As some insight to anyone who genuinely thinks us unemployed folk are deserving of these restrictions and punishments...
I have sent out 2132 CV's since January 3rd this year.
I have completed over 300 online applications (OA).
The average OA takes around an hour...
...my longest OA took over four hours.
I have gotten 745 replies.
I have had 140 positive responses from applications.
36 of these have resulted in interviews.
I have heard back from 19 interviews.
I have had 2 positive responses from interviews.
For reference one of the jobs was just too expensive a commute when they revealed the salary, and the other one led to a second interview that I had no response from.
I have 14 A*-B GCSE's and a set of strong enough A Levels. I have experience in office work and a bit of retail. I've volunteered and have proven myself on a social level too. Just for reference.
If anyone dares suggest I don't earn my £56 a week then I would certainly contest that. I work harder than a lot of people who actually have a job. In fact I would be cheeky enough to suggest I bloody well deserve the £71 a week I'd be getting if I was a few years older - my bills are the same, food costs the same, living costs are the same. Just because I'm younger, it doesn't mean I can automatically rely on the 'bank of Mum and Dad' any more than anyone else...I can't. Nor will I have orders barked at me by some Government toff's who are under the delusion that everyone who is unemployed chooses to put themselves in that compromising position - I won't.
I wouldn't suggest out don't deserve your benefits, but if the above is true then there is either something wrong with you cv /online application writing, your interview technique or you are applying for the wrong jobs.
IDS has just said there will be "Attendance Centres" whatever or wherever they are. Their purpose is to make sure people are doing what they are supposed to be doing. Whatever that is supposed to be, working I thought but maybe I have that bit wrong.
Why not just incarcerate all unemployed and release them when they have secured a job lol
I'll bet those "attendance centres" are run by private companies, in which case it will be exactly like the failed New Deal schemes.
There is a scheme like this in Northern Ireland which is called Steps to Work, the first of which you actually sit down around a table/office for 2 weeks and learn interview skills by an advisor who talks to other people with you.
The upstairs room of this building only had like 10 computers. So how they plan on hundreds of people is beyond me.
As some insight to anyone who genuinely thinks us unemployed folk are deserving of these restrictions and punishments...
I have sent out 2132 CV's since January 3rd this year.
I have completed over 300 online applications (OA).
The average OA takes around an hour...
...my longest OA took over four hours.
I have gotten 745 replies.
I have had 140 positive responses from applications.
36 of these have resulted in interviews.
I have heard back from 19 interviews.
I have had 2 positive responses from interviews.
For reference one of the jobs was just too expensive a commute when they revealed the salary, and the other one led to a second interview that I had no response from.
I have 14 A*-B GCSE's and a set of strong enough A Levels. I have experience in office work and a bit of retail. I've volunteered and have proven myself on a social level too. Just for reference.
If anyone dares suggest I don't earn my £56 a week then I would certainly contest that. I work harder than a lot of people who actually have a job. In fact I would be cheeky enough to suggest I bloody well deserve the £71 a week I'd be getting if I was a few years older - my bills are the same, food costs the same, living costs are the same. Just because I'm younger, it doesn't mean I can automatically rely on the 'bank of Mum and Dad' any more than anyone else...I can't. Nor will I have orders barked at me by some Government toff's who are under the delusion that everyone who is unemployed chooses to put themselves in that compromising position - I won't.
And still do not understand what 'long term' means as its the long term unemployed who will be affected by this
there's one thing idealism. There's another- real world reality.
While I think in a way this does have it's positives- having been someone unemployed in the past- I think it's flawed before it's even begun. Telling a large group of people to be in a jobcentre 35 hours a week with a lack of work- it's crazy.
We had around 100 claimants spread across two rooms. One working computer (became two a couple of weeks later once their IT guys actually fixed a second, but a third one never worked). We had a printer that failed after a couple of weeks, that their IT guys never did fix. In the end one of the claimants brought in a new network cable to get it working. During the 13 weeks we had many different advisers, so you just got to know one and he'd be replaced with another. The building had a lift that was almost constantly out of order, the toilets had broken toilet seats with excrement up the walls (despite the best efforts of the cleaners), you had to ask at reception for a toilet roll if you needed one, and hand the unused bit of roll back to the receptionist, they charged for tea and coffee, they constantly left files opened on desks with sensitive info on them and the filing cabinets were never locked, leading to claimants reading each other's personal info. We were made to sit down every day with the Yellow Pages and write to every employer in a given employment sector. This led to people sending their CV to the same employers every week to meet their quotas. One of my friends owned a small shop in town at the time, and was often inundated with CVs from people on New Deal, and after the first couple of weeks would just bin all the letters without even opening them.
We had guys arrested for violence onsite, arrested for drug offences and arguments etc. were common. We even had one guy carted off by the police (and eventually jailed for a couple of months) for sexually harassing female clients on the course. An adviser who eventually resigned because he was caught shagging a couple of female clients too.
The whole experience was horrific.
I'm not saying the proposed scheme will be as bad of course, but I don't see how resurrecting a scheme the Tories themselves said was a failure is going to be any better.
That sounds very similar to the experience a mate of mine had on the work programme. His was via a company called Juniper Training, wasn't the same one was it?
No doubt they would ask you would get to work if you were offered a job
Add this news to the news that people on working tax credit will also have to go the the jobcentre when universal credit comes in I can see people queuing around the block to get in
It's not just working tax credits.
Universal Credit will also replace child tax credits, housing benefit and others also paid to working people.
And IDS and the government have already stated that yes, many currently employed people will also have to attend such schemes as the Work Programme, sign on, actively seek better pay or more hours (including pestering their employers) to continue to receive such benefits.
The PCS Union has also raised many concerns, given that many DWP and Job Centre staff are part time and so will also be brought into the system they, themselves administer. They are worried that JC staff could themselves face having to be signed on, and possibly even face sanctions from their work colleagues. Staff moral amongst JC staff is already low, and they believe this is going to make things much worse.
That sounds very similar to the experience a mate of mine had on the work programme. His was via a company called Juniper Training, wasn't the same one was it?
No, this was Best, now Interserve Working Futures.
I wouldn't suggest out don't deserve your benefits, but if the above is true then there is either something wrong with you cv /online application writing, your interview technique or you are applying for the wrong jobs.
But I'm not the only person like myself in this position. I have friends who are smarter than me, and friends who are a darn sight more confident than me as well. They've been unemployed for just as long, some of them over a year longer.
It all just boils down to there not being enough jobs... we're among the youngest people in this job shortage. Even if we look the part and are a consideration to an employer, there's always someone a few years older that has that little bit more experience... age brings reassurance. Employers feel safer getting a 'back-to-work' employer, rather than a 'first-time' employer. Even the Government schemes aren't in the favour of the young - the work programme is called a 'back-to-work' scheme even though it's largest age category isn't actually going back, rather than going in for the first time.
A peculiar trend I've seen is that my female friends seem to find jobs easier than my male friends. In some cases, that is startling as some of my male friends finished school so heavily career driven.
I wouldn't suggest out don't deserve your benefits, but if the above is true then there is either something wrong with you cv /online application writing, your interview technique or you are applying for the wrong jobs.
Must be if she has applied for everything she says she has on her post
He, and the jobs might be there, but there's not enough to meet demand. Many of the job searching sites handily tell you how many people are applying for each job - it's not irregular to see job applications getting over 200 responses a time.
And the real kicker is that according to Indeed.com's statistics for 2012, your CV only gets read about 15% of the time...most the time it gets filtered straight into a recycle bin.
This is looking at the problem the wrong way round. There is no point in taking a punitive attitude to unemployed people unless there are jobs - actual jobs, not chugging or commission only or zero hours contracts - available to offer them. Trying to insist that people sit in classrooms doing pointless and poorly funded non-courses just to make sure they are under observation during working hours is DIRE. No one in the world would object to unemployed people being obliged to take proper jobs they are qualified to do, or to doing sensible, properly targeted training courses. There is no useful training course that is likely to take the form of a compulsory classroom full of people of wildly different needs, from graduates to people who sign their name with a cross, being taught on the cheap because the job centre have been ordered to keep them locked in from 9 to 5.
Actually, it is not is looking at the problem the wrong way round, what it is is asking for an opinion of how you would change the above.
The reason why is . I run employment support workshops for people who suffer with mental health . Im backed by 2 charities, and I have a very high success rate.
You say -
"There is no useful training course that is likely to take the form of a compulsory classroom full of people of wildly different needs, from graduates to people who sign their name with a cross"
That is everyone who comes on my workshop ( its not compulsory) but it features a huge mix of different people all with different abilities and qualifications and no qualifications.
" There is no point in taking a punitive attitude to unemployed people unless there are jobs - actual jobs, not chugging or commission only or zero hours contracts - available to offer them"
Why should jobs be supplied for people, what stops people from creating their own opportunities. In my world if you enable someone and re-install their self belief and work with them through their issues enabling them with help and support, they begin to create their opportunities.The economy is different from how it used to be, I teach people to think outside of the box, how can you sell and promote yourself, what do you need to get you to where you want to be.
Indeed 0 contract hours suck and so does chugging
In regards to the person who has been sending out 2100 CV and applications, the 1st thing I would ask is, Ok you have sent out X amount and only had X amount replies and very few interviews. what are you doing wrong to get so little results, how can you change your marketing approach.
The way in which jobs and the economy works now is very different compared to how it used to be there is not the concept of big industry, jobs for life and unions etc. Unfortunately he concept of thinking and moving on in the job world is not taught by the JC, its about creating the opportunities for yourself, networking, promoting yourself, proving yourself, gaining qualifications and experience, pulling in sometimes shit hours in shit roles...and asking yourself what do I need to do to get me to where I want to be, I may move town city or country, I may need to take a 24+ loan etc One thing that lacks from a lot of the training is the concept of teaching responsibility for your own way in life.
But I'm not the only person like myself in this position. I have friends who are smarter than me, and friends who are a darn sight more confident than me as well. They've been unemployed for just as long, some of them over a year longer.
It all just boils down to there not being enough jobs... we're among the youngest people in this job shortage. Even if we look the part and are a consideration to an employer, there's always someone a few years older that has that little bit more experience... age brings reassurance. Employers feel safer getting a 'back-to-work' employer, rather than a 'first-time' employer. Even the Government schemes aren't in the favour of the young - the work programme is called a 'back-to-work' scheme even though it's largest age category isn't actually going back, rather than going in for the first time.
A peculiar trend I've seen is that my female friends seem to find jobs easier than my male friends. In some cases, that is startling as some of my male friends finished school so heavily career driven.
There are enough jobs, you've applied for 2000 of them, 36 interviews. That says me to me that there is an issue with you/your interview etc. I'm not saying it to be mean, but to be truthful.
I live in rural Yorkshire, down the road from hull, one of the most affected areas in the recession. In 2010 I was made redundant, i changed careers and went back to uni. I didn't work for the first few months, giving myself time to settle into the course, then started volunteering. I work in the animal care industry, an unpaid, over saturated market, with very few jobs, particularly in this area. early 2011 I applied for 1 job, got it. I worked there for a year, applied for another job, got that, did another 2 years, applied for a thurs job and yup. Got that. Job 1 I had zero experience so made sure I highlighted my cross over skills, I had to drive 2 hours each way to get to it, as well as finish my degree and raise my kids, job 2, I had more experience but these were different animals, it was a bit nearer, but evening hours. Latest job is nearer still, but lots of travel and weekend work.
None are ideal, although I've enjoyed them all, but all are in an industry where we have endless grads wanting jobs, each one is more suitable to my life style than the last, and this is the issue with many (not directed at you abs) - they expect the perfect job, and it's never there you have to work towards it.
The work is out there, as proven by your tally chart of applications, interview etc. I'd say you need to Rehaul your cv and get some interview techniques revised.
In all my years I've only ever had one reject from interview.
Do people not realize how many people are unemployed in many areas which has not hundreds but THOUSANDS of people. How are they going to manage thousands of people going into a job centre at the same time? UNWORKABLE.
My local job centre is packed to the rafters as it is.
There is no useful training course that is likely to take the form of a compulsory classroom full of people of wildly different needs, from graduates to people who sign their name with a cross, being taught on the cheap because the job centre have been ordered to keep them locked in from 9 to 5.
One can't help wondering how many hours the new system can survive before the first petrol bomb is thrown...
There are enough jobs, you've applied for 2000 of them, 36 interviews. That says me to me that there is an issue with you/your interview etc. I'm not saying it to be mean, but to be truthful.
I live in rural Yorkshire, down the road from hull, one of the most affected areas in the recession. In 2010 I was made redundant, i changed careers and went back to uni. I didn't work for the first few months, giving myself time to settle into the course, then started volunteering. I work in the animal care industry, an unpaid, over saturated market, with very few jobs, particularly in this area. early 2011 I applied for 1 job, got it. I worked there for a year, applied for another job, got that, did another 2 years, applied for a thurs job and yup. Got that. Job 1 I had zero experience so made sure I highlighted my cross over skills, I had to drive 2 hours each way to get to it, as well as finish my degree and raise my kids, job 2, I had more experience but these were different animals, it was a bit nearer, but evening hours. Latest job is nearer still, but lots of travel and weekend work.
None are ideal, although I've enjoyed them all, but all are in an industry where we have endless grads wanting jobs, each one is more suitable to my life style than the last, and this is the issue with many (not directed at you abs) - they expect the perfect job, and it's never there you have to work towards it.
The work is out there, as proven by your tally chart of applications, interview etc. I'd say you need to Rehaul your cv and get some interview techniques revised.
In all my years I've only ever had one reject from interview.
I don't know anyone else who has only had one interview rejection...not these days.
And beyond that, these are the sort of things that the work programme has helped with (despite my general disdain for the scheme, I'll give it credit where it's due) - they've overhauled my CV and I've kept it constantly updated - my advisor gets a new email copy every fortnight, even if its identical to the last. I've sat in countless job interview simulations, as well as the interviews themselves... you usually know if it's going well or going badly. I've always done quite well in them, and if there's a problem I've always been made aware of it. I hope I've worked on them enough.
I don't expect my perfect job at all... I won't even apply for the things I wan't yet. I do my volunteer work regularly, I've gone on a business course and I've had the odd short-term job here and there but getting a full time position, at my age is a tall order for most people in my age category. I'm not even too fussy about where I work...the only place I refuse to work is restaurants due to a lack of confidence in one after a work trial. I'd do retail, admin work, warehouse work, delivery work (not that I can afford to drive at my age)... anything. It's just a case of being that 1 in often 200 people lucky enough to be narrowed down to the chosen person.
Comments
I wouldn't suggest out don't deserve your benefits, but if the above is true then there is either something wrong with you cv /online application writing, your interview technique or you are applying for the wrong jobs.
I'll bet those "attendance centres" are run by private companies, in which case it will be exactly like the failed New Deal schemes.
The upstairs room of this building only had like 10 computers. So how they plan on hundreds of people is beyond me.
And still do not understand what 'long term' means as its the long term unemployed who will be affected by this
While I think in a way this does have it's positives- having been someone unemployed in the past- I think it's flawed before it's even begun. Telling a large group of people to be in a jobcentre 35 hours a week with a lack of work- it's crazy.
That sounds very similar to the experience a mate of mine had on the work programme. His was via a company called Juniper Training, wasn't the same one was it?
It's not just working tax credits.
Universal Credit will also replace child tax credits, housing benefit and others also paid to working people.
And IDS and the government have already stated that yes, many currently employed people will also have to attend such schemes as the Work Programme, sign on, actively seek better pay or more hours (including pestering their employers) to continue to receive such benefits.
The PCS Union has also raised many concerns, given that many DWP and Job Centre staff are part time and so will also be brought into the system they, themselves administer. They are worried that JC staff could themselves face having to be signed on, and possibly even face sanctions from their work colleagues. Staff moral amongst JC staff is already low, and they believe this is going to make things much worse.
No, this was Best, now Interserve Working Futures.
But I'm not the only person like myself in this position. I have friends who are smarter than me, and friends who are a darn sight more confident than me as well. They've been unemployed for just as long, some of them over a year longer.
It all just boils down to there not being enough jobs... we're among the youngest people in this job shortage. Even if we look the part and are a consideration to an employer, there's always someone a few years older that has that little bit more experience... age brings reassurance. Employers feel safer getting a 'back-to-work' employer, rather than a 'first-time' employer. Even the Government schemes aren't in the favour of the young - the work programme is called a 'back-to-work' scheme even though it's largest age category isn't actually going back, rather than going in for the first time.
A peculiar trend I've seen is that my female friends seem to find jobs easier than my male friends. In some cases, that is startling as some of my male friends finished school so heavily career driven.
Or maybe there aren't the jobs there. :eek:
Must be if she has applied for everything she says she has on her post
I always find it funny when people say they applied for 745 jobs and then say there are no jobs out there in the same sentence
He, and the jobs might be there, but there's not enough to meet demand. Many of the job searching sites handily tell you how many people are applying for each job - it's not irregular to see job applications getting over 200 responses a time.
And the real kicker is that according to Indeed.com's statistics for 2012, your CV only gets read about 15% of the time...most the time it gets filtered straight into a recycle bin.
Actually, it is not is looking at the problem the wrong way round, what it is is asking for an opinion of how you would change the above.
The reason why is . I run employment support workshops for people who suffer with mental health . Im backed by 2 charities, and I have a very high success rate.
You say -
"There is no useful training course that is likely to take the form of a compulsory classroom full of people of wildly different needs, from graduates to people who sign their name with a cross"
That is everyone who comes on my workshop ( its not compulsory) but it features a huge mix of different people all with different abilities and qualifications and no qualifications.
" There is no point in taking a punitive attitude to unemployed people unless there are jobs - actual jobs, not chugging or commission only or zero hours contracts - available to offer them"
Why should jobs be supplied for people, what stops people from creating their own opportunities. In my world if you enable someone and re-install their self belief and work with them through their issues enabling them with help and support, they begin to create their opportunities.The economy is different from how it used to be, I teach people to think outside of the box, how can you sell and promote yourself, what do you need to get you to where you want to be.
Indeed 0 contract hours suck and so does chugging
In regards to the person who has been sending out 2100 CV and applications, the 1st thing I would ask is, Ok you have sent out X amount and only had X amount replies and very few interviews. what are you doing wrong to get so little results, how can you change your marketing approach.
The way in which jobs and the economy works now is very different compared to how it used to be there is not the concept of big industry, jobs for life and unions etc. Unfortunately he concept of thinking and moving on in the job world is not taught by the JC, its about creating the opportunities for yourself, networking, promoting yourself, proving yourself, gaining qualifications and experience, pulling in sometimes shit hours in shit roles...and asking yourself what do I need to do to get me to where I want to be, I may move town city or country, I may need to take a 24+ loan etc One thing that lacks from a lot of the training is the concept of teaching responsibility for your own way in life.
enjoy playing this instead
There are enough jobs, you've applied for 2000 of them, 36 interviews. That says me to me that there is an issue with you/your interview etc. I'm not saying it to be mean, but to be truthful.
I live in rural Yorkshire, down the road from hull, one of the most affected areas in the recession. In 2010 I was made redundant, i changed careers and went back to uni. I didn't work for the first few months, giving myself time to settle into the course, then started volunteering. I work in the animal care industry, an unpaid, over saturated market, with very few jobs, particularly in this area. early 2011 I applied for 1 job, got it. I worked there for a year, applied for another job, got that, did another 2 years, applied for a thurs job and yup. Got that. Job 1 I had zero experience so made sure I highlighted my cross over skills, I had to drive 2 hours each way to get to it, as well as finish my degree and raise my kids, job 2, I had more experience but these were different animals, it was a bit nearer, but evening hours. Latest job is nearer still, but lots of travel and weekend work.
None are ideal, although I've enjoyed them all, but all are in an industry where we have endless grads wanting jobs, each one is more suitable to my life style than the last, and this is the issue with many (not directed at you abs) - they expect the perfect job, and it's never there you have to work towards it.
The work is out there, as proven by your tally chart of applications, interview etc. I'd say you need to Rehaul your cv and get some interview techniques revised.
In all my years I've only ever had one reject from interview.
Thanks for that. I am now ready to start work.
One can't help wondering how many hours the new system can survive before the first petrol bomb is thrown...
I don't know anyone else who has only had one interview rejection...not these days.
And beyond that, these are the sort of things that the work programme has helped with (despite my general disdain for the scheme, I'll give it credit where it's due) - they've overhauled my CV and I've kept it constantly updated - my advisor gets a new email copy every fortnight, even if its identical to the last. I've sat in countless job interview simulations, as well as the interviews themselves... you usually know if it's going well or going badly. I've always done quite well in them, and if there's a problem I've always been made aware of it. I hope I've worked on them enough.
I don't expect my perfect job at all... I won't even apply for the things I wan't yet. I do my volunteer work regularly, I've gone on a business course and I've had the odd short-term job here and there but getting a full time position, at my age is a tall order for most people in my age category. I'm not even too fussy about where I work...the only place I refuse to work is restaurants due to a lack of confidence in one after a work trial. I'd do retail, admin work, warehouse work, delivery work (not that I can afford to drive at my age)... anything. It's just a case of being that 1 in often 200 people lucky enough to be narrowed down to the chosen person.
When the hell would they be able to look for work?
This is a stupid, counter productive idea that has no basis in common sense.