the unemployed attend other schemes. It must cost a lot more to the tax-payer in the long run.
The tax payer doesn't really care about the cost.
It is the idea that the unemployed are punished that pleases them.
So yeah I don't mind other people not working as long as the tax payer does not have to pay for these peoples rent etc
Must be galling to know that the vast majority of new claims for Housing Benefit is to workers and that they and pensioners make up the vast majority of the welfare bill.
Still, there are political parties standing up for elections within the next couple of years who will satisfy the bloodlust of anyone calling for the abolition of working age benefits.
Well it was a forced one morning seminar at the jobcentre and the over enthusiastic dragon running it said "I don't care what anyone says, if you are not wearing a suit to every job interview, you are not correctly dressed.". She didn't of course go on to explain who was paying for this suit if you didn't have one.
Last year I went to a "Jobfair" that they arranged and I went in a shirt, tie and black trousers and looked a bit silly as mostly everyone else was in baggy comfort clothes.
Or exactly what my brother will do who hasn't worked since he was 17 and is now 55: Sign off for 6 months, live on savings that he actually makes from JSA and then sign back on as a new claimant.
So it doesn't matter what the scheme is, he will do exactly the same as he has been doing for 38 years!
Those who are adept at working the system will always find a way to carry on doing so. All these tin-pot schemes do is harm those who are genuine.
Well it was a forced one morning seminar at the jobcentre and the over enthusiastic dragon running it said "I don't care what anyone says, if you are not wearing a suit to every job interview, you are not correctly dressed.". She didn't of course go on to explain who was paying for this suit if you didn't have one.
Last year I went to a "Jobfair" that they arranged and I went in a shirt, tie and black trousers and looked a bit silly as mostly everyone else was in baggy comfort clothes.
Pauline and her pens.
I've yet to see a decent person run a 'job club'. The ones on the Channel 4 show were terrible too.
Excellent idea, the idle will have to contribute to society and it will maybe teach them to get up out of bed in the mornings, once they get used to that instead of doing voluntary work or signing on daily they can get a proper job.
Excellent idea, the idle will have to contribute to society and it will maybe teach them to get up out of bed in the mornings, once they get used to that instead of doing voluntary work or signing on daily they can get a proper job.
You really believe all this BS, when there is a shortage of jobs.
Those who are adept at working the system will always find a way to carry on doing so. All these tin-pot schemes do is harm those who are genuine.
Precisely what I said at the very start of this thread.;-)
I know a man who must be around 55 now. He has never worked since he left school .... Apart from half a day in the 1990s. They were tightening up then :D and were insisting that the shirkers did some work. He came home at lunchtime saying he felt too stressed and he's never worked since. He is fit enough to spend most of his time under cars tinkering with them and also driving around so why isn't he made to work?
I have neighbours in their early twenties who have never worked since they moved here 8 months ago. They both look fit and healthy to me. Still, why should they when the rest of us are paying for their rent, their dogs, their satellite telly, their iPads, their **** and booze etc.
Excellent idea, the idle will have to contribute to society and it will maybe teach them to get up out of bed in the mornings, once they get used to that instead of doing voluntary work or signing on daily they can get a proper job.
Your conflating unemployment with idleness?Why?Theres more people than jobs considerably do the maths.
Theres other ways of contributing to society than economically.This is understood by all.except for the philistine tendency.
Those who are adept at working the system will always find a way to carry on doing so. All these tin-pot schemes do is harm those who are genuine.
Oh yes I fully agree! Others have to suffer whilst my **** of a brother sits back and watches "Homes Under The Hammer".
Any scheme won't get him if it hasn't for 38 years but everyone else will pay the price and give private firms free labour that makes a joke out of the minimum wages.
Why pay minimum wages when you can get people for free!
Or exactly what my brother will do who hasn't worked since he was 17 and is now 55: Sign off for 6 months, live on savings that he actually makes from JSA and then sign back on as a new claimant.
So it doesn't matter what the scheme is, he will do exactly the same as he has been doing for 38 years!
How on earth does he manage to save enough from JSA to live for 6 months?
A genuine question btw. I'm really interested to know what he spends on and what he goes without.
Comments
Plus it will limit the time people are available for interviews
Of course he won't. He's been the commander in chief of this government's war on the needy so he'll likely just see this as another "victory".
Voluntary work for thirty hours plus four hours looking for (possibly non existant) work, but at least your CV won't have a big, empty gap anymore.
What happens after the six months if you haven't found a job?
Signing on daily or back to the weekly / fortnightly sign on until the next six months voluntary work.
Or are the hoping people will take their new found skills and become self employed gardeners or continue doing voluntary work.
Or exactly what my brother will do who hasn't worked since he was 17 and is now 55: Sign off for 6 months, live on savings that he actually makes from JSA and then sign back on as a new claimant.
So it doesn't matter what the scheme is, he will do exactly the same as he has been doing for 38 years!
If you assume the aim is to make the stats look better, the policy makes far more sense.
Ah OK. I think they will have to pay bus fares, as they do when the unemployed attend other schemes. It must cost a lot more to the tax-payer in the long run.
Yes it is just like the policy they had in the 80s to take people off the unemployment statistics and onto Disability related statistics.
It is the idea that the unemployed are punished that pleases them.
As the post by madamfluff shows.
So he wants to make sure other people have it just as bad.
Still, there are political parties standing up for elections within the next couple of years who will satisfy the bloodlust of anyone calling for the abolition of working age benefits.
Years ago whilst unemployed I was!
Well it was a forced one morning seminar at the jobcentre and the over enthusiastic dragon running it said "I don't care what anyone says, if you are not wearing a suit to every job interview, you are not correctly dressed.". She didn't of course go on to explain who was paying for this suit if you didn't have one.
Last year I went to a "Jobfair" that they arranged and I went in a shirt, tie and black trousers and looked a bit silly as mostly everyone else was in baggy comfort clothes.
Pauline and her pens.
I've yet to see a decent person run a 'job club'. The ones on the Channel 4 show were terrible too.
You really believe all this BS, when there is a shortage of jobs.
Precisely what I said at the very start of this thread.;-)
I know a man who must be around 55 now. He has never worked since he left school .... Apart from half a day in the 1990s. They were tightening up then :D and were insisting that the shirkers did some work. He came home at lunchtime saying he felt too stressed and he's never worked since. He is fit enough to spend most of his time under cars tinkering with them and also driving around so why isn't he made to work?
I have neighbours in their early twenties who have never worked since they moved here 8 months ago. They both look fit and healthy to me. Still, why should they when the rest of us are paying for their rent, their dogs, their satellite telly, their iPads, their **** and booze etc.
Your conflating unemployment with idleness?Why?Theres more people than jobs considerably do the maths.
Theres other ways of contributing to society than economically.This is understood by all.except for the philistine tendency.
Oh yes I fully agree! Others have to suffer whilst my **** of a brother sits back and watches "Homes Under The Hammer".
Any scheme won't get him if it hasn't for 38 years but everyone else will pay the price and give private firms free labour that makes a joke out of the minimum wages.
Why pay minimum wages when you can get people for free!
How on earth does he manage to save enough from JSA to live for 6 months?
A genuine question btw. I'm really interested to know what he spends on and what he goes without.
Oh this woman was a complete "Pauline" - The whole lecture delivered AT YOU rather than to you. Condescending, patronising and rude.