May 12, 2011

Hardest Hit Protests.

Filed under: Employment and Support Allowance, Incapacity Benefit — Tags: ATOS, Hardest Hit — Andrew Coates @ 4:07 pm

There have been magnificent protests, notably in London, against the cuts and the way new rules will affect disabled people.

The Employment and Support Allowance, combined with harsh reductions in local help for the disabled, are particularly controversial. As is the role of ATOS in drawing up assessments of people’s capacity to work.

One individual, claiming to be a doctor in ATOS employment, has posted on this site protesting against our ‘ Communist ‘criticism of the mutinational.

He then went on to say, after defending his actions and belief that most, if not all, disabled are skiving,

This extends to all Activities in Daily Living (ADLs). For example, I (deliberately) booked an assessment with a claimant purportedly suffering from “depression” first thing on Monday morning. Now anyone, let alone someone with “depression” would find it burdensome to attend such an appointment. This lady who has NEVER worked and has been claiming benefits for “depression” since she left school turned up in the most presentable fashion; very well made-up, immaculately dressed, clean clothes, excellent personal hygiene, it would have been easy to mistake her for a job interviewee. A million miles away from the dishevelled smelling of body odour “depressive” that I was expecting. And before anyone says it, I know that “depressives” can have on and off days but this in itself passes the SOME work test. I failed this young lady and passed her papers to the DWP Decision Maker. Bear in mind also, that those who fail this assessment are only being moved to a lower rate Jobseeker’s Allowance, not excluded from the benefit system altogether.

I have to add that I have yet to assess anyone who was not capable of at least SOME work.

Perhaps the good doctor thinks depressed people are trying to do a Blackadder “wibble”.

Louise has some more serious thoughts here.

With the well-qualified medical assessor of how young women dress and smell in charge of ‘assessments’, it’s not surprising that people are angry. The Hardest Hit campaign has spread far.

Cambridge.

Protesters occupy healthcare building

Suzan Uzel

Protesters outside Atos Healthcare

Protesters last night occupied a city-based office building that is home to Atos Healthcare, claiming the firm is “victimising” those with specific needs.

Banners were strung from the roof of the building and dozens of campaigners entered the office building in Hills Road, Cambridge, pledging to stay overnight.

The office was chosen because Atos won a recent Government contract to reassess incapacity benefit claimants and the demonstration was part of UK-wide action.

Employment Minister Chris Grayling previously said there was “clear evidence” of need for change in the welfare system.

Tom Woodcock, secretary of the Cambridge and District Trades Union Council, who was at the city protest, said the building housing Atos had been occupied when he left at 5.30pm, but not the Atos offices.

Mr Woodcock said: “People are inside and there are posters all over the windows and banners hanging from the roof. I support what they are doing 100 per cent.”

Representatives from campaigning group Cambridge Defend Education were also involved in the protest.

A spokesman said last night: “The Cambridge activists have occupied the building and roof, and plan to stay the night.”

Mr Woodcock said: “The Government is attempting to decimate the social security offered to thousands of people with physical and mental health issues.

“Worse still they are allowing a private firm to profit from the process. In reality the reassessment of incapacity benefits will not increase the number of people in work but force some of the most vulnerable people into a more precarious existence.”

He added: “Atos claim they are occupation health specialists but rather than holding employers to account they are victimising and disenfranchising individuals with specific needs.”

A police helicopter was flying over Hills Road to monitor the protest. Atos was unavailable for comment last night.

From Here.

Those wanting to find out more about ATOS, or indeed tell them what they think of them, can visit their Web site here.

Anyone wanting to work for ATOS can find information on employment here.

Comments (21)

May 8, 2011

Jobcentre Plus Targets To Impose Sanctions On Claimants

Filed under: DWP — Tags: benchmark levels, district manager, Jobcentre Plus senior management, libel lies contradicting claims, Our welfare system should be a clear two-way contract. We will do everything we can to help people find work but equally we expect customers to be doing everything they can to find work as well., sanction targets — Work Programme @ 9:29 am

Ipswich Unemployed Action would like to publish the following Freedom of Information Act request:-

Dear Department for Work and Pensions,

The Guardian newspaper recently uncovered that Jobcentre Plus employees were tricking vulnerable claimants into losing welfare entitlements. A whistleblower said staff at his jobcentre were given targets of three people a week to refer for sanctions, where benefits are removed for up to six months.

The work and pensions secretary, Iain Duncan Smith, initially claimed it was “claptrap” that anyone would “hand out edicts to staff to sanction three people”, and said the story was a “conspiracy”.

Since then, further email evidence has been uncovered showing individual or group targets are being imposed to stop people’s benefits at offices across the country. In some cases staff have claimed they have been threatened with sanctions themselves if they do not reach the targets. http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/…

I would like to know the number of claimants that Jobcentre Plus offices have imposed sanction referrals on in order to meet these targets and whether the DWP consider that these peoples Human Rights have been infringed upon.

Yours faithfully,

Mr Taylor

Which got the following response: (we have removed a part regarding an information tool… use the above link to read it)

Dear Mr Taylor

Thank you for your Freedom of Information request of 14 April 2011

You requested the following information:

“… the number of claimants that Jobcentre Plus offices have imposed sanction referrals on in order to meet these targets and whether the DWP consider that these
peoples Human Rights have been infringed upon.”

From 2006 until the end of March 2011, Jobcentre Plus had benchmark levels for referrals for sanctions. These were not targets nor have we ever had targets for sanctions – there is no right or wrong level of referrals, we deal with every case fairly, on its own merits. The purpose of the benchmarks was to allow District Managers to compare their own performance against that in other Districts. If their referral rate was widely different from the benchmark, this was a signal for management to assure themselves that the referrals regime in their District was being applied fairly and consistently. Referrals for sanctions are all subject to independent decision-making, reconsideration and a formal appeal process.

Towards the end of performance year 2010/11, it became apparent that in a limited number of cases individual Advisers had been given targets for referrals, due to a misunderstanding/communication breakdown. This practice was not supported or advocated by Jobcentre Plus senior management and Ministers have made it clear personally that this is not appropriate. Managers have been reminded that this should not happen and they have all given assurances that the practice has been discontinued in the sites where it has taken place.

From April – the start of the 2011/12 performance year – there have been no benchmarks or targets for rates of referral for sanctions. It is up to individual Advisers to make judgements about whether a sanction is appropriate. Our welfare system should be a clear two-way contract. We will do everything we can to help people find work but equally we expect customers to be doing everything they can to find work as well. The sanctions regime is only to be used when people are failing to live up to their responsibilities and will be applied with discretion and commonsense.

Section 21 of the Act allows us to direct you to information which is already reasonably accessible to you.

The Department publishes a wide range of statistics on benefit claimants and sanctions both in its regular Statistical Summaries and through the Tabulation Tool which allows you to design your own tables. [The remainder has been removed see the first link on the page for more info]

If you have any queries about this letter please contact me quoting the reference number above.

Yours sincerely,

DWP Central FoI Team

Analysis

So DWP is trying to deny that Jobcentre Plus has never had “targets“. A “benchmark level” is a fancy word for target. A benchmark is “a standard by which something can be measured or judged” so doesn’t directly imply it has a target. A benchmark level isn’t a target directly, but indirectly policy to meet such benchmark level is a target to be set to meet the minimum standard.

This is a clever trick. I am sure nationally there is no:

direct target for a financial level of sanctions (i.e. say £50,000 a year)
direct target for the number of successful sanctions

But there is policy enforcing the “benchmark level” which is a target to meet the “benchmark level” of referrals (yes not the number of applied sanctions but that of the attempts).

Anyway, to keep this short:-

Benchmark targets were to compare “performance” between districts (although different Jobcentre Plus offices were reported to have their own targets and indeed different teams within a single Jobcentre Plus office – if you aren’t too sure, notice the different colour highlighter pen on your ES40Jp signing on booklet compared to anyone elses)
“There is no right or wrong level of referrals, [Jobcentre Plus] deal with every case fairly, on its own merits. ” although they later claim “Referrals for sanctions are all subject to independent decision-making” (for Jobcentre Plus to determine referrals (regardless of the likeihood that a referral is successful) which are done in house as “independent decision-making” whilst under targets is a severe joke)
It gets worse… “These were not targets nor have we ever had targets for sanctions” although sanction targets operating within 4 years…”it became apparent that in a limited number of cases individual Advisers had been given targets for referrals“, so maybe not a nationwide Jobcentre Plus practice looking strictly from evidence from whistleblowers but it should be “some Jobcentre Plus offices had targets” at least. This was blamed “due to a misunderstanding/communication breakdown” that lasted half a decade: f**k the communication must have been bad!!
It gets funny… “This practice was not supported or advocated by Jobcentre Plus senior management“… are District Managers really not senior management?! I know from a “word-of-mouth” level that any Jobcentre Plus staff who are a supervisor level or above is known informally as a “senior member of staff” or “senior staff member” but regardless of that, District Managers must be a senior member of management. Can anyone confirm if they are?
“Managers have been reminded that this should not happen“… I want to work for Jobcentre Plus! Everywhere else its threats of dismissal, civil action or police involvement but at Jobcentre Plus courtesy of hard-working law-abiding taxpaying citizens, managers are advised that is “should not happen” rather than “must not happen.
“Referrals for sanctions are all subject to independent decision-making, reconsideration and a formal appeal process.“… This isn’t the point, sanction referrals cannot be justified as the claimant has the right to appeal. What if s/he fails to appeal? S/he loses their money! Sanctions are automatic (to reach targets) so a decision maker rarely has the opportunity to deny silly sanction doubts.
Gets funnier: “ Our welfare system should be a clear two-way contract. We will do everything we can to help people find work but equally we expect customers to be doing everything they can to find work as well.” Remember to quote this!!!

Comments (17)

May 3, 2011

ATOS ‘at Work’, 3 Claimants Die.

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed, Cuts, Employment and Support Allowance, Incapacity Benefit — Tags: ATOS — Andrew Coates @ 11:27 am

Janine has just pointed to this on Facebook,

THE deaths of two people who were waiting for appeals to be heard against the loss of benefits has prompted calls for a fairer assessment system.

The two claimants, both from West Dunbartonshire, died from the conditions which caused them to claim Incapacity Benefit (IB) while waiting for appeals to be heard against cuts to their benefits.

One was deemed fit for work during a work capability assessment, despite having a deteriorating chronic illness, and lost both incapacity benefit and disability living allowance.

When his support worker appeared at the appeal tribunal she had to report her client could not be there because he was dead. The appeal was upheld and the backpayment will become part of his estate.

The other had a congenital condition which caused difficulty in walking but was assessed capable of work and his incapacity benefit was withdrawn. He was waiting for a date for an appeal tribunal when he died.

The assessment was inadequate and very unprofessional. The doctor simply did not have the information

A third person, again from West Dunbartonshire, died recently after winning a second appeal tribunal following three years of repeated assessments and decisions being overturned.

He worked as a shop assistant in his 20s but was forced to give up due to severe heart and lung problems caused by a degenerative syndrome. (more…)

Comments (25)

April 27, 2011

The Broadest Shoulders.

Filed under: Cuts, Government, Incapacity Benefit — Andrew Coates @ 8:23 am

“From Camcorder Guerillas.

“It’s fair that those with broader shoulders should bear a greater load”

(David Cameron, justifying the cuts, Conservative party conference 6 Oct 2010)

In October 2010 the coalition Government announced public sector cuts of £81 billion, including £18 billion cuts to benefits. Whilst the rich avoid £120 billion of taxes and bankers continue to award themselves huge bonuses, “disabled people are facing the biggest attack on their rights since the 1930s”.

Comments (22)

April 20, 2011

Jobseekers tricked into being eligible for Mandatory Work Activity

Filed under: Unemployment — Tags: Mandatory Work Activity — Work Programme @ 11:15 am

If you are issued an code LFW1 “Looking for work” form – it might be in your best interests to avoid filling it in and refuse into surrendering it for their use and abuse.

Work Programme Network has formulated a potential 8 categories of circumstances that will form someones eligibility (or chance of eligibility) onto the Mandatory Work Activity scheme. Six are as proposed by DWP, one is of claimants deemed not to be meeting the jobseeking conditions (due to this being granted as how Jobcentre Plus advisers will judge eligibility although strangely enough neither of the six proposed conditions are consisting of that) and the final one category is basically “none of the above”: even if its rare, due to the eligibility being discretion based there will be advisers over the 4 years referring someone due to dislike over other criteria.

Just to recap what this “questionnaire” (that isn’t anonymous) is for:

Checking you are adhering to your Jobseekers Agreement
Checking if you are Actively Seeking Employment
Checking if you are Available for Work
Checking if you are eligible by your own admission into the Mandatory Work Activity scheme
Checking if you have applied for jobs (that were not Jobseeker Directions) for any employer names you specify on such form
Checking if you have registered for recruitment agencies and jobsearch websites
Tricking the claimant into stating they are not ready for work by means of misleading questions

This can result in:

Eligibility to the Mandatory Work Activity scheme, and/or
Sanction doubts deemed to be from not meeting the “jobseeking conditions” – up to 6 month benefit sanctions; or
Claim closed

This form (although implied) isn’t mandatory, however, if you allow the Jobcentre Plus to trip you up; this form although not signed will be used against you. If you aren’t looking for work I hope you lose your benefits but its not fair for the rest of us jobseekers to be tricked into benefit sanctions.

In regards to this LFW1 form being posted or randomly handed in… the fact that its not signed means it cannot legally be attributed to you, however when you are at an signing on appointment which you are legally obligated to declare any work or change of circumstances, it will be claimed an implied contract of the disclosure of such content was made.

This is why it asks for jobseekers to submit such at the beginning of the “discussion” this is so your signature when you sign on makes such questionnaire attributed to you. Perhaps they will get you to sign to say you have handed it over.

In some cases you might be asked to complete such questionnaire during such appointment – you must refuse.

It is absolutely useless as an anonymous questionnaire, so arguing for your name to be removed and filling in another without such information, will only result in the adviser sticking those details in at a later date.

My suggestions are:

If we all refuse it, it becomes less likely that we will be placed on the Mandatory Work Activity scheme as default due to refusal to complete it (initially there is only a set number of placements)
There is no law requiring anyone to complete the questionnaire
Avoid being tricked into benefit sanctions
Let the adviser know you are looking for work (as you have been asked to prove every 2 weeks)
Let the adviser know the types of jobs you looking for etc. are located on the Jobseekers Agreement

Comments (24)

April 18, 2011

Jobcentre Call Centre Workers Strike.

Filed under: DWP, Unemployment, Welfare State — Tags: DWP, Strike — Andrew Coates @ 9:42 am

Speaking ahead of Monday’s strike by 7,000 staff in Jobcentre Plus’s 37 call centres, PCS general secretary Mark Serwotka says work and pensions secretary Iain Duncan Smith should withdraw his “thoroughly disgraceful” description of the action as “Neanderthal-like” and apologise.

Mark Serwotka added: “He’s talking about some of the lowest paid in the civil service who are being forced to take action to improve the service they provide to some of the most vulnerable people in society, in the face of unacceptable working conditions and an obsession with computer driven targets.

“The truth is, staff are monitored every minute of the day. The computer dictates start and finish times and tells them when to go for a break, with staff hauled up if they are 40 seconds late back or go over the time allowed for a call. Toilet breaks are monitored and constantly questioned.

“These call centres are a vital lifeline for members of the public when they need to claim benefits, when they’re sick or disabled or need help getting back into work. Enquiries are often complicated and many callers are understandably desperate and upset – some of them have no one else to turn to.

“Our members are not numbers, and neither are the unemployed, and they want to help people, but often they’re encouraged to just get the caller off the phone as quickly as possible and this can not be right.”

Here.

Thousands of Jobcentre staff are going on strike in a row over working conditions and management targets.

Members of the Public and Commercial Services union (PCS) in 37 call centres are staging a 24-hour walk-out on Monday.

They have accused management of showing “little willingness” to try to resolve the dispute.

More Here.

Many of us will have problems with the Call Centres.

This strike shows that the staff and claimants have the same interests in fighting for a better service.

Comments (17)

April 16, 2011

Mandatory Work Activity: extended sanction abuses

Filed under: DWP — Tags: Mandatory Work Activity, Mandatory Work Activity Scheme — Work Programme @ 10:58 am

By now we have all heard about the series of articles in The Guardian about benefit sanction targets. The upcoming 4 week compulsory employment programme called the Mandatory Work Activity scheme is an extension to sanction powers of Jobcentre Plus Employment Officers. Ipswich Unemployed Action has already spoke about the Mandatory Work Activity scheme.

Not that Jobcentre Plus ever thought this underhand practice would be exposed: they created the Mandatory Work Activity scheme to make further “savings” to the “public purse”. This could now be forced to be prematurely scrapped as I explain to you what the Mandatory Work Activity is really about.

No surprises that it is really to screw you jobseekers over (including the new JSA claimants forced over from disability benefits).

Unlawful Sanctions describes it as “bribes for benefit savings”. DWP set up a tender with a unit cost benchmark of £800 per person – successful providers are those who get the cheapest cost per head. This is done by a contract value organised by how many starts (i.e. total value / starts = unit costs). Providers specify how many people they are willing to take as they calculate how much minimum they require. This payment is paid upfront regardless of a start or not.

When the Work Programme Network announced the “workfare providers” they branded this the “sham scheme”. It is of no coincidence how everything is so conveniently perfect for this (well almost, the Work Programme Network has already found a loophole in the law which will be published in May 2011).

The three main elements:

Eligibility solely on Jobcentre Plus adviser/Employment Officer discretion at any time in the claim
Sanctions raised from 2 weeks to 13 weeks for the first offence and appeal timescales are just 5 days
There is nothing stopping someone being repeatedly placed on Mandatory Work Activity (other than being on another employment programme such as the Work Programme)

This is undeniable proof of the intention of increasing benefit sanctions:-

The Merits of Statutory Instruments Committee thinks that due to the high proportion of Jobcentre Plus adviser sanction doubts overturned by Appeal Tribunals that adviser discretion should be limited not increased. (Of course the alternative option means such benefit sanction targets would have to be more open, perhaps written into regulations – this opens the scheme to too much scrutiny)
DWP have once again refused to set in stone what the “placements” should contain. They have been kept sketchy for some reason despite thousands of complaints on New Deal, Flexible New Deal and Community Task Force. (Of course they cannot state how meaningless it will be)
They favoured this over the Work for Your Benefit pilot scheme so they can evaluate such after the 4 years it runs for, instead of after the first year of a pilot scheme. (If they made it a pilot scheme it would be pulled)
The Merits of Statutory Instruments Committee asked if it would be possible for someone to be referred for the third or fourth time, with the answer of “yes” although they made assurance of it being unlikely. This means such person would have had at least 6 month of benefit sanctions at that point. They also asked for guidance of the scheme where none was provided claiming it wasn’t finalised.

So adding up the pieces… it is the providers who are to be deciding how many workfare placements there are in the first year. DWP set an initial budget of some £8m for 10,000 placements at £800 each. We anticipate the bids under half so the initial budget will create approx 20,000 placements – but I suspect the budget to be increased when benefit savings are made.

How are referrals made? Whether Employment Officers are set targets like their benefit sanction targets of how many people to refer on to Mandatory Work Activity by Jobcentre Plus working out the number of placements or whether they will refer on the fly finding whether or not a place if available, is unknown. The latter sounds too disorganised, creating concerns of targets of referrals and therefore benefit sanctions

What are the payment terms? Providers are paid per referral not taking account of whether they do 4 weeks, leave half way through or not start. Seems a big waste of money, of course it is not if it is a bribe for a benefit sanction.

Can vexatious or malicious referrals occur? Indeed they can – and will. Numerous referrals too.

Why can you not understand it is a work placement not a sanction scam? Well… if a sanction of 13 weeks is caused; such claimant who is deemed necessary to have such experience of work discipline is not asked to do “balance of time” and the provider keeps the full amount for the 4 weeks without any further service delivery to that person. However, second (etc.) sanctions are 26 weeks if within a year of the first sanction of 13 weeks. For a latter sanction to take place the person would have to be referred back to the scheme (i.e. after 3 months). If the need for that person to be referred to such scheme to meet such objectives is so significant then “balance of time” should be as mandatory as the scheme itself, especially that such claimant may receive hardship payments and the taxpayer should be getting value for money with such payment spread out over the 4 weeks paid on attendance.

Some interesting quotes….

4.5.2 Sanction periods

If a customer is deemed to have acted in a way that could give rise to a benefit sanction as defined in 4.5.1, a referral to a Decision Maker would be made for a decision as to whether or not a sanction should be applied to the customer’s Jobseeker’s Allowance.

Sanctions will increase in length for second or subsequent breaches.

The sanctions will be of the following duration:

(a) thirteen weeks removal of Jobseeker’s Allowance for a first act or omission;

(b) twenty-six weeks removal for a second transgression leading to a failure determination which is made within 12 months of the first Mandatory Work Activity sanction starting to run.

and

4.9 Requirement to complete Mandatory Work Activity

Once a customer has been sanctioned for actions relating to Mandatory Work Activity, they will not be required to complete the balance of four weeks on the placement.
The scheme has been designed in this way to reinforce to customers that they should take the opportunity to participate in Mandatory Work Activity seriously, and cannot disengage and re-engage as it suits them.

To get a 26 week sanction its clear that such person must be referred back in 3 months time after the first sanction has ended.

Comments (24)

April 12, 2011

Whistleblower: unemployed people are being tricked into breaching the rules.

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed, jobseekers allowance, Liberal Tory Coalition, Unemployment — Tags: DWP — Andrew Coates @ 2:01 pm

Work Programme has already noted this.

The Guardian story continues to make waves,

The Guardian has been told that unemployed people are being tricked into breaching the rules so that benefits can be held back Link to this videoRising numbers of vulnerable jobseekers are being tricked into losing benefits amid growing pressure to meet welfare targets, a Jobcentre Plus adviser has told the Guardian.

More Here.

This letter today is interesting: (Here)

I worked as a fraud investigator for Jobcentre Plus until last summer when I resigned over the micro-management culture setting virtually unachieveable targets aimed at specific offences. All investigators are encouraged – nay, threatened – to only investigate allegations of fraud by lone parents with undeclared partners allegedly living with them. Far more potentially serious cases of undeclared work or fake disability are pushed to one side, as managers exhort their teams to look into these types of investigations. This often results in investigators resorting to underhand tactics to “persuade” lone parents that they had or have a partner living with them. The early morning visit at the weekend that catches a benefit claimant with a boyfriend staying over for instance: job done and another tick in the box towards this

Comments (1)

April 3, 2011

Conservatives keep Work for Your Benefit scheme dormant

Filed under: Flexible New Deal, Welfare Reform, Workfare — Tags: Flexible New Deal, Mandatory Work Activity Scheme, Work for Your Benefit, Work programme — Work Programme @ 10:16 am

Our sister site Work Programme Network reported some time ago how the Work for Your Benefit Regulations are still active although the pilots have been scrapped, but we can reveal that the Government is aiming to address this legislation. However, it isn’t all as positive as we would hope.

The Conservatives are creating a new employment scheme called the “Mandatory Work Activity Scheme” which basically is the Mandatory Work Related Activity period from Flexible New Deal renamed, however, it is stand alone and although it may (although unlikely) be part of the upcoming Work Programme – it is designed so Jobseeker Allowance (JSA) claimants can be placed onto the mandatory scheme after being given notice – which in theory could be from day 1.

The Jobseeker’s Allowance (Mandatory Work Activity Scheme) Regulations 2011 made on the 9th March 2011 and laid before Parliament on the 14th March 2011, will come in to force from the 25th April 2011. (more…)

Comments (32)

March 29, 2011

Fortnum and Mason’s

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed — Andrew Coates @ 11:46 am

My sister worked as a ‘Lift Girl’ for this charming joint.

Despite my cold I feel it’s worth posting this:

Comments (21)

May 12, 2009

Coming Flexible New Deal Providers for Ispwich.

Filed under: Ipswich, Unemployment, Workfare — Tags: New Deal for the Unemployed — Andrew Coates @ 12:12 pm

Information (from 2006 but we doubt it’s dated) here.

Leave a Comment

May 13, 2009

James Purnell: Expenses Diddler To Be New PM?

Filed under: Government, Unemployment — Tags: James Purnell — Andrew Coates @ 9:24 am

BERJAYA

Purnell with Close Friends.

The unemployed may be interested to hear that there is a rumour (here) going round. That James Purnell, Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, the man who brought us the Flexible New Deal, could stand as a joint Leader of the Labour Party with John Cruddas.

James Purnell, keen to keep the workless on the minimum of around £64 a week, has also been doing very nicely from the MPs expenses racket.

We learn that he received over the last years £143, 955 (on top of his annual salary of £142,000). Including £9,054 for groceries! The Daily Telegraph reports that the former Banking Genius managed to wheedle a substantial sum to pay for a flat that his girlfriend also forked out for. James now stands accused of being a fraudster.

We are sure the unemployed, especially those on the New Deal, sympathise with his plight.

Comments (4)

May 15, 2009

HOW TO: Jobcentre Plus Programme Provisions

Filed under: DWP, Ipswich, Suffolk, YMCA — Work Programme @ 10:01 am

So you are unemployed and fed up of attending the detention centre that is Dencora House and wondering how hard is it to run the New Deal course? YMCA has acknowledged that the New Deal contracts are the most complex they have ever seen. Below I will quote some of the New Deal course requirements and you can compare between the guidelines and the actual delivery by YMCA Training into whether they are even following the contract. (more…)

Leave a Comment

Real Benefit Levels.

Filed under: Unemployment — Andrew Coates @ 9:39 am

There’s a letter in the papers (Guardian) today that’s worth reading:

The inadequacy of the £64.30 weekly jobseeker’s allowance (£50.95 for the under-25s), noted by Paul Nicolson (Letters, 11 May) is a modern phenomenon. When unemployment benefit started in 1912 it was 7 shillings a week – about 22% of average male earnings in manufacturing. The percentage fluctuated over the succeeding decades, but by 1979 the benefit rate was still about 21% of average earnings (manual and non-manual, male and female). By 2008, however, as a result of the policy of tying benefits to the price index while real earnings increased, the renamed jobseeker’s allowance had fallen to an all-time low of 10.5% of average earnings. And while, in the past, means-tested allowances raised unemployed income to a higher minimum level, the jobseeker’s allowance rates are now the same, whether means-tested or not.

Of course, average earnings have grown but so has the relative deprivation of the unemployed. This is not a policy justified by the need to maintain work incentives. It is just a dreadful record of neglect by governments since 1979.
Jonathan Bradshaw
University of York
Tony Lynes
London

As Dan from this Blog has pointed out, if you’re under 25 you don’t have by any means less cash needs.

Comments (7)

May 17, 2009

Birmingham March for Jobs.

Filed under: Unemployment — Andrew Coates @ 9:11 am

Sky Report.

Workers are fighting to keep plants open until the economy recovers.

The demonstration in Birmingham was to urge the Government

Workers are fighting to keep plants open until the economy recovers

The demonstration in Birmingham was to urge the Government to “wake up” and take action to halt the unemployment crisis gripping the UK.

It is part of a campaign by Unite to press ministers to do more to help manufacturers ride out the recession and hold back the tide of job losses which has hit British industry in recent months.

More than 7,000 people took part including workers from firms hit by the recession, such as steel giant Corus and car companies Vauxhall and Jaguar Land Rover.

Tony Woodley, joint leader of Unite told Sky News: “It’s no good just bailing out the banks and the spivs and the speculators who caused this global crisis.

“It’s got to be about the workerss and protecting our jobs and making sure our kids have jobs in the future so we don’t needlessly force people onto the dole.”

We should be marching for the rights of us on the Dole!

Leave a Comment

May 18, 2009

Jobcentre Plus illegal dismissals and sanctions

Filed under: DWP, Government, Unemployment — Tags: benefit sanctions, gateway 2 work, New Deal — Work Programme @ 11:33 am

I have found a website that claims that the sanction and dismissals made through Jobcentre Plus by training providers awarded a contract by the Department of Work and Pensions are illegal. If correct, this is a major concern. This website specifically mentions about the Gateway 2 Work provision even though I presume it is the same with the main 13 week New Deal courses. New Deal participants may be extremely interested in reading this… (more…)

Comments (6)

May 20, 2009

Pertemps Receive £2.25 Million and Breach New Deal Contract

Filed under: DWP, Government, Unemployment — Tags: Pertemps — Work Programme @ 9:26 am

I am aware of some unknown until now New Deal training provider called Pertemps People Development Group that has received £2,259,282 even though they significantly breached their contract. This just goes to show that the Government consisting of greedy MP’s who recently have been exposed in the MP expenses scandal like to waste taxpayers’ money beyond what they can personally claim for (more…)

Comments (4)

May 21, 2009

Jobcentre Plus not exempt from Human Rights Act 1998

Filed under: DWP, Government, Unemployment — Tags: BET, DWP, Flexible New Deal, FTET, Human Rights, Jobcentre, Jobcentre Plus, New Deal, VS, VSO — Work Programme @ 9:19 am

Bad treatment of participants on New Deal courses are not exempt under the Human Rights Act 1998. (more…)

Comments (11)

May 22, 2009

Companies get £2500 to employ Jobseekers

Filed under: DWP, Government — Tags: discrimination, employment, grant, recruitment — Work Programme @ 8:15 am

The Government has announced a scheme that will give businesses of any size up to a £2,500 grant to employ unemployed persons who have been claiming Jobseekers Allowance for over 6 months. This will relieve the businesses in the current economic climate and give Jobseekers a break – in fact it is a better idea then New Deal full stop. (more…)

Comments (6)

YMCA Training: Dencora House Detention Centre

Filed under: DWP, Government, Ipswich, Suffolk, Unemployment, YMCA — Tags: David Cameron, dencora house, detention centre, Ipswich, jobseekers allowance, New Deal, Unemployed, ymca training — Work Programme @ 8:18 am

BERJAYA

If you have been on this website for more than 10 seconds you will read Dencora House, Dencora House, Dencora House! You may be thinking “What’s this Dencora House you talk of?“ Well it is a “training centre” operated by a faith charity called YMCA Training who happily receives £20 million from the Government every year - and this article sets out the reasons why we go on about Dencora House so much! Well worth the read… (more…)

Comments (15)

Purnell Tries Stout Denial of Tax Avoidance.

Filed under: DWP, Government — Tags: James Purnell, MPs Expenses — Andrew Coates @ 9:01 am

BERJAYA

Purnell’s Bedside Book.

Ipswich Unemployed Action’s fav’ Government Minister, James Purnell, takes ‘”stout denial” as the best policy faced with his latest scandal over capital-gains tax avoidance. The Daily Telegraph has reported alleged misdemeanours of the Workfare Wonder. But he has received the ‘support’ of Gordon Brown, said to be PM, for his brave attempt to face the accusations out.

We suggest that Purnell submits to the same procedures enforced on New Deal participants: he should be ‘exited’ from the Government and his pay suspended. He will then be open to re-sign on at the House of Commons.

Comments (1)

May 24, 2009

Welfare ‘Reforms’ Under Attack.

Filed under: Flexible New Deal, Unemployment, Workfare — Andrew Coates @ 9:13 am

Report from PCS (union for staff in Department of Work and Pensions) here. Staff could be reminded of the Union’s position…

This, from the Morning Star, is the only media coverage I can find.

Purnell’s forced workfare plans slammed at PCS conference

Civil servants vowed on Friday to fight the government’s latest plans for reform – or privatisation – of welfare benefits.

The Civil Service union PCS conference voted to reinforce the union’s campaign against the welfare reform agenda and the privatisation of social security services.

Delegates were already angry at Work and Pensions Minister James Purnell (far right) over plans to privatise jobcentres and to force benefit claimants into “workfare,” which are contained in the government’s latest Welfare Reform Bill, before revelations that he had dodged paying capital gains tax on the sale of his second home added insult to injury.

Dorset delegate Mandy Preece, who works in Mr Purnell’s Department for Work and Pensions (DWP), condemned new Labour’s “obsession with attacking the poor” in pushing forward with the “ill-advised so-called reforms to the benefits service” during a time of soaring unemployment.

The government has ignored the opinions of its own social security workforce and accepted the recommendations of merchant banker David Freud that job centres should be privatised – pouring more public money into private pockets.

While being forced to admit that job centres were providing an excellent service to their users, Mr Freud went on to say the service was a multibillion-pound “market” that should be opened up to private bidders.

DWP Lincolnshire and Rutland delegate Graham Peck noted: “This Bill seeks to force claimants to work to earn their benefits,” warning that employers would use the scheme to drive down wages and make money by offering “false training opportunities with little or no prospect of employment at the end.”

DWP Avon delegate Mike Wheeler added: “This Bill has been rushed through Parliament with no scrutiny or accountability.

“It is a major attack on the welfare state, which we are told by government is already on the verge of collapse. This will penalise those who need work, not workfare.”

PCS general secretary Mark Serwotka urged Mr Purnell to face “the real challenge – how to address the fastest-growing rate of unemployment in Europe.”

But Mr Serwotka lamented: “His whole plan is to attract venture capital to force the unemployed and single parents into low-paid work.”

Comments (1)

May 26, 2009

Exposed: The Government’s Love Affair with Private Companies

Filed under: Government — Work Programme @ 9:15 am

It has been announced that the Government intends to privatize the benefit system. At current schemes like New Deal and the upcoming Flexible New Deal scheme are outsourced to the private sector (and third sector), soon Jobcentre Plus will be run by private companies* on like an franchise model and before you know it, benefits will be paid by private companies too. Why? Ipswich Unemployed Action explains why… (more…)

Comments (38)

May 27, 2009

Ipswich Unemployed Action: 2 week review

Filed under: Ipswich, Suffolk, Unemployment, Workfare — Work Programme @ 10:37 am

BERJAYA

Ipswich Unemployed Action Member Outside the ‘Den’.

So it has been around 2 weeks since this blog was created and the Ipswich Unemployed Action group set up. As a group we are still very young and have literally not found our feet yet. Please feel free to read our review. (more…)

Comments (1)

May 29, 2009

Chris Mole, Ispwich MP: Work for Up to £50.95/£64.30 Quid a Week!

Filed under: Flexible New Deal, Ipswich, Suffolk, Workfare — Tags: Chris Mole, Workfare — Andrew Coates @ 9:37 am

BERJAYA Sanctions in Mole’s ‘Win-Win’ Future?

Mole backs ‘Work for Dole’ plans ahead of Ministerial visit (here).

(A friend found this while trawlling the Web. There is no date, but we can assume it was not too long ago).

New Government plans which would see local term jobless helping to improve the local community in Ipswich are being backed by Chris Mole MP today, ahead of the visit of Department for Work and Pensions Minister Mike O’Brien MP to the town.The Minister was in Ipswich to visit the JobCentre Plus in Silent Street to see how people are being encouraged to return to work, and discuss with staff the role of sanctions on benefits for those who don’t cooperate with new training and assistance from the JobCentre. The discussion also focussed on the role of local employers in helping to encourage those who are long-term unemployed back to work. The proposals would see people who have been unemployed for two years or those who go on and off of benefits working for their benefits and for the benefit of the local community.

The proposals would see those people in Ipswich who have been through the support of the New Deal and still haven’t found work or people who have a history of going on and off benefits taking part in full time community activity in return for their benefits. This will give people work experience that employers look for and will help flush out the people who are abusing the system or working while still signing on.

Commenting on the new plans, Chris said:

“Long term unemployment is down 76% in Ipswich and more people are in work than ever before. But the days of mass unemployment have left scars and in some families worklessness has been passed down from generation to generation.”

“This could be a win-win situation. Unemployed people will get valuable experience of work and we can all think of work that needs doing in the local community.”

Mole is joined in this support for ‘Workfare’ by the Tory Party and the Liberals. None of them seem to realise what making people work on these schemes means. It will have to involve heavy supervision – overseers. It will cost a vast amount of money and achieve little. It will stigmatise the unemployed - doing the tasks those sentenced by the Courts (‘Community Service’) currently do. It will undercut the pay of those in work. And it will cause massive misery.

Not everyone in the Labour Party agrees with plans for forced labour. John McDonnell, MP, says, “

“As people look to it for assistance in a dismal economic climate, it seems perverse that the government’s answer is a welfare reform bill with a bloody-minded focus on New Labour’s twin obsessions of penalising the unemployed and privatising public services.

With 2 million unemployed and vacancies drying up, already 10 people are chasing every vacancy.

The “work for benefits” scheme contained in the legislation would force long-term unemployed people (disproportionately with disabilities, ethnic minorities and, increasingly, lone parents) to work for their benefits. This workfare scheme would oblige claimants to work for £1.73 an hour.”

Comments (7)

May 30, 2009

Concerns Raised over YMCA Training Organisation.

Filed under: DWP, Flexible New Deal, Suffolk, Unemployment, YMCA — Tags: contract breaches, DWP, employment tribunal, fiddling with forms, forged signatures, fraud, Jobcentre, Jobcentre Plus, New Deal, serious allegations, sexual harassment, tampered induction forms, tampered timesheets, understaffed, unfair dismissal, volunteers, ymca training, ymca training v stewart — Work Programme @ 8:36 am

Sexual harassment and unfair dismissal, forged signatures, tampered induction forms and timesheets, intentions of fiddling with forms, serious allegations made against staff and attempting to complete forms stating that persons completed placement even though were dismissed for disruptive behaviour… just some of the issues regarding troubled New Deal prime contractor YMCA Training. (No, not the words of an unemployed person but internal complaints regarding two staff members which ended up at a Tribunal). (more…)

Comments (5)

Dencora House: without planning consent

Filed under: Ipswich, Suffolk, Unemployment, YMCA — Tags: b1, d1, dencora business centre, dencora house, DWP, New Deal, planning consent, planning permission, ymca training — Work Programme @ 8:31 am

BERJAYA

Is Dencora House a Greater Blot on the Landscape?

A short while ago we announced a bunch of issues regarding YMCA Training. It now appears that YMCA Training operated without planning permission. Dencora Business Centre is B1 usage (offices). To run a training centre you require D1 usage (non-residential education and training) permission.

YMCA Training is 31 years old: and boasts over 40 training centres nationwide. You would have thought they would know about requiring D1 usage instead of being forced to submit the following planning application after Ipswich Borough Council enforcement action was made against them. (more…)

Comments (5)

June 1, 2009

Banned For Blog: YMCA Suppresses Dissent.

Filed under: Ipswich, Unemployment, YMCA — Tags: Yymca training — Andrew Coates @ 10:46 am

WARNING: THIS BLOG IS DANGEROUS!

This morning I went to Dencora House, Ipswich. For my ‘New Deal’ induction at YMCA Training. A little while in and I was summoned. YMCA manager and colleague. Copies of this Blog, and the Ipswich Unemployed Action’s, on the table. Nervous type. Points to print-out. Picture of medieval Bastille. Legend, “Storm Dencora House“. Liked he it not. Or calling it a “detention centre”. Oh dear. Next, famous (hundreds of viewings), New Deal: YMCA Training, A Major Scandal.

Finally, their account of this,

“I have placed this website as the Home Page on all computers at Dencora House today. Hopefully some of my fellow detainees here will read it. There has also been print outs of your articles left around the centre. The staff have been going round ripping them off the walls. They then get put up again.

People who merely found this site as the home page have been undertaking these actions on their own. Hopefully more people will involve themselves in such sabotage. If we make it too much hassle for them to treat us like this then they will be forced to stop!”

Apparently, the chief said, some people are upset about this kerfuffle. Deary me.

The upshot is I face being suspended from all benefits for exercising my (see YMCA Induction Pack), “freedom of conscience”. Apparently human rights do not apply to the out-of-work on the New Deal. Still no doubt they’ll find some way of justifying themselves. YMCA Mission Statement, “Motivated by its Christian faith, YMCA Training’s mission is to inspire individuals to develop their talents and potential and so transform the communities in which they live and work.” Needs some creative re-writing.

Oh yes, one of our many invisible supporters tells us that they’ve blocked their computers’ access to our Blog.

Some faith.

Comments (15)

June 3, 2009

Blog hits double on news of YMCA Suppresses Dissent

Filed under: DWP, Government, Ipswich, Suffolk, YMCA — Tags: DWP, freedom of conscience, freedom of expression, New Deal, suppression, YMCA, ymca training — Work Programme @ 10:29 am

After posting the news of YMCA Suppresses Dissent the Ipswich Unemployed Action blog unique hits rocketed 9 times more than the previous day and the overall record hits almost doubled.

After making their potentially fatal decision, under pressure YMCA Training staff anxiously flooded to the blog to further investigate, on their twice weekly pilgrimage, to try and justify their decision.

We will keep everyone updated on any further developments.

If you work for YMCA Training and have the confidence to read the site, copy and paste and/or print out copyrighted pages, leave a comment disputing any claims you disagree with or be deemed that you agree with the site in its entirety.

Comments (2)

Dencora House: planning consent attempt #2 granted

If at first you don’t succeed – try again! After their previous attempt for planning permission (which they were obligated to undertake by council enforcement action) was appealed against for problems including damage to cars, litter and youths hanging outside in the grass area behind the building; YMCA Training made another attempt for planning consent. This time it was granted temporarily for a year. Expires 31st July 2009. (more…)

Leave a Comment

YMCA: Partial Victory?

Filed under: Ipswich, Suffolk, Unemployment, YMCA — Tags: Ipswich, YMCA — Andrew Coates @ 10:28 am

That Letter.

Latest developments.

Letter from YMCA (received yesterday lunch-time),

“Dear Mr Coates

New Deal Programme. Further to our meeting earlier today, I am writing to confirm that you have been dismissed from the New Deal Programme at YMCA Training, Dencora House.

As Discussed, the dismissal is due to our Health and Safety concerns due to the comment made on your Blog, ‘Tendance Coatesy’ which states ‘Storm Denocra House’. Our Duty of Care to our staff and participants on New Deal programmes remains paramount.” (my emphasis)

Operations Manager, Nofolk and Suffolk. “

Phoning my New Deal Adviser at the Dole she was surprised. Later in the day, another call, and I was told that I would indeed be treated as having been ‘exited’ (suspended) from the New Deal. Which means loss of benefits. She had seen this Blog. A special interview was arranged next week - local manager to be present.

This morning I heard again.

It appears I will not be suspended. No special meeting will take place. I will have to make a new claim. This means I am not sanctioned, but will have to go through the process again. Not immediately though. Not (I wonder why) with the YMCA. But, eventually, with whoever is running this autumn’s new ‘Flexible New Deal’ .

Two observations.

Firstly, it clear that this proved more trouble than it’s worth. The YMCA letter indicates that ‘comments’ from my Blog were a cause for concern. The picture of a medieval Bastille and the legend “Storm Dencora House” ( published start of May) was the cause. Yet, oddly, Dencora House has not been overrun by a pike-waving mob of baying leftists.

The revolutionary acts advocated were two: 1) Send E-Mails to Chris Mole MP, and the YMCA in protest at the New Deal, and 2) Stepping up the Campaign against Welfare Reform and the YMCA-run local New Deal.

It was obviously hard to pin a case against this other than on political grounds – Dodgy for the Dole, Crass for the Christians of the YMCA.

Secondly, there is little doubt that the solidarity shown here, and by many bloggers played a major partin this decision. I would like to thank everyone who did so. We often give solidarity for causes and don’t really think about what it means to those affected. I can assure everyone it means a lot.

There are those in trouble with this system who do not have the networks we have. We must extend our solidarity to them, and continue the fight. As Harpy says, the Flexible New Deal promises to be worse. Some contracts have been won by private prison companies and similar organisations. Their victims need aid, to organise and for that they must have our solidarity.

An Injury to One is an Injury to All!

Comments (8)

June 7, 2009

The Failed New Deal scheme in figures

Filed under: a4e, Action 4 employment, DWP, Unemployment, YMCA — Tags: child poverty, DWP, gordon brown, Jobcentre Plus, labour, New Deal, New Deal for the Unemployed, new labour, tony blair, VSO, ymca training — Work Programme @ 9:26 am

Labour in 1997 began its welfare reform regime including Gordon Brown’s New Deal scheme aimed at getting rid of the “life on benefits” trend. Regardless of progress made in making benefits harder to claim resulting in 2/5 of a million less claimants, 12 years on politicians are still using this but rebranding to various phrases including “passive receivers” when most of this problem is a thing of the past. This article also focuses on the Governments aim of eradicating Child Poverty by 2020 - a mission proposed by former Prime Minister Tony Blair.

New Deal has cost the taxpayer £75 Billion since it was introduced – as this website states most of this amount has been pumped into Private businesses and Jobseekers not seeing any benefits from the course…

3 million new jobs, but only 400,000 less claimants – something not right here. Most claimants are due to unfair sanctions imposed and procedures tightened to prevent people claiming benefits they are entitled to. Some of this figure will be however due to Jobseekers securing employment.

1 in 9 jobs are occupied by foreign workers – gives great insight in the number of unemployed people who would have had a job if the Government didn’t let in foreign people so easily. These foreign workers have greatly taken up employment opportunities where they could have been filled by British people – remember some of these people will be skilled migrants such as doctors and entrepreneurs or investors however most are not specifically skilled (no degree or professional qualification).

51% in 1998, 34% in 2005 and 25% in 2008/09 – The percentage of New Deal participants finding work has been on the decline. This probably is due to participants doing no work experience and having no training. Please Note: The 25% is an average figure – third sector providers such as YMCA Training performed much worse.

Government failed to reduce Child Poverty by 1/4 and since missing that deadline Child Poverty has increased

Comments (12)

June 10, 2009

New Deal final chance: Jobcentre forces Jobseekers on to New Deal

Filed under: Action 4 employment, DWP, Government, intensive activity, Ipswich, jobseekers allowance, Suffolk, Unemployment, YMCA — Tags: dencora house, DWP, Flexible New Deal, Gateway, gateway 2 work, GtW, Ipswich, JCP, Jobcentre Plus, jobseekers allowance, JSA, NDYP, New Deal, Ref2, taster sessions, Volunteering, VSO, Work Trial, ymca training — Work Programme @ 4:03 pm

Feedback has it that Jobcentre Plus is trying to push as many people through on to New Deal courses as possible regardless of the actual legal implications of them being unable to put through a lot of them – they are still hoping to catch people out who are unaware of the rules and are happy to participate in order to secure benefits. So much for the “passive receiver” trend the DWP and MP constantly claim.

This will result in a lot of people nationwide (especially in Ipswich) to be stuck in places such as Dencora House Detention Centre to spend 13 weeks wasting away and being mistreated. This is because the New Deal contracts end soon as the scheme is being replaced with Flexible New Deal with it’s contracts starting this October 2009.

It is then of great pleasure for me to announce the following guide I have prepared to empower you in to avoiding being stuck on a New Deal course that contradicts with the promise they make towards you of support finding and securing employment. I hope you find it useful: links to and comments welcome!

(more…)

Comments (405)

June 12, 2009

Why YMCA Training didn’t bid for Flexible New Deal…

Filed under: Flexible New Deal, YMCA — Tags: Ashley Seaborne, Flexible New Deal, ymca training — Work Programme @ 10:19 am

“YMCA Training works with people of all ages, abilities and backgrounds offering apprenticeships, NVQs, adult key skills and job search training. In the past 30 years it has worked successfully with JobCentre Plus, but the size of the latest Flexible New Deal contracts has resulted in the charity reevaluating the nature of its involvement.“

http://www.cover-east.org/cms/uploads/MEDIA/DOCUMENTS/Manifesto_Jul08.pdf

“New Deal contracts now cover huge
geographic areas and demand levels of
administrative experience and financial risk
we can’t consider. Future Flexible New Deal
contracts are rumoured to cover more than
one region and have a value around £40m.

The result is that YMCA Training is unable
to bid for direct contracts, because the risk
factor is too high, and in future we will only
act as a sub-contractor, which may result
in us getting less money to deliver the
programme.”

YMCA Training East, Ashley Seaborne.

What’s wrong with the truth? Let’s rephrase this above statement…

“The Flexible New Deal demands high levels of
administrative experience, financial cash flow,
managerial performance and resources that we
simply don’t have and cannot offer or deliver.

Our Cambridgeshire & Suffolk New Deal contract
for example we lacked the staffing resources to
deliver the contract and resulted in us having to
advertise for volunteers to deliver the contract
in the Cambridge area.

It was no fun in the Ipswich area neither. We were
reported allegedly by neighbours for not having
the correct planning consent at Dencora House.

This wasn’t our main concern however. DWP set
our target of job outcomes to 45%. In the past
two fiscal years we failed to achieve this.

We were thoroughly disappointed at our
performance of 12% however satisfied that we are
making progress when the following year was 21%.

As we can only hope to gain sub-contractor
contracts for smaller parts of the region this means
our income would be smaller than the overall regional
contract – so we will have less money to deliver the
programme.

This is not initially a major concern as we have a
strong working relationship with the SCA in
Cambridge to provide volunteers to cut down the
actual staff expenditure.

We are hoping desperately to gain a sub-contracting
contract with A4e to save the majority of our employees.”

Leave a Comment

June 13, 2009

Dencora House: Safe for How Long?

Filed under: Flexible New Deal, Ipswich — Andrew Coates @ 11:05 am

BERJAYA

This disgraceful information comes from the notorious ‘Tendance Coatesy’ Site.

“A mob of unruly Transylvanian Peasants are rumoured to be heading towards Dencora House this Saturday. To celebrate the Victory of their alleged ‘leader’.” (Vlad the Impaler Workers’ Daily)

I have to announce to the International Proletariat and Unity of the Peoples against YMCA-Training, that guess what, Coatesy has won his epic struggle!

I was not best pleased yesterday reading some stuff from the Dole about my ‘misconduct’. Just a phase, but it rankled.

But I noted – that is after quenching my thirst on three pints of Abbot Ale – that I had got the Dole transfer in my account.

This morning, looking at the sordid pile of junk mail, I picked up a Dole paper.

Coatesy has been reinstated on the Dole.

Now the struggle has to focus on the rights of the other blokettes and blokes who have got thumped on.

This so-called Coatesy, more like pretentious frog eating, namby-pamy, is now saying:

” An injury to one is an injury to us all. We have to unite to defend ourselves: no-one else is going to do it.”

Comments (1)

June 15, 2009

73% of employers admit to discriminating against the disabled and older ages during recruitment

Filed under: DWP, Government, Unemployment — Tags: ageism, Benefit Claimant, disability, discrimination, employment and support allowance, esa, Incapacity Benefit, Recession, recruitment — Work Programme @ 8:59 am

A survey for the Institution of Occupational Safety and Health (IOSH) undertaken by “YouGovStone” returned the devastating verdict that almost three quarters of employers would not give people on Incapacity Benefit (now Employment and Support Allowance) and older people, the opportunity to return to employment. (more…)

Comments (21)

June 20, 2009

Cambridge Jobseeker felt “humiliated and degraded” by YMCA Training

Filed under: jobseekers allowance, Suffolk, Unemployment, YMCA — Tags: cambridge, detention centre, DWP, James Purnell, Jobcentre, Jobcentre Plus, jobseekers allowance, New Deal, New Deal for the Unemployed, Unemployed, ymca training — Work Programme @ 3:42 pm

We have been biased in our coverage of YMCA Training by only including experiences of the Ipswich provided New Deal courses. Well… it is no better in Cambridge!! (this training centre is also included in the same New Deal contract as the Ipswich one) One New Deal participant spoke out against his disappointment of expecting to be given a work placement (as promised by Jobcentre Plus to get you enrolled) and be given a course of watching DVD’s, paper contests and walks.

Feel free to read the Department for Work and Pensions attempt to justify YMCA Training’s activities when New Deal participants should have been stuck in a work placement 4 days a week and been given supported jobsearch. (more…)

Comments (5)

Conservatives to rewrite Flexible New Deal contracts

Filed under: DWP, Flexible New Deal, Government, Unemployment — Tags: Conservatives, Flexible New Deal, FND, General Election, Theresa May, Welfare Reform, Welfare to Work — Work Programme @ 3:41 pm

The Conservative Party has promised to implement changes to Flexible New Deal if they win the General Election.

At the Welfare to Work conference shadow Secretary of State Theresa May said if the second phase Flexible New Deal contracts have not been signed by the time they enter power, they will rewrite the contracts.

The proposals include introducing Flexible New Deal at 6 months NOT 12 months. Not really a significant big deal, as Labour currently plan to fast track Job Seekers to Flexible New Deal at 6 months anyway. We recently reported that the Jobcentre are unlawfully fast tracking “customers” on New Deal courses so it can be expected that most people would be fast tracked for Flexible New Deal. The proposals by Labour states anyone who has claimed before, regardless of the period, will be fast tracked after 6 months, and those that make a new claim which is also their first ever claim will have to wait for 12 months.

The proposals also include changing the contracting system to allow for smaller players in particular the third sector. Figures released show that New Deal prime contractors such as YMCA Training were amongst the poorest performing New Deal programme provision providers. I am not sure why, solely due to past performance, why anyone would want to consider the worst performers of the previous failed New Deal scheme to ruin a reformed scheme.

The Conservatives want to continue New Labour’s welfare reform agenda and take it further.

This seems another reason NOT to vote for the Tories. Thousands of people including jobseekers and other benefit claimants along with various Unions and other organisations have hit out against the Welfare Reform plans and not to mention the Welfare Reform Bill which caused some major concerns.

The Conservatives have made it clear that they want to create a stronger workfare system than what Labour proposes, bring forward the default timescales by slashing it in half from 12 months to just 6 months and sticking more Flexible New Deal participants in to Community Service like activities.

Comments (31)

June 30, 2009

YMCA Training 517 London Road: No planning permission

Filed under: DWP, Government, Ipswich, Suffolk, Unemployment, YMCA — Tags: d1, dencora house, DWP, Ipswich, Jobcentre Plus, New Deal, planning consent, planning permission, ymca training — Work Programme @ 9:35 am

It has been announced that YMCA Training operating out of their London Road training centre also has NOT got planning permission for a training centre – even though they have been using it for numerous years and had enforcement action taken against their newest Ipswich location of Dencora House over a year ago, planners at Ipswich Borough Council are still waiting for an application form to be submitted.

Comments (7)

June 22, 2009

YMCA Training Activities Exposed

Filed under: DWP, intensive activity, Ipswich, jobseekers allowance, Unemployment, YMCA — Tags: 517 London Road, dencora house, gateway 2 work, training activities, VSO, YMCA, ymca training — Work Programme @ 1:14 pm

Today we expose the so-called training and learning activities at YMCA Training. We are aware of these being used at Dencora House and the 517 London Road training centre even though are likely to be used at all the training centres in the region covered by the New Deal contract. (more…)

Comments (4)

New Deal Complaints.

Filed under: Ipswich, New Deal — Tags: New Deal — Andrew Coates @ 1:19 pm

BERJAYA

Is Your New Deal Scheme Resembling This?

New Deal Complaints: a must-see new site. (here)

Comments (5)

June 24, 2009

YMCA Training Wolsey House: The TRUTH!

Filed under: DWP, Ipswich, New Deal, Suffolk, Unemployment, YMCA — Tags: Ipswich, Misconduct, New Deal, Princes Street, Wolsey House, ymca training — Work Programme @ 3:07 pm

If you have been on a New Deal course previously at YMCA Training it may have been at Wolsey House in Princes Street or you may have heard about it. Two main reasons given by YMCA Training as to why they left are as follows:

Wolsey House wasn’t big enough for their needs; Or
A participant let off the fire alarm which made everyone evacuate the building including other businesses and those businesses either later sued YMCA Training or threatened to do so (conflicting reports)

Both the above reasons were given by staff at YMCA Training and not New Deal participants.

I will not state that any of the above reasons were lies – I never attended YMCA Training at Wolsey House so I didn’t know the comparison of size between Wolsey House and Dencora House or 517 London Road.

The REAL and actual reason for the relocation to Dencora House were… (more…)

Comments (6)

June 28, 2009

New Deal fraud probe begins: A4e under investigation

Filed under: a4e, Action 4 employment, DWP, Flexible New Deal, Government, New Deal, Uncategorized — Tags: a4e, Action 4 employment, DWP, Flexible New Deal, Jobcentre Plus, New Deal, New Deal Fraud — Work Programme @ 1:20 pm

Ipswich Unemployed Action can report that the Department for Work and Pensions is investigating Action 4 Employment and 2 other undisclosed New Deal training providers for fraud.

This means that A4e could lose their Flexible New Deal contract if further investigations show widespread fraud.

One of the New Deal providers under investigation have entered a contract with a local temporary job recruitment agency to gain job outcome payments while the New Deal participants gained short lived agency work until the provider profited from the bonus.

This is a concern that Ipswich Unemployed Action has previously raised with the new Flexible New Deal course – we were NOT surprised to learn that at least one provider has already been using that with New Deal.

A group called New Deal Scandal which runs the New Deal Complaints site we recently displayed on this site aims for a full investigation of the £75 billion New Deal scheme and believes that the DWP investigation is just the tip of the iceberg. Jobcentre Plus hasn’t shown any concerns from complaints from New Deal participants.

It could be presumed that out of the few providers the Department for Work and Pensions have admitted to, only Action 4 Employment has been named, could be proof of guilt. A4e is the largest New Deal provider and would have taken legal action to protect their reputation should the claims not be true.

The Guardian reports that Action 4 Employment has to repay at least £15,000 and another provider to repay £48,000. We think this provider could be Pertemps. The article also states that the investigation has been ongoing for over 13 months and criticises why A4e was allowed to bid and win Flexible New Deal contracts while being thoroughly investigated for fraud and been found guilty of at least 20 cases from the beginning – thus the continued investigation.

Comments (23)

July 5, 2009

New Deal: The TRUTH Exposed!

Filed under: New Deal, Unemployment — Work Programme @ 1:18 pm

New Deal, courses to “help” the unemployed get back in to employment: overcrowded rooms, under resourced facilities, full time job search, zero rights and no independent regulation, forced short term employment just for providers to get job bonuses, providers under staffed and using volunteers, no training or learning opportunities, identities stolen by providers in order to fraudulently gain Job Outcome bonuses, depression and boredom for participants, decreasing the availability for the unemployed to seek jobs and apply for them, providers not even having planning permission to provide courses, work placements in charity shops sorting through used clothes all day, dismissals for trivial reasons resulting in loss of benefits and sanctions imposed … the list goes on.

So why is the New Deal not helping people? We have an Government document which describes the main reasons for the New Deal – and this document isn’t leaked – readily available just under publicised. (more…)

Comments (6)

July 8, 2009

We have Won a Small but Significant Battle.

Filed under: Ipswich, New Deal, Suffolk — Andrew Coates @ 2:26 pm

BERJAYA

The Spirit of our Goddess was with us today.

The Historic Leader of Tendance Coatesy, and activist of Ipswich Unemployed Action, (Internationally famous pioneers of fighting for the unemployed) was in a bit of a foreboding.

The Dole had summoned me for a special meeting.

Turns out I am excused from any version of the New Deal.

I wonder why…

And I get my dole!

Now if we all stood up like this we would smash the New Deal (and variants) into the ground.

Comments (13)

July 11, 2009

Ipswich Unemployed Action Member Attacked by Security Guards.

Filed under: Government, Ipswich — Andrew Coates @ 11:00 am

BERJAYA

Manuel for Job Centre Security.

News just coming in is that a prominent member of Ipswich Unemployed Action was attacked by 3 Security Guards at the Silent Street Job centre. Coz he got a bit stroppy. He managed to escape before the Police came. Details are only now emerging. But he was there because he had an interview.

So it took 3 security guards acting on a charge of “trespassing” to pin down a small working class youth.

What a fucking nightmare the Dole is becoming.

Comments (15)

July 15, 2009

YMCA Training and the New Deal participant data breach

Filed under: DWP, Ipswich, New Deal, Unemployment, YMCA — Tags: dencora house, Ipswich, New Deal, ymca training — Work Programme @ 1:43 pm

BERJAYA

YMCA Training Manual.

YMCA Training keeps all New Deal participants details on file and discloses this personal information to QDP Services who then later sends a letter pretending to be YMCA Training with a poor made up letter, requesting your support to help future participants by giving feedback on the course. They claim it to be anonymous and “cannot be attributed to you” but it can as it contains a tracking code on each page of the survey.

DWP New Deal Scandal has more information on this.

We rather recently reported that:

Comments (9)

July 16, 2009

Suffolk unemployment benefit claimants DOUBLE

Filed under: Ipswich, Suffolk, Unemployment — Tags: jobseekers allowance — Work Programme @ 11:41 am

Ipswich Unemployed Action can reveal that the number of claimants in Suffolk has doubled in one year, where in Essex it has increased more than double. An average of 4,000 new claims per month in the last few months has been reported in the region. (more…)

Comments (1)

July 17, 2009

YMCA Training data disclosure: take action!

Filed under: DWP, Ipswich, New Deal, Suffolk, Unemployment, YMCA — Tags: dencora house, gateway 2 work, Ipswich, New Deal, YMCA, ymca training — Work Programme @ 11:04 am

What can I do about YMCA Training breaching the Data Protection Act 1998?

Read on for advice regarding resolving the unlawful disclosure of your personal details. (more…)

Comments (11)

July 20, 2009

YMCA Training New Deal contract terminated

Filed under: New Deal, Suffolk, YMCA — Tags: dencora house, Jobcentre Plus, New Deal, Unemployed, VSO, ymca training — Work Programme @ 1:38 pm

We have heard a rumour from someone returning back from the Jobcentre that YMCA Training has had their New Deal contract terminated with immediate effect and everyone who were on New Deal have been pushed on to Flexible New Deal Stage 3. (more…)

Comments (2)

July 23, 2009

How to Revive the Unemployed Movement.

Filed under: Unemployment — Tags: Unemployed Action — Andrew Coates @ 10:10 am

This list is sparse. Here.

Interesting to note the North East Unemployed Action Group. I think we can be sure that we are in solidarity with our sisters and brothers from the same movement.

But what we need is a campaign. Nationally.

Comments (4)

Complaints Rising. New Contributions to Ipswich Unemployed Action

Filed under: New Deal, Unemployment — Tags: Unemployment — Andrew Coates @ 11:45 am

Letters to IUA:

I’ve been reading the blogs and swatting up for my 2nd New Deal interview 18 months after I was kicked off. I replied to the blog entry from “Ipswich unemployed action” if you need some info..
Now I’m in the process of writing a complaint letter and request another interview as I thought I unfairly treated.

You can publish this letter if you want, but would like some advice as to how to go about my next interview?

Regards,

Thought you might find the following message very interesting: I received it earlier from Ann who runs the Freewebs site.

Hi, chaps, I hope this gets through. I’ve just had notification that the site has been banned because of complaints from A4e that it’s defamatory. I’m going to try to retrieve the content, so spread the word.
http://www.freewebs.com/watchinga4e/

Apologies for not posting immediately: we have so much to do on the Web. Plus I’ve got four E-Mail accounts!

Leave a Comment

July 26, 2009

Surprise, Surprise: YMCA Training New Deal Southend; No planning consent

Filed under: DWP, New Deal, Unemployment, YMCA — Tags: Baryta House, New Deal, New Deal Essex, planning consent, planning permission, Southend, Unemployed, VSO, YMCA, ymca training — Work Programme @ 9:47 am

Ipswich Unemployed Action has previously spoke about YMCA Training not having planning permission to deliver training services at 517 London Road, Wolsey House and Dencora House detention centre. This is all part of the Cambridgeshire and Suffolk New Deal contract.

We can now reveal that, YMCA Training have traded from premises in Southend delivering New Deal to those in their New Deal Essex contract – also without the required planning consent.

Leave a Comment

July 31, 2009

Government to Create Jobs for Young People (?).

Filed under: Unemployment — Tags: Job Creation, Youth Unemployment — Andrew Coates @ 10:01 am

Announced by the Government a couple of days ago. See Here.

With Comments.

A £40m campaign has been launched by the government aimed at creating thousands of new jobs for young people

‘Backing Young Britain’ will create 20,000 additional internships.

These of course are not jobs. Behind the fancy American word, internships, they mean work experience. Not to be sneered at – well not totally – but not real employment. And what about those on these schemes employment rights?

Launching the scheme, work and pensions secretary Yvette Cooper said:

“We are determined not to lose a generation of talent because of the recession.

“Many young people were denied the help they needed in the recessions of the 80s and 90s, ending up out of work for months and years. Too many never got a start in the jobs market.

Very True. Let’s see what they are actually proposing.

Ministers also announced the first 47,000 youth jobs supported by the Future Jobs Fund for young people who are unable to find work or training within a year.

The £1bn investment, announced by Alistair Darling in April’s Budget, will attempt to prevent the country from losing a generation to unemployment brought about by the recession.

The jobs aimed at 18-24 year-olds will include sports coaches and teaching assistants.

Good. At least that’s more useful than New Deal schemes teaching you how to sit in a room and endure boredom while ‘job searching’.

Latest figures show that 726,000 18-24 year-olds are currently unemployed.

In other words 47,000 jobs is a drop in the Ocean. This is not going to change the fate of a ‘generation’.

The government has called on business to support young people attempting to find work. Children, schools and families secretary Ed Balls said:

We must not repeat the mistakes of the past and abandon a generation of young people.

The government already has programmes up and running to help school-leavers, graduates and young unemployed people and wed like (?) businesses and charities to join in by offering volunteering places, work experience and apprenticeships.

Nothing new here. This has been long in existence.

As part of the campaign, a graduate talent pool website will be launched tomorrow, with more than 2,000 internships available to graduates, with 4,000 more to be added in the next few weeks.

More non-jobs.

Conclusion: a very small step, barely a quiver, but in the right direction.

A lot more needs to be done.

How will those in such jobs get paid? Will ‘Interns’ get more than the Dole (or even that) ? What will be their employment conditions and rights?

Comments (9)

August 6, 2009

Workfare Coming To Suffolk.

Filed under: Ipswich, Suffolk, Workfare — Tags: Workfare — Andrew Coates @ 12:44 pm

BERJAYA

From Harpy Marx,

“Workfare, euphemistically known as ‘Work for Your Benefit’ schemes, is going to be piloted in a town near you from 2010. The pilots will take place in Greater Manchester, Norfolk, Cambridgeshire and Suffolk and will run for two years from October 2010.”

This is something which we will organise against. I have already had talks with the President of our Trades Council and he suggested a campaign. I was initially a little – a very little – reserved. Because nothing concrete we could target clearly was in the offing.

Now we have it.

Comments (6)

August 9, 2009

Its official: £4 weekly travel deductions are unlawful!

Filed under: a4e, Action 4 employment, DWP, Government, jobseekers allowance, New Deal, Unemployment, YMCA — Tags: DWP, Jobcentre Plus, New Deal, ymca training — Work Programme @ 10:19 am

Ipswich Unemployed Action can reveal that the £4 weekly travel deduction on New Deal is unlawful.

An intense investigation reveals that no legislation warrants this £4 taxation.

The Training Allowance is mentioned in legislation but the £4 deductions is not. At current the Provider Guidance (a manual for New Deal providers) which is referenced into the New Deal contract gives permission for the New Deal provider to deduct £4 per week. This however isn’t statutory law and thus is only a contractual agreement between Jobcentre Plus/DWP and the New Deal providers.

As this deduction was unlawfully acquired you may claim it back. The first instance would be to ask for it back. If they refuse to do so the next step would be via the legal system – if you still are a Jobseeker it would be free to do so.

Using the DWP provided data for NDYP alone up to November 2008 it leaves a pool of £68,377,400 of potential total travel deductions since New Deal started – or as an average just shy of £7 million per year. Of course not everyone will claim for travel reimbursements and we can’t assume that everyone lasted the full 13 weeks.

I would estimate it as nout less than £2 million fraud involved here. New Deal participants assumed that the New Deal training provider has the lawful authority to make such a deduction – they didn’t – they profited from it. Jobcentre Plus was involved. I wouldn’t be surprised if it did reach reach near the £20 million mark.

For each time you been on New Deal (assuming you claimed travel for whole 13 weeks) you can claim £52 plus any applicable interest – roughly a weeks money. If you had been on New Deal 3 times then you are looking at around £156 – or 3 weeks dole money.

Comments (3)

August 11, 2009

YMCA Training forced to submit an planning application for 517 London Road

Filed under: Ipswich, New Deal, YMCA — Tags: 517 London Road, d1, dencora house, detention centre, planning consent, planning permission, ymca training — Work Programme @ 10:50 am

So since the D1 use of 517 London Road by YMCA Training in April 2003 – 6 years later they have finally submitted an application for D1 planning consent. This wasn’t, however, without Ipswich Borough Council pressure. (more…)

Leave a Comment

August 16, 2009

A4E and Working Links To Snaffle More Public Money.

Filed under: a4e, Government — Tags: a4e, fraud — Andrew Coates @ 9:15 am

Today’s Observer (here)

“A furious row has broken out over government plans to extend the “privatisation” of the job market after it emerged that two companies subject to a fraud inquiry were on the shortlist for lucrative contracts to get people with severe disabilities into work.

Recruitment companies A4e and Working Links have been shortlisted for a new programme to find work for people with long-term mental or physical needs. Both are under investigation by the Department for Work and Pensions following allegations that employees had made false claims of getting people into work.”

I noticed on Channel Four that some heroine from A4E is going to get the star treatment in a programme this coming Thurday. Helping single-mums back to work.

Those bastards don’t seem to know when a very long period of silence from them would be welcome.

Comments (1)

August 19, 2009

Benefits Busted!

Filed under: a4e — Tags: a4e — Andrew Coates @ 9:19 am

Coming to your telly this Thursday on Channel Four. More free-publicity for A4e - one wonders why not a even a tinsey mention of the mountain of allegations against them…

Instead of this programme’s utter cack – a celebration of bullying by a bunch of chancers out to grind the faces of the poor (below) those interested in this murky world should look at this and this.

“Hayley Taylor’s job is to persuade single mothers on benefits to go back to work.

The company she works for, A4E, which is helping to tackle the Government’s target of getting 70 per cent of lone parents into paid work by 2010, is the largest welfare reform company in the world.

A4E is run by multimillionaire entrepreneur Emma Harrison, who believes her business is ‘improving people’s lives by getting them into work.’

Until recently, the 700,000 lone parents receiving benefit didn’t have to look for work until their youngest child was 16. Soon, they must either work, or be looking for work, once their youngest child is seven.

At Doncaster A4E, Hayley runs a course called Elevate that aims to give lone parents the skills and confidence to enter the workplace and convince them they’ll be better off doing so. Cameras follow her group of ten single mothers during their intensive six-week course to prepare them for work”

Seeing the advance clips we’d say Hayley is a dead-ringer for Little Britain’s Marjorie Dawes, the terrifying, pudgy, leader of weight loss support group Fatfighters.

Comments (2)

August 23, 2009

The Future for Workfare?

Filed under: a4e, Flexible New Deal, James Purnell, Unemployment, Workfare, YMCA — Andrew Coates @ 9:56 am

BERJAYA

Prophecy for Workfare?

How will workfare develop? Its going to be difficult to keep people working for their Dole, so we know that there will be a hard time for those forced on the schemes. But, on the bright side, for some, there will be lots of opportunities to make money out of people labouring for free. Hey, the state will pay companies and ‘voluntary’ organisations to take them on. Loads of opportunities for overseers and officious busy-bodies.

But where’s it going to end.

In a forgotten novel by H.G.Wells, The Sleeper Awakes, the hero, Graham, wakes up, after a few hundred years dozing, in a new world. It’s a planet controlled by huge Trusts. Futuristic cities, skyscrapers, aeroplanes, gleaming machines. But it’s no socialistic utopia. The world is run by the White Council. No democracy. Pleasure resorts for those with money. Who are they? Graham’s own trustees, in charge of his funds as he lay sleeping. The legacy had been invested so well that they ended up in charge of every economy and country.

The story develops around a rebellion led by an ambiguous figure, Ostrog.

But that’s not the really interesting bit.

The world still needs workers. Clad in blue – hounded and beaten. On the bread-line. Permanently. Why? It turns out that they are directed by The Labour Department. Huh? It’s a privatised descendant of the Salvation Army, turned into a compulsory workfare system for the unemployed. Out of a job? No money? No right to benefits. Plenty of responsibilities. To this: you trace your steps there. Anyone refusing to work gets slung in prison. Anyone a bit stroppy about the set-up gets given the worst tasks. They are bound in servitude. For ever.

Who knows. A4e is already a paradise for bullies, and the YMCA run dodgy private ‘training’ schemes. Then there’s all the other job-stockers and chancers swarming around Welfare Reform. We might see this happening here. Good for the economy. A lot cheaper than employing people on real wages, with rights. To help discipline and boost identity, shouldn’t they be in serge. Like blue?

Who’ll bid for the contracts of the Labour Department when Cameron and Co. get their greedy paws on the unemployed?

Comments (2)

August 29, 2009

More Attacks on the Welfare State: Abolition of Attendance Allowance and Cut in Housing Benefit.

Filed under: Atttendance Allowance, Government, Welfare State — Tags: Attendance Allowance, Housing Benefit — Andrew Coates @ 8:43 am

Brighton & Hove UNEMPLOYED WORKERS CENTRE 4 Crestway Parade, The Crestway, Brighton BN1 7BL ( & 01273-540717

PRESS RELEASE:

Unemployed Centre Condemns Proposals to Abolish Attendance Allowance & Disability Living Allowance and Cut Housing Benefit .

Brighton & Hove Unemployed Workers Centre has sent an open letter to all 3 of Brighton & Hove’s New Labour MPs asking them to speak out about the proposals in the new Care Green Paper to abolish Attendance Allowance, which is paid to people aged 65 and over who need help with care. No sooner have MPs put behind them the scandals of Second Homes Allowances and decorating their own homes at public expense, then they are choosing to attack the most vulnerable sections of society. Housing Benefit was capped a few years ago and this attempt to make the unemployed move into the worst accommodationwas sweetened by allowing them to keep any monies below the fixed rent levels. Then this was cut to £15 a week and now it is proposed to cut any surplus altogether. DLA and Attendance Allowance, which were originally introduced by a Conservative Government, is now the subject of proposals to abolish them . In its place the Green Paper proposes that the money ‘saved’ will be allocated to care by local government. The latter pledge will no doubt be forgotten about whilst the disabled will suffer massive cuts in their living standards.

Tony Greenstein, Secretary of Brighton Unemployed Centre said: ‘I have a disabled child, who suffers from autism. DLA is not used for care but to pay for the extra expenses involved in caring for a disabled person. Things like breakages, outings, clothes etc. Pie-in-the-sky promises that it will be put in a local government pool, with all the vagaries that this involves, are unacceptable. New Labour has pilloried the poor. Welfare ‘Reforms’ that force lone parents to ‘actively seek’ work if their child is 7 are in marked contrast to the lavish lifestyle of MPs. This Government has bailed out the banks with hundreds of billions of pounds, whilst doing absolutely nothing about the payment of million pound bonuses. Yet it has audacity to cut the meagre amounts that the disabled are entitled to.’ We call on all 3 Brighton & Hove Labour MPs to make it clear that they will vote against these and any similar proposals. ’For Immediate Release For further information contact: Tony Greenstein 01273-540717/07843350343

Ipswich Unemployed Action notes with concern these moves. Attendance Allowance is essential for many elderly people. Housing Benefit is already difficult for the unemployed (some landlords do not like the out-of-work as tenants in the first place). The money they propose to cut can make all the difference between being able to pay utility bills and being permanently in debt.

We wonder if Suffolk Coastal MP John Gummer – who got his garden sorted at public expense – or other local MPs, like Chris Mole, Ispwich, who has a London flat allowance to complement his local home - know what it’s like having to rely on Housing Benefits.

On the edge of complete destitution.

Comments (1)

September 1, 2009

Abolition of Disability Allowance: Hits Most Vulnerable Unemployed.

Filed under: Atttendance Allowance, Campaigns for Unemployed, Welfare State, Workfare — Tags: Disability Allowance — Andrew Coates @ 10:22 am

From Tony Greenstein’s Blog:

New Labour Proposes to Abolish ALL Disability Benefits – DLA and AA included

What kind of ‘Labour’ Government are the Trade Unions Funding?

Having already abolished Incapacity Benefit, with barely a squeak or murmur from the trade unions or labour movement, New Labour has signalled that it wants to scrap ALL disability benefits.

On July 14th New Labour published a Green Paper, Shaping the Future of Care. Reading through the spin and waffle, the message is clear. DLA is ‘inefficient’ ‘poorly targetted’ [because it’s not means tested!] and has to go.

In fact DLAis the best benefit there is. If your needs are great enough, if you cannot care and need help with bodily functions for part or all of the day (and night) you are eligible for DLA. There are 3 bands – lower, middle and higher. Receipt of DLAdoes not overlap with other benefits and is not counted as taxable income. The result is that people who are the most vulnerable and sick in this society see a small increase in their standard of living.

More here.

Tony and his fellow Brighton activists think we should have a national demo against ‘Welfare Reform’. That the TUC and Unions should be pressured into action.

We need to begin by organising ourselves at the grass-roots, against a4e, the YMCA and other profiteers from the out-of-work and disabled. Above all, against the Government, and Tories’ plans to divide, harass, and grind us down.

The name of the end for many of us (and who knows, the disabled as well): Workfare. Undercutting those in employment, and toiling for a pittance under the kind of overseer we see in the companies and the ‘voluntary’ sector now setting up the ‘Flexible New Deal’. Whether they are hectoring bullies (with all the prejudices you can imagine) or genuinely good people (who want the best for their ‘clients’) they will soon have to face a choice: collaborate with the forced labour system or be opposed to it.

Leave a Comment

September 2, 2009

Youth March for Jobs.

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed, Unemployment — Tags: Youth March for Jobs — Andrew Coates @ 10:06 am

CAMPAIGN group Youth Fight for Jobs has warned the government that it was planning a national demonstration against unemployment as the number of youngsters out of work surges towards the one million mark.

The campaign, backed by a number of leading trade unions, is staging the event in London on November 28 and will press the government to do more to help young people through the recession.

More info here.

It would be a good idea if the March was also: Fight Welfare ‘Reform’, Against Workfare, For Decent Benefits for All!

Comments (1)

September 4, 2009

TNG and Avanta.

Filed under: Flexible New Deal, Suffolk — Tags: Avanta, TNG — Andrew Coates @ 10:52 am

The Flexible New Deal is due to begin this October.

In Suffolk A4e was one of the preferred bidders. It will be, we assume, up and running, round here soon. The other company in charge in the County is part of TNG, part of AVANTA here.

Looking at the Board of this company, which appears to do very well out of public money, we find some dodgy-looking people.

Comments in Bold Italics: (more…)

Comments (7)

September 11, 2009

No company promotion at the Ipswich Jobsfair

Filed under: Ipswich, Unemployment — Tags: Ipswich Jobsfair, Jobcentre Plus — Work Programme @ 8:45 am

Ipswich Jobsfair
Wednesday 9th September 2009
Ipswich Corn Exchange
10am to 3pm

What a joke!

I have never seen such a bad unprepared, underpromoted, plain and pointless event in my entire life!

I had been to an Jobsfair earlier in the year at the same place and it is obvious that the businesses featured whom want people to signup and work for them this time round didn’t stick an effort in to persuading people to join them.

Lack of promotion

If you are a Jobseeker and recently been to the Jobcentre (apart from one Ipswich Unemployed Action member who signed on the same day and wasn’t advised about its existance) you would know about the jobsfair.

Even though Archant had a table they didn’t seem to advertise it on their website. Why not?

Entrance Security

Two employees of Jobcentre Plus obstructed the corridor obtaining the Jobseeker Directions (letters from Jobcentre saying you have to attend). Not everyone have them, so thsoe attending (like myself) without one found it difficult to get through. Beside them was a table containing a map of the hall with boxes scattered around numbered from 1 to 42.

Jobsfair: disorganised

Instead of having a stall it really did consist of nothing more than a table and above it on a board was a number.
In order to co-ordinate where you are going you would have to non-stop read the map/Jobsfair plan
No signs at all of company logo or brands… no Argos, no KFC logo, no Toys R Us
No laminated sheets with the company name printed on them (just a number!)
Every “table” was identical apart from a different assigned number and different people behind it
No job advertisements displayed at all
No leaflets, freebies, etc. on display at all

Archant
CV Connect
Reed
Jobcentre Plus
Suffolk Childcare / Redundancy Advisor
Navy
Prestide Nursing
Key Training
Les Enfants
Holiday Inn
Argos
Primary Homecare
Mencap
Seetec
Money Shop
CSV Media
Adepta
ITEC
Army
SCC
SCC
Fire Service
ISG Jackson
IBC
IBC
Avon
Stag Security
Handford House
KFC
Elizabeth Copdock Hotel
Guardian Security
Suffolk Employment Care
Label Craft
Nacro
Snap
Anglian Home Improvements
Briarcare
Just Tech
Telecom Plus
Toys ‘R’ Us
WS Training
Care UK

Comments (7)

September 10, 2009

Unemployed Workers’ Union.

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed, Unemployment — Tags: Unemployed Workers' Union — Andrew Coates @ 10:01 am

FROM FACEBOOK GROUP:

Alex Halligan September 10 at 2:41am Reply

Hi everyone,

I have been swamped with emails and phone calls over the last couple of weeks. The unemployed Workers Union looks like it will go far

it looks like we will be able to set up a minimum of 25 Branches around Britain and Ireland over the coming months.

*Please get in touch if you want to get innvolved
*send me your email address and town or city
*Spread the word and INVITE YOUR FRIENDS TO THE UNEMPLOYED WORKERS UNION FACEBOOK GROUP

Details of a national Youth Fight for Jobs demo can be found at the following link

http://www.youthfightforjobs.com/article/6946

Solidarity,

Alex Halligan

(more…)

Leave a Comment

September 16, 2009

“Massive jobs boost”: 200 new jobs in Suffolk

Filed under: Government, Ipswich, Suffolk, Unemployment — Tags: credit crunch, Future Jobs Fund, young people — Work Programme @ 11:44 am

Evening Star has reported that the Government’s “Future Jobs Fund” will create 200 new jobs in Suffolk.

SUFFOLK’S future looked bright today after the announcement of 200 new jobs for young people.

The county council has been given the go-ahead to create the vacancies in waste and environmental work, the voluntary sector, arts and culture, general admin, social care and youth work.

Role will include library assistants, assistant rangers, and heritage and tourism positions.

The new posts were among more than 600 created across the East of England and 7,500 in the country as part of the government’s £1billion Future Jobs Fund (FJF).

They bring the total number of jobs created through FJF to almost 55,000.

It is good that new jobs are created but I have a few concerns (more…)

Comments (12)

Ipswich Detention Centre Operated by YMCA Training to Stay

Filed under: Flexible New Deal, Ipswich, New Deal, Suffolk, YMCA — Tags: dencora house, ymca training — Work Programme @ 11:44 am

Ipswich Unemployed Action can reveal that YMCA Training were successful in their planning permission application therefore the Dencora House Detention Centre is here to stay! (more…)

Comments (1)

September 24, 2009

Unemployed Workers’ Centres.

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed, Flexible New Deal, New Deal, Unemployment, Welfare State, Workfare — Tags: TUC, Unemployed Centres — Andrew Coates @ 9:21 am

Rising unemployment, Welfare Reform, The Flexible New Deal, Workfare. Against these we need strong campaigns to defend the rights of those of us who are out of work. We need places which can offer independent advice and help, somewhere to talk, organise, maybe have a cup of tea and food. Independent and responsible to the workless.

There were, once upon a time, plenty of these. They were called Unemployed Workers’ Centres. Inspired by the unemployed, unions, and backed by the TUC, there was a network across the country. Set up with funds from the movement, and sympathetic local councils. A few still remain. Some have been changed into Community Resource Centres. Many have closed. Faced with the cuts every political party is threatening the future for independent support for those on the dole or receiving any form of welfare payment, looks grim.

But…

The recent TUC Annual Conference passed a resolution (text available soon – we hope), calling a renewal of these Centres. Now setting up a building with staff is a big task. But we should at least ask: if the TUC back the unemployed then we should ask for support for other initiatives. Like Unemployed Unions.

These need to be independent.

Not separate (from unions, other campaigns). But free from ties with the state and the Voluntary and Charity sector.

Why?

It seems more and more obvious that with Workfare on the horizon parts of the ‘voluntary sector’ are gearing up to be the drill sergeants for the State. They will be the organisations running at least part of the schemes (in ‘partnership’ with the likes of A4e, TNG, and the YMCA). Already trial-runs are being played out. This involves co-operation by some of the unemployed. It involves putting pressure on the out-of-work to collaborate. Paving the way for the compulsory scheme.

One can see the opportunities this offers for some people to excercise power over others. For some to play the Charity Prince and Princesses helping the unfortunate. And for dodgy people to become important.

Instead of being under the thumb of the private companies running the lives of the unemployed, relying on the DWP, or trusting to the good will of the Charitable, we need independent organisations. In fact ones that can fight against this raft of would-be runners of our lives.

Unemployed Workers’ Centres would help us do this.

Comments (1)

September 25, 2009

Scottish MSP Expenses 93% of their salaries

Filed under: Government — Tags: MSP, Scottish Parliament — Work Programme @ 10:22 am

A FoI request reveals the Scottish MSP expenses almost as large as their salaries.

They refused to disclose the year 2008/09.

Year	Cost of Salaries	Cost of Expenses	Approx percentage
2007/08	£11,301,000	£9,727,000	86%
2006/07	£10,050,000	£9,738,000	97%
2005/06	£9,698,000	£9,572,000	98%
2004/05	£9,600,000	£8,896,000	93%

Comments (7)

YMCA Training lies to Ipswich Borough Council

Filed under: Ipswich, New Deal, Suffolk, YMCA — Tags: 517 London Road, IBC, Ipswich Borough Council, YMCA, ymca training — Work Programme @ 10:21 am

YMCA Training lied to Ipswich Borough Council to attempt to secure retrospective planning permission for 517 London Road.

1. Proposal

The non-residential education and training centre run by the YMCA has been carried
out at this site since April 2003. The YMCA were unaware until recently that they
required an application for planning permission for the change of use.

Once this was brought to their attention they applied for the formal consent.

The use operated at this site is similar to that operated from 34 Whitehouse Road
(given a permanent planning permission at the last meeting of this committee).
YMCA Training also operate from similar premises in employment areas elsewhere
within Suffolk.

Given the history relating to the use at 34 Whitehouse Road it was determined that in
this instance this application should be presented to Committee for determination.

Nonsense…

Even though YMCA Training were forced to get planning consent for Dencora House they still refused to get planning permission for 517 London Road, Ipswich, IP2 0ST.

If it wasn’t for someone reporting them to the council (wonder who that could have been?) they wouldn’t have bothered applying.

Comments (1)

September 29, 2009

Unemployed to Be Forced to Take Drug and Alchool Tests.

Filed under: a4e, Campaigns for Unemployed, DWP, New Deal, Welfare State — Tags: Alchool tests, Drug Tests for Unemployed — Andrew Coates @ 9:26 am

BERJAYA

Don’t Forget to Bring These!

Just when you thought it couldn’t get any worse…

It’s been reported (here) that the DWP will soon (if the law passes) be able to order compulsory drug and alcohol tests on those singing-on. The aim? To force anyone they consider an addict or an alcoholic to undergo rehabilitation. Usual bean-bags and people hectoring you (perhaps A4e will get the contracts?). Otherwise: no Dole.

Giving these powers to your local Job Centre is not a good idea.

Apart from the massive intrusion into people’s lives, it will lead to all kinds of front-desk rows. Plus more people begging in the streets.

Now many of us find addicts a pretty severe problem. But this is not the way to get round it. They need real treatment. As Campaigning Groups like Release (which does a good job) say. Not anything that’s a version of the New Deal (the likely offer).

It makes me want to turn up with a four-pack of Tennent’s Super, a Bottle of Vodka and sniff some Talcum Powder (JSA does not extend to the price of real Coke!).

Comments (9)

October 4, 2009

Tories to Make Things Worse for Unemployed.

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed, David Freud, Flexible New Deal, Government, Tories, Welfare State, Workfare — Tags: David Freud, Tories, Workfare — Andrew Coates @ 9:39 am

Update (Monday).

People on employment support allowance who are deemed fit to work would be put on the jobseeker’s allowance, reducing their benefits by £25 a week. Work ‘experience’ and ‘training’ to be compulsory after 6 months. The core elements of the Tory package involve putting everyone on a single out-of-work benefit, including the stock of 2.6m incapacity benefit claimants and lone parents. The back-to-work programme will largely be run by voluntary groups and private sector companies.

I woke up – briefly – around five-thirty this morning. Put the radio on (Radio Five I think). Some woman from (guess it!)…A4e. Haven’t heard anyone so thick. And such a goody-two-shoes. Unable to get simple questions. Interviewer asked if there was a subsidy to take on the unemployed employers might get rid of existing workers to have the extra money. She failed to understand this. Replied about what a wonderful job her company was doing.

These are the people who are going to Get Britain Working!

The media today (written Sunday) is full of David Cameron’s plans to Get Britain Working.

He plans to abolish the New Deal (in its various forms) for the Unemployed.

Good.

But what will they put in its place? And who is behind the schemes?

Details are sketchy (we will update them as they are revealed), but this (here) is worth noting. The policy is called,

“Get Britain Working” – which will see sweeping changes to policy across whole swathes of Whitehall in an attempt to “unleash investment and entrepreneurial activity that helps create more jobs”.

That is, the usual guff.

But wait..Who is the Shadow (unelected) Chap in Charge?

Mr Cameron’s article puts wholesale reform of Britain’s welfare system at heart of his drive for jobs – masterminded by Lord (David) Freud, the welfare expert who “defected” from advising the government to become a Tory shadow minister earlier this year.

David Baron Freud’s ‘expertise’ on welfare is nill. What has he done in his life? Well, he was a public schoolboy. He went to Oxford. Worked at the Financial Times. He then swanned around advising on financial deals, pilfering and making a mess of things.

To start with, what is his experience in life? Sketch here.

“His involvement in raising £50bn ($72bn) during some of the biggest deals of the 1980s and 1990s made him a wealthy man – yet he continues to cycle to work, swim regularly in Hampstead Heath’s ponds and conduct his business in functional off-the-peg suits.”

Mistakes he has made in his career include (here),

He moved into advising companies, and was involved in piecing together extremely complex deals such as the flotations of Eurotunnel and EuroDisney, which cost investors millions, and the financing of the Channel Tunnel rail link. Eurotunnel opened in May 1994 one year behind schedule and £2bn ($2.9bn) over budget. Sir David later admitted the deal was a “shambles” and that he had “successfully sold the market a pup”.But his chutzpah meant his career was not held back.Hauled before furious MPs to explain the mispricing of Railtrack, he was subsequently appointed an advisor to the government on its successor, Network Rail.

As a an adviser to the Labour Government Freud was responsible for introducing the principle of Workfare and the Flexible New Deal. Now he has ratted and joined the Tories we can be sure he will have had an even freer hand. Expect loads of money for the usual suspects (A4E etc) to ’train’ the workless, and a programme of workfare. That will be as a futile, demeaning, pointless, costly, as anyone can imagine. And do absolutely nothing to deal with mass unemployment.

Watching A4E gives some more information on this depressing, tyrannical, absurd, scheme (here).

Welcome to the Baron in charge of Creating Social Exclusion.

Comments (7)

October 5, 2009

Work for Benefit.

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed, David Freud, Workfare — Tags: Workfare — Andrew Coates @ 10:36 am

This is not so widely reported,

“The proposals also build on the government’s “work for your benefit” scheme, forcing long-term unemployed to engage in community work programmes to “earn” benefits.

Participation in community work will be for one year, at the end of which participants will start a fresh back-to-work cycle with a fresh assessment.

The Conservatives admitted that they were basing their ideas for the unemployed on Australia’s “work for the dole” projects.”

Here.

Comments (4)

October 12, 2009

Youth Unemployment Heads to One Million.

Filed under: Government, Unemployment, Welfare State — Tags: Youth Unemployment — Andrew Coates @ 10:14 am

From the Observer (Here),

“The government’s record on youth unemployment will come under intense scrutiny this week amid fears that the number of jobless 16 to 24-year-olds will rise through the one-million barrier.

Economists believe the failure of large numbers of this year’s school leavers and graduates to find work this summer will lead to a sharp jump in those under 25 without work when the data for August is released on Wednesday.”

The Labour, and Conservative response is that there has to be an expansion of unpaid workplacements – ‘Internships’.

Perhaps they should take a Butcher’s at this site: Carrot Workers (here).

Comments (5)

October 17, 2009

YMCA Training: We can’t give out phone numbers

Filed under: New Deal, YMCA — Tags: dencora house, New Deal, ymca training, ymca training ipswich, ymca training norwich — Work Programme @ 8:26 am

A member of Ipswich Unemployed Action rang Dencora House on Tuesday asking if they had the phone number for another detention centre of theirs. Surprise, surprise, the person who answered the phone stated YMCA Training had a policy where they couldn’t disclose telephone numbers. (more…)

Comments (3)

October 14, 2009

Unemployed FORCED to take Drug Tests.

Filed under: DWP, Unemployment, Welfare State — Tags: Drug Tests for Unemployed — Andrew Coates @ 9:51 am

As noted already here, this is in prospect everywhere. However even we did not realise this practice has already begun.

Hat-Tip to Chris.

Published: Friday, 9th October, 2009 2:00pm Full Story here.

Job centre drug test fury Profile by Russell Steele

Image related to story 392743, see caption or article text
DRUG SHOCK: Job Centre.

SHOCKED jobseekers were subjected to ‘degrading’ drug tests in a Greenock street by a top recruitment firm, the Tele has learned.

People who were interviewed for posts with cabling firm Sanmina were left astonished this week when they were escorted outside Greenock Jobcentre by staff from Pertemps for mouth swabs to be taken – as cars drove past and pedestrians walked by.

The tests were taken outside the Jobcentre because Pertemps did not have permission to conduct them inside during interviews. ”

This is a major scandal.

Comments (29)

October 18, 2009

Vagabonds, criminals, paupers & gangrels? Variant Magazine Interview.

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed, David Freud, DWP, James Purnell, New Deal, Unemployment, Welfare State — Tags: Unemployed, Variant Magazine — Andrew Coates @ 9:18 am

Interview with Edinburgh Coalition Against Poverty & Edinburgh Claimants.

This is highly recommended reading for anyone who thinks ‘Welfare reform’ (reducing our living standards and taking away our rights) is a good idea. .

“They hang the man,
and flog the woman,
That steals the goose
from off the common;
But let the greater villain loose,
That steals the common
from the goose.”
Anonymous, 17th century

A false division exists between those in work and those ‘out of work’, and, despite the correlation between welfare and work, there have been few effective movements to defend the unemployed and low-wage workers collectively. However, with the unemployed increasingly herded into a privatised workfare industry, and with the onset of large-scale unemployment under recessionary conditions, there lies the possibility of a convergence of interests and perspectives between the unemployed, people in precarious work, and all those who contribute to society outside of the wage-relation. In the context of punitive Welfare restructuring there have been some challenging community responses – ECAP and Edinburgh Claimants are among those groups that are only too well aware of the implications. Variant interviewed them, as building and strengthening coalitions between people in low paid work and people on benefits is surely (more here)

Leave a Comment

October 19, 2009

Working Links’ £13m Flexible New Deal boost

Filed under: Flexible New Deal — Tags: Flexible New Deal, New Deal Fraud, Working Links — Work Programme @ 9:11 am

Royal Bank of Scotland has loaned Working Links £13 million via its Revolving Credit facility (designed to provide businesses with the working capital required) to help fund the initial working capital to deliver the £500 million 5-year Flexible New Deal contract allowing the employment of over 300 new employees at 40 new offices they intend to open across the UK.

(more…)

Comments (5)

October 24, 2009

SAVE DLA AND ALL DISABILITY BENEFITS.

Filed under: Atttendance Allowance, Campaigns for Unemployed, DWP — Tags: Disabilities, DLA, Welfare Reform — Andrew Coates @ 8:16 am

This is cross-posted from Tony Greenstein’s Blog.

Tony is in contact with Ipswich Unemployed Action. One of his complaints (see below) is the lack of serious opposition to Welfare Reform. Here he gives further details of the threat this poses and what should be done.

There are already serious cases in Ipswich of people having their money cut. The DWP runs examinations popularly known as the Lourdes cure: the halt and the lame emerge in full health (er…). Some of the most serious examples involve people with ‘invisible’ disabilities – that is those suffering from mental troubles.

SAVE DLA AND ALL DISABILITY BENEFITS

Tony Greenstein Having already abolished Incapacity Benefit, New Labour has now made it clear that it wants to scrap ALL disability benefits. On July 14th New Labour published a Green Paper, Shaping the Future of Care. Reading through the spin, the message is clear. DLA is ‘inefficient’ ‘poorly targeted’ [because it’s not means tested!] and therefore has to go towards paying for a new national care service. DLA is the best benefit there is. If your needs are great enough, if you cannot care and need help with bodily functions for part or all of the day (and night) you are eligible for DLA. There are 3 bands – lower, middle and higher. Receipt of DLA does not overlap with other benefits and is not counted as taxable income. The result is that people who are the most vulnerable and sick in this society see a small increase in their standard of living. This is what New Labour hate most of all. The proposal is to use the money for ‘individual budgets’ run by private companies, whereby the disabled, in agreement with the local authority, can spend the money on care. Of course they’ll never actually see the money!! The whole system will be discretionary and, of course, liable to cuts. Anyone with any experience of the existing system of individual budgets knows what a nightmare the whole system is.

The Green Paper talks about abolishing Attendance Allowance which is paid to those 65 and over (AA is the equivalent of the care component of DLA). Instead they intend to force the elderly to pay £20,000 to insure themselves!! The Green Paper talks about replacing not just Attendance Allowance but ‘disability benefits’ – a clear sign that it is not just AA which is in their sights. And the Green Paper dresses up its purpose with the usual New Labour waffle such as proclaiming that “our aspiration (is) to build a stronger, fairer Britain.” The Attlee Government of 1945-51, which was a right-wing cold war Labour government, introduced the building blocs of the welfare state which New Labour is intent on dismantling. They introduced the 1948 National Assistance Act intended to act as a safety net for those who fell below a certain level of income. (more…)

Comments (5)

October 28, 2009

Workfare (Forced Labour) to be Piloted in Suffolk (and elsewhere).

Filed under: Flexible New Deal, Welfare State, Workfare — Tags: Work for Your Benefit, Workfare — Andrew Coates @ 11:44 am

Work for Your Benefits (here)

Work for Your Benefit (WfYB) pilots were a key part of the Green Paper “No one written off: reforming welfare to reform responsibility” published in July 2008 and the response “Raising expectations and increasing support: reforming welfare for the future” published in December 2008.

The Work for Your Benefit programme will consist of full-time (30 hours a week) work experience, backed up with flexible employment support.
There will be two pilots:
Greater Manchester
Norfolk, Cambridgeshire and Suffolk

This is coming, very soon. This will apply to people who have completed the 52 weeks programme of the Flexible New Deal. Given the rates of unemployment it means quite a few of us will be facing the prospect for working for our meagre Dole. Locally ‘voluntary; organisations are already trumpeting a ‘soft’ (voluntary) version of workfare. Well-rewarded professionals consider that we should contribute something to society at rates of pay they would never dream of accepting. Like Housing Associations we will see some of them transform as they become publicly-funded (but privately run) bodies. Already there are some reports of dodgy individuals getting involved in these ‘projects’.

More to the point: given Councils are cash-strapped, looking for ways to save money, how long will it before some Town Hall hits on the idea of using Workfare to replace paid staff?

Comments (9)

November 3, 2009

Unemployment Set to Keep Rising.

Filed under: Government, Unemployment, Workfare — Tags: Unemployment, Workfare — Andrew Coates @ 11:27 am

Unemployment in the UK is set to hit 2.75 million by November next year as the economic recovery fails to boost the jobs market, research has claimed. (More here).

The ‘Flexible New Deal’ is to be followed by Work for Benefits. We have mentioned that East Anglia will be a Pilot area. This will be followed by the rest of the country. With these figures the signs are that a vast number of people are going to end up under the thumb of private Companies, Charities, Voluntary Organisations. Full-time. Dependent on their Good Will. Of the ‘good practice’ of the likes of a4e and Working Links. Not that, charities and ‘voluntary groups’ are exactly famous for this in regard to their own staff. As the trade unions know only too well.

Comments (3)

November 5, 2009

New Deal Sanctions Exposed

Filed under: DWP, Flexible New Deal, Government, intensive activity, jobseekers allowance, Unemployment, Welfare State — Tags: iap, Jobcentre Plus, nd25, NDYP, New Deal, sanctions, VSO — Work Programme @ 11:49 am

679,820 New Deal Sanctions

So, we are always hearing about the millions of people who New Deal has supposedly helped get such jobseekers back in to work off benefits. You have also heard about how poorly New Deal participants are treated and perhaps you have your own experiences to back up this, but Ipswich Unemployed Action can reveal that over 679,820 sanctions have been awarded to lucky New Deal participants since the year 2000.
Whether the Government likes to admit this or not, the figures are an alarmingly high figure (equates to approx 84,977 sanctions per year) which probably suggest why the Government has refused mine and numerous other peoples attempts to reveal the numbers of people on New Deal being dismissed (or exited as they like to call it) under the Freedom of Information Act claiming an exemption.
Whereas these figures state the exact number of sanctions successfully imposed, it doesn’t state the number of times New Deal participants were exited/dismissed. It can be assumed that for each sanction a dismissal had occurred because that is the procedure however, myself and Andrew to name just two examples have been dismissed in the past without any imposed sanctions at all.
The figure of 679,820 definite dismissals with sanctions is a big figure so it is best to break it up.

New Deal

Prior to April 2004 but after April 2000, there were 193,300 sanctions awarded. At this time their systems didn’t specify which New Deal scheme it referred to. After April 2004 they are more detailed. The above figures equates to a rough average of 48,325 sanctions per year.
This is 4,027 sanctions per a month; 929 sanctions each week or to break it down completely, 261 sanctions each working day (5 day week Mon-Fri) solely from New Deal.

New Deal for Young People (NDYP)

Since April 2004 up until April 2009 (not up until New Deal ended) there were 325,390 successful sanctions awarded.
Gateway 2 Work (GtW)
On New Deal for Young People (NDYP) Gateway to Work there were 119,570 dismissals leading to successful sanctioning.
This is 2,491 sanctions per a month; 575 sanctions each week or to break it down completely, 115 sanctions each working day (5 day week Mon-Fri) solely from the Gateway 2 Work (GtW) stage of New Deal for Young People (NDYP).
ETF/VSO Option etc. (Option stage)
On New Deal for Young People (NDYP) VSO etc. there were 205, 560 dismissals leading to successful sanctioning.
This is 4,282 sanctions per a month; 988 sanctions each week or to break it down completely, 197 sanctions each working day (5 day week Mon-Fri) solely from the Option stage of New Deal for Young People (NDYP).
Other NDYP
I assume this category refers to the Adviser stage of New Deal; there were only 260 sanctions which equates to just over 1 a week.

New Deal 25+ (ND25+)

Since April 2004 up until April 2009 (not up until New Deal ended) there were 64,750 successful sanctions awarded.
Gateway 2 Work (GtW)
On New Deal 25+ (ND25+) Gateway to Work there were 7,110 dismissals leading to successful sanctioning.
This is 148 sanctions per a month; 34 sanctions each week solely from the Gateway 2 Work (GtW) stage of New Deal 25+ (ND25+).
Intensive Activity Period (IAP)
On New Deal 25+ (ND25+) IAP there were 57,640 dismissals leading to successful sanctioning.
This is 1,200 sanctions per a month; 277 sanctions each week or to break it down completely, 55 sanctions each working day (5 day week Mon-Fri) solely from the IAP stage of New Deal 25+ (ND25+).

Basic Skills

Since April 2004 up until April 2009 (not up until New Deal ended) there were 1,700 successful sanctions awarded equating to almost 2 every working day.

IAP (ages 50-59)

Since April 2004 up until April 2009 (not up until New Deal ended) there were 40 successful sanctions awarded equating to just under 1 a month.

Refusing/Failing a Jobseeker Direction while on New Deal

Does this mean refusing New Deal?! Since April 2004 up until April 2009 (not up until New Deal ended) there were 70,190 successful sanctions awarded for refusing New Deal/Jobseeker Direction.
This is 1,462 sanctions per a month; 337 sanctions each week or to break it down completely, 67 sanctions each working day (5 day week Mon-Fri) solely for refusing New Deal.

“Unknown”

Since April 2004 up until April 2009 (not up until New Deal ended) there were 5,980 successful sanctions awarded. We assume this category of Unknown New Deal is the other schemes such as NDDP, NDLP etc. out of process of elimination (i.e. the NDYP, ND25+ accounted for).
This is 125 sanctions per a month; 29 sanctions each week or to break it down completely, 6 sanctions each working day (5 day week Mon-Fri).

Reflection

From 2000 to April 2004, there were 193,300 sanctions making a rough figure of 48,325 sanctions per year. After April 2004 (up until April 2009) there were 486,520 sanctions making a rough figure of 121,630 per year.

This is an increase of 60% in sanctions.

Flexible New Deal

The Conservatives claim they will bring tougher sanctions and the Labour Party seems to have similar ideas.

Comments (17)

November 10, 2009

Bypass Norwich! Local benefit claimants must read

Filed under: DWP, Flexible New Deal, Ipswich, jobseekers allowance, New Deal, Suffolk, Unemployment, Welfare State — Tags: Benefit Delay Scandal — Work Programme @ 11:24 am

Bypass the Benefit Delay Scandal

Jobcentre Plus gets correspondence sent to the below published address for the Suffolk (?) area:

Bury St Edmunds BDC
Thorpe Road
Norwich
NR99 1AD

(more…)

Comments (5)

November 12, 2009

Claimants’ Unions National Meeting.

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed, Welfare State, Workfare — Tags: Claimants' Unions, Unemployed Campaigns, Welfare Refiorm — Andrew Coates @ 9:30 am

Signs that things are starting to happen,

No to Welfare Abolition

the national planning meeting

Manchester University Students Union, Steve Biko Building, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PR, rooms MR1 and MR2

Saturday 14th November

Arrive 11.30am for 12 noon start. Finish 5.30pm.

* The aims: stop the implementation of the welfare reform (abolition) bill; build a network of solidarity between claimants; create links between unemployed workers and workers in the PCS

* The day: 1. Share information 2. Plan a national action 3. Build a strategy and work out how we can co-ordinate nationally

The Welfare Reform Bill is a massive attack on the disabled, single parents, unemployed workers and workers in the Department for Work and Pensions and we cannot allow it to be implemented.

14^th November is our chance for welfare and disability rights activists, members of unemployed workers’ groups and trade unionists to get to together, build links of solidarity and plan our struggle. If you are organising against welfare abolition or want to start doing so, please make sure people from your group come along!

We say to the government and the bosses, we do not exist for your benefit!

Free lunch will be provided.

Let us know you are coming by emailing hackneyunemployedworkers@gmail.com.

Contact rebecca.galbraith@yahoo.co.uk if you want to use the free creche.

Contact hackneyunemployedworkers@gmail.com if you need transport from London

Naturally, Manchester is rather a long way from Ipswich….

Leave a Comment

November 13, 2009

Unjustly Imprisoned Claimants.

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed, Welfare State — Tags: Benefit Claimants, Prison — Andrew Coates @ 11:22 am

Mick’s Blog contains some important stuff,

“ prison bars Many hundreds of claimants are unjustly imprisoned every year because overpayment amounts are being ‘wildly exaggerated’ by the DWP, welfare benefits expert witness Neil Bateman has told MPs . In one case he assisted with, a woman prosecuted for a £47,000 overpayment had in reality under-claimed benefits.

The shocking revelations were made in written evidence to a House of Commons committee currently examining the standard of DWP decision making.”

More here.

Comments (12)

November 18, 2009

Reed in Partnership. What Kind of Partners for the Unemployed?

Filed under: Flexible New Deal, Suffolk, Unemployment — Tags: Flexible New Deal, Reed in Partnership — Andrew Coates @ 10:30 am

Reed in Partnership - the word ‘partnership’ should make anyone wary.

They are subcontracted to provide the flexible New Deal. In Suffolk.

Flexible New Deal has raised issues about them in the recent past.

We have yet to hear any criticisms of how they treat ‘customers’ locally. And we shall be scrupulous in fulfilling any demands they make on our members and supporters - insofar as they correspond to Reed’s own criteria.

That is their “set of six core values “, “Accountability, Honesty, Efficiency, Forward Thinking, High Performing and Customer Focus”. (here)

Any experiences of these – please comment.

Comments (88)

November 24, 2009

Flexible New Deal, TNG and Sanctions.

Filed under: Ipswich, jobseekers allowance, New Deal — Tags: Felexible New Deal, TNG — Andrew Coates @ 10:03 am

Well, it’s all off the Flexible New Deal. Contrary to what I was led to believe by other people, it is TNG that I have to report to.

The New Deal Scandal site, and others, have already shared their knowledge and experience of this “provider” (for example here)

I wonder if any of this relates to the contents of the Jobcentreplus Flexible New Deal document, “What you can expect and what we can expect from you.” (FNDI 10/09).

It begin with two pages explaining what the FND is.

One page on what we can expect from you. That is responsibilities we owe to the DWP and the ‘Provider’.

Then “What happens if you don’t meet your responsibilities”?”

Answer: Sanctions. Seven pages ( Page 7 to 13), from a total of 14, about them.

Ends with “How to make a complaint.”

On Page 2 there is some stuff about ‘service standards’.

It would have been more useful if they explained how the Flexible New Deal is going to be delivered, what is consists of, and what responsibilities the ‘provider’ TNG, has towards its clients.

But of this, nothing.

Comments (15)

November 27, 2009

Work For Benefit: The New Helots.

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed, Flexible New Deal, New Deal, Unemployment, Workfare — Tags: Flexible New Deal, Welfare State, Work For Benefit — Andrew Coates @ 9:27 am

This article appears in the December issue of Labour Briefing – a left journal strongly critical of the present government.

Work for Your Benefit: Labour’s New Helots.

Welfare reform legislation is due to be one of this Government’s enduring legacies. From this autumn there will be two benefits: Jobseeker’s Allowance, and Employment and Support Allowance. Already there is pressure on medical assessors to channel those on Incapacity Benefit into the former, where many lone parents and others will also eventually join them. JSA brings a lower income – down to the standard rate of £64.30 a week, in contrast to £89.80, the starting point of incapacity allowance – and, after six months, puts claimants on the Flexible New Deal. This, being tried out in large parts of the country, will eventually replace all existing welfare-to-work schemes. For a year the jobless will be farmed out to private companies, intensively advised and obliged to carry out a minimum of four weeks of “work related activity” (they may be “advised” to do much more).

This sounds relatively benign. It replaces 13 weeks in “work placements” of dubious value or simply stuck in “training centres” (where the only “training” is sitting in front of computers “job searching” for work that does not exist) of the previous New Deal. However, the Government has learned nothing from its experience of farming out the New Deal to private companies, two of which at least have been accused of malpractice. The faith-led YMCA has also run schemes. Most have scraped through their contracts with low employment outcomes and feeble training standards. The approximately 600,000 claimants who have faced sanctions for not complying with every aspect of the schemes shows how they are used to punish people. If participants were in charge of inspections, the companies would fail in an instant – yet the DWP has been told to contract out its new scheme to the same bodies.

The new regime will closely regulate people’s lives. Partners of JSA claimants will also have to seek work actively. Those dependent on drugs and alcohol will undergo compulsory rehabilitation. There is no clear notion of what will happen if they fail, other than they will have no benefits.

Most worryingly, after two years unemployment people will be forced onto the Work for Benefits programme. This will involve full time activity in “training options, short term work trials, a remuneration subsidy for employers to take them, or voluntary work in the local community,” (DWP October 2009). With unemployment set to rise to 3 million by October next year, when this policy is enforced, they will have plenty of compelled “volunteers”.

Some argue that since JSA is supplemented by housing and council tax benefit, it is “fair” to work for this money. However, those further benefits are paid at varying rates, making the overall pay rates different between individuals – and still leaving them well below the minimum wage.

This all raises fundamental issues. First, why should those who through no fault of their own have no job be forced to do what has up to now been the task of those sentenced to do community service by the courts? Indeed, what will happen to community service orders when the long-term unemployed start to undertake similar “sentences”?

Second, this will corrupt the voluntary sector, parts of which are already gearing up for it. The character of the voluntary sector will change. The nature of forced labour is to give power to the employer while discouraging the worker, making them dependent on the goodwill of the employer. The rights of volunteers are not the same as those on paid contracts. Groups and no doubt individuals will profit financially.

Third, it doesn’t take a genius to realise that cash-strapped local government will see this as an opportunity to plug gaps in their services. A tied labourer is cheaper than a paid employee. In areas as disparate as home helps to environmental projects volunteering could become a new national service, replacing those working for real salaries.

Those opposed to welfare reform have to date had little impact on Brown’s take it or leave it decision that this is the direction welfare will go in. The umbrella initiatives organised by the TUC have petered out in well-meaning but ineffective lobbying by a coalition of “antipoverty” NGOs with some union support. There are now signs of a more militant approach emerging from unions of the unemployed and other groups. There are web sites promoting opposition and plans for a decent benefit system that could really cope with people’s needs. As mass unemployment returns pressure for change will increase.

Labour looks set to leave behind a new class of helots – the work-for-the dole underclass. An incoming Conservative Administration will have plenty of conscripts for its plans for workfare. Both ideas were pioneered by the same person – once adviser to Labour and now the Tories, the exceedingly wealthy Lord Freud.

Andrew Coates

􀁺For more information, visit Ipswich Unemployed Action: http://intensiveactivity.wordpress.com/

Comments (22)

December 8, 2009

TNG are racist! (Ed’s note: Ofsted alleges “inadequate” Equal Ops)

Filed under: DWP, Flexible New Deal, Ipswich, New Deal, Suffolk — Tags: disability discrimination, Flexible New Deal, New Deal, ofsted, ofsted inspection, racial discrimination, racism, sexual discrimination, TNG — Work Programme @ 10:11 am

Equal Opportunities?

Ipswich Unemployed Action would like to alert Flexible New Deal clients that an Ofsted report for ”TNG (Avanta) Bedfordshire & Hertfordshire New Deal” raised massive concerns about the central structure of TNG/Avanta being racist at its core.

During the Ofsted report inspection, the inspector noted some “inappropriate language and images” by both TNG staff and subcontractor staff – whereas Ofsted didn’t state whether these fell under racism, sexism, disability discrimination or a mixture of more than one, it raises extreme concerns especially when Equal Opportunities is written in the core of New Deal contracts.

DWP/Jobcentre Plus are aware of this concern at the time prior to the inspection and forced the holding company to establish an equality of opportunity representatives’ group (although this was for Avanta not TNG itself) and to immediately implement equality and diversity policies, procedures and staff training in TNG.

The report concluded that although had given plenty of time to do so prior to the Ofsted inspection most staff did not receive training on equality and diversity and the direct results of this are present when such staff couldn’t suppress such behaviour when being inspected by Ofsted, resulting in them being caught speaking offensive language and advocating the presentation of disgusting images to participants. Any attempts to include equality and diversity in TNG’s adult training public service environment have failed. The staff racism etc. was solely noted on this contract area although the failing’s in the company as a whole was raised i.e. if they dont have policies and procedures in place and staff aren’t trained – the situation will be a problem nationally.

Although these are major concerns (and on the tendering stage potential provides have to show awareness of Equal ops, harassment policies etc. these are also policies which form part of the New Deal contract hence why providers mention them on induction as they have to) TNG kept this prime contract. They also managed to secure Flexible New Deal. (more…)

Leave a Comment

December 13, 2009

TNG Ipswich: How do we get there?

Filed under: DWP, Flexible New Deal, Ipswich, jobseekers allowance, New Deal, Suffolk — Tags: Avanta, Flexible New Deal, New Deal, TNG, Training Network Group — Work Programme @ 1:12 pm

So many people in Ipswich may have got an invite to attend Flexible New Deal at TNG.

TNG which stands for Training Network Group or more to the point Trainee Network Group. Maybe the company should be called NGT (Network Group in Training) as even though they are part of a bigger company (Avanta) and have landed huge Government contracts to deliver Flexible New Deal – they are the most incompetent useless unprofessional dim wits ever!

Before you see this as a rant against the Flexible New Deal provider, read on and see how poor their methods of communication are.

We can hear an TNG employee stating:

How come only those who came by train had arrived?

(more…)

Comments (19)

December 22, 2009

Ipswich Jobseekers should claim back New Deal travel deductions after DWP has admitted it is illegal

Filed under: DWP, Ipswich, New Deal, Suffolk, Unemployment, Welfare State, YMCA — Tags: DWP, Jobcentre Plus, New Deal, new deal travel deductions, ymca training — Work Programme @ 1:26 pm

New Deal Scandal has just announced that the £4 weekly travel deductions are illegal when DWP finally admitted:

There is no legislation involved in this decision.

DWP has since tried to remove the Freedom of Information request from the WhatDoTheyKnow Freedom of Information website. More details (and the full response) are available on Flexible-New-Deal.co.uk : New Deal Travel Deductions: DWP admits £4 deductions are unlawful

Ipswich Unemployed Action recommends everyone who fell victim to this multi-million pound scam since 1998 should contact their New Deal training provider and demand their money back (with interest to keep with inflation).

Those in Ipswich should contact Dencora House, YMCA Training.

Their details are as follows…

Dencora House
Units 6 to 10
34 Whitehouse Road
Ipswich
Suffolk
IP1 5LU

Tel: 01473 243980

517 London Road
Ipswich
Suffolk
IP2 0ST

Telephone: 01473 406126

Contact name: Sally Smith

Comments (1)

January 2, 2010

YMCA Training New Deal Contract Published

Filed under: DWP, Ipswich, New Deal, Suffolk, YMCA — Tags: 517 London Road, a4e, dencora house, New Deal, new deal contract, TNG, Working Links, ymca training — Work Programme @ 1:57 pm

So, amongst reporting about the failings of New Deal as a whole and numerous other unemployment/welfare issues including new and proposed schemes such as Flexible New Deal and Workfare; you would have read about numerous concerns regarding local New Deal prime contractor (and I hear, also a subcontractor for Flexible New Deal) YMCA Training based at Dencora House and London Road.

Just to recap:

Poor conditions at Dencora House and mistreatment of participants (overcrowding etc)
Leaking participants confidential information
Sending participants on walks (Cambridge) and requesting volunteers in order to run provision
Dismissing participants with lies including claiming someone was a breach of Health & Safety obligations for saying “Storm Dencora House” on his blog, but really was down to speaking out about the scandal *before* he started the course
Harrassment and Diversity issues
Not complying to the Data Protection Act 1998 i.e. overdue information requests
New Deal Fraud including timesheet fraud – saying participants are there longer than reality
Deducting £4 week without legal authority to do so (advice on reclaiming coming soon)

(more…)

Comments (9)

January 7, 2010

YMCA Training New Deal: no Diversity or Harrassment policies

Filed under: New Deal, YMCA — Tags: DWP, Jobcentre Plus, New Deal, new deal contracts, YMCA, ymca training — Work Programme @ 10:14 am

So, YMCA Training’s New Deal contract had been recently published and one of the most interesting discoveries was no diversity or harrassment policies were included when the contract was signed.

(more…)

Comments (2)

January 9, 2010

Draconian Testing Regime.

Filed under: Atttendance Allowance, Campaigns for Unemployed, Government, Welfare State — Andrew Coates @ 9:48 am

Via Mick, (here)”

In two reports issued last month, UK charities have finally begun to wake up and challenge the government over the ‘cruel’ and ‘unacceptable’ failings of the Employment and Support Allowance, (ESA) which is to replace the sickness benefits paid to those who are to ill or disabled to work. In the article below, the web site Benefits and Work looks at the disquiet which is gradually emerging over the way claimants are tested by the DWP to find out whether they are fit for work, and thus not eligible for sickness benefits. The new system has proved especially problematical as it operates on a one size fits all computer programe, which is unable to take into account the different ways illness and disability impacts on individual claimants. Some of the examples the article throws up are shocking. For example a claimant undergoing chemotherapy was obliged to attend a medical by badly trained DWP staff and told if she failed to attend she would lose her sickness benefit. Others claimants with cancer scored very few points when assessed under the new work capability assessment and were refused ESA. One woman with cancer scored just six points and was found capable of work.

Read the rest here.

Comments (7)

January 15, 2010

Petition to Abolish Workfare.

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed, Workfare — Tags: Workfare — Andrew Coates @ 10:08 am

Petition to abolish Workfare

Please sign the following petition supporting the abolition of Workfare.

We want to abolish work for your benefit/workfare schemes in the UK. The Welfare Reform Bill will cause severe financial and emotional distress to the poorest and most vulnerable in society.

Via Harpy Marx.

Comments (2)

January 16, 2010

Right to Work Conference.

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed — Tags: Right to Work — Andrew Coates @ 11:46 am

The forthcoming Right to Work conference in Manchester on Sat Jan 30th and the transport that is being put on to get people there from our area in case you or any of the other unemployed people you have built up contact with are interested in taking part. The local contact for the conference and transport arrangements is John Curtis, and his mobile number is 07517 531733, and his e-mail address is below. The Right to Work website is www.righttowork.org.uk where you will find lots more information about their campaign. If you or other local unemployed people want to go but feel the £5 cost is more than you can afford, please get in touch with me and I will see if we can raise some financial help.

Leave a Comment

January 18, 2010

New Labour Christian Charity.

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed, Welfare State — Tags: Welfare State — Andrew Coates @ 1:02 pm

Via Fat Man on a Keyboard.

“In June of last year a young Frenchwoman jumped off the sixth floor balcony of her sister’s flat in London holding her five-month-old baby in her arms. Both were killed. A tragedy, but one with a reason. Let Jenni Russell take up the story. Christelle fitted no stereotype. She was a 32-year-old Frenchwoman living in Hackney who had lived in Britain since she and her sister moved here in 1997. In May 2008 she graduated from London’s Metropolitan University with a degree in philosophy. At about the same time she discovered she was pregnant. She looked for work while claiming jobseeker’s allowance and housing benefit.

Then in December 2008, the advisers at the jobcentre told her she no longer qualified for jobseeker’s allowance.

According to the Department for Work and Pensions the fact that she was within 11 weeks of giving birth disqualified her from being an active jobseeker. She was told to apply for income support instead. What no one warned her was that European nationals who claim income support must provide more proof of residence than jobseekers have to. All a jobseeker needs do is show they are looking for work. Income support is only given if the claimant can prove that for the previous five years they have been either in work, searching for work, studying, or self-sufficient.

Christelle had an eight-month period in 2003 when she said she had been working in a cafe but had no employment records to prove it. Her claim was turned down.

Once that happened, the welfare state stopped operating. Her housing benefit was automatically withdrawn. The state, having decreed she was not in a fit condition to look for work, took no further interest in how the penniless mother of a new baby was going to survive.

This is how it ends. All the endless measures aimed at tightening the rules on claimants and foreigners in an attempt to appease the supposed, and probably fictional, atavistic appetites of the electorate, all the cosying up to the the editors of the right wing press, all the creation of increasingly labyrinthine bureaucratic rules, they all result in two broken bodies lying on a Hackney pavement.

And now we turn to the ‘coup’ that failed – the last ditch attempt to oust the Prime Minister. I may have missed it, but I can’t recall any debate about what the Labour Party should be and what would change under a new leader. Was there a discussion of alternative ideas, philosophies and policies? Was there any mention of how to create a better Britain, one forged from the best traditions of the Labour movement, one that would not lead someone to choose death over destitution? Not as far as I could see. Instead all the talk was of who would be most likely to win an election, of who is in and who is out, of factions and intrigues. Court politics. That is what we are left with, court politics.

Jenni Russell concluded, I don’t believe this is a stance a civilised society can justify. It pitches foreign-born mothers back into a Victorian-style existence in which pregnancy may mean destitution and disgrace. I agree. And as the ghastly prospect of a prolonged election campaign, dripping with platitudes, looms, don’t expect to hear anything about the suicide of a young mother and how we should ensure that something as grotesquely tragic never happens again. It wouldn’t do to disturb the formulaic answers and sloganising with the lives and deaths of real people. Would it?”

I wept when I read this.

Comments (4)

February 4, 2010

Claim unlawful travel deductions back

Filed under: DWP, Government, Ipswich, New Deal, Suffolk, Unemployment, YMCA — Tags: dencora house, New Deal — Work Programme @ 11:34 am

Sister site Flexible New Deal Scandal (flexible-new-deal.co.uk) is seeking volunteers who have been on a New Deal course at Dencora House within the last year to help everyone claim their travel back. Last year we exposed that such travel deductions were unlawful and now we wish to take action. (more…)

Comments (1)

January 28, 2010

Right to Work Conference: Welfare Reform.

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed, Unemployment, Welfare State — Tags: Right to Work Conference, Welfare Reform — Andrew Coates @ 11:15 am

BERJAYA

A conference of resistance and solidarity Saturday 30 January, Central Hall, Oldham Street, Manchester 11.30am-5pm Fight for every job Organise to stop the cuts Defend services and pensions Unite the public and private sectors Demand a million green jobs Jobs not bombs Defend migrant workers – jobs for all Speakers include: Mark Serwotka (PCS), Sally Hunt (UCU), Tony Kearns (CWU), Pete Murray (NUJ), Jerry Hicks (Unite), Mark Smith (former Vestas worker), Paul Brandon (Unite bus worker), Nahella Ashraf (chair, Greater Manchester Stop the War), Dave Chapple (Chair National Shop Stewards Network), Clara Osagiede (RMT cleaners’ secretary), Kevin Courtney (NUT national executive, personal capacity), Dot Gibson (General Secretary, National Pensioners Convention). More here.

We note that there will be discussion of a campaign against Welfare Reform. In our view this is a central concern. We have posted extensively on this.

The TUC sponsered campaign had not gained momentum.

This is not just an issue for trade unions, NGOs, and left political parties. It is time that those affected, unemployed, single parents, those on Incapacity Benefits, make our voices heard.

Comments (2)

Councils Under Tories May Set Benefit Levels.

Filed under: Ipswich, Suffolk, Tories, Unemployment — Tags: Tories, Unemployment — Andrew Coates @ 12:23 pm

Tories may give councils power to set benefits

Toby Helm. Guardian here.

Under the proposal benefits would be lower where it was easier to find work, and councils would also be given incentives to help people find jobs.

The Conservative Treasury team are holding talks on handing responsibility to local councils for setting and distributing benefits such as the jobseeker’s allowance.

A move to setting benefit rates to match the needs of local labour markets has been pushed by radical Tory councils but it is the first time that the frontbench has embraced the concept.Speaking at a conference organised by the New Local Government Network in London, the shadow chief secretary, Philip Hammond, disclosed that he was holding talks on the issue with Conservative councils, including Kent.

He said: “There are some key challenges we will have to face in delivering this agenda. Can we take the public with us in this agenda? Can we persuade people living in your area, for example, they would rather see the management of workless benefits in the hands of a local authority than in the hands of a national government setting standards nationally?”

He said “huge potential savings” were available, adding that he regarded local government as pivotal to reducing the public sector deficit.

Under the proposal benefits would be lower where it was easier to find work. Councils would also be given incentives to help people find jobs. The plan has not yet appeared in any formal document.

In Ipswich this would be an utter disaster. The Liberal-Tory administration has attacked public services: shut down local Housing Offices, closed the Film Theatre, closed Crown Pools Car Park, hived off work to ‘consultants’, threatens to shut a residence for homeless families, and is now privatising Ipswich buses. They refuse to deal properly with the needs of growing numbers of street sleepers.

Their attitude to the poor is summed up by one leading Tory Councillor saying that their new ‘Community Centre’ in an old town Church (St Lawrence Centre) will ”keep the riff raff out“.

Put that lot in charge of the dole and we will be queuing at Charity soup kitchens in no time.

Comments (10)

February 5, 2010

Flexible New Deal in Ipswich

Filed under: a4e, Action 4 employment, DWP, Flexible New Deal, Government, Ipswich, jobseekers allowance, Suffolk, Unemployment, Welfare State, YMCA — Tags: Ipswich, Flexible New Deal — Work Programme @ 3:50 pm

Ipswich Unemployed Action has done some primary research on the two Flexible New Deal providers in Ipswich: TNG and A4e. (Reed in Partnership Scandal Grows). (more…)

Comments (88)

February 2, 2010

Sanctions on Flexible New Deal.

Filed under: Flexible New Deal, jobseekers allowance, YMCA — Tags: Flexible New Deal, Sanctions Under Flexible New Deal — Andrew Coates @ 9:37 am

“Should a customer not fully participate in Flexible New Deal it may be necessary as a last resort to raise either an Entitlement Doubt or Sanction Doubt“.

Entitlement Doubts when “we suspect a participant is not complying with the basic rules of claiming Jobseeker’s Allowance

Being available for employment, and
Actively seeking employment.

Sanction Doubts: “are used to formally notify Jobcentre Plus of specific incidents of non-compliance by the participant with relation to his or her participation through FND, where YMCA Training’s staff make a decision that a temporary penalty should be raised.

A doubt may be raised against your benefits it:

You do not appear to be actively seeking work
You do not make yourself available for work
You refuse to apply for, or take up, a job
You restrict your availability for training
You leave training before it is completed.
You do not attend your agreed appointment
You refuse to sign your action plan
You refuse to do what is on you action plan.

And:

You do not curtsey or bow when in the presence of your betters.

Actually I made that one up.

Anyway, this list of ‘doubts’ is, well let’s just say, comprehensive.

Comments (16)

February 3, 2010

Right to Work Conference Report.

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed, Flexible New Deal, Unemployment, Welfare State — Tags: Right to Work Conference — Andrew Coates @ 10:02 am

Guest Post by “Unemployed from Ipswich” who attended the conference.

Right to Work

A Conference for Resistance and Solidarity

Central Hall, Oldham Street, 30th January 2010

Workshop 10: The Welfare Reform agenda, fighting for our rights.

Chairman: James Eadon – Chesterfield Trades Council President.

Delegates were invited to contribute experiences to identify the issues that needed tackling and therefore, help shape future action. Though it quickly became clear that not only was there a huge ignorance of rights, particularly by minority groups, but there is an erosion of the funding to monitor rights.

Here are selected contributions:

John Bradley of Derbyshire Unemployed Workers Centre.

New Labour has gone further than any previous Conservative government in its harshness of policy on unemployed people. The majority of whom, the system treats as potential fraudsters. No talk of wealth redistribution. The minimum wage coupled with Tax credits has amounted to a huge subsidy to employers.

The TUC must be central in organising the 40 unemployed centres in an organised fight-back.

Scott of Cambridge Unemployed Union.

Example or a group already getting organised: defendwelfare.org

PCS member from Manchester working in the call centre for crisis loans

Money is running out at the end of the month, meaning that requests for essential items have to be refused. The replacement with a call centre service, has led to deterioration in ‘customer’ service – coupled with staff cut-backs led to slow resolutions.

GP from East London

Ethnic minorities cannot deal with call centres because of language barrier. Schemes turning into internships that were leading to depression among the poor.

Rights Worker from Midlands

Marginalisation through debt, Continuous amendments in law created a complexity, both in rights of individual and of the state. Partial solution was in an understanding of the “newspeak” and that had a part to play in informing the disadvantaged.

Case study: Mick from Sheffield

His overpayment, despite his informing and resulting reassurance that there was no overpayment, wisely retained the overpayment because following a change of opinion and resulting request to return the over-payment, was able to do so.

Rachel, Welfare Rights Worker from South London

Sanctions were part of the erosion of the welfare safety net. What has happened to the minimum amount to live on? Her view that the poverty of people in work was meeting the same level as those on benefit. Little debate on the matter.

ESA appeals ¾ not passing their appeals. Lifetime DLA awards being removed leading to more appeals at which, because of the Legal Services Commission system of fixed fee, personal representation at appeals was unfunded. Appeal tribunals taking place on 2nd or 3rd story rooms without lifts.

My contribution was to stress the need to monitor Flexible New Deal because the old scheme had been nothing more than 13 week detention for claimants and if that was tolerated, what incentive is there to make FND helpful in the present climate? I reported the London TUC’s “unhappy with certain aspects (ND)”, but would not oppose ND stance.

Cats & Dogs aka Odds & Ends

10% cut in funding to advice centres while competition between private (A4E) and voluntary sector advisors was favouring the business organisations.

Privatisation had returned welfare to the Poor Laws of past times. That training had been neglected. What training was available was too expensive.

The near-future action that was suggested included the assembling of all the campaigning groups. To inform claimants of their rights and a Right to Work march at the party conferences.

Other observations There was an expectancy of about 700 people at the conference, but the estimate was 900 because the closing session was full to the rafters – delegates having to listen from the corridor. There was much dismay with UNISON who had to be lent upon to represent cleaners in London and their intolerance of perceived factions within the union.

Logistics: left Ipswich 6.40am arrived Manchester 12.20am. Parked beside The Britannia Hotel.

http://sites.google.com/site/righttoworkconference/

Leave a Comment

February 9, 2010

Reed in Partnership and the Carers Scam

Filed under: DWP, Flexible New Deal, Suffolk, Unemployment — Tags: carers, Flexible New Deal, Reed in Partnership — Work Programme @ 12:06 pm

Ipswich Unemployed Action has been tipped off about Reed in Partnership’s intention of forcing Flexible New Deal participants into Carers Jobs – which is pretty much a duplication of the Jobcentre Plus activity that was underway in 2009 at the Ipswich Jobcentre Plus Office – and a few others I know of.

Reed in Partnership is ignoring the Flexible New Deal participants’ 5 chosen job areas and in some cases forcing on participants a career in caring.

This strikes me as extremely concerning – not primarily because jobs are being unnecessarily forced on to Flexible New Deal participants – but due to the fact that the disabled, the elderly and the young requires a person undertaking a carer role who are passionate about the job and not someone who couldn’t care only not to get a 6 month variable benefit sanction.

A carer who doesn’t care really goes against the point I think…

Comments (7)

February 15, 2010

Benefit Cheats? Rewarding Grasses?

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed, jobseekers allowance, Unemployment — Tags: Benefit Cheats — Andrew Coates @ 11:37 am

(Response to Government Plans to Pay those who inform on ‘dole fraud’)

By the government’s own admission, more than 1,100 people phone its benefit hotline or report online each day, and last year it claims that more than 56,000 people were caught, although there were only 6,000 prosecutions (Report, 8 February). Yet even on the DWP’s own figures the overwhelming majority of calls were malicious and without foundation.

Each time someone is informed upon, whether innocent or otherwise, they are summoned to an interview on pain of suspension of benefits. This causes immense stress for people who are the victims of anonymous informants.

To target people who are already vulnerable should be a clear warning that for the unemployed New Labour is no better than the Tory opposition. Most so-called benefit fraud arises from the fact that it is impossible, for any length of time, for a person to survive on £64.30 a week. The term “benefit thief” is itself derogatory and discriminatory. It implies that all benefit claimants are potential or actual thieves.

Tony Greenstein

Secretary, Brighton & Hove Unemployed Workers Centre

(Guardian 15.2.10)

Comments (9)

February 17, 2010

Informal Meeting for Unemployed in Ipswich.

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed, Flexible New Deal, Workfare — Tags: Right to Work, Unemployed Unions — Andrew Coates @ 4:11 pm

There will be an informal meeting of the unemployed next week in Ipswich.

It will be on the 22nd of February at 7pm in the Labour Club, Silent St (just up from the DWP, near the Old Cattle Market).

It is being held as a Right to Work meeting. That is the national campaign which we have reported here before.

Ipswich Unemployed Action is concerned with highlighting the problems we ont he Dole face. We want a fairer, better system – and ways to deal with all the miserable problems the DWP and Flexible New Deal providers throw at us. Not to mention the prospect of Workfare – slog for a pittance with no rights.

In this we are probably in line with the Unemployed Workers’ Unions being set up all over the country.

Anyway, this is a chance to do something about changing our conditions.

Comments (4)

February 21, 2010

James Purnell: What a Swell!

Filed under: Flexible New Deal, Government, James Purnell, Unemployment, Welfare State, Workfare — Tags: James Purnell, Welfare State — Andrew Coates @ 3:34 pm

James Purnell MP is not standing in the forthcoming General Election (here). Harpy here.

Former cabinet minister James Purnell has announced he will leave Parliament at the general election.

The MP for Stalybridge and Hyde, Greater Manchester, said it was a “difficult decision”, but he did not want to spend all his life in politics.

Mr Purnell quit as work and pensions secretary after last year’s local and European elections, calling for Gordon Brown to resign as prime minister.Business Secretary Lord Mandelson said he was “sad” about him going as an MP.

A former aide to Tony Blair, Mr Purnell has also served as culture secretary.

‘Huge privilege’

He has been an MP since 2001 and is currently leading a project on the future of the Left for the think-tank Demos.

He will be remembered by those on Benefits for introducing ‘Welfare Reform’.

That is lower benefits for the incapacitated, the Flexible New Deal, and workfare.

As the BBC report states, he had has a “huge privilege” (s).

Now he proposes to do some Lord Bountiful charity. With whatever well-paid ‘work’ he is used to.

What a swell governor!

Comments (3)

February 25, 2010

YMCA Training and the OVERDUE Accounts

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed, DWP, Flexible New Deal, Ipswich, New Deal, Suffolk, YMCA — Tags: limited companies, overdue accounts, ymca training — Work Programme @ 9:58 am

Some more on our favourite New Deal Prime Contractor and Flexible New Deal Subcontractor: it looks as if YMCA Training will be fined for failing to deliver their accounts on time. It is almost a month overdue!

(more…)

Comments (12)

February 27, 2010

Ipswich Backing Young Britain Ministerial Careers Fair

Filed under: Government, Ipswich, Suffolk — Tags: Apprenticeships service, Backing Young Britain, Backing Young Britain Ministerial Careers Fair., Backing Young Suffolk, Business Link, BYB, Care First Careers, Chamber of Commerce, DWP, Future Jobs Fund Employers, IDEA Apprenticeships, Ipswich Town Football Club, ITFC, JCP, Jobcentre Plus, Leap, National Council of Entrepreneurship, Next Steps, Princes Trust, Reed in Partnership, Suffolk College, Suffolk County Council, UCS — Work Programme @ 11:55 am

If you are unemployed, under 25 years old and have attended the Jobcentre recently you would have been invited to the “Backing Young Britain” ministerial careers fair at in the Sir Bobby Robson Suite (Ipswich Town Football Club) on Monday 15th March 2010 between 10.00AM – 11.00am.

They had even promoted it on the Jobcentre Plus website as a job. (more…)

Comments (5)

March 2, 2010

Ipswich Unemployed Action helps YMCA Training file their accounts

Filed under: Flexible New Deal, Ipswich, YMCA — Tags: ymca training — Work Programme @ 11:27 am

Ipswich Unemployed Action is happy to reveal that within a week we have managed to advise and support YMCA Training into delivering their accounts. YMCA Training were stuck in a rut: feeling down about Flexible New Deal and their inability to competently deliver Government Welfare-to-work schemes, so they forgot to fulfil their legal obligations of filing their business Accounts with the registry Companies House.

Enter Ipswich Unemployed Action who wasn’t judgemental or discriminative of YMCA Training’s past experiences or present circumstances of relying on religion to rejoice and praise them of their sins (including but not limited to slavery) who motivated the cursed Christian faith-oriented organisation YMCA Training to inspire their staff, develop their talents by joining in union to create a powerful team and transforming theirs thoughts into action!

Yes, YMCA Training with a bit of motivational training provided by Ipswich Unemployed Action… and recognition, made the transition into submitting their accounts. Finally!

It will cost £150 fine for late filing however without Ipswich Unemployed Actions help, it could have been as much as £1500 – saving £1350… Nevermind its only taxpayers’ money…

(more…)

Comments (5)

March 5, 2010

Defend the Welfare State and Public Services. 10th of April.

Filed under: Atttendance Allowance, Campaigns for Unemployed, Government, Welfare State — Tags: Welfare State — Andrew Coates @ 11:05 am

Defend the Welfare State and Public Services.

London Demonstration, 10th of April.

Supported by major trade unions and pensioners’ organisations.

More Here

Leave a Comment

March 8, 2010

Forced Labour for Jobseekers Pilot.

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed, jobseekers allowance, Welfare State, Workfare — Tags: Unemployment, Workfare — Andrew Coates @ 4:01 pm

Forced labour for Jobseekers (Via Manchester Mule here)

Despite high levels of unemployment due to the recession jobseekers in Greater Manchester will be forced to work up to 40 hours a week as part of the Work for Your Benefits (WfYB) pilot scheme. The region is set to be the trialling ground for a government initiative that will see unemployed people put into mandatory work placements for up to six months just to hold on to their Jobseeker’s Allowance.

Below minimum wage

From October Jobseekers who have failed to find a job at the end of the Flexible New Deal programme will be required to undertake full time employment for between £50 and £65 a week, the equivalent of as little as £1.27 an hour. Concerns have already been raised that, with the numbers of unemployed rising, people who genuinely cannot find a job will be forced to work for next to nothing in an unsuitable role.

Alex Halligan from Salford Unemployed Workers’ Union said, “It’s disgusting that they’ve chosen to trial this in an area with such high unemployment. This scheme is a further attack on the right of people who can’t find work to get the support they need.” Those who opposed the scheme say that it fails to take into account personal circumstances or the condition of the economy.

WfYB is being introduced as part of the government’s wide-ranging reform of the welfare system. Other elements include lowering the age up to which parents can claim child support and measures to force more people off incapacity benefits.

Workers wages could fall by 12 per cent

Some suggest that the scheme will affect the working population as well as those claiming benefits. “This flood of unwaged labour into the market will have a big effect on low waged jobs. When a similar scheme was introduced in the US there was a 12 per cent decline in pay for low-income jobs,” Rebecca Galbraith from ‘No to Welfare Abolition’ told MULE.

Commenting on the fact that private companies rather than Jobcentres will be running the WfYB programme, she added, “Whoever runs this scheme it will be a disaster, but private companies can set arbitrary targets and are much less accountable.”

Businesses will be paid for each person they get into a work placement. This has raised fears companies might ignore difficult cases or put people into unsuitable positions just to receive the commission.

Labour MP John McDonnell placed a parliamentary question in December regarding the employment rights that participants in the scheme will be entitled to. He is concerned that, since they will not be technically employed, those taking part may be put in danger as they may not be covered by health and safety legislation.

Charities set to lose out

Charities and social institutions that rely on volunteers, many of whom are also Jobseekers, have expressed concerns that WfYB will take these people out of important roles and put them into positions that have no benefit to the community.

“The government does not care that many ‘claimants’ are not actually idle and do a lot of unpaid work like caring for others. Real voluntary activities will suffer if people are kicked into work schemes under this pilot,” said Mike from No to Welfare Abolition.

Alongside the WfYB scheme an alternative Jobcentre Plus regime will be trialled, designed to offer Jobseekers increased adviser contact and access to a personal support fund. This trial will receive just £3.5 million of funding whereas the WfYB programme will receive £15 million, raising questions over the government’s priorities.

Uncertainty

Tenders for the running of the scheme have been submitted and will be allocated in April. It remains to be seen which employers will be taking advantage of the cheap labour, or the kinds of jobs people will be expected to do.

Patrick Smith

Comments (30)

March 11, 2010

Forced Labour in Suffolk.

Filed under: Ipswich, Welfare State, Workfare — Tags: Suffolk, Work For Benefit — Andrew Coates @ 10:16 am

Just a reminder that the Manchester scheme is going to happen in Suffolk: (here)

A requirement for people who have been out of work for two years to do up to six months of valuable work experience to help them get jobs will be trialled in two pilot areas, Secretary of State for Work and Pensions Yvette Cooper said today.

The Government has already announced that every young person unemployed for a year will be guaranteed a job, training or work placement, which will be compulsory. Now, for the minority who aren’t able to find a job in two years, the Work for Your Benefit pilots will give people up to six months of intensive work experience which will help improve their employability.

The pilots will apply to people on Jobseeker’s Allowance who will already have been offered a range of alternative intensive support at an earlier stage in their claim – including training options, short term work trials, a recruitment subsidy for employers to take them on, or voluntary work in the local community. Participants will continue to receive Jobseeker’s Allowance.

The pilots will take place in Greater Manchester, Norfolk, Cambridgeshire and Suffolk and will run for two years from October 2010.

Yvette Cooper said:

“We are investing £5bn to help people who have lost their jobs. We are determined to give the right help and support to everyone who is unemployed. We want to make sure that short-term job losses are not allowed to turn into long-term unemployment which can scar communities for generations. The longer people are left out of work, and without recent work experience, the harder it is to get a new job.”

Jobseekers will be required to participate in the Work for Your Benefit programme for up to six months, whilst still able to retain their benefit. Failure to participate may result in the sanction of benefits.

Comments (102)

March 12, 2010

YMCA Training have great powers to sanction

Flexible New Deal scandal has published a list of job titles at Flexible New Deal providers who have the powers to raise sanction doubts which highlights the powers YMCA Training has over participants. (more…)

Comments (4)

March 16, 2010

Workfare for Dummies.

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed, Unemployment, Welfare State, Workfare — Tags: Workfare — Andrew Coates @ 11:34 am

Comments (44)

March 20, 2010

Workfare: Get Your Post, Helpful Suggestions.

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed, Welfare State, Workfare — Tags: Workfare — Andrew Coates @ 12:03 pm

TrueBlueBlood offers these “helpful hints” * for future Workfare jobs here.

* We hope they are in the vein of Viz’s ‘Top Tips”.

Imagine, if companies or the public sector were presented with extra workforce, at no extra charge to them, to help them in their business life. Consider these ares for example:

- Call Centres. Rather than outsource all the call centre work to India and other Asian countries, why not staffed via workfare?

- Schools: Help at schools, after passing background checks, classroom help, help with PE, cleaning, making school dinners etc.

- Manufacturing Industry: Why not provide a stream of workers in our manufacturing plants. This ‘free labour’ would help some of the struggling industries like the car industry.

- Post Office: Again, if the Post Office is to be privatised, why not utilise workfare for Post deliverers.

- Hospitals: Help with general work around the hospital eg the Hospital Superbug MRSA is due to dirty wards, why not have more cleaners in the hospitals instead of people sitting at home

- Building: with a boom in building contracts eg Olympics, more manual labour

- Civil Service: With so much bureaucracy, plenty of paperwork could be finally completed

- Street cleaning & refuse collection: (why should council pay full time salaries when this could be a workfare role?)

- Help in Supermarkets/retail: Be it Customer Service or managerial.

This is but a few examples of where labour can be directed. Yes some is skilled, some unskilled. But there are plenty of areas of opportunity to get Britain working and ensure welfare dependence does not creep in.

Ipswich Unemployed Action helpfully suggests.

Eventually one can see that all new posts would be filled as ‘Workfare Hub Interns Placement” (WHIP). These would set down all employment terms and conditions. To get a post you would apply to the Directing Initiate Co-ordination (DIC), who would contract you to a private ‘provider’. Uniforms – ‘profile enhancing’ - and electronic tagging – ‘ performance monitoring – would be the responsibility of ‘arm’s length’ outsourced set of bidders. Regular Polygraph Initiative Surveillance Statistics (PISS) would ensure Quality Control. The voluntary Sector and Faith organisation as well as private-only-for- profit organisations would be part of the new ‘Structure Holding Initiative Training’ (SHIT) coordinating the programmes. Scratch-Cards will be sold in newsagents with prizes such as Have a Workfare Servant for a Luxury Week! Your Valet for a Fortnight! A Cleaner for Life!

Apply to WHIP, with big DIC in charge, you will soon get used to PISS and SHIT.

Comments (9)

March 23, 2010

Privatising Welfare: Tony Judt.

Filed under: Flexible New Deal, New Deal, Unemployment, Welfare State — Tags: Flexible New Deal, Tony Judt, Welfare — Andrew Coates @ 11:50 am

On Privating Welfare – and the Unemployed.

Last weekend a leading thinker, Tony Judt, put into polished words what most of us would say in blunter ones (here).

In effect, privatisation reverses a centuries-long process whereby the state took on things that individuals could not or would not do. The corrosive consequences of this for public life are, as so often, rendered inadvertently explicit in the new “policy-speak”. When British politicians and civil servants bother to justify the abandonment of traditional public service monopolies, they talk of “diversifying providers”. When the UK work and pensions secretary announced plans in June 2008 to privatise social services – including short-term palliative welfare-to-work schemes which enable Whitehall to publish misleadingly low unemployment figures – he described himself as “optimising welfare delivery”. The chief shortcoming of the old public services was the restrictive regulations and facilities – one-size-fits-all – with which they were notoriously associated. But at least their provision was universal, and for good and ill they were regarded as a public responsibility.

The rise of enterprise culture has destroyed all that. A private company does not present itself as a collective good to which all citizens have a right. Unsurprisingly, there has been a sharp falling off in the number of people claiming benefits and services to which they are legally entitled.

The result is a hollowed-out society. From the point of view of the person at the bottom – seeking unemployment pay, medical attention, social benefits or other officially mandated services – it is no longer to the state, the administration or the government that he or she instinctively turns. The service or benefit in question is now often “delivered” by a private intermediary. As a consequence, the thick mesh of social interactions and public goods has been reduced to a minimum, with nothing except authority and obedience binding the citizen to the state.

Comments (2)

March 24, 2010

Jobs Centres Failing Users.

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed, DWP, Government, Unemployment, Welfare State — Tags: DWP, Job Centres — Andrew Coates @ 12:13 pm

BBC Radio, File on Four, reports (here). (Hat-tips to Ipswich Mr X and Lowestoft’s Finest).

Jobcentre Plus is ‘failing customers’

A new report published by a government-funded consumer watchdog, Consumer Focus, says that job centres in England and Wales are not doing a good enough job for people during these difficult economic times. Allan Urry hears how some jobless people have fared.

Jobcentre Plus is under fire in a new report by a consumer watchdog

Steve Dixon started to have doubts about the kind of service his local job centre in Redcar offered when a print-out from a Jobpoint terminal in the centre advertised the post of submarine designer – no experience necessary.

“We only have 20 submarines in the whole of Britain, it said no experience necessary, which sounds ridiculous,” he told BBC File on 4.

“It said you would be working on a certain style of submarine redesigning a submarine and working on your own initiative and I found that strange too on the local Jobpoint.”

He added: “I decided to apply for it… I was curious to see what the feedback would be, but of course there was no feedback.”

On the day File on 4 visited Steve, 42, who trained as a graphic designer, he had received 12 “local” job leads.

One was for Scotland, another based in the North West, one in the South West and one was nationwide. Another was based 45 miles away.

‘Speculative vacancies’

The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) maintains that vacancies are on the increase nationally but Steve doubts if some of the jobs advertised at job centres really exist.

We only have 20 submarines in the whole of Britain, it said no experience necessary, which sounds ridiculous

Steve Dixon, unemployed

He said he had once seen 30 jobs listed with no job title, only a code number and an identical description and salary.

Any more Reports?

Comments (21)

Work for Benefit: PQQ Level Successful Tenders for Suffolk, Norfolk, Cambridgeshire.

Filed under: Suffolk, Unemployment, Workfare — Tags: Work For Benefit — Andrew Coates @ 3:59 pm

Norfolk, Cambridgeshire & Suffolk

The information below identifies the suppliers who have been successful at PQQ stage of the Work for Your Benefit competition and the Contract Package Areas they have been invited to tender in.

1 – A4E

2 – Consultancy Home Counties

3 – Ingeus

4 – Intraining

5 – Reed in Partnership

6 – Seetec

7 - Suffolk County Council

8 – TBG Learning

9 – TNG

From Here.

Usual suspects. With a new face.

Wondered how Suffolk County Council is going to make savings on its staff?

Comments (2)

March 26, 2010

Work for Your Benefit: What it Will Mean.

Filed under: Unemployment, Welfare State, Workfare — Tags: Work For Benefits — Andrew Coates @ 10:24 am

From here.

Here’s a tasty little research report, which has been commissioned by the Department for Work and Pensions themselves, the report is entitled: ‘A comparative review of workfare programmes in the United States, Canada and Australia’ (report 533)

This report examines the impact of workfare schemes that mandate participation in unpaid work activities as a condition of receiving social assistance (‘work for benefits’).

It finds that:

There is little evidence that workfare increases the likelihood of finding work. It can even reduce employment chances by limiting the time available for job search and by failing to provide the skills and experience valued by employers.
Subsidised (‘transitional’) job schemes that pay a wage can be more effective in raising employment levels than ‘work for benefit’ programmes.
Workfare is least effective in getting people into jobs in weak labour markets where unemployment is high.
Levels of non-participation in mandatory activities are high in some workfare programmes.
Workfare is least effective for individuals with multiple barriers to work.
Some states in the US have scaled down large-scale, universal workfare programmes in preference for ‘softer’ and more flexible models that offer greater support to those with the most barriers to work.

Our Community Allowance model, which are keen to pilot and campaigning DWP to enable us to do so, would offer people the opportunity to try out small bits of work PLUS they would get the support that is so essential.

The DWPs current direction of travel is to get people on benefits to ‘sing for their supper’. This is very worrying. From our own experience at Community Links we think it simply will not work. It will push more people off benefits, forced to fend for themselves, possibly by doing cash-in-hand work. (See previous blog entries)

It’s not just us saying it … it’s in their own research. A bit more evidence based policy making please.

We, by contrast, are opposed to all Work for Your Benefits schemes.

Ipswich Unemployed Action adds that:

These schemes will be run by companies and organisations who already have a poor track record dealing with the unemployed A4E, Reed International, for example.
There are no normal workers’ rights over dismissal and many other areas (except Health and Safety) for those on Work for your Benefit. Are there union rights? Are there rights to refuse to carry out unsitable tasks?
There is no provision to make sure work for benefit employees do not replace (indirectly or directly) those working for a real wage.
There are no real wages.
There are obvious areas where bullying and unsuitable placements can take place.
This will create a massive downward pull on normal pay. Why get somebody to work for a council when you can get someone for free from the Dole. The Government, the Liberals and the Tories talk about the need to cut public expenditure. Look at Suffolk County Council. It is going to reduce its numbers of paid workers. But they still need services. Solution? It will recruit unpaid ones.
When employment agencies like Reed are exploiting the situation they can be obvious conflicts of interest.
Benefits are already well below the minimum wage and are below levels considered a reasonable standard of living.
The system is based on compulsion. It is forced labour – the most inefficient kind of labour ever known.

Comments (17)

March 29, 2010

Workfare, “Community Service” for the out-of-work.

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed, Flexible New Deal, Tories, Welfare State, Workfare — Tags: Community Service, Workfare — Andrew Coates @ 4:16 pm

The Tory Adam Smith Institute calls a spade a spade,

The primary feature of ‘workfare’ is that all unemployed people seeking state support should face immediate work requirements – no work, no benefits. Subsidized jobs and compulsory work experience should be the preferred options, but if no such employment can be found then welfare claimants should have to do community service. Those with severe education deficiencies may undergo training, while claimants with alcohol and drug problems would be expected to undergo treatment.

(Here.)

So now we know.

Commit a Crime: get Community Service.

Be unemployed……

Comments (36)

April 1, 2010

The Lords Debate Workfare.

Filed under: Government, Unemployment, Welfare State, Workfare — Tags: House of Lords, Work for Your Benefit, Workfare — Andrew Coates @ 9:04 am

Hat-Tip to Gerry Attric.

House of Lords, 30th of March.

Baroness Thomas of Winchester (Liberal Democrat)

Ipswich Unemployed Action will take this up in more detail later.

For the moment these critical comments stand out.

My Lords, I, too, thank the Minister for explaining these regulations, which bring in four pilot schemes-two urban and two rural-for the controversial Work for your Benefit provisions starting in November this year for two years.

“The aim of the scheme is to test whether mandatory work experience, coupled with job search support, helps the long term unemployed find and sustain work”.

Hum hum hum,

There is a view that such schemes can even reduce employment chances by limiting the time available for job search and failing to provide the skills and experience that are valued by employers. One finding from DWP research report 533, A Comparative Review of Workfare Programmes in the United States, Canada and Australia, by Crisp and Fletcher, is not a surprise. It was that workfare, which is similar to Work for your Benefit, was least effective in getting people into jobs in weak labour markets where unemployment was high.

Quite right, your Ladyship!

if the jobs are not there, they are not there, and no amount of Jobcentre Plus smoke and mirrors can find them. I wonder what sort of work placements will be offered to Work for your Benefit claimants. We simply do not know. I understand that companies have to sign a declaration that the placement will be in addition to existing or expected job vacancies.

We fear that there are likely to be cuts in the near future in public sector employment. Perhaps these work placements will be in that sector.

Perhaps her Baronessesses reads Ipswich Unemployed Action and Flexible New Deal!

Perhaps one sign of a confusion of policy is that, as the Minister said, Jobcentre Plus officers are encouraged to identify for early access to the Work for your Benefit scheme some claimants who have been unemployed for less than two years, if they think that they will benefit from it. However, these people, who might think that they are being singled for preferment or extra help, will actually be in a sanctions regime, as though they were demotivated and work-shy.

In other words,one feature of the scheme will be to allow the DWP to be nasty to those they don’t like.

WorkDirections, which is a well respected provider, suggested designing the length of the placement by asking the clients some simple questions at the action-planning stage. For example, what are the constraints that the clients are facing? What does the client need to gain? How long will it take to gain the relevant skills, knowledge or experience? How can progress be verified? In other words, a six-month one-size-fits-all placement is too inflexible.

More to the point what on earth do you get from these type of placements, and what about the barriers you’ll face having to put on a CV your “community service” – like a prison record.

last thing that we want is for claimants just to default on a placement and, by doing that, to receive a sanction because the particular placement was totally unsuitable for them.

What protection is there against exploiting oppressive employers, eh?

Finally, I am disturbed that claimants will be allocated randomly to the pilots. This seems totally at odds with the whole tailored-to-the-individual approach that the Flexible New Deal was supposed to give people. My honourable friend Steve Webb in another place, who is a social scientist, makes the point that a Flexible New Deal provider should already have given the claimant work experience during the two years that the claimant was unemployed. It seems distinctly odd that such a claimant might be randomly assigned to a Work for your Benefit scheme when their only problem is that there is no suitable job available. I wonder whether part of the reason for this whole scheme is to clamp down on those who are suspected of moonlighting-claiming and working on the sly.

Well, that’s one reason. The other is to get votes from the kind of plonkers who like dreaming up schemes to get people they don’t like sweeping the streets and tugging their forelock to the likes of many of the noble Lords and Ladies.

Comments (17)

April 6, 2010

Inside Info on Suffolk County Council and Work for Benefit.

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed, Flexible New Deal, Suffolk, Workfare — Tags: Work For Benefit, Workfare — Andrew Coates @ 12:47 pm

Council statement:

Work for your benefit is a new initiative from the DWP. It is a national initiative which is being piloted in the job centreplus districts of Norfolk Suffolk Cambridgeshire and also in Greater Manchester.

It is procured nationally and SCC’s team in Enterprise Employment Advice and Guidance have been shortlisted to deliver the whole programme for the 3 counties in the East. The reason we have bid, is because we believe we can deliver a really effective programme of work focussed activity linked to a skills and qualification pathway.

The contract award will be made in May. Therefore we have no places associated with this as yet. Whoever is successful, it is likely that they will approach SCC for work placements to help occupy the individuals who are referred to the programme. It is based on a highly successful model from Australia.

We have 200 places under another government initiative The Future Jobs Fund. This initiative will be extended to 2012 according to the Chancellor’s budget. We have made a further bid to the FJF for the next round and have offered to deliver 170 opportunities for young people aged 18-25.

Our Informant notes: There are 3 things here:

1) Suffolk County Council have put forward their Employment Advice team to run the whole DWP package for all of Norfolk, Suffolk and Cambridgeshire. They have got onto the shortlist – as mentioned in your email – but the “winner” will not be picked until May and it is most likely to be either “Reed in Partnership” or A4E that gets picked. As I understand it only one “programme delivery contractor” will be chosen, and it is not likely to be SCC.

2) Whoever does win the contract, whether it is SCC or not, will almost certainly want to take up work placements within SCC. Clearly these have not yet been identified – it is up to the delivery contractor to decide whether to take up SCC places and how many to ask for.

3) The County Council has also been offering places to young people (18-25) under the Future Jobs Fund. I’m not quite clear how these work, but I think they are temporary jobs that are paid (albeit not very much!). The County Council is offering 170 of these for the coming year.

Questions remain about how exactly this is going to operate.

Comments (25)

April 8, 2010

NEETs Clamp-Down: Young People To Lose Benefits.

Filed under: Unemployment, Welfare State — Tags: NEETs, Unemployment, young people — Andrew Coates @ 12:52 pm

The BBC Reports:

Neets ’should not get benefits’, say MPs

Ministers want to cut the number of Neets aged 16 to 18 to 7.6% in 2010 (Note BBC Picture of Sinister Hoodie as typical NEET)

Young people in England should not receive state benefits unless they are working, training or in education, a committee of MPs says.

MPs are suggesting adopting a system use in Holland reduce the number of 16 to 25-year-olds not in education, employment or training, known as Neets.

They said the Dutch equivalent of jobseeker’s allowance was dependent on being in work, education or training.

At the end of 2009, nearly 15% of 16 to 24-year-olds were classed as Neets.

And 9.3% of the youngsters classified as Neet at the end of 2009 were aged 16 to 18.

And the government looks set to miss its target to reduce that figure to an average of 7.6% for a whole of 2010.

More Here.

Anyone who thinks about it can come up with problems this will create. Not least that young people’s rights to decide what training, education or employment they take is already restricted. Not to mention the low rates of benefits, the poor quality of some ‘training’, and the lack of rights people have.

We bet there’s plenty of bad experiences to tell.

Comments (10)

April 14, 2010

Workfare and the General Election.

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed, Unemployment, Welfare State, Workfare — Tags: Workfare — Andrew Coates @ 9:24 am

BERJAYA

Workfare’s Model Workers.

All the parties now stand for workfare.

This goes from Labour’s plans for compulsory ’placements’ (and so on), Tory’s “Community Work Programme”, to the wilder shores of UKIP and the BNP (the latter say the “ benefit recipient must complete a certain number of hours of work per week “(here). If I could be arsed I’d probably find the Liberal Demcorats have something – nicer worded – in this line.

We at Ipswich Unemployed Action have made the case that Workfare is time-wasting, exploitative, pointless, and completely useless.

There is no real ‘training’. It drags wages down and does nothing to get rid of unemployment.

Except for those lucky to be living off the public purse in providing these schemes (Reed International, a4e and pals).

Who no doubt have a greater say in what has got in Parties’ Manifestos than the views of the out-of-work.

Comments (18)

April 19, 2010

Unemployed Groups: Cambridge Unemployed Workers’ Union.

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed, New Deal, Unemployment, Welfare State, Workfare — Tags: Cambridge Unemployed, Unemployed Movements — Andrew Coates @ 10:08 am

This looks interesting -

Cambridge Unemployed Workers Union.

The Unemployed are among some of the most dispossessed people in Cambridge. We believe that by organising together we can gain more respect, improved welfare benefits, and good jobs and apprenticeships for all.

Aims and Objectives

To gain socially useful jobs – this incorporates the right not to work jobs society doesn’t need, i.e. Marketing, Advertising, Non-Defensive Weapons Production
Access to free Education and Training of the highest standard we can maintain
To be treated Equally with human respect
To spread information regarding our rights
Money used for arms and business subsidy to be spent on provisions for those focussing on childcare and illness
To reach out and build solidarity with other workers and the general public.

Stall Outside A4e (Action 4 Employment) A4e is one of the ‘Providers’ for the DWP that will take care of the work programs dished out to those who are claiming benefits, they have been found to be corrupt and telling the government that they have found jobs for people when it wasn’t the case to get their hands on public money. A4e is a smokescreen for the privatisation of the Benefits system – most people know of them as ‘Flexible New Deal’. We will be presenting info to the public and clients of A4e their track record and what they can expect as well as alternative ways of getting help and support. A4e is currently situated in Wellington House, East Rd. We will be outside from 12 – 2pm Friday 22nd Jan 2010. Come along and join us.

More on their activities here.

Brighton Benefits Campaign is worth a look too – here.

Comments (1)

April 21, 2010

Unemployment Up Again.

Filed under: Government, Unemployment, Welfare State, Workfare — Tags: Genereal Election, Unemployment — Andrew Coates @ 12:56 pm

The BBC reports.

The number of people unemployed in the UK rose by 43,000 to 2.5 million during the three months to February, official figures have shown

The jobless total is now at its highest since 1994. The rate of unemployment now stands at 8% – the highest since 1996 – the Office for National Statistics said. However, the total number of people claiming unemployment benefit fell in March by 32,900 to 1.54 million – a much sharper fall than expected. (more here.)

You wonder how many people are not counted as unemployed, but still out-of-work, there are.

I am on a ‘Training’ allowance – and am not (statistically) ‘unemployed’ (ho hum).

One thing that’s annoying.

I have to pay out £18 a week in bus fares. I get it back – at the end of the week. Many people in Suffolk pay more than this. As we have had our training allowance cut (we used to get a £15 a week extra) this is a hefty wedge of the Dole.

Nor is it likely, with these figures, that a job is in the offing.

With full-time workfare it’s going to be even worse: real toil for next to nothing, and having to lay out moneyin advance for the privilege of doing ‘community service’.

But then I have helped the government’s statistics.

Comments (18)

April 25, 2010

The Unemployment Business.

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed, Flexible New Deal, Government, New Deal, Unemployment, Welfare State, Workfare — Tags: Unemployment, Welfare State — Andrew Coates @ 9:28 am

Corporate Watch has just published an important article on the ‘Unemployment Business’ – here.

There’s plenty to chew over. Such as,

The approach taken by the government and its private ‘partners’ in reducing unemployment seems to be centred around bullying claimants into accepting any job available, based on the presumption that everyone wants to work, whatever the work is. Those who don’t are considered ‘parasitic free riders’. This logic, which blames unemployment on the unemployed and ignores the fact that job offers are subject to market mechanisms, is used to justify the criminalisation of the unemployed and the use of increasingly punitive and repressive measures against them (the ‘zero tolerance’ approach). Other possible approaches, such as reducing working hours or increasing the minimum wage, are readily dismissed as that might be politically dangerous: people with their basic needs met and a lot of time on their hands might be capable of too much.

This reminds me.

There is a case round here. A chap stuck out in the villages on Incapacity Benefit. It was taken away (DWP doctor, not his own).

He appealed (if you knew him he really needs every quid of Incapacity money). It took a year. Tribunal. He won.

Ten weeks later he is still waiting for his money.

Talk about bullying….

Comments (4)

April 29, 2010

Workfare: BBC, Well-Fed Loafers Have Their Say.

Filed under: Flexible New Deal, Government, New Deal, Unemployment, Welfare State, Workfare — Tags: BBC, Workfare — Andrew Coates @ 9:49 am

‘Make ‘em work’ – could workfare work for Britain?

Lazy Loafer Eamonn Walsh says,

“The question of whether those claiming benefits should have to work for their money has long polarised political opinion, to such an extent that it has often been pushed to the political margins.

However, this week the former head of the CBI, Lord Digby Jones, told Panorama that he thought the time was right for the introduction of workfare – as the plan is often called.

Lord Jones actually took a step further than most in claiming that if he were a viewer at home, Panorama’s report on the young unemployed would make him so angry that he would want to starve some of the long-term unemployed back into work.”

Something ol’ jowelly blubber-guts is unlikely to do in the immediate future.

BERJAYA

Digby Jones after a Good Feed.

“He added that he thought he was in step with the British public’s thinking on the subject.

Workfare is of course an alternative to the social welfare system that operates in the UK and is rooted in the US of the early 1970s.”
Yes, it is a system with earlier roots: the workhouse.

“In the UK, as long as people are demonstrating that they are actively seeking employment then – if eligible – they receive their benefits.”

In many US states – and indeed parts of Australia and Canada – unemployed have to take jobs – often in the public or voluntary sector – to continue to earn their benefits. If they don’t accept an offer of work, then they don’t receive their payments.”

Do they get paid for this? What do people getting real wages think abo0ut having the workless do their jobs?

“Panorama went to McDowell County, West Virginia in the United States for a programme broadcast on 7 April 1986 to investigate the workfare system operating there.”

Another jaunt for the loafers who ‘work’ for the BBC.

“There, they found workfare employees in almost every area of the public sector, from patient day care in health centres and residential homes, to street cleaning to, perhaps most surprisingly, walking the beat as police officers, able to do everything a regular police officer could do – except carry a gun.”

No doubt Deputy Dawg puts ‘em in irons if they get uppity and ask for some pay.

“What Panorama also ‘discovered’ was a system that appeared to be working successfully.

The kind of well-nourished ponce who did this ‘research’ probably never let off sipping mint julips with the good ol’ boys who told them this.

“Those employed claimed that workfare gave them dignity and a sense of self-worth from working for their benefits and the local mayor spoke of the contribution made to the local economy and the public good.”

We bet that Deputy Dawg was close by when this was said.

“Workfare was not without its critics. Opponents claimed that it was simply a source of cheap labour and that it actually stymied opportunity for the unemployed.”

Strike a light! Amazing. Some of the inhabitants of Houndstown in McCounty sweating on the chain-gang would like some real pay! Hot diggery-dog!

“But its popular appeal and apparent economic sense made it a vote-winner and a form of workfare was introduced nationally in the US in 1996 under Bill Clinton.”

“It remains to be seen whether workfare will be introduced in the UK after the election, but with unemployment continuing to rise and the need for public spending cuts now generally accepted, it might prove to be a tempting option for future government”

It bleeding well is going to be introduced. No doubt about that.

(from Here. )

Comments (42)

May 4, 2010

Conservatives: unemployed to “work for the dole” on community programmes

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed, Unemployment, Welfare State, Workfare — Tags: Unemployment, Workfare — Andrew Coates @ 8:43 am

In the news,

The latest plank of Mr Cameron’s “Big Society” pitch, encouraging people to “take more control over how the country is run”.
The new welfare contract pledges to “tear up the old ways of dealing with worklessness”.

The work programme, to be up and running by the end of 2010, promises to ensure people “get help as soon as you need it”.

A range of business-led training places will be offered, starting with 50,000 in the hospitality and leisure industries, while 400,000 apprenticeship, training and college places will be available to under-25s.

Work clubs will be set up, providing somewhere for the unemployed to go during the day where they can learn skills and make contacts, and individuals looking to start businesses will be given access to a business mentor and start-up loans.

A sanctions regime will be put in place within six months of the Tories taking office, cutting Jobseeker’s Allowance (JSA) for people who refuse to join the work programme.

Benefits will also be cut for up to three years if people refuse to take up “reasonable” job offers or if they are caught repeatedly committing benefit fraud.

Long-term claimants who cannot find work will be required to “work for the dole” on community programmes, and all people claiming incapacity benefits will be reassessed – and transferred onto JSA if they are fit enough to work.

(from Here) (more here)

How this fits in with ” encouraging people to “take more control over how the country is run” is clear.

One group of people, friends of the Conservative Party, will take control over running other – the unemployed – people’s lives.

Having just finished a ‘placement’, which might as well as have been workfare, though conditions were good and what I did was of some use, I would add this. Firstly, that if we are forced to work on a long-term basis for our miserable Dole, we will not be happy workers. Secondly, travel and other costs on the ‘wage’ we get, make a real problem. £18 a week in my case - which we pay out in advance and get back when we present every single one of our bus tickets - is a big sum to get us to work in the first place. Thirdly, there is nothing, nothing, that sticks in my craw like the idea that doing this for the foreseable future (Cameron’s plan, and the rest of the main parties, including the Liberal Democrats as far as I am aware – prove me wrong) is part of building a “Big Society“.

Comments (39)

May 7, 2010

New Government, New Business Opportunities for Welfare-to-Work Providers.

Filed under: Flexible New Deal, Government, Unemployment, Welfare State, Workfare — Tags: New Government, Welfare State, Workfare — Andrew Coates @ 8:23 am


Acquisition of Cheap Labour and Easy Profits Opportunities for the Third Sector Tuesday 27th April 2010 yesMinister As providers of welfare to work and learning and skills provision tender and compete to deliver longer and larger contracts, there are increasing opportunities for expansion. There are also concerns about the financial capacity and viability of the existing provider base. y esMinister is working with national and international clients who are actively seeking to speak with companies/organisations that are interested in discussing M&A or other formal structures. Experience in Slave-driving, Gang-mastering, and Skivvy-recrutiment preferred but not essential. Details regarding 4th June Seminar will be available shortly.	East Anglian Regional Authority Skills Development East Anglia Tuesday 27th April 2010 Norfolk, Suffolk and Cambridgeshire businesses have signed up to employ more than 7,000 Modern Bonded Labourers in the coming year, it was announced today. 7,000 young people and adults will start Bonded Labour in October Work-for-Benefits Pilot.

Devastating impact of late payments on SMEs Bad debts and late payment of invoices are endemic problems for UK businesses. Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Tuesday 6th April 2010 A survey carried out by RBS and NatWest found that 71 per cent of SMEs have suffered from delays in payment in the last 12 months and that the overall worth of those invoices paid outside the agreed period was £62.87 billion. Of this total, £15 billion accounted for invoices that were more than 120 days overdue. The survey, which covered 500 firms, indicated that as many as 235,000 SMEs have had to invest time and effort chasing unpaid bills. While larger firms have to shoulder a higher value of late payments, smaller businesses are hit the hardest because their unsettled bills represent a greater proportion of their turnover. Our ‘enforcer’ debt collectors advice service available 24/7.	Tackling worklessness guides published The Improvement and Development Agency (IDeA) has published four guides on how to tackle worklessness. Improvement and Development Agency (IDeA) Thursday 15th April 2010 The guides contain advice and real examples of delivering employment initiatives for people in local areas. Guide 1: Houndstown Texas: Deputy Dawg on US Workfare. Guide 2: How to Make ‘em sweat for your Profit. Devil’s Island, a case-study and guidelines. Delivering Future Jobs, Guide 3: Shoe-shiners,chimney sweeps, street sweeping, mudlarks, professions of the future, Targeting jobs and training through the procurement process, Guide 4: How to Lobby with Loads of Loot. Introduction by Emma Harrison. Working in partnership with Jobcentre Plus.	The New Welfare Contract The Conservative party has published a New Welfare Contract laying out its plans to tackle worklessness and unemployment. Conservative Party Tuesday 20th April 2010 David Cameron has pledged to introduce the contract before the end of 2010 if he wins the election. A conservative government would; Cut the benefits of anyone on Job Seekers Allowance who refuses to enter the ‘Work Programme’ and tug their forelock, Cut the benefit of anyone who refuses to take up a job offer at any wage, Cut benefit for up to three years for repeated lippy attitude. Long term benefit claimants will be required to ‘Work for the Dole’ on Community Programmes, Bring Back Domestic Service for Lone Parents Oakam Picking in the Workhouse for Long-term unemployed. Disabled Benefits to be Allocated by Lottery. Read more…. visit yesMinister’s blog

Hat-Tip to Sister S.

From Here.

Comments (4)

May 10, 2010

DWP Phone Scandal Back.

Filed under: Flexible New Deal, Government, jobseekers allowance, New Deal, Suffolk — Tags: DWP, Flexible New Deal — Andrew Coates @ 11:32 am

When you’re on the Flexible New Deal you get sent on placements, and have a ‘training allowance instead of JSA. It’s around 10 pence more (I am not making this up).

When you finish the ‘training’ you have to re-apply for JSA.

Usual form-filling (I swear it’s grown an extra few pages in the meantime). Usual letter off to – in our – case Bury St Edmunds.

Check. Always check after over 10 days.

Try to phone.

Friday. No luck.

This Morning, Monday. Two Hours trying. No luck.

Every time you get through to Income Support – not JSA. Every time. No phone queue, just this transfer. A different message half the time. We can’t say anything much. Try again. Try later. Try tomorrow. Try next bloody year no doubt….

It seems beyond the wit of the DWP to have enough people in their Call Centres, or to organise a proper queue.

I am still waiting.

Comments (21)

May 19, 2010

Frank Field: Could You Make This Up?

Filed under: Government — Andrew Coates @ 9:37 am

Frank Field defects to Cameron’s coalition to be the nation’s ‘Poverty Tsar’

By Simon Walters
Last updated at 8:36 AM on 16th May 2010

Former Labour Minister Frank Field is to ‘defect’ to David Cameron’s new coalition Government by taking on the role of Britain’s ‘Poverty Tsar’, it was revealed last night.

Social conservative Mr Field is to lead a major review into poverty as part of Mr Cameron’s promise to tackle what he calls ‘Broken Britain’ – social breakdown, rising crime and the benefits dependency culture.

The move is a major boost in Mr Cameron’s attempt to show that his new Liberal-

here.

Comments (20)

May 25, 2010

Queen’s Speech: The Volunteering Big Society. Official Government Video.

Filed under: Unemployment, Welfare State, Workfare — Andrew Coates @ 4:24 pm

Hat-Tip to ‘Brainwashed’.

Comments (28)

May 26, 2010

Welfare Reform: It’s a-Comin’

Filed under: Welfare State, Workfare — Andrew Coates @ 9:08 am

From the documents behind the The Queen’s Speech:

Making the benefits system less complex.

Improving work incentives.

Getting the five million plus people languishing on benefits into work and out of poverty.

Reducing the scope for fraud and error.

From here.

Fine words butter no asparagus.

The point is that this declaration builds on the existing legalisation.

Specifically such documents as “No-one is written off”.

Aka Workfare.

Comments (58)

May 29, 2010

Thanks to all the Posters!

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed — Andrew Coates @ 9:34 am

They say that are in need for being re-educated!

Well we at Ipswich Unemployed Action say that the people posting here are some of the best in the land.

Funny, witty, and to the point, the comments that people post here are some of the best in the ol’Blogosphere.

Flexy has done some really serious work and as we link to him all the time I recommend his sites for some really brilliant posts.

Keep it up chappettes and chaps!

Comments (2)

June 2, 2010

Day of Action Against Flexible New Deal.

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed — Tags: Campaigns for the Unemployed, Flexible New Deal — Andrew Coates @ 12:15 pm

At the national meeting of ‘no to welfare abolition’ we decided to
organise a national day of action against the flexible new deal on
June 16th. We are just wondering what everyone has got planned and how
they are publicising it e.g. links to websites etc. which advertise
what you are doing. We can then add these to our blog so we can
demonstrate that action is wider than just our town.

We would also like to suggest a regional conference of southern groups
soon to devise strategies on how we can develop this campaign. Let us
know if you think this is a good idea and please forward us the emails
of any groups who we have missed out who would also be interested.

All the best to everyone.

Brighton Benefits Campaign

We hear that our friends from Hackney Unemployed Workers are planning something.

Ipswich Unemployed Action stands squarely behind this.

But bilmey, the cost of train to London means that we find joining in very difficult.

Comments (11)

June 5, 2010

Top Tips for Unemployed: Cordelia Gummer Speaks.

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed, Unemployment, Welfare State — Andrew Coates @ 11:31 am

Guest-Post.

Cordelia Gummer is a supporter of Ipswich Unemployed Action. She has contributed articles to radical publications such as The Lady, Country Life and The Field. Recently made redundant she has this advice to offer the out-of-work.

“Being unemployed, or a ‘Doley’, is a tragedy. My Brother the Right Honourable Benedict Gummer may claim on this site that it the fault of the lazy. But, well, he is so lazy he has his manservant put the paste on his toothbrush.”

“The first problem we down-at-heels have is money. Bills Bills Bills. I have these wizard suggestions for getting these down to a manageable size.

Water Charges. Why not dig a well in your garden? I had a delightful little man who dug mine and it has saved me ozzles of wonga.
Electricity. Benedict has a Windmill that generates power on top of his just-off Norwich Road Mansion. Why not make your own? I am presently making one with help from my Janet and John guide.
Bus and Train fares? I recommend good old walking. My friend Violet-Elizabeth Carter-Bright Grummelstone Hights walked all the way to the shops (three hundred yards!) last week. Makes a change from the old Sedan Chair! Plus it’s good for those of you with weight problems. Lizy has reduced the size of her behind by over 000.1 centimetres.

Then there’s signing-on. I know a wonderful little gal who does it all for you! She takes your place on Flexible New Deal and will do all the psychological tests as well. Naturally one has to use some of Pater’s influence for this – as the beastly Benedict knows all too well. But surely you chaps and chappettes on the ‘Dole’ can find someone to do the same? I mean you ragamuffins (no disrespect) and scroungers know all the tricks!

More here.

Comments (2)

June 9, 2010

Cuts to Benefits?

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed, Flexible New Deal, Government — Tags: Welfare cuts — Andrew Coates @ 12:49 pm

From the Daily Telegraph, (here)

Yesterday, the Treasury set out the framework for a review of all government spending. The official document stated it would “comprehensively examine areas such as social security, tax credits and public service pensions”.

Plans for “savings and reform in these areas” would be unveiled later this year.

It is the first time that the welfare system – such as child benefit, disability payments and unemployment benefits – has been identified as a target for cuts. Freezing all benefit payments would save more than £4 billion a year.

As Flexy has pointed out here the real levels of benefits are lower today than they were twenty years ago.

Comments (42)

June 13, 2010

Unions Condemn Welfare ‘Reform’.

Filed under: Flexible New Deal, Unemployment, Welfare Reform, Welfare State — Tags: Welfare Reform — Andrew Coates @ 9:57 am

Unemployed need support – not punitive action – to return to work

Commenting on the Government’s plans announced today (Tuesday) in the Queen’s Speech for a Welfare Reform Bill, TUC General Secretary Brendan Barber said:

‘Unions will support measures to help unemployed and disabled people into work but there is no excuse for such a heavy handed, punitive approach.

‘The recession - not lazy individuals – has caused rising unemployment and most people on disability benefits are out of work because today’s labour market is a tough place for those with severe health conditions.

‘Moves to eliminate fraud are to be welcomed but cutting the number of administrative staff will only make the problem worse. Jobcentre Plus staff are already under tremendous pressure and further cuts will lead to more errors being made and fewer fraudsters caught.’ (here)

Comments (12)

June 17, 2010

Workless Up, But JSA Claimants Down.

Filed under: Flexible New Deal, Government, Liberal Tory Coalition, Tories, Unemployment — Tags: Unemployment — Andrew Coates @ 9:41 am

The BBC Reports:

Any rise in unemployment is a “tragedy,” the prime minister said as the jobless total neared 2.5 million.

At Commons question time on 16 June 2010, David Cameron insisted the latest unemployment figures were a “mixed picture”.

He said: “On the one hand, the claimant count is down. On the other hand though, the International Labour Organisation (ILO) measure of unemployment is up by 23,000.”

The government will bring in a work programme, which is “going to be the biggest, boldest scheme for getting people back to work, as soon as we can”, he pledged.

But acting Labour leader Harriet Harman accused him of “talking the economy down to soften the public up” for cuts in next week’s Budget.

Demanding assurances that the government would do nothing to add to the dole queue in its tax and spend package, Ms Harman warned that ministers were “undermining business confidence”.

But Mr Cameron dismissed the charge, insisting Labour should apologise for having done the economy down

(from Here)

Indeed the figures indicate that the JSA claimant figure is down.

Office for National Statistics data revealed the number of people looking for work rose by 53,000 between January and March to hit 2.51m, the highest total since 1994. The UK’s employment rate slumped to 72%, the lowest since 1996.Yet despite the worsening picture for overall unemployment, the numbers claiming the jobseeker’s allowance fell by more than expected – down by 27,100 last month to 1.52m, the lowest level for a year. (More Here)

Readers of this site know full well the explanation for the fact that while unemployment figures are rising those counted (and eligible) for JSA are decreasing.

Let’s start with the Flexible New Deal….

Comments (21)

June 18, 2010

Cuts for Unemployment Schemes.

Filed under: Government, Liberal Tory Coalition, Unemployment, Welfare Reform — Tags: Cuts, Unemployment — Andrew Coates @ 10:14 am

The roll-out of the Future Jobs Fund, an extension of the Young Person’s Guarantee to 2011/12 and the two year Jobseekers guarantee – all programmes to help guarantee work or training for longer term unemployed people in the recession – were cut altogether, saving £995m.

Yvette Cooper, the shadow work and pensions secretary, said: “This is shocking short-termist and shows that the Tory-Liberal government clearly thinks unemployment is a price worth paying … it will cost us all far more in the long term in higher unemployment benefits and damage to our communities.”

A Treasury spokesman insisted that the schemes would be replaced by a new Single Work Programme, but the government could not give details of how this would operate, or what it would cost.

(From Here)

This is an outline of what we know so far (from Here).

Chris Grayling 10th of June.

(Minister of State (Employment), Work and Pensions; Epsom and Ewell, Conservative)

The Government have previously announced their plans for radical reforms of the welfare to work system and the implementation of the Work Programme. The Work Programme will be a single integrated package of support providing personalised help for everyone who finds themselves out of work regardless of the benefit they claim.

This will give providers longer to work with individuals and greater freedom to decide the appropriate support for them. We will also offer stronger incentives for providers to work with the harder to help, paying providers out of the additional benefits they realise as a result of placing people into work.

We are determined to move quickly and are aiming to have the Work Programme in place nationally by the summer of 2011.

Until the Work Programme is implemented, we will ensure support is in place. Where necessary, we will seek to extend current arrangements to ensure that there is no gap in provision and people can continue to receive help and support to get back into work.

Once the Work Programme is implemented it will supersede much of the complicated raft of national programmes currently on offer and these will be phased out. The support currently provided by programmes such as the Flexible New Deal will be folded into the Work Programme as soon as possible.

We are committed to supporting severely disabled people and are currently reviewing the best way of doing this.

The Government have today written to relevant providers and will be beginning one to one discussions with them to discuss what this means for them. We believe that the Work Programme will offer significant new opportunities for contractors from the private and voluntary sectors to deliver truly flexible and personalised support, building appropriate partnerships to do so. We recognise the crucial role that the voluntary sector in particular has to play in tackling worklessness, and our plans reflect this.

We will be publishing further details as the design and implementation of the Work Programme progresses.

I make the following observations.

Firstly, any work-for-benefits (Workfare) scheme in this programme will be very expensive. It needs a complicated system of ‘providers’. It needs overseers to make us toil. Secondly, if it is used to patch gaps in local services (growing with all the cuts they are making), it will cause immense resentment amongst the employees whose jobs it threatens. Thirdly, with no job guarantee at the end it will be loathed by those forced onto it.

Comments (42)

June 22, 2010

A Budget Against the Unemployed.

Filed under: Government, Liberal Tory Coalition, Welfare State — Tags: Budget, Unemployed — Andrew Coates @ 8:45 am

Okay I’m writing in the morning and I don’t yet know the details of the Budget.

But David Cameron has called the unemployed “Welfare scroungers” in the last few days. Or rather “There is no way of dealing with an 11% budget deficit just by hitting either the rich or the welfare scrounger.”(here)

This kind of vulgar language, is a bit rich one might say coming from someone as rich as Cameron and his chums in the Bullingdon Club at Oxford. They have never done an honest days work in their lives. They have richness beyond the dreams of avarice.

This is a sign that people on the Dole, Disability Living Allowance and Invalidity Benefit, should watch out. We are fair-game.

We can be sure he’s not going to treat us kindly.

Opinion has been softened up for weeks now.

Last night on Channel Four News we have one young unemployed woman who said she’d be worse off in a job. I don’t know about everyone but I’d be a hell of a lot better off in work than on JSA. Maybe she rented from one of those Housing Associations that charge a fortune. Well, their rents certainly aren’t going to go down after the Budget shaves more money off them. Anyway, what was the report suggesting? That she should get less money than the existing JSA pittance to force her into employment?

I predict a benefits freeze.

I predict a “crack-down” on Benefit “fraud”.

The Daily Record (Scotland) suggests that

The Government (may) decide to link payment levels to the Consumer Price Index rather than the Retail Price Index. The CPI, which does not include house prices, is about one per cent lower than the RPI and the move could shave more than £1billion from the £105billion welfare budget.

Some may consider that Cameron and Clegg have got hold of the wrong end of the stick.

We can be sure that with public sector cuts there’s going to be plenty more people joining us on the Dole queue.

Perhaps we’ll end up ‘volunteering’ to take their former jobs.

On Benefits that is.

Comments (151)

June 24, 2010

Welfare Analysis of the Budget.

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed, Liberal Tory Coalition, New Deal, Unemployment, Welfare Reform, Welfare State — Tags: Budget, Unemployed, Welfare — Andrew Coates @ 8:58 am

This is a cross-post from Harpy (here). Louise is employed full-time in the area of welfare rights. She is one of the few people who have been campaigning against Welfare Reform for the last few years. Ipswich Unemployed Action works with her. As someone based in the East End of London she knows some of the hardest edges of the system.

Louise’s Blog also has her own, really ace, digital photos on it.

I note, in passing, that our old friend David Freud was on Newsnight yesterday. Interviewed by a very anti-the-unemployed Jeremy Paxman.

The incredibly wealthy Paxman came out with some Daily Express type tales about people living the life of Riley on the Dole. Normally he does not bully the weak, but you could see on the programme how nasty he can turn. For some details on the kind of lies that are being peddled see this – here.

The real human cost of this miserable & draconian Budget

22 06 2010

This emergency Budget is totally draconian and utterly austere. To think otherwise (only if you are wealthy) is a fool’s paradise. Richard Murphy highlighted:

Benefits will be cut by about 10%. Departmental spending, except in health and overseas development will be cut by 25%. At least 750,000 state sector jobs will go on that basis, in my estimation. I think 750,000 more from the private sector could join them on the unemployment register. And this budget, which according to George Osborne promised growth, did no such thing.

Sunny Hundal points to this YouGov poll where 49% of the respondents believe that the cuts are a good idea (the vox pop on tonight’s C4 News concluded that it wasn’t too bad and many expected to ‘pay’ for the crisis)… . Firstly, regarding this YouGov poll, who was precisely polled and secondly, it’s the calm before the storm…and the impact has not sunk in as yet. People will pay, and pay dearly they will. But the reality is that people will suffer, a massive 25% will be slashed from public departments. Public sector pay will be frozen for two years (translated…. a pay cut). Therefore massive unemployment, poorer population and the likelihood of a double-dip recession. To put it bluntly, we are fucked….

Another area that has been plundered is welfare, Con/Dems attack the poorest and the most powerless with their raid on the coffers of welfare.

Uprating

the government will adopt the Consumer Price Index (CPI) for the uprating of benefits and tax credits from April 2011

DLA

the government will introduce the use of ‘objective medical assessments’ for all DLA claimants from 2013/2014

Translated this means bullying people into the job market based on supposedly “objective medical assessment” when really it is based on ideology.

Benefits and children

from October 2011, lone parents whose youngest child is aged 5 or above will be eligible for jobseeker’s allowance rather than income support, and existing claimants will be transferred from income support to jobseeker’s allowance from April 2012;
from April 2011 the government will restrict eligibility to the sure start maternity grant for the first child (or children where the first is a multiple birth);
the health in pregnancy grant will be abolished from January 2011; and
child benefit will be frozen for three years from April 2011

Tax credits

from April 2011, the second income threshold for the family element of child tax credit will reduce from £50,000 to £40,000 and, from April 2012, the family element of child tax credit will be withdrawn immediately after the child element;

Benefits and children

from October 2011, lone parents whose youngest child is aged 5 or above will be eligible for jobseeker’s allowance rather than income support, and existing claimants will be transferred from income support to jobseeker’s allowance from April 2012;
from April 2011 the government will restrict eligibility to the sure start maternity grant for the first child (or children where the first is a multiple birth) ;
the health in pregnancy grant will be abolished from January 2011; and
child benefit will be frozen for three years from April 2011.

Housing costs and housing benefit

I know there are other measures regarding Housing benefit but this below is very worrying as it will cause untold misery;

from April 2013, housing benefit awards will be reduced to 90 per cent of the initial award after 12 months for claimants receiving jobseeker’s allowance;

This means not just that people will be finding things a bit tough but that they will not be able to pay the rent. They will be made homeless. George is putting beggars back on the street in the same way that his hero, Thatcher, did.

Unemployed people will be used to put downward pressure on wages. This the role of the employment advisers involved in the “New Deal”. The result is that the rich and their big corporations will benefit hugely at ordinary peoples’ expense. Expect more bullying in the workplace and in the Jobcentre.

We are going to be living in a very nasty and destructive society (and the CBI btw want to restrict strike action). The message people should take is organise and resist or be destroyed.

As Mark Serwotka (PCS general secretary) argues, This is one of the most regressive budgets we have seen for many years, with attacks on the low-paid, the unemployed, pensioners, the welfare state and the public sector as a whole. This is not a progressive budget to help the country recover from the worst economic crisis in living memory, it is a programme of despair for millions of people who did not cause the recession and should not be made to pay for it. We do not believe that these cuts are necessary, we do not accept the flawed analysis on which they are based, and we are committed to helping to organise joint union action and campaigning in communities to resist them.

Comments (22)

June 26, 2010

USA: Millions Face No Dole, No Home.

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed, Unemployment, Welfare State — Tags: USA Unemployed — Andrew Coates @ 9:38 am

American Tent City.

USA, Down and Out.

Channel Four’s Unreported World Last Night -you can watch it here.

“Unreported World meets the USA’s new middle-class homeless: families struggling to hold down jobs that pay so little they’re forced to live in tent cities or their cars and receive little help from the government.

Reporter Ramita Navai and producer Clancy Chassay begin their journey in Chicago, one of the country’s manufacturing centres, which has been hit hard by the effects of the worst financial crisis in decades. St Columbanus church is one of 600 charities across the city that gives out emergency food rations.Across America, many working people from all sectors have taken as much as 40% in pay cuts in desperation to hold on to their jobs. Their motivation is clear: if you are a temporary, part-time or self-employed worker you don’t qualify for government help. The result is that many can’t make ends meet and afford to feed themselves and their families.

From the Programme’s Blog (here)

The producer, Clancy Chassay, and I flew to America knowing that increasing numbers of people were being made homeless. Many were just ordinary, working Americans who’d never expected to find themselves in such dire circumstances.

From the moment we landed it was clear what was happening was largely hidden – there weren’t thousands of middle-class Americans sleeping on the streets in plain view. Investigating further we were shocked at what we found. Shelters across the country were packed to capacity with people who had, until very recently, been living the American dream – the house, the job, the car and the big-screen TV. What was even more surprising is that many still had jobs, but the pay wasn’t enough to keep the roof over their heads. All the shelters had waiting lists of hundreds of people; it was clear that there just weren’t enough to cope with the explosion in numbers of people being made homeless. With so many people having nowhere to go, we found groups coming together forming new communities of their own. Many had set up camps out of view of the public – in woods, industrial areas or abandoned wasteland – operating in tandem with mainstream society.

Some of this is already happening here. There are people who get no benefits whatsoever. There are those sanctioned trying to get by on below the minimum the DWP itself says is necessary to live on. The local Community Resource Centre is beginning to give out food parcels to those stuck in trouble with the DWP’s system. There are people sleeping on the streets of Ipswich. There are beggars.

No doubt with the squeeze on Housing Benefit we will see more of this.

Comments (41)

June 28, 2010

Crack-Down on Incapacity Benefit Claimants, Private Companies to Benefit.

Filed under: Incapacity Benefit, Liberal Tory Coalition, Welfare Reform, Welfare State — Tags: Crack-down on Incapacity Benefit — Andrew Coates @ 11:33 am

All the papers are roughly the same today: Crack Down on Incapacity Benefit.

(something else happened yesterday afternoon that got reported but I can’t remember what it was).

The fair-minded Daily Express says (here),

BENEFITS cheats who languish on state hand-outs after lying that they are too ill to work are to be targeted in a fresh Government crackdown, it emerged yesterday.

The Daily Mail, all softy, says, (here),

Meanwhile, latest figures show that some claim to be unfit because of headaches, indigestion and even blisters.

The Guardian says,

Ministers are to signal a tougher approach to incapacity benefit this week as the next stage of its welfare reforms, by reducing the benefit levels of those tested if they are found capable of doing some work.

Details are expected to be announced by the work minister, Chris Grayling, this week. Early pilots suggest half of those assessed are being taken off the higher rate benefit on the basis that tests reveal they are fit to do some work, government sources say.

Those deemed capable are likely to be required to do more to make themselves available for work if they are to continue receiving benefit.

Ministers have also looked at whether they can speed up the testing, but denied a suggestion that they could treble the number tested.

The chancellor, George Osborne, signalled tonight that efforts to take more of those on incapacity benefit off welfare will form a significant part of plans to cut the deficit, saying: “It’s a choice we all face. It is not a choice we can duck.”

Osborne said the trade-off between cutting the £192bn welfare bill and the level of spending cuts required in other government departments will be a central feature of the first meeting this week of his pivotal cabinet committee on public spending.

Ministers are looking to see whether existing incapacity benefit claimants can be passed to new private sector welfare-to-work providers.

More here.

Apart from this there is one thing (amongst many) that is really wrong here.

There are a lot of people on these Benefits who have psychological problems. Some times they can work. Other times not.

It is a real act of cruelty to force them to ‘work’ when they are at risk of serious difficulties.

Many of us know people like this already forced onto New Deal Schemes. Isee one frequently.

It is not fair for them, and it is not easy for anyone else, when they are in a difficult state.

New Deal Contractors must be already aware of what’s already gone on here.

Any firm taking on a contract to force such individuals into employment (and in doing so putting them in a position where they permanently risk sanctions), is a very dubious company.

A real sack of artful dodgers.

Comments (17)

July 1, 2010

‘Workshy’ to Live on Air for Three Years.

Filed under: Liberal Tory Coalition, Unemployment, Welfare Reform, Work Programme — Tags: Work programme, Workfare — Andrew Coates @ 10:50 am

Friend-of-the-Dole-Claimant, the Daly Mail, announces today (Thursday),

Ministers will today unveil a tough new benefits regime designed to drive millions of claimants back into work and smash Labour’s legacy of welfare dependency.

Under the Government’s new Work Programme, millions of people on benefits will be forced to make daily efforts to find a job.

Those who refuse to co-operate will have their benefits stopped immediately. People on Jobseekers’ Allowance would lose their entire benefit of £65.45 a week. inisters will today unveil a tough new benefits regime designed to drive millions of claimants back into work and smash Labour’s legacy of welfare dependency.

Under the Government’s new Work Programme, millions of people on benefits will be forced to make daily efforts to find a job.

Those who refuse to co-operate will have their benefits stopped immediately. People on Jobseekers’ Allowance would lose their entire benefit of £65.45 a week

So far so same old story.

The Work Programme will be introduced in April and will replace all six back-to-work schemes set up by Labour.

It will be operated by private companies, which will be paid thousands of paid thousands of pounds for each person they find a job, funded by savings from the welfare budget.

Anyone unemployed for more than a year will be placed on the scheme, along with all under-25s who have been jobless for more than six months. All 2.6 million people on incapacity benefit will face tough new medical tests.

Those who are deemed fit to work will also be put on the Work Programme.

Individuals placed on the scheme will be given a tailored package to help them find a job.

Those who refuse to accept a ‘reasonable job offer’ will have their benefits stopped for a month. Ministers are believed to be considering plans to stop benefits for up to three years in cases where someone refuses three jobs.

People refusing to participate in the Work Programme will also have their benefits stopped.

Anyone refusing to make serious efforts to find work will be required to undertake ‘ mandatory community activity’, such as environmental volunteering

July 3, 2010

Lord Freud, Minister for Welfare Reform on Government Plans.

Filed under: David Freud, Government, Welfare Reform, Welfare State, Work Programme — Tags: David Freud, Welfare Reform, Welfare State — Andrew Coates @ 10:08 am

Recently our old friend, his Lordship David Freud, Minister for Welfare Reform, DWP , made a speech (from Here).

For some unaccountable reason Ipswich Unemployed Action was not invited to this event, or sent the left-overs from the sumptuous buffet afterwards.

We have however added our comments.

Address to Welfare Providers

Wednesday 2 June 2010, Church House

First of all, thanks to Chris for outlining our ambitions for radical welfare reform.As you’ve heard, it is absolutely vital that we press ahead with these reforms as quickly as possible.For one thing, as Iain Duncan Smith pointed out in his speech last Thursday, the country quite literally cannot afford to go on like this.

But just as importantly, we need to take this opportunity to tackle poverty and long-term worklessness while there is a real appetite for radical change in government and across the country.

That is not to underestimate the scale of the challenge.No-one doubts there are problems within the current benefits system.

The incentives are inadequately aligned and the system actually reinforces unemployment and the poverty trap, rather than fighting it as it should.

There are real issues with the link between risk and reward for those who want to make the journey back to work.

And there are inherent problems with a system that does not concentrate enough on outcomes as the key measure.

That adds up to the central challenge for everyone here today as we work together to address the underlying issues that have left so many lives blighted by entrenched worklessness and poverty (aka the level of benefits you propose to lower).

There is some good news though, because we now have a government that is committed to making the changes we need and a Secretary of State who is prepared to champion the reforms in Cabinet.

Our reforms will be radical, but they are based around a simple premise: re-establishing responsibility and fairness as the cornerstone of our society (who are you kidding?).

What this means for you as providers, or potential providers, is equally simple: we will pay you a fair rate, but that rate will be set by outcomes, not by input (drive ‘em off benefits for god’s sake!) .

At the same time, we will free you from the pressures of political tinkering so that you can get on with the job, making the most of your own expertise and “business practices”. ( nervous titters) .

In this way, we will fix the system so that it works better for you, works out cheaper for taxpayers, and works harder for those who are hardest to help.

Work programme rationale

This is the rationale behind the Government’s single Work Programme.

We believe the present system does not do enough to help people get back to work and keep them there. Too often the system itself is responsible for ‘churn’ – people moving off benefits, into unsustainable work, back on to benefits, and back into unsustainable work, endlessly cycling between the two (What the hell is ‘unsustinable work’ in English?)

Moreover, the present system lumps people into a series of almost arbitrary categories. Not only that, but it fails to draw an adequate distinction between those who are work ready and simply need a job, and those who need substantial help to get back into the labour market (explain how your own period as a Government Adviser under Gordon Brown failed this alter this. Answers on back of a matchbox) .

The new Work Programme will be different.

It will be designed to allow you, the people who work at the coalface(!!!!!!!!!), to run your own operations as you see fit and provide more personalised help where that works for the individual. (Like putting Urban Foxes in charge of a chicken-coop).

If a jobseeker requires eight escalating stages of support rather than six, it will be up to you to make that decision.

If a jobseeker needs intensive support from day one and is referred to you, it will be up to you to decide what support they get. One programme also means you can tackle the collective issues of family members in a coherent way – rather than splitting them up into different programmes. (Does this mean they will be in charge of families’ private lives – because this is what it looks like).

Sustainability will be at the heart of the Work Programme. You will be expected to handle the journey into work and the early stages within a new job – when those hardest to help are in the most fragile position. (More Nosey-Parkering.)

Necessity of dialogue

This must involve a radical shake-up of the system – and it must happen quickly. But despite the scale of our ambition and the pace of change, I want to assure everyone here that this will be a two-way process. (That is, the Unemployed are merchandise between the Government and the Providers).

As you know, I have been in constant dialogue with you over the last year – through bodies like ERSA and the CBI – and that process will continue.

We want to bring you all with us and we are open to any ideas that will help us get the process moving quickly (Consult Ipswich Unemployed Action and you’ll be even quicker – we would get rid of the lot of you shifty types.)

We have a very clear idea of where we are going. But we haven’t nailed down all the steps we need to get there. The obvious example is the question of how we start up the system.

Fundamentally, that is why we are here today (and for the excellent food and drink) – so we can start that process of open and honest dialogue. We will need to create a provider-based regime that preserves and embraces the best of what we have, while building the new framework we need to move forward.

Provider capital

Many of you already know my views about the type of changes we need to make (Unlike us, poor fools, who you’ve not informed at all).

To keep up the pace of progress we envisage, we will need well-capitalised and well-resourced groups that are prepared to take up the challenge of competition in this area. (what a profitable business running the out-of-works lives can be!)

Given the greater off-flows we expect to see through migration (!!!!) from Incapacity Benefit to ESA (Employment and Support Allowance) under the new Work Capability Assessment, we will need companies with the scale to make an impact.

And in view of the difficulties that we are all familiar with in targeting support to some of the hardest to reach, we will also need groups that already have – or can co-opt into consortia – the skills and expertise needed to provide real change to people’s lives (we are already all to aware of what ‘changes’ can happen)

Consortia formation, financing and management will, I am convinced, lie at the heart of the successful operation of the sector.

So if you represent a medium or larger organisation, you might want to accelerate your thinking about how you can work with partners with resources in other areas or locations. Many of you, I know, have already elaborated strategies in this area. (tired, opps, tried, and proven success eh……)

We’re already seeing the emergence of groups with strong skill-sets and a solid reserve of capital (??????); groups which are in a financial position to compete and invest in moving their customers into work.

At the same time, increased competition will be fairly rewarded by a payment-by-outcomes system that will foster innovation and creativity. And we will base our payments more firmly on keeping people in employment.

This is how the Government and the taxpayer can finally harness the dynamism and initiative that is evident in the organisations represented in this room today. (Pass the sick-bucket..)

There is a unique opportunity to combine the best of the third sector, the voluntary sector and the private sector to reinvigorate our welfare-to-work system.

Industry policing

The new Work Programme will herald a fundamental recalibration of the role of the state in welfare provision.

Yes, we’ll continue to make benefit payments and support the most vulnerable.

Yes, we’ll continue to hold a stake in your relationships with Jobcentre customers.

But we will not tell you how to run your businesses and we won’t meddle in your operations. (See remarks on Urban Foxes above).

We are determined that the “black box” approach, as it has been called, will really mean that we will judge you by your results and pay you accordingly. (Translation: we put the workless in a dark hole and let you get on with it.)

Some of you will remember that this proposition was at the heart of my report three years ago, when I recommended greater private and voluntary sector involvement in the welfare system. (We remember it well, and we’ve marked you down ever since your Lordship).

We have moved in the right direction since then, but there are still too many top-down Whitehall rules instead of a framework that frees your ability to apply your own approach to get Britain working.

These changes will allow you to individualise your services like never before.

This implies greater specialisation. Some of you will concentrate in helping lone parents into work; or providing intensive support for ethnic groups in your area who suffer particular disadvantages.

All we want to focus on, and pay you for, is your record of getting people off benefits and into sustainable work. And this really is a big change – we care as much about your record of keeping people in work as we do your record of getting them there in the first place.

Challenges ahead

I don’t underestimate the challenges ahead. We’ll have to work out a different kind of pricing structure to establish rates of payment to providers – one which reflects the cost of supporting different types of jobseekers. (We assure you, you’ll make a mint with a growing captive market!)

There will be the added challenge of former Incapacity Benefit claimants flowing onto ESA through the Work Capability Assessment – or making a claim for Jobseeker’s Allowance. (You’ll have to put up with the lame and the halt – but we’ll pay you well.)

Rolling out the Work Programme across the country will be a challenge,(how true!) especially with regards to managing the transition. As Chris said, we intend to provide you with specific propositions shortly.

We’ve made good progress with our plans, but we want to hear your suggestions before we finalise them. After we’ve reflected on today, officials will be writing to all providers and bidders, spelling out the implications programme by programme and competition by competition.

Communications officials will be on hand to deal with your enquiries, and we’ve even set up a dedicated email address so we can provide effective Questions and Answers. The address is:

THEWORKPROGRAMME.EXTERNAL@DWP.GSI.GOV.UK (Please contact them asp).

Conclusion

I want to close by reassuring you that those providers who have done well and are moving into the Work Programme with a legacy of strong performance (!!!!!!) are in a good position for the future.

For smaller providers, we will examine ways to provide you with the support you need, and encourage ideas that help you to access the capital you need, so that you can play a full part in the Work Programme.

Welfare reform is at the very top of the Government’s agenda – it was right at the top of last week’s Queen’s speech – and it is a personal goal of mine.

Many of you know me. I hope I have begun to earn your trust – at least for the consistency of my message. I want to make the system work well and work for everyone – just as Chris does, just as the new Secretary of State does, and just as the entire Coalition Government does.

Because welfare reform is the key to so many of this country’s problems; and you are the key to welfare reform. We, as a government, believe in the values of freedom, fairness and responsibility (!!!!!), and these ideas embody the thinking behind the Work Programme.

So please, engage with us during this collaborative reform process. Talk to us, to DWP officials, and amongst each other. Voice your concerns and make your suggestions (Unemployed follow this example of your betters and do the same!).

This is a pivotal time for welfare in this country. I urge you all to help us implement the reforms we so desperately need, and play a part getting Britain back to work.

Thank you.

Since June, as the plans are rolling out, one thing is becoming clearer and clearer the Likes of A4E and the rest of the scapegrace ‘providers’ are going to run amok under Welfare Reform.

Comments (49)

July 4, 2010

Unemployed With No Crisis Loan or Benefit Sanctions to Get Christian Charity Food Vouchers.

Filed under: jobseekers allowance, Unemployment, Welfare Reform — Tags: Charity, Food Vouchers for Unemployed, Welfare Reform — Andrew Coates @ 9:25 am

Ministers consider scheme to hand out food vouchers to unemployed

Charity director says some claimants ‘on the edge’ because they have been refused crisis loan or had benefits halted

The government is considering plans to distribute food vouchers to people on the dole as part of a wider drive to empower charitiess to supplement the support provided by the welfare state.

Iain Duncan Smith, the work and pensions secretary, has given his provisional backing to JobCentre Plus staff handing out vouchers that can be exchanged for food parcels.

The parcels, which contain enough donated items to keep a family fed for six days, are administered from 65 food banks across the country run by the Trussell Trust, a Christian charity.

The initiative could prove politically controversial, and officials at the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) are keen the policy is seen as an attempt to bolster the voluntary sector, rather than the state abandoning people who fall through the welfare net.

Ministers see attempts to empower charities as in keeping with the Conservative party’s “big society” theme, and hope Jobcentre Plus advisers, who encounter people in poverty every day, could direct them to a range of locally-based charities.

More Here.

Today’s Independent on Sunday runs the story about Foodbanks - Here.

A ‘Student’ comments (here),

hm, im not sure what i think about this, on the one hand, it could stop people who live off JSA from spending their money on things they dont need(alcohol, cigarettes etc etc) and making sure they are fed properly, yes i know this isnt true in the majority of cases, but i have seen it first hand how some people dont bother working and use their money to fund their drinking and just eat chinese takeaway all the time.
on the other hand, in this current climate anyone will struggle to get a job, is it fair to cut the JSA for people who really try, but cannot get a job in the field they are qualified for, and what about the social stigma, would people not look down on people paying with food vouchers?
In a different climate where the unemployment rate would be a lot lot lower, i would be all for this tbh, but at this current time, no, bad idea imo.

Or indeed some students might spend more time learning how to spell and write.

But I digress.

Being dependent on the good-will of Charities for basic necessities is always wrong.

Always.

This is a step backwards to the days of Lord and Lady Bountiful.

Comments (46)

July 6, 2010

Letter to DWP On Work Programme.

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed, David Freud, DWP — Tags: David Freud, DWP — Andrew Coates @ 9:01 am

Sent by E-Mail this Morning.

Dear DWP Ministers,

Ipswich Unemployment Action is a lively Blog run by the unemployed (http://intensiveactivity.wordpress.com/).

It posts news and comments (many hundreds) on issues to do with unemployment, state benefits and schemes (such as the Flexible New Deal) which are said to help people back into work.

We have grave concerns about the new Work Programme.

A major one is that Minister, Lord David Freud, describes the new system as a “black box”. That in a speech to providers he said, “We are determined that the “black box” approach, as it has been called, will really mean that we will judge you by your results and pay you accordingly.”

Does this mean that there will no public scrutiny of how it works, its effects on participants, and its outcomes?

As a member of Ipswich Unemployed Action I would like to see any programme that affects the out-of-work operate with maximum openness.

I hope you can clarify the meaning of the phrase “black box”.

Yours faithfully,

Comments (16)

July 10, 2010

Unemployment Bound to Rise Says Think-Tank. Fairy Jobmother to the Rescue.

Filed under: DWP, Government, Unemployment — Tags: Unemployment — Andrew Coates @ 11:55 am

The employer group reckons public sector cuts could see the dole queues swell to about 3m.

The employment picture might be looking slightly healthier in the private sector, but it’s a very different story in the public sector. The CIPD warns today that the Con-Lib coalition’s aggressive axe-wielding plans will leave some 725,000 civil servants out of a job – pushing the total UK unemployment figure up to 2.95m by 2012. Worse still, it thinks this number will remain pretty steady until 2015, since the private sector recovery is likely to be too weak to pick up the slack. Arguably it’s right that the state sector should finally experience some of the pain felt by the rest of us in recent years – but it’s going to have some nasty consequences…

From Here.

We doubt very much that civil servants are going to turn up as debt collectors, pawn-shop managers, Big Issue sellers (more Here), aroma therapists and other much-needed areas of employment set to grow in the near future.

One thing was very noticable: if unemployment is bound to rise, why are the Government planning to close yet more Job Centres?

But, hold on, rescue is at hand.

The Fairy Jobmother is back Next Week (here).

BERJAYA

Be Afraid, Be Very Afraid!

Yes we Can!

Comments (55)

July 12, 2010

Housing Benefit Caps To Turf Out The Poor.

Filed under: Housing Benefit, Ipswich, Unemployment, Welfare Reform — Tags: Welfare Reform — Andrew Coates @ 10:10 am

This is already beginning to happen….

Coalition’s welfare cuts will combine with joblessness and home repossessions to leave thousands homeless, charities predict

By Sean O’Grady, Economics Editor The Independent.

Thousands of people will be made homeless as public spending is slashed because of a dangerous combination of higher unemployment, increasing repossessions and cuts to housing benefit, housing experts have warned.

The retired, disabled people, carers and working families will be hardest hit and charities predict it will trigger the steepest rise in families living in unsuitable accommodation and individuals sleeping rough since the 1980s.

Those in London will be the worst affected, forcing an exodus of poorer people from the centre to outer boroughs, and adding to the financial pressures on local authorities, which are obliged to find homes, school places and social care for the newly arrived families.

The homeless charity, Shelter, said that some households in London currently receiving housing benefit will have to find a shortfall of up to £1,548 a month to meet their housing costs. The result, say opposition MPs, will be “social cleansing” of poorer tenants from richer areas. (More Here)

If anyone thinks this will just affect people in places like London it’s already touching people in more modest locations – in Ipswich.

A case brought to our attention include a couple living in a near to centre of town flat who have to make up the shortfall on their Housing Benefit – up to £15 a week (out of the pittance you have already).
It’s becoming increasingly common for this to happen.
Add it to the delays in getting Housing Benefit and you’ve got a recipe for getting into rent arrears.
Soon lots more people will be in this trap.

Bear in mind that after a year on the Dole, a 10% shortfall of Benefit to Rent is programmed in this round of Welfare ‘Reforms’.

Bear this in mind – everyone will fall under this rule, not the handful of individuals the Press publicises who get vast sums.

Not that this stops Tory Councillors from saying this (here),

“ we are living in an age of austerity in which we all need to adapt to the new economic realities of the day. Reducing housing benefit payments is a key way to do this.”

Top-Tip: Invest in the Big Issue, a paper with a future.

Comments (24)

July 14, 2010

Hayley Taylor: Saint and Saviour.

Filed under: Unemployment, Welfare State, Workfare — Tags: a4e, Charlatan, Cheap Gimmicks, Fat Fighters, Hayley Taylor, Hucksters, Patronising Drivel, Snake Oil Merchants — Andrew Coates @ 9:19 am

BERJAYA

A4E: Canonised Sainthood.

If every jobless person in Britain had Hayley Taylor on their case, we’d soon be living in a land of zero unemployment. An unstoppable life force with a neat line in off-centre neckwear (a curious choker/cravat hybrid affair), it can’t be long before Taylor gets signed by the Cameron-Clegg coalition as Minister for Positivity.

(More in same vein Here.)

Hayley Taylor is soon due to perform the same miracles in the USA – Hat-tip to Funny A4e Photos.

LA CASTING:

Have you been out of the workforce for a significant amount of time? Have you lost hope at having a career? Is the bad economy weighing down you and your family? Hayley Taylor, career specialist who has successfully helped countless numbers of people on a show of the same name in the UK, is looking to help the perpetually unemployed finally get past their problems and finally obtain and keep a job on this side of the ocean.

Seeking:

- Unemployed men and women

- Ages 18 and up

- Must be a legal US resident and able to work ( here )

I watched the first five minutes.

Noticed her make-over alone would have cost more than a fortnight’s JSA.

She started with something like, “My job is to make the unemployed feel good about themselves”.

Charlatan barely begins to cover it.

Comments (61)

July 18, 2010

Funny A4E Video-Clip.

Filed under: a4e, Unemployment, Welfare Reform, Welfare State, Work Programme — Tags: a4e — Andrew Coates @ 9:36 am

As the government plans to ‘outsource’ everything to Hayley Taylor-Arthur Daley Plc. now is the time to look again at the some of the companies dealing with the unemployed.

Okay I couldn’t find any videos about the coming Work Programme.

Comments (18)

July 20, 2010

John Bird: Cut State Benefits, Buy the Big Issue.

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed, Government, jobseekers allowance, Unemployment, Welfare Reform — Tags: John Bird, Welfare — Andrew Coates @ 3:32 pm

How to Deal with Ne’re-Do-Wells.

Jobless must earn their benefits says John Bird (MBE)

Monday 21st of June 2010

John Bird, Founder & Editor in Chief of The Big Issue, has written to David Cameron urging him to cut state benefits.

In his letter to the Prime Minister Mr Bird urges him to take measures which oblige the unemployed to become involved in community work in order to improve their life skills and readiness for work.

It is his firm belief that long term benefit dependency is responsible for a great many ills in society, including the creation of an underclass lacking in motivation or aspiration.

“That’s not only damaging to individuals, it’s damaging to society. The illegal drugs industry would be lost without the support of the welfare state,” he told the Sunday Times yesterday.

Mr Bird explains that it is more expensive to keep a child in care than it is to send them to Eton – like the Prime Minister.

“He has to move fast: a new government has only six months of goodwill. I reminded him that we have the most expensive poor in the world.”

From Here

Help the Big Issue, use their Job Service: Here.

More on Big Issue Scam (Flexy) – Here.

Comments (22)

July 22, 2010

John Bird: Someone Loves Yer!

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed, Welfare Reform, Welfare State, Workfare — Tags: Big Issue, John Bird — Andrew Coates @ 9:55 am

Champion of the Out-Of-Work John Bird has many friends amongst Ipswich Unemployed Action.

His solution to mass worklessness: less dole, ‘voluntary work’ (David Cameron’s Big Society) and flog some his mag on street corners.

Bird is rapidly getting support. Away with the Nanny State (not that we are too clear on what Nannies are)! Bring communities back in charge! Buy the Big Issue!

In Ipswich we JSA types and Flexible New Dealers are ready to volunteer to

Take over the Drink Squad from Busy Coppers. If we see people drinking in the street, we will confiscate all tinnies of strong cider and lager and put them a socially useful purpose.
Run the Local Library. To save space we will transfer all CDs and DVDs to our homes.
Food Safety. Our vigilant inspectors will pounce on the slightest infraction. We will confiscate all dodgy looking take-aways and bring them to our central depot for strict tastings.

We hope that Birdy will help us a Consultant.

Bird is man with a future. As his mate Gordon Roddick says

Life as John’s friend is a series of startling incidents. He is an anarchist who enjoys a drink – evenings out with him are always slightly dangerous. You’re sure to end up embroiled in arguments or heavy scenes in restaurants. John is part of life’s rich entertainment: he makes me laugh and I love the guy.

(More, yuk, Here)

What a scamp!

Comments (9)

July 25, 2010

Housing Benefit Cuts Will Hit Poor Hard.

Filed under: Housing Benefit, Liberal Tory Coalition, Welfare Reform, Welfare State — Tags: Housing Benefit, Welfare Reform — Andrew Coates @ 9:15 am

The cuts in Housing Benefit will hit hard. I think this is going to be a major cause of distress. Not only, as people here have remarked, is it almost impossible to rent a new place when you’re on the dole but many landlords already make life difficult for anyone on Benefits. Having to fork out that ‘extra’ money – when the DWP already says the existing JSA level is the minimum you need to (barely) live on – is a hard demand. It will also affect anyone trying to get back into work, since people on low-paid jobs are often helped out by Housing Benefit.

From the Guardian (Here.)

Almost a million of the poorest people in Britain will lose on average £12 a week next year – a drop of up to 17% of their disposable income, according to a government analysis of housing benefits cuts announced in last month’s budget.

The figures show that 170,000 pensioners, 240,000 low-paid workers and half a million others will be affected.

The greatest impact will be felt by the unemployed, who will have to find an extra £11 a week to pay their rents – their jobseeker’s allowance is £65.

More than 40,000 households will lose more than £1,000 a year.

The government says the cuts are necessary as the cost to the taxpayer of housing benefit expenditure is now £20bn – double that of a decade ago.

The government’s analysis looks only at the effect of changes next year. These will cap the amount of housing benefit allowance, peg the amount of support to the bottom third of rents in the claimant’s borough and remove a £15 incentive paid to families who seek cheaper accommodation.

There have been persistent warnings from campaigners that the draconian nature of the reforms will lead to parts of the country being emptied of poor people.

Helen Williams, assistant director at the National Housing Federation, said: “Almost 100% of claimants will be worse off. There’s a very real risk that these cuts will push hundreds of thousands of people into poverty, debt and even on to the streets if they end up being evicted.”

Labour said the “figures prove that the government’s housing benefit cuts will push thousands of people into poverty and homelessness”. Yvette Cooper, the shadow secretary for work and pensions, said: “Almost every private sector tenant in the country on local housing allowance is going to be badly hit by these plans – including over 50,000 of the poorest pensioners.”

Cooper described the measures as just the “tip of iceberg”, representing less than a third of the putative savings of £1.76bn outlined by the coalition government. “Shocking that this is just the tip of the iceberg, as these only include figures for 2011, when many more cuts come in after that,” she said.

Today the Department for Work and Pensions appeared to accept that the changes would leave some people in receipt of housing benefit unable to rent properties in prosperous parts of the country.

“What these reforms mean is that people receiving housing benefit may not be able to live in expensive city centres, but the same applies to most working families who do not receive benefit,” it said.

The minister for welfare reform, Lord Freud, a former Labour adviser, said that the previous government had let housing benefit “spiral out of control” and left families “in properties which they could never afford to maintain”.

Hat tips to Homeless Harry and everyone else who’s posted on this

Comments (6)

July 27, 2010

David Freud: His Lordship on Getting People into Work.

Filed under: David Freud, Government, Liberal Tory Coalition, Welfare Reform, Work Programme — Tags: David Freud, Welfare Reform, Work programme — Andrew Coates @ 9:27 am

The Work Programme seems set to run from next year.

In the meantime we are getting reports that existing ‘providers’ (as if they are like nurturing parents…) of the Flexible New Deal seem less and less interested in their ‘customers’.

Some people have not heard from their advisers for a considerable time.

Comments (52)

July 30, 2010

Labour Market System Scam #485,672

Filed under: Unemployment — Tags: Aircell Media, Aircell Media Group, Labour Market System, leaflet distributors, Lucent Internet Services — Work Programme @ 8:46 am

Just a heads up to be careful about what jobs you apply for.

This is one example: LEAFLET DISTRIBUTOR that is NATIONWIDE, PERMANENT, 20+ HOURS WEEK and WAGE of £7.55 PER HOUR (ref: ERG/14706). The employer, AIRCELL MEDIA (Assumingly, tongue in cheek of “Air” referring to empty and “Cell” referring to a single Brain Cell) whom has a website at www.aircellmedia.co.uk (registered to “Lucent Internet Services” – lucent meaning shining, bright or translucent) and redirects via registrar domainmonster.com to aircell.homestead.com. (more…)

Comments (40)

August 1, 2010

Welfare Reform ‘Option’: £50 A Week Dole.

Filed under: Government, Unemployment, Welfare Reform — Tags: Iain Duncan Smith, Welfare Reform — Andrew Coates @ 9:14 am

Looking at the details of the proposed Welfare Reforms we find this,

From the Guardian.

After the budget tinkered with indexation in a manner that will ratchet down the safety net every year, it was chilling to see one option floated in yesterday’s paper which involved cutting the basic rate of income support to just £50 per week. With that sort of idea as part of the mix, it is hard to greet other ideas – such as more regional welfare – with the open mind that they might otherwise deserve.

More Here.

Comments (79)

August 4, 2010

Millionaire Cabinet and Welfare Reform.

Filed under: Government, Incapacity Benefit, Liberal Tory Coalition, Welfare Reform — Tags: Disability Living Allowance, Disabled Benefits, Liberal-Tory Coalition, Welfare Reform — Andrew Coates @ 9:50 am

From the ever reliable Daily Mail (Here. )

It is the £60million Cabinet. David Cameron’s coalition Government may have adopted ‘fairness’ as one of its defining slogans, but his team of Ministers has been drawn almost exclusively from the ranks of the financial elite – leading to accusations that politics is once again becoming the preserve of the wealthy.

Of the 29 Ministers entitled to attend Cabinet meetings, 23 have assets and investments estimated to be worth more than £1million.

Compare and contrast their cushioned lived with this (Hat-Tip to Old Timer),(more Here.)

That is the purge on people who get the miserable level of benefits for the Disabled and Ill:

The “migration” of IB claimants to the new employment support allowance (ESA) is a warning for DLA claimants. George Osborne recently announced a new medical-test for DLA claimants to reduce nonexistent disincentives to work, and to tackle the miniscule level of fraud. It will probably be the same type of unfair programme, run by private contractors Atos, aimed at reducing the caseload for DLA by 20%. This implicit target for throwing people off DLA is easily seen in June’s budget.

As for fraud, there is little justification for a catch-all punishment. Atos will get £500m over seven years for kicking people off benefits, while fraud in IB over this period will add up to around £250m: the tests intended to stop the fraud cost twice as much as the actual fraud! This means that the only way Atos can be value-for-money is if they cut £250m off the ESA caseload – so that there is indeed an implicit target, just as there is for the DLA caseload. The real story isn’t of cheating disabled people, but of a government with a badly hidden agenda.

Comments (41)

August 7, 2010

Getting a Job: Channel Four Next Tuesday.

Filed under: TV Shows on Unemployed, Unemployment, Workfare — Tags: Getting a Job, Lab-Rats, Vhannel Four — Andrew Coates @ 10:41 am

If anyone unemployed enjoys being a lab-rat then they will love the latest Channel Four programme: here.

The country’s top recruitment expert, Emma Harrison, and self-proclaimed political maverick Ray Lewis go head to head to prove that they know the best way to tackle a problem that’s plagued governments for decades: unemployment.

For Ray Lewis, Gang Tsar and Director of Eastside Young Leaders Academy, which helps disaffected youngsters get back on the straight and narrow, there’s only one way to get long-term unemployed back to work: ‘To keep them on track they need a strong and firm hand.’

Emma’s approach is to work with people: ‘I walk by their side, hold their hand and we go on a journey resulting in them getting a job that transforms their lives.’

Emma and Ray both select a member of the public for each other, someone who has been unemployed for over 18 months. They then work on their new client, agreeing that the best method will be the one that finds their client the highest paid job.

Emma helps 21-year-old John, who has never had a job and lives with his parents on a council estate in Leyton. Going to prison has become a real possibility for John and now he says he wants to turn his back on his criminal past.

Ray’s disciplinarian regime has been successful in transforming the lives of young men at this Academy in the East End, but how effectively will his boot camp methods work with 48-year-old unemployed Dave, who hasn’t had a job for over two years and feels that he’s already exhausted all avenues?

Ray Lewis ”

Former London deputy mayor Ray Lewis has been given a new City Hall role, two years after he resigned amid claims of financial irregularities.

London mayor Boris Johnson has recruited Mr Lewis to help stop young men from troubled backgrounds being drawn into gang violence.

The former mayor resigned as deputy mayor for youth in July 2008.

Emma Harrison needs no introduction to many readers of this site.

But for those who know nothing of her fragrant self:

Comments (20)

August 8, 2010

John Bird and Emma Harrison Get It Together To Help Unemployed Health.

Filed under: a4e, Government, TV Shows on Unemployed, Welfare Reform — Tags: Emma Harrison, John Bird — Andrew Coates @ 9:32 am

From the Friend of the Dole Queue, the Daily Mail,

An initiative to improve the health of the long-term unemployed is to be launched by Emma Harrison, founder of the A4e welfare-to-work organisation, and John Bird, who set up the Big Issue.

The joint venture will establish ‘wellness centres’ staffed with GPs throughout the 250 A4e branches.

Harrison, who will star in the Channel 4 programme Who Knows Best: Getting A Job on Tuesday, said: ‘There is a correlation between poor health and people in the subsistence culture, the dispossessed and longterm unemployed.’

(From Here.)

Hat-Tip to Watching A4E.

For those who have forgotten who John – cut the benefits of the out-of-work – Bird is (From Here.)

JOHN BIRD: FOUNDER OF THE BIG ISSUE

John Bird founded The Big Issue ltd London in the early 1990′s. Since then he has spread the business all over the world. The latest was a very successful launch of the
Big Issue in Osaka and Tokyo

John is one of the most inspiring speakers you will ever meet. “I have a lifetime of experience to draw upon. I was born into the underclass, made homeless at the age of seven, in prison by the time I was a teenager, slept rough on the streets of
London, and from there went on to buying and selling products and services, and building businesses“.

Bird has spoken at some of the following places:

The UN in New York, Nairobi and Istanbul
At Number ten Downing Street
Queen Elizabeth Conference Centre, Westminster.
Buckingham Palace,
The Society of Actuaries dinner
Countless after dinner speeches for charities, clubs etc

He has spoken in the presence of Prince Charles, Kofi Annan, the Late Princess Diana, Tony Blair, and the current cabinet.

And at meetings and conferences with BT, Business in the Community etc

Most of his businesses have been social businesses. That is they were set up to help people, with most of the profits going back into social support work.

But because the end has been social it does not mean that the businesses he has started do not need to be commercial. Bird has been very resolute in keeping costs down, inspiring staff, and giving leadership to many people wishing to enter business.

Bird’s major role now is coming up with new business ideas. He also speaks at business forums, in prisons, to police officers, corporate and professional bodies, from a small group to a large conference.

Now with fellow scamp Emma, Birdy has got a new money-spinner!

Comments (164)

August 10, 2010

Bounty Hunters to Help Run Dole.

Filed under: Government, Liberal Tory Coalition, Tories, Welfare Reform — Tags: Bounty Hunters, Welfare Fraud — Andrew Coates @ 9:02 am

Dog the DWP Bounty Hunter.

Bounty hunters to cut benefit fraud by £1bn

Private agencies are to be paid by the Government to reduce benefit fraud by £1billion, David Cameron is to announce.

As an estimated one in three claimants is suspected at some point, either through being reported by a ‘whistle-blower’ (translation: informer witha grudge against someone) or after suspicions are raised by staff, the financial records of millions of people could be vetted.

The credit company will be able to cross-check information about private household spending, such as utility bills, mobile phone payment details and satellite television subscriptions (Note: who can afford that for long on the Dole?), against benefit records to identify potential fraudsters.

People with “lifestyles that are inconsistent with those claiming incapacity benefit” will also be highlighted (Note: ability to walk and breath are known signs of faud).

Claimants spending large sums on gardening (?), DIY (Note: fixing stuff yourself sign of fraud) and foreign holidays (Note: it is presently illegal for a person on JSA to travel out of the country) may come under scrutiny.

More Here.

Dog the Bounty Hunter (Cartman) will be out there: Respect my authoritah!

Training Video For Fraud Busters:

Comments (48)

August 11, 2010

Emma Harrison Versus Ray Lewis: Get a Real Job, Please.

Filed under: a4e, TV Shows on Unemployed, Welfare Reform — Tags: Emma Harrison, Ray Lewis — Andrew Coates @ 3:00 pm

BERJAYA

Channel Four Job Adviser.

Call me a cynical, bookie-booze-all-day, sofa-telly-glued, chips-with-everything, 40-stone-idler.

But wasn’t the Harrison-Lewis show last night dire? (site here)

Okay the Emma character got someone – that is, yes, one - a job.

All power to him.

The real star, Emma, got to speak about holding people’s hands. Which was all very sweet.

But the spectacle was all about the duel of the dullards: Em and Lew.

Lewy gave a bad impression of Jules Winnfield (Pulp Fiction), threatening fire and brimstone all round.

The main interest in the programme was on which of these moral titans would “win”. The unemployed were their cards. Em, won.

Er, that was it.

Comments (58)

August 13, 2010

Poundland to move in to Woolworths

Filed under: Ipswich — Work Programme @ 3:50 pm

Poundland Ipswich is set to relocate to the former Woolworths store. As the store they are moving in is much larger its probable that many more jobs will be created…

Get writing your speculative letters to:

Poundland
44 Carr Street
Ipswich
IP4 1EW

(01473) 232 497

This is the current store contract details – sending to the Woolworths store is risky as they might not receive it.

Not job of the century… but its a job.

Comments (81)

August 20, 2010

Smoke A Joint, Drink A Pint of Bitter, And Get No Benefits.

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed, Flexible New Deal, Liberal Tory Coalition — Tags: Liberal Tories — Andrew Coates @ 8:35 am

Okay I made up a bit here but this is the latest scheme of the Liberal-Tory Junta that runs this country,

Drug addicts who refuse treatment could have their welfare benefits withdrawn, it was reported.

The Home Office is considering some form of “financial benefit sanction” for claimants who fail to address their drug or alcohol dependency, the BBC said.

It would mark the revival of a scheme planned by the previous Labour government aimed at helping get drug users back into work.

Social security advisers have warned such a move could drive addicts back into a life of crime.

(Comment: Too bloody right!)

The idea is said to be in a consultation paper on the Government’s drug strategy for England, Wales and Scotland. A spokesman for the Home Office was unable to comment on the proposal.

It comes amid government plans for wider shake-up of the welfare system to help save billions of pounds.

The Labour government planned a series of pilot schemes this year to help drug users kick their habits and return to work.

They included applying sanctions to addicts who failed to attend treatment awareness programmes, and increased powers for the criminal justice system to help identify problem drug users not in treatment.

But the Social Security Advisory Committee – a statutory body – warned the pilot could cause “significant harm” including the “disengagement of problem drug users from the welfare to work system with…negative economic and social impacts”.

This is the latest area of drug policy to come under the microscope this week.

Here.

Comments (61)

August 24, 2010

Cordelia Gummer Speaks: Coatesy Has Gone Abuja.

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed — Andrew Coates @ 9:15 am

BERJAYA

This is a guest post from well-respected Cordeila Gummer (her with the heart).

Cordellia is well known in radical unemployed circles for her tireless work in support of out-of-work nannies with Bovine spongiform encephalopathy.

Ipswich Unemployed Action is proud to announce that former ring-leader Komrade Koates is now a leading Viagra selling-distributor in our Abuja Branch.

All future correspondence should be addressed to the following E-Mail:

fuckoffnuuters@Hotmail.com.

Comments (56)

August 31, 2010

Work for Your Benefit scheme axed!

Ipswich Unemployed Action can officially report (after the Government has confirmed this within the last week) that the Work for Your Benefit scheme pilots have been scrapped by Government, however, the ConDem(n) Government will be introducing fulltime community [service] activity in the new Work Programme designed to keep longterm unemployed people in the routine and discipline of work. I would comment its too much too late.

I have always said that the Work Programme appeared to be a mix of Flexible New Deal and the Work for Your Benefit (pilot) scheme… which the outlooks seems to be confirm that it will exactly be this. Perhaps, first half of the Work Programme will be like Flexible New Deal and the other half 6 months of fulltime Community Service like activity or it could be mixed – whereas on Flexible New Deal you have the Mandatory Work Related Activity period which can be taken anytime in the 12 months as long as it can be completed; flexibility could be written in requiring Community Service activity to be started earlier. It would actually be a better way of organising resources by dividing the numbers instead of having hundreds of people starting at once.

This will become an extreme concern as unlike with the planned pilots where the person would have to be signing on for 6-12 months and do 12 months on Flexible New Deal before being referred to such pilots (i.e. up to 2 years)… ConDem(n) Government is planning of fast tracking everyone before 6 months of their claim, thus if plans happen as speculated within 12 months people will be undertaking fulltime Community Service work.

The lack of logic why the ConDem(n) Government didn’t allow the pilots to go ahead is clear. Firstly, it would jeopardise the latter Work Programme when it is discovered that the pilots were unsuccessful. Secondly, as a separate scheme, enrollment would have to be left until Work Programme ended…. thus 6 months unemployment + 12 months duration of scheme (?) … would leave 18 months before people have to do such work. Statistically, most claimants (no indication on who is unique or repeat claims) sign off before 6 months (or so was the case before Credit Crunch). Combining it into one scheme requires the unemployed to participate at least 6 months earlier – thus more people are affected… although ConDem(n) had hinted that they might fast track people near day one of their claim… which means less time before fulltime Community Service.

It is currently unknown whether the ConDem(n) Government will be influenced by Labours proposed (made law for the pilots before it was axed) Sanctions Regime including verbal Jobseeker Directions.

Feel free to discuss. At current it is a minor victory for the unemployed in these pilot areas, however, the ConDem(n) Government is planning worse things ahead. Elsewhere, Flexible New Deal providers are still not contacting Flexible New Deal participants… leaving them without support, although the Flexible New Deal providers have heavily profited from a top heavy service fee. I am aware of many cases of this. Anyone else parked by their Provider?

Comments (52)

September 3, 2010

Sanctions: Appeal From Our Hackney Friends.

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed, Unemployment — Tags: DWP, sanctions — Andrew Coates @ 10:54 am

Dear all We’re looking for cases of people’s benefits being sanctioned by the Jobcentre to make a judicial review challenging the targets for sanctioning set by the DWP (see their reply to our freedom of information request below). Members of Hackney Unemployed Workers who have been sanctioned are putting their cases forward but we need as many as possible to have a better chance of winning the case, which we think would be a good practical victory. If anyone knows someone who has been sanctioned and wouldn’t mind their cases being part of this please mail us at hackneyunemployedworkers@gmail.com. Cheers Terry and Richard Hackney Unemployed Workers London Coalition Against Poverty.

More info on Sanctions here.

Hackney Web Site Here.

Comments (180)

September 13, 2010

Frank Field Goes Bonkers (And Cameron Wants to “to limit the “lifestyle choices” of the Poor).

Filed under: Government, Liberal Tory Coalition — Tags: Nutters, TOry-Liberals — Andrew Coates @ 11:28 am

Here

The interim report (by Frank Field) will give details about efforts to construct an “index of life opportunities” and suggest a “range of intelligent interventions” to focus on children between the ages or five and 10, to try to improve the life chances of those from less well-off families.

Note er, what?

However, whereas most government-commissioned interim reports are published, this one will not be. A source close to Mr Field admitted last night: “We are submitting it on Monday – but we don’t know whether they’ll publish it.”

Mr Cameron is understood not to want colourful proposals by Mr Field to be debated in public at such a sensitive time as the announcement of the CSR, which sees Whitehall departments facing cuts to their budgets of up to 40 per cent.

And what was in this report?

A proposal to “create four or five terms in the school year to shorten the long summer holiday, which he argues disadvantages the poor.” And, for “child benefits (up to £100,000 over 19 years by his estimate) to arrive in one lump sum at birth”

Mr Duncan Smith, the Work and Pensions Secretary, is already locked in a struggle with Mr Osborne, the Chancellor, over plans to restrict benefits to middle-income families and moves to “make work pay” for those currently on benefits.

With no deal yet on the table, Mr Osborne (Cameron’s mate) last week revealed that the welfare bill will be cut by another £4 billion on top of £16 billion of savings already announced as he seeks to limit the “lifestyle choices” of those who prefer to stay at home on benefit rather than work.

Ach, these freedom loving Tories and Liberals.

I repeat they want to “to limit the “lifestyle choices” of other people.

How precisely are they going to do that?

Have us all report daily to some private company who will tell us how to live our lives?

Give the Police powers to tell us how to live our lives?

Put CCTV in our flats and houses to check up?

Blimey!

Comments (82)

September 16, 2010

Clegg Cheers Cuts.

Filed under: Liberal Tory Coalition, Welfare Reform, Welfare State — Tags: Nick Clegg, Welfare cuts — Andrew Coates @ 10:06 am

Nick Clegg today issued a staunch defence of radical benefit cuts as he geared up for potential clashes with Liberal Democrat activists at the party’s annual conference.

The deputy prime minister said welfare should not be there “to compensate the poor for their predicament” but act as “an engine of mobility”.

Billions of pounds are to be slashed from the welfare budget by the chancellor, George Osborne, when he unveils the results of his drastic public spending review next month.

From Here. More on the Liberal Democrats Here.

So now we know that the poor are to receive no compensation for being poor.

Perhaps we shouldn’t get anything at all, unless we take it ourselves.

It would be interesting to know exactly how reducing the amount of money you have will make you more ‘mobile’.

Perhaps we should ask Clegg to take a pay cut and see if he gets a better job.

Comments (127)

September 18, 2010

Work Trials:Another Racket.

Filed under: Flexible New Deal, jobseekers allowance, Unemployment, Welfare Reform — Tags: Welfare, Work Trial — Andrew Coates @ 9:56 am

Work Trails are some of the remnants of the last government’s hare-brained schemes for the unemployed. A work trial means placing someone in a job they normally would not apply for. You work for an alloted time, up to thirty days, under high surveillance. There is no extra payment – the employer gets labour for free.

It is becoming clear that while the present government dithers over its plans for the out-of-work ‘providers’ are pushing this scheme – down out throats.

Panny Panayiotou explains what this means.

This is how it works; A person on Job Seeker’s Allowance is presented with the opportunity to work for a company on what can be a full time basis (anywhere up to 40 hours) and will be paid in benefits, rather than with an actual wage. If, at the end of those three weeks, the employer or employee wishes to terminate the job, then the difficult search continues for the employee.

The scheme is open on a voluntary basis and is supposed to give the prospective worker the freedom to not take on a job they don’t like, however the reality of this scheme is very different indeed.

At a time when unemployment is high, it is a fallacy to believe that anyone would not take a work trial if offered. After all, a job search in the present climate is likely to be long, hard and desperate. As well as this, the unemployed have to report back on their job searches weekly and if their search is found to be insufficient, then benefits can be held back for a week.

If someone were to reject a work trial, it could be interpreted as a wilful act to avoid future jobs and this can be held against them.

In other words it’s similar to workfare (no real pay for work), and is about as ‘voluntary’ as the Mafia’s offers. It’s clearly a means of disciplining claimants. For what end? As I began above:: into taking work they would not normally (or suitably, or appropriately) accept.

September 20, 2010

Youth Fight For Jobs National Demo.

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed, Liberal Tory Coalition, Unemployment, Welfare Reform — Tags: Youth March for Jobs — Andrew Coates @ 9:14 am

demonstration against youth unemployment in 2010

Youth Fight for Jobs wholeheartedly welcomes move

At today’s Trade Union Congress Conference in Manchester, a motion was passed committing the TUC to a national demonstration against youth unemployment before the end of the year. Youth Fight for Jobs, a campaigning organisation backed by six national trade unions and seen as a key organisation in the TUC resolution, today welcomed the decision.

Ben Robinson, Youth Fight for Jobs Chair, said “This is a huge step forwards and we are extremely pleased. As fresh unemployment figures due to be released on 15 September are expected to show little change in youth unemployment, it is clear that the time for action is now. A-level students who’ve missed out on university, young workers thrown out of work because of cuts and bankruptcies, and those in work and education who will be affected by this recession, this is an essential event to attend.”

“Youth Fight for Jobs, working with the TUC, youth sections of the trade unions and its other affiliates, will seek to make this demonstration as big as possible. We urge the TUC general council to name a date as soon as possible so that we and others can start campaigning for it. Together with the demonstration called by the National Union of Students, it’s clear that young people are fighting back on a whole new level. This privileged government and their friends in the square mile better take note.”

Youth Fight for Jobs was launched at the start of the recession to combat the effects of the crisis on young people. It is backed by Unite, UCU, PCS, CWU, Bectu and RMT and has organised two national demonstrations, as well as numerous local protests, rallies and demonstrations.

From Here.

Comments (108)

September 24, 2010

Suffolk County Council: New Blow to Jobs and Public Services.

Filed under: Government, Ipswich, Liberal Tory Coalition — Tags: Suffolk County Council — Andrew Coates @ 4:32 pm

From the BBC.

A county council has agreed to slash its £1.1bn budget by 30% by outsourcing almost all its services.

The decision by Suffolk County Council could be seen as model for other councils to follow.

Under the New Strategic Direction almost all council services will be offloaded to social enterprises or companies over the next few years.

Unions have warned the plan puts a huge number of the council’s 27,000 jobs at risk.

The aim is to turn the authority from one which provides public services itself, to an enabling council which commissions other to carry out the services.

It could eventually see the council’s workforce slimmed down to just a few hundred people who would manage the contracts.

Comments (62)

September 29, 2010

Miliband and Welfare Reform.

Filed under: Flexible New Deal, James Purnell, Welfare Reform — Tags: Ed Miliband, Welfare Reform — Andrew Coates @ 9:11 am

Ed Miliband on Welfare Reform:

This is one of the hardest issues for our party because all of us know in our communities people who are in genuine need and who worry about the impact of new medical tests, or changes to rules on them.

At the same time, let’s be honest, we also know there are those for whom the benefits system has become a trap.

That is not in their interests or the interests of us a society and we are right when we say it must be challenged.

Reforming our benefits system is not about stereotyping everybody out of work, it’s about transforming their lives.

Real help matched with real responsibility.

That is why on welfare, I will look closely at whatever the government comes forward with: not arbitrary cuts to benefits but a genuine plan to make sure that those in need are protected and that those who can work have the help they need to ensure they do so.

Work is a central part of life. But it is not all that matters.

We all care about making a living, but we don’t just care about that.

More Here.

What does this mean?

One indication could show us.

There are rumours that our old friend James Purnell – the man who began the whole miserable process of ‘welfare reform’ – may seek a post in the Shadow Cabinet. In the same role?

We shall be watching developments like ‘awks.

Comments (34)

October 2, 2010

Welfare-to-Work, Reed in Partnership “inadquate”.

Filed under: a4e, Action 4 employment, Government, Suffolk, Unemployment — Tags: a4e, Reed in Partnership, Welfare to Work — Andrew Coates @ 3:01 pm

Private Eye has just published (1st of October) a short piece in the latest issue on companies running the ‘Pathways to Work’ schemes. These (here) are part of ” a national back-to-work programme available to all customers claiming incapacity benefits and the Employment and Support Allowance in Great Britain.”

OFSTED inspects these firms and its report found its way to the magazine.

“The worst scheme was in Cambridgeshire and Suffolk, where the government’s leading contractor, ‘Reed In Partnership’ was found to be ‘inadquate in all areas.” It does not provide good value for money. “Participant outcomes are low against contract targets.”

And so it goes.

Reed in South London was un’satifacory’. but “staff turnover is high ” (Note: a common feature of all such companies running these and Flexible New Deal schemes), and there were ”too few personal advisers”.

A4E in West Yorkshire, was marked by the fact that “action to resolve staff underperformance had been slow” (Note: Emma was not there to hold their hands).

Import from Australia, Ingeus , was found to be “inadequate” in Southwark, City and East London and central London. A scheme in central London was found to be the worst, with ”often uninspiring” training and “insufficient access to computers”.

A4E the Eye notes (later than us lot here) employs former Annabel’s regular and part-time Minister David Blunkett. Ingeus was employs Dean James, “former chief operating officer at Blunket’s DWP.

We await reports on the performance of these companies for the Flexible New Deal

Comments (15)

October 3, 2010

Welfare Reform – ‘Big Work Programme’ – to Include Workfare.

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed, Government, Welfare Reform, Work Programme, Workfare — Tags: Work programme, Workfare — Andrew Coates @ 10:51 am

The Sunday Times (which does not allow free information access) reports today on Ian Duncan Smith’s plans for Welfare Reforms. (More general outline from the BBC)

One area is of specific interest.

Unemployed to “be forced into a US-style ‘workfare’ programme to make them employable.”

Amongst the details of how benefits will continue (in a hyper-complicated way posters here have explained) when you are in work this will mean:

No money if a you refuse a job (nothing new at all then – this is already the rule).

“”In an American ‘workfare’ style system, private companies will be paid to ‘do whatever it takes’ to make individuals employable and find them posts. As well as skills training, this could involved teaching them how to dress smartly, sending staff to force them out of the bed in the morning and offering them counselling or confidence-boosting sessions.”

The ace-reporters on the Sunday Times note that benefits are already conditional and can be withdrawn from those who “persistently refuse to work”. What is new is that this is apparently which is news to us at Ipswich Unemployed Action) “this is almost impossible to enforce, when individuals can justifiably claim that there are financially better off out of work”.

Humm.

In an inside page ‘report’ it is stated that people failing to get a job through this plan will mean US-style obligations to do ”actual work in socially beneficial projects, such as in parks and administration, as a teacher’s aid or construction work.”

For Dole Wages? No doubt a wizard plan to help, say, with Suffolk County Council’s cuts and outsourcing: replace fully paid staff on the County with workfare claimants.

Ex-Workers’ revolutionary Party member and Big Issue founder, John Bird*, is cited, expressing his support for this “tough love”. Though many wonder if selling the Big Issue is the way to “increase social mobility” – apart from this own move ever upwards.

Labour were also planning a Work for Benefits Programme.

The only truly new part of this part of the overall reform scheme is the plan to send private company employees round to our houses to wake us up in the morning.

* John Bird MBE is available for corporate functions and after-dinner speaking – Here.

Comments (138)

October 7, 2010

David Cameron: Tooth Fairy to Reform Welfare and Cure Everything.

Filed under: Government, Unemployment, Welfare Reform, Welfare State — Tags: David Cameron, Tories — Andrew Coates @ 9:15 am

David Cameron Speaks,

I got a letter from a six-year-old girl called Niamh with a pound coin stuck to it. And there was a note from her mum, which said: “Dear Mr Cameron … after hearing about the budget, Niamh wanted to send you her tooth fairy money to help.”

Niamh: thankyou.

(Puts coin in his piggy bank)

Here.

Here’s how he’s going to reform public services:

The big, giant state monopolies – we’re breaking them open to get new ideas in.

Saying to the people who work in our public services – set up as a co-operative, be your own boss, do things your way.

Saying to business, faith groups, charities, social enterprises – come in and provide a great service.

The rest, fairness, fairness, two to tango etc.

Fairness?

To Begin with, Housing Benefit Reform. The National Housing Federation (here) says,

The Government should not proceed with the proposal to cut Housing Benefit by 10% for those who have been claiming Job Seeker’s Allowance for 1 year. Instead the Government should incentivise work through challenging and supporting people through job creation and the Work Programme.

Building more social homes keeps the housing benefit bill down and far below any imposed caps for private rented sector rents.

We have demanded a more detailed assessment of the impacts of the proposals on BME households who often require larger, higher rent homes.

Rather than cutting benefit for those who are under-occupying, Government investment agencies should work in partnership with local authorities and other social landlords to help households move home, in dialogue with existing tenants. These proposals were detailed in the Federation’s Report of the Mobility Taskforce.

Reducing the Local Housing Allowance limit to the 30th percentile will not bring private sector rents down. The additional stress and hardship caused by the reduction is likely to damage people’s health, educational attainment and anxiety levels, and will also cause significant costs to the public purse.

The reforms will have a negative impact on the income of disabled people, their employment prospects and the range of housing choices open to them.

The proposal for housing entitlements for working age people in the social rented sector to reflect family size may mean that thousands of housing association tenants would have to face either a shortfall in their rent, or the urgent need to relocate.

Comments (32)

October 8, 2010

Poor To Be Cleansed From London

Filed under: Government, Housing Benefit, Liberal Tory Coalition, Welfare Reform — Tags: Housing Benefit, Welfare Reform — Andrew Coates @ 2:43 pm

Jo, the Crossing-Sweeper (Bleak House, Dickens).

“Move on, Move on, You Can’t Stay Here.”

Welfare cuts ‘will be like the Highland Clearances’

Joe Murphy, Political Editorr
07.10.10

A political storm broke today after a government minister claimed that plans to cap welfare benefits would prompt an exodus of Labour voters from London.The unnamed Conservative minister was quoted as describing the policy as “the Highland Clearances” – the eviction of farmers from the Scottish highlands and islands in the 18th and 19th centuries.

Labour said the term smacked of gerrymandering, and recalled the scandal at Westminster City Council when poorer families were moved away from marginal wards to improve the chances of Tory wins.

Chancellor George Osborne used his party conference speech to announce plans to cap the total weekly benefit claims of any household at £500. His officials said about 50,000 claimants would be affected, almost all of them in London. June’s budget revealed plans to reduce housing benefit claims, another measure that affects Londoners most.

An article in today’s Telegraph quoted anonymous ministers as saying the housing benefit cap “will force an exodus from London and other areas with high property prices”. The author commented that the benefits cap “sounds small but politically it has the potential to be devastating to Labour”.

More Here.

We will no doubt see similar results in the rest of the country.

I suppose no-one who writes these articles has the wit to mention that moving home and finding a new one is hard, if not impossible, for anyone on benefits.

Comments (65)

October 11, 2010

Incapacity Benefit, ‘Reassessment’ – Yet Again, and Again and….

Filed under: Incapacity Benefit, Welfare Reform, Welfare State — Tags: Incapacity Benefit — Andrew Coates @ 9:23 am

BERJAYA

The BBC reports,

Incapacity benefit claimants in north-east Scotland and Burnley in Lancashire are to be the first to be reassessed ahead of UK-wide welfare reform.

Those deemed fit enough to work, using a points-based system, will be moved to the jobseeker’s allowance.

The reassessment was designed to end the one-size-fits-all approach to those with illness and disabilities.

(More Here. )

Our friend Harpy Marx comments (here),

This means bullying people into the job market based on supposedly “objective medical assessment” (changes to DLA) when really it is based on ideology, it means forcing vulnerable claimants onto Workfare by some contracted-out private sector company, it means further alienation and isolation. Mental distress hits around one in four adults. That’s a helluva number of people yet it’s still stigmatised and hidden. Marginalised and vilified (apparently we are “bad, mad and dangerous to know”). During the past two years, recession and unemployment has caused:

1 in 10 had visited their GP for support

7% had started a course of medical treatment for depression

5% had seen a counsellor

Half said staff morale was low

28% were working longer hours

A third said staff were having to compete against each other.

We can only agree with Harpy’s observations.

There are many people with ‘invisible’ illnesses. Mental health issues are widespread. On the Flexible New Deal in Ipswich there was one individual who is really seriously – really seriously - mentally ill. I pointed this out the staff at the ‘Den’. They ignored my advice, although I suggested this person’s condition was well-known in the town and no doubt to the authorities.

Putting someone like that on JSA is not only a joke but an act of great cruelty.

Comments (44)

October 15, 2010

Note on Swearing.

Filed under: Internet — Tags: Language Policy — Andrew Coates @ 11:43 am

BERJAYA

I realise this will lead to a torrent of rude language (er, though I hope not).

Note on Swearing.

We’ve got an E-Mail from Norfolk saying that because the swear-words on this site he gets access to it denied through the Public Library system.

That is they’ve got some kind of filter that makes Ipswich Unemployed off limits because of bad language.

I can believe this.

So please can people stop using the f and c words – it means that other people can’t get onto here to expresses their views.

Andrew Coates

Comments (18)

October 16, 2010

TUC on Unfair Benefit Rulings.

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed, Employment and Support Allowance, Government, Housing Benefit, Incapacity Benefit, Liberal Tory Coalition — Tags: Benefit Rulings, Employment of Support Allowance, TUC — Andrew Coates @ 9:14 am

Unfair benefit rulings are another attack by Government on the poor, says TUC

The TUC reveals new evidence today (Friday) that the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) is moving people from Employment and Support Allowance (ESA) to Jobseeker’s Allowance (JSA) purely to save money, even though the individuals are not fit enough to return to work.

The TUC has identified a number of case studies who have been awarded ’0 points’ by Atos Origin Ltd – a company contracted by the DWP to carry out ESA assessment reviews – and declared fit to work when they had all previously been declared too ill to do so.

When they met with Atos Origin Ltd, Sue Hutchings had breast cancer and was awaiting surgery, while John Watkins had his arm in plaster from his shoulder to his fingertips following an operation.

They were moved from ESA at £96.85 a week on to JSA at £65.45 a week, losing them each £1,632.80 a year in benefit support, and forcing them to start looking for work.

Atos Origin Ltd receives millions of pounds in contracts from the DWP and large employers for assessing people who have been declared unfit for work. Advice workers all over the country have voiced concerns to the TUC over the large number of people being denied benefits following disability analysis undertaken by Atos Origin Ltd on behalf of the DWP.

This week (starting Monday 11 October) the DWP began two ESA re-assessment trials in Burnley and Aberdeen. The TUC is concerned that the Government is moving many disabled and sick people from ESA on to JSA to save money even though they are too ill to work. Statistics from the Tribunals Service reveal there has been a 128 per cent increase in ESA appeals for the first quarter of 2010 compared to the first quarter of last year.

TUC General Secretary Brendan Barber said: ‘With the proposal to move more than a million benefit

More Here.

It seems that they are finally waking up to things we’ve pointing out since the dawn of time.

Anyone with similar cases should contact the TUC.

Comments (97)

October 20, 2010

Spending Review Hits Unemployed.

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed, Government, Liberal Tory Coalition, Welfare Reform, Welfare State — Tags: CSR — Andrew Coates @ 3:45 pm

This sums it all up.

With the CSR, we will certainly see more people out of work (cuts), and the DWP Budget is for the chop.

While our trained analysts, economists, commentators, and sooth-sayers pore over the CRR the comments boxes are open.

Comments (17)

October 21, 2010

Spending Review: Under 35s to Live in Rabbit Hutches.

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed, Housing Benefit, Liberal Tory Coalition — Tags: Housing Benefit, Spending Review — Andrew Coates @ 9:14 am

BERJAYA

Future Under-35s Accommodation.

Okay I made that headline up.

But only just.

The item that stuck out in the Spending Review (though there’s plenty else to get annoyed about) is this.

From Inside Housing, Here.

The government has announced further plans to cut housing benefit payments in the comprehensive spending review.

From 2012, single people under 35 will be paid a shared room rate rather than a rate for a full flat.The shared room rate is lower than all other housing benefit payments and is currently paid to claimants under 25. It is based on the amount of rent charged for a single room with shared use of the rest of a house.

The government expects raising the age at which the shared room rate can be paid will save £215 million by 2014/15.

Announcing the change, which comes on top of savings announced in the emergency Budget and at the Conservative party conference, chancellor George Osborne said: ‘This will ensure that housing benefit rules reflect the housing expectations of people of a similar age not on benefits.’

Today’s review also revealed a cap on benefits for out-of-work single people of £18,200. This follows the announcement of a £26,000 cap for workless families at the Tory party conference two weeks ago, and will be administered in the same way, with housing benefit being cut up to the cap.

Campbell Robb, chief executive of Shelter, said: ‘The combined worry of cuts to housing benefit and the slashing of the affordable house building subsidy, coupled with the absence of a long-term strategy, will be devastating for the housing aspirations of thousands of young people consigned to increasing costs and bringing up their families in an insecure private rented sector.

‘The chancellor acknowledged this generational shift in housing aspiration for under 35s in his speech.’

So kind of the Chancellor to decide for anyone under 35 what their “housing aspirations” are.

They think of everything to help us, these Liberals and Tories!

Comments (45)

October 24, 2010

UK Workfare and Training Wage Bill: Sub £2.50 wages!

Filed under: Government, Workfare — Tags: Apprenticeships, Flexible New Deal, National Minimum Wage, National Minimum Wage Apprenticeships, New Deal, Training Wage Bill, uk workfare, Work programme — Work Programme @ 9:13 am

This is just a post to keep the “Training Wage Bill” in active discussion. The Government has recently introduced a new National Minimum Wage (NMW) rate for apprentices in their first year of apprenticeship (or under 19) so they are only entitled to £2.50 per hour.

What you may not know is the Government is planning a secretive piece of legislation, currently in the “Bill” stage (Training Wage Bill) which has been delayed until 2011.

This “Private Members” Bill is designed to create a new wage exempt from the National Minimum Wage.

I can only think it will mean a wage lower than the National Minimum Wage (otherwise it wouldn’t be required) and could perhaps even be lower than the £2.50 apprentice rate.

With no details being released about the Work Programme (which is expected to be a combination of Flexible New Deal and the scrapped Work for Your Benefit scheme) and an workfare scheme of some sort under way shortly… it is likely this Training Wage Bill is designed for the purpose of reducing wages further below NMW in particular to legalise workfare. The official description (all that is dislcosed at the moment) is as follows:

A Bill to make provision that persons receiving a training wage are exempt from legislation relating to the minimum wage; and for connected purposes.

Training? Apprentices already have an National Minimum Wage rate. New Deal and Flexible New Deal etc. always were marketed at giving jobseekers new skills through an “employment course” scam (reduces claimant count).

Comments (61)

October 27, 2010

Benefit Fraud, Government Exaggerates Say Churches.

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed, Government, Incapacity Benefit, Welfare Reform, Welfare State — Tags: Benefit Fraud — Andrew Coates @ 9:31 am

It’s worth reading this statement in full, (from Here).

Chancellor got his numbers wrong in Spending Review, say Churches

Churches have voiced concern over Chancellor George Osborne’s inaccurate use of welfare fraud statistics in his Spending Review speech.

The Methodist Church, the Baptist Union of Great Britain and the United Reformed Church have criticised the Chancellor for claiming that welfare fraud is responsible for cheating tax payers out of £5 billion a year.

A Department of Work and Pensions report published last week stated that welfare fraud accounts for £1 billion of money lost, with tax credit fraud accounting for an additional £0.6 billion, leading to £1.6 billion lost in total. Church leaders said the exaggerated £5 billion figure depicts the poorest and most vulnerable in society as thieves.

“Exaggerating benefit fraud points the finger of blame at the poor,” said Revd Alison Tomlin, President of the Methodist Conference. “Let us be clear this recession was not caused by the poor, those on benefits, or even benefit cheats. The poorest in society only got poorer during the boom years and it’s simply not fair to make them pay for the bust.

“Questions also need to be asked about the £7 billion of uncollected tax revenues that the Chancellor claims he is targeting. According to the HMRC, there is approximately £42 billion in uncollected revenues; why does Mr Osborne only speak of £7 billion?”

Revd Graham Sparkes, Head of Faith and Unity at the Baptist Union of Great Britain, said: “There is already deep concern that the severe reductions in welfare provision will cause immense hardship to the most vulnerable. This misuse of figures to exaggerate the scale of benefit fraud only adds to the sense of injustice.”

Mr Simon Loveitt, Public Issues Spokesperson for the United Reformed Church, added: “The coalition government is very keen to talk about fairness and the false notion that ‘we are all in this together’, but the Chancellor’s exaggeration of fraud and last week’s Comprehensive Spending Review confirm the grim reality that it is those who are most vulnerable who will pay the price for that which is so clearly not their fault.”

BBC on this Here.

A theory going round is that these stories are deliberately got up to make people hate the out-of-work and the incapacitated.

Mind you the Daily Mail and Express have been doing this for a long time. The former since its days in the 30s, when it admired the Blackshirts.

BERJAYA

Daily Mail Publisher Lord Rothmere with friend.

Comments (30)

Council Tax Benefit Under Threat?

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed, Housing Benefit, Liberal Tory Coalition, Tories, Welfare Reform, Welfare State — Tags: Council Tax Benefit — Andrew Coates @ 9:12 am

Will Universal Credit be a good system?

The Guardian reports today (Here.) that it is being “strangled at birth”.

For the sake of saving rather less cash than he has set aside for creating the new credit, Mr Osborne seriously undermined it by handing sweeping discretion over council tax rebates to local authorities, together with a sum of money which he freely admits will be 10% short of what is required for funding them properly. In response to that shortfall, new rules will claw back the cash with such aggression that it will pay less to work. And it will not be one set of rules, but different rules in different parts of the country. No universal credit – no matter how well-designed – can achieve a smooth fit with all of these rules at once.

This is no minor detail. Council tax benefit is the one means test applied to just about everyone who is poor – the old, the young, the sick, the well, homeowners and tenants alike. This one botched decision condemns all these groups to continue to live with a system that frustrates good intention and flies in the face of the common sense that Mr Duncan Smith promises.

This is a recipe for another Poll Tax conflict.

Comments (15)

October 29, 2010

Thousands of Ipswich poorest struggle while £25 million wasted

Filed under: Ipswich — Tags: bury road park and ride, ConDem, ConDem(n) Government, Ipswich, Ipswich Borough Council, Ipswich fit for the 21st century, ipswich park and ride, park and ride, Suffolk County Council — Work Programme @ 3:25 pm

As over 13,270 benefit claimants (and goodness knows how many thousands of families) in Ipswich struggle in the economic climate and Suffolk County Council plans of turning off street lights and disposing of much needed services; a £25 million scheme has been given the green light to improve transportation in Ipswich.

(more…)

Comments (17)

October 30, 2010

The End of Social Housing. From ‘Excuse Me Whilst I Step Outside’.

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed, Housing Benefit, Liberal Tory Coalition, Welfare State — Tags: Housing Benefit, Social Housing — Andrew Coates @ 2:47 pm

This very important article is from ‘Excuse Me Whilst I Step Outside’.

It should have maximum circulation.

This will affect the unemployed worst of all.

What happens to social housing in London will come to East Anglia.

Grant freeze marks death of social housing

29/10/2010

The graphic is from this week’s edition of the housing trade mag, not some alarmist leftist publication. It refers to the end of public subsidy for the capital costs of building social housing. If the Tories really mean what they say, we’re in uncharted waters.

Housing finance is notoriously difficult and dull, so let’s strip it back to its essentials: to cover the costs of building houses you can either pay a lot upfront to cover the initial costs or borrow that money and pay the loan off by hiring it out on a periodic basis. The smaller amount of money you sink into the scheme upfront the higher the periodic charge. This is not rocket science.

Since the late 1980s, we’ve not had 100% capital subsidy for social housing – indeed, housing associations have bid for funding partly on the basis of how little capital monies they need to deliver any given project. Naturally, the first result of this system was to send rents – the ‘periodic charge’ – through the roof in the early 1990s.& high rents do tend to produce very high Housing Benefit bills.

So a decade or so ago the government introduced a system of ‘target rents’ which apply to both council and housing association rented stock. Basically, this system sets the rent of any given socially rented property, new or existing, in accordance with a formula based on the size and value of the property and relative local manual wage rates. So this reined in the tendency to produce low capital subsidy/high rent schemes.

The Tories have decided to rip this system up: they want rents to be capped at 80% of the local market rate for all incoming tenants, even those going into existing social housing, which has enjoyed past capital subsidy. This is laughably called ‘affordable‘. Public capital subsidy is being reduced to more or less nothing. The promised 150,000 new ‘affordable’ social tenancies are supposedly going to be financed primarily from either these higher rental streams or via loans mobilised by big housing associations on existing stock where previous capital subsidy means the debt is now largely paid off.

Wake up at the back there – I know this is boring and detailed and rather more than you perhaps want to know. So let me put this in context: this means that rents for a two bedded socially rented property in Islington would rise from £91pw to £232pw: a three bed social rented house in Cambridge would go up from £93pw to £128pw. I can only assume that the application of the word ‘affordable’ to such rents is some kind of sick joke.

& what’s more this means that the Housing Benefit bill is going to go up, not down. The housing associations’ trade body is saying that, in Hackney, you’d have to earn £54,000 to escape HB eligibility and be in a position to keep the bulk of your additional salary and be better off in work.

For all the dull, grey complexity of housing finance it really is that simple: higher rents= deeper benefit traps for wider numbers of people. No amount of huffing and puffing about a Universal Credit is going to change that.

Nor is this simply a problem for the minority of the population who live in social housing. House prices are now such that it is increasingly difficult for people to get their foot on the ladder. A new report from the Home Builders Federation puts this pretty graphically:

“…the average first time buyer (FTB) would have to save every single penny of their earnings for more than two years to have a chance of getting a foot on the housing ladder. In London it would take three years.

Even over five years, young people have to save almost half of their take home pay every month to save a deposit for a house, with some areas even higher.”

So rents matter: even if you’re in the 70% of people who are currently home owners your children are probably not going to be any time soon if they live in London and the SE.

Comments (22)

October 31, 2010

The Proposed Ipswich Death Trap: Transport Plans Exposed!

Filed under: Ipswich — Tags: Ipswich, Ipswich Borough Council, Ipswich fit for the 21st century, Suffolk County Council — Work Programme @ 10:37 am

This is relevant to anyone who lives in Ipswich (Comrade Coates writes)

We will add that while spending money on this scheme the local authorities have hummed and hawed for years over provision for the Homeless. The money to help street sleepers (and the numbers of the homeless is rising and will rise greatly in the coming years, thanks to Housing Benefit and Welfare ‘reform’) is not forthcoming. So look foward to seeing more people, with all their possessions in a few sacks, asking you for cash in Upper Brook Street….

Instead we get this:

Written by Flexy as part of the series: Ipswich Exposed!

Ipswich Death Trap!
Professional consultancy designing the proposed traffic scheme by replacing a roundabout and subway network with traffic lights and pedestrian crossings functions may have proven controversial with many Ipswich residents unsure of what benefits are to come.
One of the most overlooked issues comes down to the Council’s official big plans for the £25 million grant scheme containing a severe flaw. The professional model presenting of how the replacement will look shows a major concern, added to some others with the proposed changes, which could endanger lives of many pedestrians, cyclists and drivers who use the junction.
We have published this to Ipswich Unemployed Action to save lives. (Picture of bid plan included).

(more…)

Comments (12)

November 2, 2010

Ipswich Fit for 21st Century: Lack of Infrastructure

Filed under: Ipswich — Tags: Ipswich, Ipswich Borough Council, Ipswich fit for the 21st century, Suffolk County Council — Work Programme @ 9:41 am

Ipswich Fit for 21st Century: Lack of Infrastructure

The argument regarding the £25m bid recently won for Ipswich as part of a multibillion Central Government package for transport infrastructure goes on and no mention of Tesco Plc contributing to the plans. Part 1 of Ipswich Unemployed Action’s feature on Ipswich Fit for the 21st Century looks further into the lack of infrastructure and therefore raises big questions and criticisms of the proposed plans.

(more…)

Comments (4)

1,6 Million Jobs to Go in Shock Measures.

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed, Employment and Support Allowance, Government, Liberal Tory Coalition — Tags: Street Kids, Unemployment — Andrew Coates @ 9:50 am

The government’s spending cuts and the rise in VAT to 20% in January will result in more than 1.6 million job losses across the public and private sectors, research suggests.

The figure from the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) is far higher than previous estimates.

It said the full impact of the government’s Spending Review had been “understated”.

The government has estimated around 500,000 public sector jobs will go.

The Treasury defended its spending cuts, saying: “The independent Office for Budget Responsibility has set out its forecast showing sustained economic growth in the years ahead, with employment rising and unemployment falling.”

Some business groups, including the CBI, have said that job creation in the private sector will be able to compensate for losses in the public sector.

However, the CIPD said that the private sector would be hit harder than the public sector.

An average of 320,000 private sector jobs a year would have to be created by 2015-16 just to keep unemployment steady at 2.5 million, it said.

“The full impact of the coalition government’s planned fiscal tightening has been understated,” said Dr John Philpott, chief economic adviser to the CIPD.

“The 490,000 public sector job losses cited in the Spending Review looks like an underestimate, given what most public sector managers are telling [us].”

He put the total number of jobs to be lost in the public sector between 2009-10 and 2015-16 at 725,000.

The number of jobs lost in the private sector due directly and indirectly from the cuts would be 650,000, with an additional 250,000 jobs to go due to the VAT increase, he estimated.

‘Tall order’

The CIPD said the private sector was “perfectly capable” of creating more than 300,000 jobs a year, but only if the economy grew faster than 2.5% on average a year.

This, it said, “looks like a tall order”.

Initial estimates show that the UK economy grew by 0.8% between July and September, and by 1.2% in the previous three months.

However, most economists expect growth to slow as a result of the spending cuts.

November 6, 2010

Labour Shadow Minister Backs Abuse of Incapacity Claimants and ‘Welfare Reform’.

Filed under: Government, Housing Benefit, Incapacity Benefit, Welfare Reform, Welfare State — Tags: Douglas Alexander, Welfare Reform — Andrew Coates @ 10:43 am

Just when you thought it couldn’t get any worse:

Douglas Alexander, the new shadow work and pensions secretary, today moved to clarify Labour‘s stance on welfare by saying he will back phased reform of housing benefit and stressing the party’s support for stricter incapacity benefit tests.

Note: Private companies have widely abused these tests. Big numbers of seriously ill people, charities, and pressure groups have shown, are found ‘fit for work’ . Their ‘success’ rate has earned their surgeries the nickname of “Lourdes’.

He also said he was broadly supportive of plans for a universal credit, the centrepiece of Iain Duncan Smith’s welfare white paper, due to be unveiled next week, but set a series of tests for his support. The universal credit will unify most benefits and tax credits into a single payment.

In his first interview since taking on what is likely to be a central political battleground, Alexander told the Guardian his preference was a Danish model of the state guaranteeing work, and then obliging people to take the job or lose benefit. “This is a form of conditional welfare. Real guarantees of work, but real sanctions if the offer is not taken up.”

Note: There is and never will be guarantees for work for all. Sanctions for those for refuse job offers, however ,exist and have done so for many many years.

Duncan Smith, he said, had by contrast been obliged by the Treasury to follow an American punitive model of simply cutting benefit, regardless of whether work was available. In return for his £2bn universal credit scheme, Duncan Smith had agreed to £18bn of welfare cuts, many of which will reduce disincentives to work. Alexander and Duncan Smith are due to clash on welfare in a Commons debate on Tuesday.

Labour has been criticised, including by its former party general secretary Peter Watt, for appearing to be siding with the feckless poor against the hard-working squeezed middle, so appearing less credible on how to tackle the deficit.

But Alexander listed a series of welfare reforms he was willing to accept, including changing access to disability living allowance, driving out fraud, temporary changes to the uprating of some benefits, and testing the availability for work of incapacity benefit claimants .

Note: so instead of defending the poor he attacks them.

On the planned reductions in housing benefit for those in the private rented sector – the issue that has led to allegations that as many as 80,000 poor families will be driven from their homes – he said Labour supported the principle.

Note: the principle of kicking people out of their homes.

But critically, Alexander said, the government was making an error by making the changes in one year and by cutting the level of benefit down from the 50th to the 30th percentile of rents in the local area, a move he said would mean 700,000 of the poorest people losing an average £9 a week. “The government are trying to pretend these rushed and arbitrary changes will affect a small number of people – it will affect hundreds of thousands of people,” he said.

He added: “If the government produced a proposal for a staged and lower percentile reduction over years that is something we could consider.”

Note: so he prefers removing people and slashing their benefits slowly.

That’s all right then.

But he said he was implacably opposed to plans from April 2013 to cut 10% of housing benefit from anyone claiming unemployment benefit for a year. “This is just punitive,” he said.

Note: one slender reasonable position.

Alexander acknowledged that Labour in office had made mistakes on welfare. The Labour government should have done more to tackle low pay job insecurity, he said, adding Labour came relatively late to tackling the large numbers placed on incapacity benefit for years by the Thatcher government. Labour had initially focused instead on reducing unemployment.

He also conceded the housing benefit bill had been forced to take too much of the strain “for generation-long failures in the housing market, principally the lack of affordable homes to rent and buy”.

Challenged that Labour had been slow in office to reform welfare, he said: “We made significant reforms, but welfare reform is easier to assert than achieve. Many of the government’s current reforms build on what we set in train.”

Alexander predicted: “Welfare is going to be a central battleground not just of political argument, but public discussions in the years ahead. Our responsibility is to protect people and help them into work. My grave fear is that this government, like the Thatcher government, will show themselves very good at welfare cuts, and very bad at getting people into work.”

Note: waffle, waffle and more waffle.

George Osborne, and his Liberal Democrat allies, had burnt a lot of credibility in trying to prove the overall spending package was fair, when independent thinktanks had demolished those claims.

He said the coming battle would not simply be about cuts or fairness, but about the pressure being applied on the living standards of hard-working families. He also asserted that many other Tory reforms in the spending review, including cuts to childcare, the freezing of tax credit, and the increase in commuter fares, created disincentives to work.

He added that the localisation of council tax benefit proposed by Osborne risked complicating the simplicity of the universal credit system.

The prospect is for a cross-party consensus on ending the welfare state, replacing it with a state that fits people into work, and that provides a minimum safety-net for the really hard cases.

From Here

Comments (22)

November 7, 2010

Unemployed to be Sentenced to Unpaid Work.

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed, DWP, Welfare Reform, Welfare State, Workfare — Tags: Workfare — Andrew Coates @ 10:39 am

BERJAYA

Future Dole Queue.

The BBC says,

Long-term benefit claimants could be forced to do compulsory manual labour under proposals being put forward by the government, it has emerged.

More Here.

Unemployed told: do four weeks of unpaid work or lose your benefits

The unemployed will be ordered to do periods of compulsory full-time work in the community or be stripped of their benefits under controversial American-style plans to slash the number of people without jobs.

The proposals, in a white paper on welfare reform to be unveiled this week, are part of a radical government agenda aimed at cutting the £190bn-a-year welfare bill and breaking what the coalition now calls the “habit of worklessness”.

The measures will be announced to parliament by the work and pensions secretary, Iain Duncan Smith, as part of what he will describe as a new “contract” with the 1.4 million people on jobseekers’ allowance. The government’s side of the bargain will be the promise of a new “universal credit”, to replace all existing benefits, that will ensure it always pays to work rather than stay on welfare.

In return, where advisers believe a jobseeker would benefit from experiencing the “habits and routines” of working life, an unemployed person will be told to take up “mandatory work activity” of at least 30 hours a week for a four-week period. If they refuse or fail to complete the programme their jobseeker’s allowance payments, currently £50.95 a week for those under 25 and £64.30 for those over 25, could be stopped for at least three months.

The Department for Work and Pensions plans to contract private providers to organise the placements with charities, voluntary organisations and companies. An insider close to the discussions said: “We know there are still some jobseekers who need an extra push to get them into the mindset of being in the working environment and an opportunity to experience that environment.

“This is all about getting them back into a working routine which, in turn, makes them a much more appealing prospect for an employer looking to fill a vacancy, and more confident when they enter the workplace. The goal is to break into the habit of worklessness.”

Sanctions – including removal of benefit – currently exist if people refuse to go on training courses or fail to turn up to job interviews, but they are rarely used.

The plans stop short of systems used in the US since the 1990s under which benefits can be “time limited”, meaning all payments end after a defined period. But they draw heavily on American attempts to change public attitudes to welfare and to change the perception that welfare is an option for life.

More Here.

Questions: What ‘advisers’ are going to be in charge of the sentencing process? what ‘Charities’ and voluntary groups are going to run these chain gangs along with private firms? What rights will those sentenced have?

Above all: what difference will there be between those condemned to do this community work and those sentenced by the courts to do community service?

The model is Wisconsin in the USA.

Introduced in 1997 the programme of Workfare has been found a “total failure” – here.

The American Unemployment rate in 1997 was 5.30%

In 2010 October it was 9,6% (Here)

Thanks to all who have already signaled this in the IUA comments.

Comments (111)

November 10, 2010

Welfare Reform White Paper: Watch out for Terrible Thursday.

Filed under: David Freud, DWP, Liberal Tory Coalition, Welfare Reform, Welfare State — Tags: Ian Duncan Smith, Welfare Reform — Andrew Coates @ 11:29 am

This Thursday Minister Ian Duncan Smith (Secretary of State for Work and Pensions) will publish his Welfare Reform White Paper.

We can expect lots of favourable publicity from the usual quarters.

His Lordship

Key features will include changing the “

a single integrated Universal Credit, which could bring together out-of-work benefits, Tax Credits and payments for needs such as housing costs;

a Single Unified Taper which would ensure that we look at all of someone’s benefit entitlement when we look at their earnings; and

possible changes to the conditionality rules for people getting benefits.

Meanwhile this is worth thinking about,

you hand less to poor people and therefore have less to take away – making universal credit affordable. You also make poverty a work incentive, mimicking workfare in the United States where benefit levels are so low that many people don’t apply.The message over the weekend was that the long-term unemployed faced losing their benefits if they did not partake in community service. This again is an American import: work requirements have long been used to force people off benefits. But the evidence from the US is mixed: rising numbers on food stamps and in receipt of unemployment benefit. If Duncan Smith is really dealing in such weapons of mass destitution, the political fallout will be felt for years to come.

Randeep Ramesh

(Here)

Many people have said the whole scheme does not look at with low pay and how to end this trap.

It would also be true to say that it does not deal with job creation at decent rates of pay, raising benefits to a level people can live decently on, offering any real training, getting rid of the expensive, useless, failing and greedy companies running the “unemployment bizness” to corral the unemployed into lives of deprivation.

Not to mention how forced labour is going to be paid for – because it will cost hard, really hard, to organise and supervise work gangs.
It would be a good idea to start thinking of some counter-proposals.

Anyone who refuses to accept a job, fails to apply for a position suggested by an adviser or does not complete a period of community work will see their handouts stopped altogether.

Thursday Update:

Yet more sanctions.

The first offence will see Jobseeker’s Allowance, worth £64.45 a week, automatically withdrawn for three months. The second offence will mean a loss of benefits for six months and the third for three years. Currently, job centre staff can withdraw handouts from those who fail … “

And so on.

The issue here is that refusing the workfare chore gets you out in the street without a penny.

Plus that refusing a lousy job (does this happen?It’s not that easy to get offered a job in the first place) can lead in the same direction.

Comments (57)

November 12, 2010

Jobseekers subject to workfare from day one

Filed under: Work Programme, Workfare — Tags: Actively Seeking Employment, Available for Work, ConDem(n), ConDem(n) Government, Employment Course, jobseekers allowance, JSA, National Minimum Wage, New Claim, New Deal Fraud, New Deal Work Trial, Rapid Reclaim, Training Allowance, uk workfare, Work Activity, Work programme, Work Trial — Work Programme @ 12:53 pm

The BBC has announced that those making a new claim for Jobseekers Allowance are liable to begin working for their benefits from day one of their claim. This means the majority of new claims could realistically begin a 4 week “Work Activity” period beginning from the second month of claiming.

Those with the implied accusation that they might already be working or doing activity which makes them not Available for Work are more likely to be placed on to such workfare plan.

It is claimed that such 4 weeks of fulltime working is to keep people in the work routine *and* to market themselves to prospective employers – little chance of this when private businesses, councils and charities thrive on the free labour without having any job vacancies going.

There has been no discussion of a cap – so its likely jobseekers can be placed on numerous Work Activity periods – especially those where spiteful and libel rumours of being a benefit cheat has been attributed to you by a Jobcentre Plus staff member without any benefit fraud investigation ever taking place or any evidence to suggest it is even likely.

Of course, my main concerns is, how can you be Actively Seeking Employment if doing a fulltime job? Possible, but not effective.

Yesterday, a new highest unique visitor (and hits) record was reached on this blog – so concerns are steady rising (I didn’t think we would top the record achieved by the New Deal Fraud stuff etc.).

Of course, this will be a scheme that is different to the Work Programme, so further workfare is possible. I guess it similar to a New Deal Work Trial.

Implications of this means its not possible to claim Jobseekers Allowance and do fulltime work (over 16 hours of activity) unless they change the law.

It is likely jobseekers will be placed on to a “Training Allowance” (hence with referral its not realistic for a day one start, although theoretically possible, as it won’t be mixed benefit weeks – so could be from following week – especially for Rapid Reclaims and those who have claimed before) to get round the conditions of Jobseekers Allowance.

This is likely to be roped in to an “Employment Course” (or given a fancy title) and registered by statute which gives automatic exemption from the National Minimum Wage.

Comments (48)

November 15, 2010

Universal Credit: Welfare that will not Work.

Filed under: David Freud, DWP, Government, Welfare Reform, Welfare State, Work Programme, Workfare — Tags: Universal Credit, Welfare r, Workfare — Andrew Coates @ 10:32 am

The government White Paper, Universal Credit, Welfare that Work, has stirred up a lot of comment.

Little of it has come from the unemployed.

The present system is “unsustainable”. “Welfare dependency” has taken root. We lack a “culture of work” . We need a “new contract” and a “ladder of opportunity”.

The Liberal-Tory Government offers us a “leaner but fairer” welfare state. This will be a “system that provides people with the confidence and security to play a full part in society through a flexible labour market within a competitive modern economy.”
Is this so?

Will a system based on “increased conditionality” give any security?

***********
The signs are not good.

Much has been made of the details of the “universal credit” that will replace existing benefits. It will be “simpler” and enable people in low-paid work to keep more of their wages. Scepticism must be high about the ability fo a “single taper” and “earnings disregards” being any easier to administer than working tax credits – whose problems are well known.
There is a nasty little sting in this. Central financing of Council tax Benefit will (2013 – 14) will be reduced by 10%. It will be “administered by local authorities”. they will have a “greater say” in the “amount of support” given. This will be, we are told, be more ”cost effective”. Local authorities will be able to represent the “priorities of their own local communities” (Chapter 2. 37). Some councils will decide to pay Council Tax benefit in full. Others will not.
Conditionality and sanctions. This has got a lot of publicity. Some people like treating the out-of-work as toy soldiers they can march up and down. That is the impression given by the “tool kit” of punishments available. The real problems will start when it becomes clear that it is DWP and Work Programme (yet to be given details of) ‘advisers’ who will decide on sanctions - such as the “mandatory work activity”. On what basis are these to be judge-jury and prison wardens of the unemployed? Giving someone the power, effectively, to turf an individual out onto the street with no money is a recipe for disaster. The scope for abuse is immense.There are no independent mechanisms to look over the system.

The White Paper appears to think that labour markets work well.

The problem is to fit loads of reluctant people into it.

Tinkering with the benefits system to give a small increase in money to those who move into work and sanction those who are reluctant to do so, will not solve a more basic difficulty.

Labour markets are “segmented”. That is they cannot absorb anyone into any job. We go into areas where we are employable.

The White Paper will not increase employability – it will stigmatise those sanctioned. For all but a few there will be no real training - a condition responsible for much present unemployment. Reducing housing benefit will, further make people unable to take jobs. They will be preoccupied with keeping their flats and homes. Raising social housing rents (underway) will make us less likely to move. Its method of ‘targeting’ benefits means the state will make choices about our private lives and make us dependent on their judgement. The Liberal-Tories will swell the numbers of the hard-to-employ. Or simply the ‘under class’ and destitute.

Nor are labour markets so healthy. It is not the case that people will suddenly flock into work. There is less and less of it. It is convenient for employers to take on mobile young people, and migrant labour, because they have little costs and are prepared to share houses and accept lower pay. Is the intention to reduce our living standards so that we can outbid them?

But as they get older, those who do not migrate again, will demand better money and accommodation. Then they will join the rest of us, fed up with lousy pay and living conditions.

Making Britain into a paradise for the highly paid, lightly taxed, and a hell for the rest of us, drifting between bad jobs and the dole, will not boost the economy. Or get us out of mass unemployment. There is a lack of jobs, as the TUC says. Cuts in public spending will throw more people into the hands of the DWP. Planned reductions in their staff numbers will seize up the system.

************

The White Paper is built on the principle that the state should decide who is the “deserving” and who is the “undeserving” welfare claimant.

Behind its simplicity the reality is that the system remains complex, full of a potential for more red-tape.

It will be costly as it will be introduced with more outsourcing to inefficient private companies.

It is unfair, as people will suffer from arbitrary judgements.

It will not work.

Comments (29)

November 17, 2010

Unemployment ‘Almost Unchanged’: Long-Term Jobless Rises.

Filed under: Government, Liberal Tory Coalition, Unemployment — Tags: Unemployment — Andrew Coates @ 11:18 am

The BBC Reports.

The number of people unemployed in the UK fell by 9,000 in the three months to September, leaving total unemployment almost unchanged at 2.45 million.

The overall unemployment rate was also unchanged at 7.7%, the Office for National Statistics (ONS) said.

The data showed that the claimant count – those out of work and receiving benefits – also fell slightly in October, by 3,700 to 1.47 million.

This reversed a 5,300 rise in the claimant count the previous month.

The overall picture remains one of a jobs recovery that is much more sluggish than after previous recessions, analysts say.

Businesses are reluctant to take on full-time workers due to their concerns over the longer-term economic outlook”

End Quote Howard Archer chief UK economist, IHS Global Insight Part-time jobs

Overall employment in the UK economy increased by 167,000 in the three months to September, compared with the previous quarter, reaching 29.19 million, according to the ONS’s statistical bulletin.

This suggests that while some unemployed people are finding jobs, the total pool of unemployed workers is being replenished by inactive people who are choosing to re-enter the workforce by actively looking for work again.

However, most of the new jobs created were only part-time.

“Part-time workers now account for 27.3% of total employment, which is up from 25.4% at mid-2008,” said Howard Archer, chief UK economist at IHS Global Insight.

More Here.

The TUC had already commented,

Union leaders have complained of a “distinct lack of jobs” in the UK, highlighting figures showing that the number of long-term unemployed has doubled since before the recession, with the highest number in Birmingham.

The TUC said almost 250,000 people in England, Scotland and Wales had been claiming Jobseeker’s Allowance (JSA) for at least a year, twice as many as at the start of 2008.

Here.

Ipswich Unemployed Action says,

Our indicators of unemployment-leading-to-destitution are clear. The ‘being-asked-for-money’ in the street rate continues to rise in Ipswich. From a couple of times a week it has reached at least once a day.

Comments (6)

November 18, 2010

Breaking News: Flexible New Deal Cost £31,284 per job!

Filed under: a4e, Action 4 employment, DWP, Flexible New Deal, Government, Ipswich, jobseekers allowance, Unemployment, Welfare State, Work Programme, YMCA — Tags: Flexible New Deal — Work Programme @ 11:30 am

Work Programme Network can reveal that the Flexible New Deal has cost £31,284 per job outcome!

Add Future Jobs Fund jobs that some providers claimed for (TNG!), costing taxpayers almost £4k per job for the employee salary/wages. This job creation exercise has cost up to £35,000 per an unsustainable National Minimum Wage job.

Think this is bad? Some people are still waiting referral back onto Flexible New Deal although the providers are happy enough to cash in the top heavy service fees.We need to investigate the Flexible New Deal Fraud!

Comments (14)

November 20, 2010

Suffolk Coalition For Public Services Protest on 27th November.

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed, Ipswich, Suffolk, Unemployment, Welfare State — Tags: Suffolk Coalition for Public Services — Andrew Coates @ 10:17 am

BERJAYA

For the Unemployed, we need to stop the cuts in Housing Benefit, and other cuts on Welfare.

Suffolk County Council proposes to hive off most of its services to private companies, ‘social’ enterprises’ and voluntary groups (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11398678.)

*****
It’s suggested that libraries and other County Council services will see volunteers replacing paid staff.

We wonder how long it will be before the unemployed are ‘volunteered‘ to work for their dole in these areas?

Comments (22)

November 22, 2010

Benefit Claims to Go On-Line Only.

Filed under: DWP, Government, Housing Benefit, Welfare Reform — Tags: Benefits on-Line — Andrew Coates @ 10:10 am

Britons will be forced to apply online for government services such as student loans, driving licences, passports and benefits under cost-cutting plans to be unveiled this week.

Officials say getting rid of all paper applications could save billions of pounds. They insist that vulnerable groups will be able to fill in forms digitally at their local post offices.

The plans are likely to infuriate millions of people. Around 27% of households still have no internet connection at home and six million people aged over 65 have never used the web.

More here.http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2010/nov/20/government-services-online-only

People may have noticed that the ‘insert link’ function on this site is not working. This is because Suffolk Library Computers have problems.

I have therefore had to insert the whole http string.

It is not hard to foresee that people may have ‘problems’ when they fill in their JSA, Council Tax Benefit, Housing Benefit forms on-Line.

That is if they have access to the Net, free.

Whether they feel confident about trusting their details to such a system, or are at ease with typing on the screen, is another matter.

Comments (31)

November 25, 2010

Students: Unemployed Protests to Follow?

Filed under: Government, Unemployment, Welfare Reform — Tags: Protests, Unemployment — Andrew Coates @ 10:32 am

BERJAYA

Do the Out-of-Work have to do this to get Attention?

After the free and joyous protests by students, why not the unemployed?

Do we want cuts in Housing Benefit?

Do we want threats to make us work for free on Community Service?

Do we want to be stuck without decent work always harassed by the dole?

Do we want the Unemployment Bizniz to make money offering useless ‘training’?

Do we want real change to make our lives better and to get us real work?

Or are we going to accept welfare ‘reform’?

Do we want to be miserable?

No!

Follow the students!

Comments (36)

November 29, 2010

Deeper Cuts, then Housing Benefit Cuts Delayed: Government Goes Gaga.

Filed under: Cuts, Government, Housing Benefit, Unemployment, Welfare Reform, Welfare State — Tags: Cuts, Housing Benefits, Welfare State — Andrew Coates @ 9:55 am

Are these two reports signs of a government going gaga?

Sunday.

Around 100,000 public sector workers could see their jobs saved following the Treasury’s shift away from Whitehall spending reductions to deeper cuts in welfare payments, the government’s new spending watchdog is expected to reveal tomorrow.

Here.

Monday.

The government is expected to make a vital concession in its cuts to housing benefit this week by delaying the cuts for existing private sector claimants.

Work and pensions secretary Iain Duncan Smith will lay out secondary legislation for a number of the cuts announced in the emergency Budget and comprehensive spending review this week, but is expected to delay caps to the amount of local housing allowance existing claimants can receive until January 2012.

Here.

Now you either have deeper cuts, or you don’t. If you delay Housing Benefit cuts – to let us worry long and nice – then you don’t save money.

Just thought we’d point this out.

Comments (5)

November 30, 2010

Work Programme: Outline Released.

Filed under: Welfare Reform, Welfare State, Work Programme — Tags: Work programme — Andrew Coates @ 10:04 am

The Government has published some specifications of the Work Programme.

Full document, or ‘prospectus’ (as if it’s some kind of brochure for a degree course) , here.

Watching A4E has already underlines the main points here.

From day one on the Dole there will be job clubs (groan, ‘voluntary’ work (groan and groan), ‘and peer-to-peer support (groan, groan, and groan).

The lengthy potential time-scale people are ‘referred’ to the cowboys running these schemes, – five years and two more there is a cause of concern.

There is also this:

35. The government is clear that providers are best placed to know what works for customers and as such we will not specify what providers should deliver. However, customers should know what level of service they can expect.

As a result, bidders for Work Programme contracts will be asked to provide a summary in their tender of the minimum service they will offer to all customer groups. These minimum service levels will be translated into a small number of Key Performance Indicators within each contract and will be articulated to customers at the point they start the provision. These promised service levels will be made public so that customers and their representatives will be able to judge whether providers are delivering what they have promised. If the providers fail to deliver these minimum

What are these minimum levels?

We should like to know.

Comments (32)

December 2, 2010

Cuts Fantastic! Says Multimillionaire Angel Emma.

Filed under: a4e, Campaigns for Unemployed, Liberal Tory Coalition, Unemployment, Welfare Reform, Welfare State, Work Programme, Workfare — Tags: a4e, Angels, Emma Harrison, Saints — Andrew Coates @ 11:51 am

“Question: Who’s going to get Britain back to work? Answer: Emma Harrison CBE

Perhaps the only person who is positive about spending cuts is the head of Britain’s biggest employment agency A4e. “The coalition government’s cuts are, in fact, fantastic!” says Emma Harrison.

”Cutting benefits will put a stop to people making a profession out of being unemployed. The Government is looking to put more effort into helping people get back to work which is the most important thing.”

A4e controls 25% of the long-term unemployment budget for the Department of Work and Pensions.
“There are about 450,000 jobs currently being advertised with the JobCentre so there are jobs out there,” insists Mrs Harrison.

From Here.

But Angels have wings.

The Saintly One has since backtracked,

At 7.53pm last night Emma Harrison, under the username Emmachat, posted this comment:

I did not have any knowledge of this press release. I did not ask for it, write it or approve it. My views are wholly and utterly misrepresented and from what I can determine were written by someone from Hillgrove that I have never met with, or spoken to. The blog writer by his own admission was suspicious that these were not my sentiments but he did not bother to check with me. Ummmmmm.

At 8.18pm she posted the following comment:

My PR company? I rang them. They have apologised. Junior that i do not know, trying to get the attention of editors with dramatic, distorted and what I consider to be offensive views. Not my views. Shame the blog writer did not check with me or other Guardian articles they have written about me and my views – the ones when they have actually spoken to me……. Ummmmmm

Ps I am not a baddy

TV, media, papers. A snapshot only, and only the one they want to give you.

• The article was updated on 2 December 2010 to highlight comments made by Emma Harrison in the comment threads of this blog post

The Holy One has since added,

Confused? So am I, and personally very upset too.
Sometimes in life you say something which gets misrepresented by others.

(We know how you feel Emma, life’s a bitch).

Any comments I have made recently, both on TV and in press interviews, are around the fact that more needs to be done earlier to help the unemployed back into work and that any changes which give extra support to individuals which means they are better off working than being dependent on benefits are wholly welcome.

(Well said O Essence of Celestial Grace!)

Anyone who knows me will know that I am passionate about working to lift people out of financial hardship. From the last twenty years of helping people back into work, I know that the only thing that works is ensuring people get sustainable jobs which ensure long term financial security.

People who know me will also know that I am straight-talking and to the point.

(And a Healer and Muse, Emma, don’t forget that!)

But, more importantly, I am passionate in what I do to help people who are long-term unemployed get back into work.

(Would that everyone shared your passion!)

The reason I work in this industry has always been, and will always remain to be, improving people’s lives.

(Well done yet again!)

If you want to know what I really think and believe in, then visit my blog here at Mya4e.com.

(We surely will)

We are sure you’d like to follow up this suggestion:

Also if you have any comments or questions please email me it’s eharrison@a4e.co.uk

Emma

Hat Tip to Work Programme here.

Comments (52)

December 6, 2010

National Day of Protest Against Welfare and Housing Benefit Cuts.

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed, Flexible New Deal, Unemployment, Welfare Reform — Tags: Cuts, Protest, Welfare — Andrew Coates @ 11:36 am

Take action now to defend the Welfare State. We will not pay for their crisis.

The National Day of Protest Against Welfare & Housing Benefit Cuts on 15th December 2010 aims to be the first of many and this time will concentrate on the Housing Benefit cuts. With this in mind, why not organise a sit in, protest or demonstration in your local Civic Centre, Housing Benefit Office or Town Hall.

Think Christmas party. Gather up some f…riends, take a ticket and bring cake, food to share, Christmas decorations, crackers, music and presents for the kids. Why not apply for Council Housing whilst you’re at it, ask for information about impending homelessness due to the cuts or clear up that nagging benefit issue. Then collect contact details to organise a bigger event in the New Year and spread some festive cheer.

Make sure to support people present who are in emergency need of help to access it and make sure they are treated properly. There’s no rush after all, you can easily stay late, or even all night. It’s Christmas after all.

Alternatively hold a public meeting, organise an info stall or even just leaflet your local Council offices. If you are organising an event please contact us asap to be added to the facebook page (and upcoming website).

London benefit claimants will be attending and supporting the Housing Emergency Demonstration at Downing Street, 12.30pm. Bring cardboard boxes, sleeping bags etc and create a cardboard city opposite Downing Street. then onto Trafalgar Square at 3pm for Christmas fun under the tree.

http://disabledpeopleprotest.wordpress.com/2010/11/30/housing-emergency-coalition-a-call-to-action-15th-december/

Local groups, individuals, ideas and support needed, please get in touch.

This is just the beginning, further actions and events are planned for the New Year.

latest

London confirmed – 15th December

12.30 Downing Street, Housing Emergency Coalition protest, take cardboard boxes and sleeping bags

3pm Trafalgar Square, Disabled People Against Cuts – No Room at The Inn nativity under the tree.

Norwich confirmed – 15th December – Defend Council Housing And Fight The Welfare Cuts Public Meeting – Belvedere Centre, Belvoir Street, Norwich, 15th Dec 7.30pm – 9.30pm.

Plans afoot so far in Newcastle, Edinburgh, Brighton, Hastings, Stoke, Lewisham, Lydney and Nuneaton

Actions called for/enquired about in Bristol, Southampton, Cambridge, Hackney, Lincolnshire, Exeter & Ipswich

Called by autonomous benefit claimants around the UK.

National Day of Protest Against Welfare & Housing Benefit Cuts: http://www.facebook.com/pages/National-Day-of-Protest-Against-Welfare-Housing-Benefit-Cuts/106945382710717

Disabled People Against Cuts: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=121196194603310

Black Triangle – Anti-Defamation Campaign In Defence of Disabled Claimants: http://www.facebook.com/blacktriangle1

Work Programme & Flexible New Deal Scandal: http://www.workprogramme.org.uk/

Benefit Claimants Fight Back: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=116432071735566

Comments (21)

December 12, 2010

Emma Harrison Champion for Families.

Filed under: a4e, Action 4 employment, Government — Tags: a4e, Emma Harrison — Andrew Coates @ 10:52 am

BERJAYA

Saint Emma.

I have ‘inspired millions of people around the world to do something they did not think possible. Now I am Family Champ. Wow! There is a practical reality to taking on this task…

It’s brilliant to receive these sorts of wonderful messages. I am very excited and honoured to be asked to help make real the amazing vision to turn 100,000 ‘never worked’ families into families that are hard working, paying their own debts, living fantastic lives and, what’s more, helping others by taking ownership of their own situation.

Think smart and don’t get burned out. I have spent more than 20 years have always been passionate about helping individuals and families in the most disadvantaged communities  empower themselves, get work, regain ambition and improve both their lives and the lives of those around them.

Now, under this programme, every troubled family will have their own champion able to use every existing exciting resource to help them get going, face up to and sort out their fantastic problems, whether they be parenting challenges, poor health, debt, addiction, dependency, dire poverty,   or lack of motivation. I will tackle the economic recession and the banking crisis. Most importantly, I will involve helping people into meaningful employment to help create brilliant wonderful happy, working families with a new sense of real purpose and an active role in the big society.

Faint heart never won fair maiden.Top Tips: I will do everything in my power to inspire, to change attitudes,  using the power of the personal, to make sure that every bit of the existing government, voluntary and private effort adds up to this single goal of creating wonderful happy, working and caring families and saving the human race.

I am going to start this initiative by recruiting six brilliant families to work alongside – and will do everything to help them become working families. Some people suffer from being shy but the work we do together will be highlighted in the wonderful media. We will create wider public understanding and knowledge about how fantastic and amazing individuals and smart families across Britain can help themselves and each other. I will also recruit, train and develop an army of dedicated great family champions who will be from really great communities up and down the country- people who are passionate about and capable of helping others.

Please come and join me…

Here.

More drivel Here.

Comments (23)

December 15, 2010

Westminster Council to Cleanse Borough of Homeless Benefit Claimants.

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed, Housing Benefit, Liberal Tory Coalition, Welfare Reform, Welfare State — Tags: Cuts, Housing Benefit, Liberal Tory Coalition — Andrew Coates @ 11:18 am

BERJAYA

Tom-All-Alone: Westminster’s Future Homeless Accommodation.

On the National Day of Protest Against Welfare & Housing Benefit Cuts Westminster Council acts.

A council has admitted it plans to move 80 per cent of homeless housing benefit claimants needing temporary accommodation out of the borough.

Westminster Council’s finance and resources overview and scrutiny committee is considering a report which says nearly 400 families will be moved into homes outside of the borough once housing benefit cuts mean their accommodation is no longer affordable.

The report predicts a shift in the proportion of accommodation that the council books within the borough. It currently houses 70 per cent of those presenting as homeless within the borough, but by 2016 this will shift to 80 per cent of claimants housed outside Westminster.

More Here.

Comments (9)

December 18, 2010

Unemployed to Get Food Vouchers for Christian Charity Dole-Out.

Filed under: Cuts, DWP, Unemployment, Welfare Reform, Welfare State — Tags: Food Banks, Trussell Trust, Welfare Reform — Andrew Coates @ 10:25 am

BERJAYA

The Coming Benefit System.

The BBC reports,

Job centres around Britain are to give food vouchers to people experiencing severe financial hardship. The vouchers, which can be redeemed at foodbanks run by the Trussell Trust charity, will be handed out by staff at Jobcentre Plus (JCP) branches.

One voucher can be exchanged for three days’ worth of food. The scheme will be piloted in Salisbury and Gloucester from 4 January, before expanding across England, Wales and Scotland in April. It will run in Jobcentre Plus branches that have a foodbank in the surrounding area. The Trussell Trust already has 78 foodbanks around the country and anticipates that there will be 86 foodbanks by April 2011. Severe hardship.

The move comes after lengthy negotiations between the trust and the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP). The charity sent a report to the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, Iain Duncan Smith, in the summer.

A person experiencing severe financial hardship, caused by issues such as benefit delays or being ineligible for a JCP crisis loan, will be given a voucher that can be exchanged at a trust foodbank for three days’ worth of food. An individual can be given three vouchers in a row during one particular period of hardship, and can be helped three times in a year, meaning a total of nine vouchers a year can be given out per person.

Chris Mould, director of the trust, said: “Although it has taken two years of campaigning to get to this point, we are delighted that ministers are listening to feedback from the front line of the voluntary sector. “Their decision means people on the breadline will now get the help they need more easily and that’s of course what matters to us in the foodbank network. “This is about sensible working between a public service and the voluntary sector.”

About 41,000 people were fed by 44 foodbanks across the UK last year The Trussell Trust is a Christian charity and its staff and volunteers arrange collections of food. They ask supermarket shoppers in each foodbank area to donate an extra item from a predefined shopping list – then distribute the goods by means of vouchers. The vouchers are distributed by “statutory professionals” such as doctors, health workers, social workers, the Citizens’ Advice Bureau and probation officers among others. Some 41,000 people were fed by 44 foodbanks last year, and the trust estimates that 35-40% of them had problems with benefits.

When the first foodbanks were set up in 2000 in Salisbury, employees of the local JCP were initially one of the main distributors of foodbank vouchers. When the charity’s foodbank franchise scheme rolled out around the country in 2004, other JCPs also began to adopt the process.

However, in December 2008 the then-Labour government issued a directive stopping JCPs from referring clients in crisis to a foodbank. When the charity challenged the government over this decision, it initially responded that, among other reasons, all those entitled to benefits received them on the day if they were in crisis and that delay was not an issue. Continue reading the main story “Start Quote If you have a family to feed and no money then waiting even a couple of days is too long”

Chris Mould Trussell Trust director But the trust says it is “simply not true that all those entitled to benefits receive them on the day”. On behalf of the trust, MP Andrew Selous asked a series of parliamentary questions in 2009 and 2010 about benefit delay. The eventual response given in January 2010 stated that 37,046 people waited 17 days or more for their jobseeker’s allowance, of which 20,068 waited 22 days or more.

Mr Mould said: “We wanted to work with the job centres again because tens of thousands of people across the country are not getting paid their benefits on time. “Unless the DWP has a target of reaching 100% of people, there will be thousands of people who will be left in trouble through benefit delay, or for not being eligible for a crisis loan, for whatever reason. “If you have a family to feed and no money then waiting even a couple of days is too long.” A spokeswoman for the DWP said: “We recognise the merit of having additional targeted support in place such as foodbanks which play an important role in local communities. “Jobcentre Plus is already in discussion with the Trussell Trust and have agreed to work together in the new year.”

Suppliants for this charity are reminded, the Trussell Trust, states of this message,”‘For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was astranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed me…’” Matthew 25:35-36

“We are a Christian organisation motivated by Jesus’ teaching on poverty and injustice. We operate according to Christian principles of compassion, honesty, integrity, openness, kindness and care of all people, regardless of backgrounds or beliefs. We believe in turning faith into practical action, living out God’s love for the poor…”

That’s as may be.

Some might ask why the state should rely on a group with a religious-agenda to plug the gaps in its public services.

One might ask if other religious groups will feel entitled to do the same.

More details – here.

Comments (58)

December 23, 2010

Long-Term Unemployment Rises – TUC.

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed, Cuts, Government — Tags: TUC, Unemployment — Andrew Coates @ 10:30 am

No Christmas cheer for the long-term unemployed, says TUC

Almost a quarter of a million people have now been on the dole for more than a year in the UK – more than twice as many as at the start of the last recession – and lots of them will be spending their second or even third successive Christmas out of work, says the TUC today (Wednesday).

The TUC analysis of official unemployment statistics reveals that more than a third of the 232 local authority areas across the UK (88 council areas) now have more than a thousand residents who have been claiming Jobseeker’s Allowance (JSA) for at least 12 months, compared to just 26 council areas in December 2007.

At the beginning of the last recession, at the close of 2007, 117,845 individuals had been claiming JSA for more than 12 months. Now, almost three years on in November 2010, there are 243,330 who have been struggling to find work for more than a year.

More Here.

Comments (2)

Seasonal Treat: Christmas Day in the Workhouse.

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed, Welfare Reform, Workfare — Tags: Workhouse — Andrew Coates @ 10:34 am

Comments (6)

December 30, 2010

Rare Breeds: Sally Smith of YMCA Training

Filed under: YMCA — Tags: Flexible New Deal, Jimmy's Farm, New Deal, poverty pimp, sally smith, sally smith assistant manager, TNG, work placements, YMCA, ymca training, YMCA Training New Deal Dencora House Detention Centre, ymca training work placements — Work Programme @ 10:45 am

Before we end the year, lets recap on this year’s highlights of our favourite local christian poverty pimp YMCA Training.

I was browsing Google referrer search terms (i.e. what people search to find us) and noticed amongst the many, a lot of search terms relating to providers, the owners/founders and those who run them. This is obviously in addition to many more in regards to New Deal, Flexible New Deal and the upcoming Work Programme. This is far more than happened 6 months ago. (more…)

Comments (6)

January 9, 2011

Model Letter to the Dole?

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed — Andrew Coates @ 11:35 am

From the The Black Fingernail.

I am writing to you in connection with the above vacancy, which is being advertised in the Jobcentre. Because you have chosen to advertise this vacancy through the Jobcentre, a number of unemployed and formerly long-term sick people are going to be forced by the Jobcentre into applying for this vacancy under threat of having their benefits stopped if they refuse.

They will be advised to phone you to arrange an interview or ask if they can send you a CV/written application. The Jobcentre can force the unemployed to apply for any vacancy advertised through them, regardless of their suitability for that vacancy.

The unemployed are forbidden from disclosing that they have been told to apply for a vacancy; and nor can they refuse an offer of a job either. People who are forced into taking a job under threat of having their benefits stopped if they refuse will almost certainly harbour a great deal of anger and resentment. If you employ such a person then that anger could drive them into carrying out wanton acts of vandalism to your company running into thousands of pounds. Your fixtures and fittings could be damaged, for example. Fire alarms could go off repeatedly.

Sickness may prevent them from doing a full week’s work. And that’s just for starters. Before you go getting your knickers in a twist, just be aware that people who remain unemployed do so for a variety of reasons. They may be caught in a benefits trap; they may have been wrongly forced off incapacity benefit; or they may be caring for an elderly relative. The Jobcentre also have what they call a ninety-minute rule. This means that if a vacancy is do-able by public transport within ninety minutes (an-hour-and-a half) from where the unemployed live then they have to apply for that vacancy.

To indicate to you that they do not want this job and that they only applied for it under threat of having their benefits stopped if they refused; they will scratch their noses. And it will be done in such a way as to leave you under no illusions as to where they are coming from. Should you choose to ignore this then you will have yourself the employee from hell; and all that it entails.

Comments (26)

January 13, 2011

Trussell Trust Christians Feed the Poor. Bless.

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed, Cuts — Tags: Lords and Lady Bountiful — Andrew Coates @ 10:54 am

Hat-tip to Kate,

The Trussell Trust are coming to the aid of us them there poor folks.

Looking at the list of food they will give you (from here)

Milk (UHT or powdered)
Sugar (500g)
Fruit juice (carton)
Soup
Pasta sauces
Sponge pudding (tinned)
Tomatoes (tinned)
Cereals
Rice pudding (tinned)
Tea Bags/instant coffee
Instant mash potato
Rice/pasta
Tinned meat/fish
Tinned fruit
Jam
Biscuits or snack bars.

Bless you kind ladies and sirs.

We ‘umble folk likes our sponge pudding.

Comments (24)

January 16, 2011

National Day of Protest Against Benefit Cuts: UK Round Up

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed — Tags: a4e, Atos Origin, benefit cuts protests, January 24, National Day of Protest Against Benefit Cuts — Work Programme @ 1:30 pm

News is coming in of protests and actions around the UK as part of the National Day of Protest Against Benefit Cuts called for the 24th January.

With a call to focus on the poverty pimps set to make hundreds of millions out of benefit reforms, many groups have chosen to target Atos Origin, the company responsible for the punitive medical testing of disability and sickness benefits.

In London a Party and Picnic has been called in Triton Square near Euston from 2pm. Bring music, drums, whistles, banners, food to share and brighten up the faceless corporate wasteland that is home to poverty pimps Atos Origin Ltd.

In Livingston,not far from Edinburgh, protesters will be visiting Atos Origin’s Scotland Office. Visit the facebook page for more info, and be there from 10am.

Atos will also be the scene of a protest in Leeds called by local claimants and West Yorkshire Solidarity Federation. Be at 1 Whitehall, Leeds from 10 am then a group will be visiting notorious poverty pimps A4e at noon.

Even the Shires are revolting with a Protest Against Disability Cuts to be held in Lydney, Gloucestershire. Meet outside the Co-op at 1pm.

A call has gone out for protests in Burnley, whilst Hastings activists will be laying a trail of Red Drops from Hastings to London.

Comments (9)

January 21, 2011

Storm Dencora House!

Filed under: YMCA — Tags: Dencora House detention centre, storm dencora house, ymca training — Work Programme @ 11:39 am

It has been quite a while since we last used the phrase “Storm Dencora House”. It was a fraud by New Deal prime contractor YMCA Training, to dismiss Andrew Coates a deemed trouble maker for making comments on his blog showing YMCA Training and Dencora House Detention Centre in a bad light although fully truthful, whilst being paid full 13 weeks monies even though Andy spent no more than an hour and such dismissal decision was decided before he even attended.

There is a rumour going around on private groups on Social Networking websites such as facebook that on Monday 24th January 2011, a group of people will indeed “Storm Dencora House”! Rather than being a Health & Safety concern as previously stated for merely a blog comment, it appears under the surface of what appears to be an event bringing disorder and repute over the injustice unemployed people are suffering and will suffer, it will actually be more of a well-mannered protest in White House Road against the christian organisation YMCA Training and the ConDem(n) Government’s Work Programme plans of 7 years detention at YMCA Training’s Dencora House Detention Centre open prison while the likes of YMCA Training dish out 3 year sanctions to participants starting off with 3 months, shortly followed by 6 months, and the big one… 3 years!

There is no public event for such on facebook etc. so I cannot see how it is being organised or how many people would be turning up – and whether its local people or those coming from a far just to cause trouble. Whether its actually going ahead is unknown but there is talk of disruption to the access of Dencora House business units so I assuming a group of people will be sitting in front of the Dencora House Detention Centre gates obstructing access with picket signs and slogans etc., although someone suggested baracading the entrance with vehicles such as a white transit van so the people are less likely to be moved so easily by police.

The good news is there has been no comments suggesting any sort of criminal damage, vandalism or severe disorder against a person or property. The time hasn’t been confirmed and its likely that the people all know each other and communicate this via telephone or text message to avoid this being revealed to the public. Some people suggested similar action to the likes of A4e (who actually don’t have a place in the area – so I assume they mean subcontractor Reed) and TNG. I think the focus will be on YMCA Training.

So this appears to be a well-mannered event anyone interested in joining will have to find the private group on facebook. I don’t have a facebook account so I only know this by an email I received. If anyone is in the area and can take photos on their camera phone etc. if they see any protests please do so and upload to the internet so we can all see. Of course, if you know any more details feel free to comment below.

Comments (17)

January 25, 2011

Youth Unemployment: Onwards and Upwards!

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed, Unemployment — Tags: Youth Unemployment — Andrew Coates @ 11:44 am

The latest employment figures show that youth unemployment has not yet reached the 1 million mark as many had predicted, but on long-term youth unemployment (spending six months or more out of work) it turns out original estimates were far too conservative. At over 400,000, the rate has already exceeded some analysts’ predictions for the end of 2011. More Here.

The TUC reacts:

A Future that Works: a TUC National Rally for Young People

Sat, 29 Jan 2011 3:00 to 15:00 Platt Fields Park Manchester.
The abolition of the Education Maintenance Allowance, the increase in university tuition fees, record levels of youth unemployment, and the coalition government’s programme of vicious and unnecessary cuts are hitting Britain’s young people hard.

Routes into education and employment are being squeezed as young people are made to pick up the bill for a financial crisis they didn’t create!

‘A Future that Works’ will highlight the impact of the recession and the coalition government’s cuts programme on young workers and young people in general – and promote the trade union, student movement and partner organisation campaign against the cuts and for the alternatives. ‘A Future that Works’ is being hosted by the TUC in partnership with the National Union of Students and the UCU.

Here.

We comment: until people tackle the companies making a mint out of youth unemployment, A4E et.al, with the bogus ‘work experience’ schemes, and offer real jobs, all of this is hot air.

Comments (7)

January 28, 2011

DWP Corruption: LMS Directgov Jobs ripped apart!

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed, DWP, Unemployment, Welfare State — Tags: benefit sanctions, directgov, directgov job search, DWP, Jobcentre Plus, jobpoints, Jobseeker Direction, Jobseeker Directions, jobseeker job denial scam trap, jobseekers allowance, jobseekers direct, Labour Market System, unlawful sanctions, warm phones, Welfare State, Work programme — Work Programme @ 5:16 pm

Sister site Work Programme Network, has spilled the beans on:

Why is Jobcentre Plus’ job database so poor in quality?
Why does Jobcentre Plus’ fail/refuse to improve such service or listen to feedback from its users?
Why do Jobcentre Plus issue Jobseeker Directions solely for jobs advertised on their job system?
Why does most jobs require an fully identified enquiry to Jobcentre Plus to get details of how to apply?
Why does Jobcentre Plus ask (sometimes multiple times) whether you have applied for each (and every) job they know you have received details about?

It is the “jobseeker job denial scam trap“. The Labour Market System might appear to be the official job database “to help you find work” but the reality is so very different! (more…)

Comments (19)

February 1, 2011

Improved Job Search

Filed under: Unemployment — Tags: Jobs, Unemployment — Work Programme @ 12:55 pm

Ipswich Unemployed Action can reveal that sister site Work Programme Network is testing a new job search website.

For alpha testing, the site boasts a current database of 2,188 jobs by 1,068 Employers from 24 selected town/city areas in Great Britain. This amount of Jobs will grow daily from Mon-Fri when new jobs are added.

The site is a very basic implementation of a free to use upcoming job search website. It has many advantages over DWP’s poor excuse for a job website. It uses open source WordPress to power the site (same software powering this blog) with proprietary software to obtain and manage the jobs. (more…)

Comments (15)

February 3, 2011

Atos Origin – Harrying the Ill and Disabled for Profit.

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed, Cuts, Employment and Support Allowance, Incapacity Benefit — Tags: ATOS, Work Capability Assessment — Andrew Coates @ 11:29 am

I mention this because it has been brought to our attention that people in Ipswich are suffering under the ‘testing’ regime that this is part of. The local centre dealing with medical testing is known as ‘Lourdes’ – the sick, and the disabled go there and, bingo, they are miraculously cured!

It’s got to the point where the Suffolk Chamber of Commerce (yes!) has been concerned enough to post this:

Papworth Trust is leading a coalition of disability charities declaring that the Work Capability Assessment, which examines people’s fitness for employment, isn’t working.

Charities are being overwhelmed by evidence showing the assessment to be inaccurate and often unfair to the nation’s most vulnerable people. The assessment is too focused on physical capability, meaning that people with serious mental health issues, learning disabilities and fluctuating health conditions are often marked as fit to work.

Wendy, a Nurse Manager who had a breakdown and tried to commit suicide after being overwhelmed with stress, has been assessed as fit to work. Wendy says “I went from being a capable person to someone who couldn’t even make simple decisions such as what to eat. I was like that for several months.”

Her assessment was carried out by a nurse rather than a psychiatrist or psychologist. Because Wendy could wash, dress, walk and talk coherently, she was determined fit to work. Wendy says “Our financial worries are a major stress factor. I’ve always paid into the system and have never claimed for anything before. I desperately want to go back to work but am still unwell. I need time and support to recover before I can hold down a full-time job again.”

Papworth Trust believes that the independent assessors have not been sufficiently trained to recognise the full range of disabilities, causing people dealing with serious health conditions to be reported as work ready.

(More here.)

Background.

The battle against benefit cuts and “poverty pimps”Posted by Laurie Penny – 24 January 2011 10:38

Disabled people and their allies are fighting back against cuts – shame on the rest of us if we do not fight with them.

Of all the obdurate lies peddled by the Conservative Party in the run-up to the last general election, perhaps the most callous was when the Tory disability spokesperson Mark Harmer told key representatives of Britain’s millions of disabled and mentally unwell citizens: “I don’t think disabled people have anything to fear from a Conservative government.” It turns out that disabled people have a great deal to fear.

(more…)

Comments (31)

February 8, 2011

As Big Society Fails, ‘Volunteering’ for the Unemployed.

Filed under: Cuts, DWP, Government, Liberal Tory Coalition — Tags: Big Society, Volunteeering — Andrew Coates @ 9:56 am

Are these two stories related?

February 2011 – Government unveils new plans to massively expand volunteering and training opportunities for the unemployed

Unemployed people will be able to access thousands of new volunteering and training opportunities to help them take their first steps back into work – under new plans unveiled today by Secretary of State for Work and Pensions Iain Duncan Smith.

Under the scheme advisers from youth charity The Prince’s Trust and other local government voluntary organisations will be located in Jobcentre Plus (JCP) offices to signpost jobseekers of all ages to volunteering and training opportunities in their area. The new initiative will particularly benefit young people as they will be able to get more support to help them into jobs, education and training.

Ministers are keen to strengthen partnerships with the voluntary sector as it is uniquely placed to help disadvantaged groups and communities. They believe that increasing the support for this sector will be crucial to get Britain working again.

Prince’s Trust advisers and local volunteering centres will start to appear in Jobcentres in the next few weeks, with a national roll out from April where possible.

For people who have claimed benefits for many years volunteering and training courses offer the ideal opportunity to make the first move into the workplace and a good way to build confidence and gain new skills. There are currently almost five million people on out of work benefits, many of whom with the right help and support could start a journey back into employment.

More Here.

David Cameron‘s “big society” is being undermined by government spending cuts which are in danger of “destroying” the country’s volunteer army, a senior figure in the volunteering sector warned today.

Dame Elisabeth Hoodless – who is stepping down after leading Britain’s largest volunteering charity, Community Service Volunteers (CSV), for more than 40 years – also said the prime minister had overestimated the amount of responsibility volunteers were prepared to take on.

Hoodless said the government had failed to provide opportunities for people to do more in their communities, adding that, in some cases, spending cuts imposed on councils had actually taken opportunities away.

A cynical person might say that the Government intends to use the unemployed as an upaid army to plug the holes left by these cuts.

More here.

Comments (20)

February 14, 2011

Big Society, Social Stock Exchange and University.

Filed under: Cuts, Government, Unemployment, Welfare Reform, Welfare State — Tags: Big Society — Andrew Coates @ 9:55 am

It’s often said that we unemployed are lazy. That we sit at home, watching our plasma tellys, drinking 2 litre bottles of White Lightening with Vodka (Breakfast) , stuffing our faces with crisps and Pringles (Dinner), spending a fortune on the dogs down William Hill and the rest of the day at the local Wetherspoon’s.

Now is the chance to prove this wrong.

Ipswich Unemployed Action is volunteering to become the first graduates of the Big Society University.

Mr Cameron and Francis Maude, the Cabinet Office minister, will today set out new measures which they hope will bring private investment into projects run by social entrepreneurs and charities.

A “Social Stock Exchange” will allow people to buy stakes in projects that bid for contracts providing public services, receiving a return as the project gets public money on a “payment by results” basis. Such stakes could then be held in new individual savings accounts.

The Big Society Bank will co-fund charitable projects, offering start-up capital alongside private investors. There are also long-term plans for a Big Society university, which would train community volunteers and social entrepreneurs.

More Here.

We do, naturally, expect to be rewarded for our efforts.

On a scale, say, consummate with pay levels for other workers on the Stock Exchange.

Comments (19)

February 17, 2011

Back To Work Programme; Back to Same Old Sagging Schemes?

Filed under: Cuts, DWP, Government, Unemployment, Welfare Reform — Tags: Back to Work Programme, Welfare Reform — Andrew Coates @ 10:49 am

Ian Duncan Smith (Secretary of State for Work and Pensions).

From his speech today,

“I believe it is only right that if we are helping people to get back into work, then we also have a right to expect that those we support are ready and willing to take on work if it is offered. That is why reform of the Back to Work programme is so important. We will create a Work Programme which will move toward a single scheme that will offer targeted, personalised help for those who need it most, sooner rather than later… It seems obvious to me that if we know a particular older worker is going to struggle to get back into employment, it is only fair that we try to get them on to a welfare-to-work programme immediately, rather than pausing for 12 months as is currently the case.

“To make sure we get the best value for money, we will also be changing the framework to bring the ideas and energy of the third sector and the private sector to the forefront of the process. We will reform the regime so that we properly reward the providers who do best at creating sustainable jobs that help people move out of benefits and into work. But we are not prepared to pay for anything less. At the same time, we will also make sure the system is fair by ensuring that receipt of benefits for those able to work is conditional on their willingness to work. So to be fair to the taxpayer, we will cut payments if they don’t do the right thing.

“In addition, we will re-assess all current claimants of Incapacity Benefit on their readiness to work. If people genuinely cannot work, then we will make sure they get the unconditional support they need. However, those assessed as immediately capable of work will be moved on to Jobseeker’s Allowance straight away. At the same time, those who have the potential to return to work will receive the enhanced support they need through ESA (Employment and Support Allowance) and the Work Programme.”

Here

Work Programme has been analysing these systems for some months (Here).

Many of us are familiar with the existing schemes. That is, their providers’ incompetence, their inability to help create jobs (except for the ‘Unemployment Bizniz’), and the sheer waste of time they are for the out-of-work.

Now, watch the small print, there will be heavier sanctions for those on these programmes who get stroppy.

Apart from that….what’s new?

Well, at least this has been dropped:

U-Turn on Housing Benefit.

Hat Tip to Crystal Balls.

The government is set to unveil the biggest shake-up of welfare for a generation today, but it has backtracked on plans to cut housing benefit.

The welfare reform bill, which will be published today, will not include plans to cut housing benefit by ten per cent if someone in the household had been on jobseekers’ allowance for over a year.

“We won’t see this in the bill for one very good reason,” work and pensions secretary Iain Duncan Smith told the Today programme.

“The more we looked at this, the more I reviewed the interplay between that reduction at 12 months and the universal credit and work programme meant that all of these people were going to move into the work programme anyway, so they would be having intensive help to get back to work.”

Here

Comments (15)

February 21, 2011

Work Programme: Details? Got a Spare Couple of Hundred Quid?

Filed under: DWP, Welfare Reform, Work Programme — Tags: Work programme — Andrew Coates @ 10:32 am

Find out out the Work Programme’s details – here.

Open Events for this Topic
05 Apr 2011	WS4047	£250.00	London Euston
06 Apr 2011	WS4048	£230.00	Birmingham City Centre
12 Apr 2011	WS4049	£230.00	Newcastle Upon Tyne City Centre
13 Apr 2011	WS4050	£230.00	Manchester City Centre
This workshop can also be run as a custom internal workshop

The DWP states that:

Members of the general public should send any enquiries or suggestions to the DWP Ministerial team who will be happy to deal with any correspondence. You can contact them on: ministers@dwp.gsi.gov.uk

People Management comments,

The government’s new Work Programme has “a high-risk financial model and unrealistic targets” which could leave training providers at risk of failure, the sector body for learning has warned.The Association of Learning Providers (ALP) said that many providers are reluctant to bid for government contracts to deliver employability skills and job support because of the way the contracts have been drawn up.

More concerns are expressed by Carley Consultants, (here)

The Work & Pensions Committee has been listening to industry concerns about the Work Programme. In convening too late to influence the design of the Invitation to Tender itself, the Committee has turned its attention to transition issues. The Committee’s Chair, Dame Anne Begg, wrote to Employment Minister Chris Grayling, ahead of his appearance before the Committee next month. Her letter expresses concerns over the gap between the end date of existing programmes and the launch of the Work Programme which “may result in a widespread fall in capacity across services and will disrupt the service that many clients receive”.

Comments (16)

February 25, 2011

On Flexible New Deal or New Deal? Is your data safe?

Filed under: a4e, Action 4 employment, DWP, Unemployment — Work Programme @ 11:24 am

So we are all aware now that poverty pimp A4e got fined for data theft (unencrypted data on a stolen laptop).

Now DWP are warning providers to be wary of phone calls from bogus ‘employers’ with job offers!!!

The full message is as follows:

Dear Provider

DWP have been made aware of possible bogus callers contacting Welfare to Work Providers with job offers for DWP customers participating on programmes.

Although these offers appear genuine, further investigation has found some are part of a scam, organised and run by individuals based outside of the UK.

As a result of this, DWP advise contracted Welfare to Work providers ensure all job offers received by DWP customers are thoroughly checked to ensure their legitimacy, in accordance with DWP policy.

In addition to DWP Policy, the following link may provide a useful reminder to DWP customers and provider staff in relation to ensuring customer safety in relation to job offers/interviews.

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Employment/Jobseekers/LookingForWork/DG_173812

Should you believe that any job offer received by a customer on your programme may be part of the scam, please contact DWP via the Security Inbox email address that you use to report security incidents – PMD.SECURITY@DWP.GSI.GOV.UK.

Steve Welch

Specialist Commercial Team

Harvesting desperate jobseeker’s information isn’t the difficult bit. The Work Programme Network exposed that 1 in 26 Jobcentre Plus advertised jobs requested a CV to be sent to a free email address (this started off as 1 in 40 but by the next week it increased to 1 in 26!). A “free email address” is one which is a) free (yes, you guessed it) and b) require no personal information to set up – so is anonymous. To name a few we are talking about email addresses ending in hotmail, msn, live, yahoo, gmail, googlemail etc. This excludes ISP mail accounts (which could also be dodgy). These can be registered within 5 minutes – 5 minutes being for a person who isn’t competent at use of computers and internet – a “whiz kid” could probably do so in a minute – thus a scammer could achieve this in 30 seconds via automated scripts.

How would these foreign criminal gangs be aware of such people being on a government course such as New Deal or Flexible New Deal? Well, collecting jobseeker details which yield some being on the Government courses. Some might even state this although I think its unlikely many would. A technical guess could be achieved by looking at unemployment gaps, with the assumption they are claiming benefits and should be on such course. Flexible New Deal is more clean cut than New Deal however due to longer scheme period.

Whats in it for the scammers? Actually, I am not too sure what the scammers can do with this practice – unless the providers choose to release an incentive to the employers which I feel is unlikely. If a scammer can obtain basic information (name, address, phone number) on someone, and the fact they are a Jobseekers Allowance claimant, and that at that moment in time are on a Government employment course; and where there is multiple providers, choose the right provider(!!), are they awaiting sensitive details being disclosed by the welfare to work provider?

Surely the “employer” would obtain this from the employee and I know many people get so desperate for a job that they lose all concept of data security. On the Labour Market System Jobs website where jobseekers may comment on individual jobs and rate them, countless people try to use the commenting feature for disclosing numerous sensitive information. We had to update the site asking people not to disclose sensitive details.

Where did the scammers get the information from? I think there is a fundamental link with a certain welfare to work provider (no names) or Jobcentre Plus themselves, to this scam. It would be rather simple to collate a database of jobseekers information, where say 9/10 are claiming benefits, 7/10 are longterm unemployed (indicated on the CV) and perhaps 1/5 potentially being on a course with one of a couple of providers in the area, however this “hit and miss” method will get far too many misses, and kill the whole scam.

Perhaps job offers are fraudulent and there is a provider link? Perhaps a poverty pimp such as A4e who has a growing worldwide presence (not an accusation against A4e but just an example) got one of their foreign offices to call in with client details to increase Job Outcomes. DWP being alerted to this “scam” of ”bogus job offers” when a few Job Outcome claims were rejected as fake. Perhaps when a new claim of benefit was made or an “off benefit” check by DWP failed. Obviously instead of admitting to making false claims an investigation with the DWP indicated the likely source and such were issued with a provider notice.

Thoughts? Of course, any “job offer” can be found not to exist (no paid job), not legit or be withdrawn; but as my example above (speculation only) suggests to get just 20 successful claims there is going to be approx 80 unsuccessful leads. To be worthwhile you want at least 200 successful making at least 800 leads not going anywhere!! There are only a handful of providers and locations. The scam would be killed as when you made just 2 unsuccessful attempts at one location your cover would be blown and barred from that location. Its likely an internal memo will go through the rest of the organisation.

I can’t help thinking that such notice really means providers have attempted to claim job outcomes for suspected jobs with very little information on how legit it actually is. Providers live for the job outcomes so wanting to claim one isn’t a bad thing – absolutely nothing wrong with that – but whereas skipping standard procedure to make money due to low outcome rates already, nothing less than fraud!

Comments (2)

February 27, 2011

Merthyr Shows Unemployment As It Is.

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed, Cuts, Unemployment, Welfare Reform — Tags: Unemployed, Wales — Andrew Coates @ 10:35 am

Hat-tip to Claimants’ Action South Wales.

“Gemma and Donna Griffiths, sisters and media students from Merthyr Tydfil, have made a film that exposes welfare reform for the sadistic, blinkered ideology that it really is. Amazingly, they’ve had help from the BBC (strange how the beeb’s attitude has softened, now it’s Tory “reforms” instead of almost identical Labour “reforms”), and a “behind the scenes” version of their film has been shown, available through the iplayer until the first of march - don’t miss it. There’s also youtube, but I haven’t managed to get into that yet. Now, I could go into great detail here, and took copious notes, but really it’s better if you just watch it. All the same, I couldn’t resist commenting on some of the highlights… Remember when IDS (who refused to be interviewed, what a surprise!) said that claimants in Merthyr should “get a bus to Cardiff” to look for work? We see how the first bus down (in the real world, not on the timetable) doesn’t get in until after 8am, and takes twice the time claimed by IDS. We have a clear admission by Maria Larcombe of Acorn [agency scum] that many jobs, particularly unskilled jobs, will start at 6 or 6:30, and thus are of no use to people travelling by bus from Merthyr – in any case at the time of filming there were 14,700 people unemployed in Cardiff chasing just 2,941 jobs, and as we know only too well, most of those won’t be real jobs anyway. We have an interview with the infamous Norman Tebbit who spouts on for a bit, asks the same old rhetorical questions such as why the system isn’t working, people aren’t getting off benefits and into work – when the answer, that there is no work, is obvious to anyone who cares to open their eyes. Tebbit also talks about how people in the south east of England – his area of expertise – often travel for over an hour and a half to work, but surely this is mainly due to congestion of the roads and railways, ironically another problem that has been caused by the same sort of incompetence and mis-government that has led to Merthyr, and most of the rest of Wales, being in the economic hole that it is.

Gemma and Donna, welfare claimants salute your excellent work! Now, how about exposing the fake jobs advertised by Jobcentre Plus for your next project..? And if you fancied writing an article, or several, I would love to publish it…”

Ipswich Unemployment Action publishes the Video now:

Comments (35)

March 4, 2011

Blogs on Unemployment.

Filed under: Campaigns for Unemployed — Tags: Unemployment — Andrew Coates @ 3:59 pm

Ipswich Unemployed Action tries to keep up-to-date on Blogs that deal with unemployment, and campaiging groups.

Here are some recent ones we’ve added to our links.

Benefit Sanctions,

“Come to the Unlawful Sanctions website! This website is dedicated to exposing the unlawful, unfair, cruel and criminally unjust financial punishments on our societys poorest people. Whats more, criminals convicted of benefit fraud are sometimes “punished” by applying the same length sanctions to their current benefit claim (instead of jail) that Joe Bloggs, the typical genuine jobseeker is receiving for arriving late to sign on because the bus was late!” More (Part of the Work Programme Network (that is, linked to us) Here)

A4E Hell

“The hell and hummilliation I have suffered at the hands of A4E and DWP.”

Highly recommended: Here.

Campaigning: Benefit Claimants Fight Back. Here.

This is also interesting, from Mick’s Organised Rage - Here.

On Wednesday the 16th February I wrote a piece which condemned as unbalanced the previous nights BBC’s, TV current affairs flagship programme News-night. After it showed a film of a visit made by US Pro Lawrence Mead to Liverpool and studio discussion between him and Chris Grayling, the Tory led coalition minister responsible for unemployment benefits. Mead, a favourite of U.S. mainstream media outlets like Fox News, and a right wing academic who has outdated 19th century views on welfare benefits and the unemployed. He played a major role in implementing ‘Workfare’ in the state of Wisconsin, which resulted in many claimants plunging into dire poverty and hopelessness.

I subsequently sent a complaint to the BBC about this programe, if anything the reply I have now received is as biased and unbalanced as the program itself, and I will be pursuing this matter further. Although, as with most multi national corporations the BBC’s complaints procedures is stacked against complainants. For example a complaint, once it is received by the BBC becomes what they call ‘feedback,’ which gives a hint about just how seriously they take such matters.

Below is the BBC justification for propagandizing on Mr Mead’s and the Coalition governments behalf, for that is how I see both the programe and the BBC’s reply to my complaint. Nevertheless it is for readers to make up their own minds, above is the link to my article on which my original complaint was based, and below is the BBC response to my complaint and my reply.

Dear Mr Hall

Thank you for your feedback regarding ‘Newsnight’ broadcast on 15 February 2011.

We understand some viewers felt the programme’s report from Lawrence Mead and discussion on the UK’s welfare system showed biased against benefit claimants.

Lawrence Mead has been a key architect of many ‘welfare-to-work’ schemes in the U.S.A, including a very influential scheme in the state of Wisconsin (where they cut the number of people on welfare by ninety per cent). His work has also had a big influence on British Government policy, for example the Welfare Reform Bill. We therefore thought it would be interesting to commission an authored film by Mr Mead to see how his views might be received in a British City with British welfare recipients.

During the piece we heard from unemployed people and benefit claimants who agreed with Mr Mead’s assertion – that the existing welfare system and economic structures unwittingly discouraged work and the seeking of employment, whilst passively making claimants benefit-dependent. The report made it clear that a number of factors have contributed to the current situation, the overarching element being the welfare system itself.

We made it very clear that the views expressed in the piece were Mr Mead’s views and not those of ‘Newsnight’. We did, of course, robustly challenge Mr Mead in a discussion after his film. It is part of ‘Newsnight’s remit to air and challenge controversial views, especially when those views have such a key influence on British policymakers.

Thanks again for taking the time to contact us.

Kind Regards

Mark Roberts

BBC Complaints

www.bbc.co.uk/complaints

Dear Mr Roberts,

I am bemused and totally unsatisfied with your reply as you have not dealt with the main issues I raised, which were centered on a lack of balance in the Newsnight segment. You have endorsed without question Mr Mead contentious claims about the success he had in reducing the numbers claiming unemployment benefits in Wisconsin. Your claim he reduced claimants by 90% is breathtaking in its disingenuousness. For any fool can reduce the take up of benefits, if claimants are unable to meet the new criteria set to claim them. If you cut welfare benefits for the long term unemployed as happened in Wisconsin, it is hardly rocket science there will be less claimants.

What happened to those who were claiming these benefits after they had them taken away is the core question, and Newsnight, taking Mead at his word, failed to ask him this question in its after film chit chat. I will tell you what occurred, far from finding work as Mead implies, it drove many of the most marginalized and economically disadvantaged people in the USA further into poverty. After loosing their benefits they disappeared off the official radar into a life of hopelessness, petty crime, addiction and poverty. As an aside, if the prisons and mental health facilities, etc, fill up after benefits are cut, pray tell me how can that reduce the deficit. It cost £45,000 to keep one person in a UK prison for one year. (Yet no one at Newsnight felt the need ask Mead such questions.)

As to the group of claimants who were videoed talking to Mead in Liverpool, they were never going to argue vigorously against his nasty vindictive theories, because if they disagreed with him on camera and said they would refuse to accept ‘any job,’ and this got back to Job Centre staff, they could loose their benefit under the current UK system. That Newsnight failed to inform its viewers of this again show a lack of balance if not down right bias.

To claim after his film was broadcast, Mr Mead was ‘robustly challenge’ during a Newsnight discussion is simply untrue. (Have you watched the debate?) As I wrote in my original complaint, those in the studio consisted of Mr Paxman, who showed little interest in the subject, Mr Mead, on video link from New York, and Chris Grayling, the Coalition Government minister responsible for benefits at the Department of Work and Pensions, who at this very time is himself engaged in cutting welfare benefits in a not dissimilar way to Mead’s reactionary 19th century theories about the unemployed.

Despite there being countless individuals who could have offered an authoritative alternative viewpoint on this matter, none appeared in the studio debate, if one can call it that. Hence my complaint is based on the total lack of balance in this BBC Newsnight segment.

You also failed to deal with my question when I asked ask who financed Lawrence Mead’s trip from the USA to the UK and his visit to Liverpool, did the BBC cover any of his costs? This is not a minor side issue as how the BBC spends license payers hard earned cash is of vital importance today.

To date, having refused to deal with the main components of my complaint, I e lack of balance and cost, I do not believe you have dealt with it adequately. Thus I have no choice but to pursue the matter further. I would appreciate if you could tell me where I go from here.

Regards

Mr Mick Hall

It can be safely said that Lawrence Mead has joined the list of Ipswich Unemployed Action’s sworn foes.

We invite and welcome any new links.

Comments (12)

March 8, 2011

The Adventures of Unemployed Man.

Filed under: Unemployment — Tags: Unemployed Man — Andrew Coates @ 9:22 am

This looks interesting (More here.)

Will the gang visit the U.K?

Comments (1)

March 9, 2011

YMCA Training – Work Programme

Filed under: DWP, Flexible New Deal, Ipswich, Unemployment, Work Programme, YMCA — Tags: YMCA — Work Programme @ 12:18 am

Ipswich – supporting FND participants to make a sustained transition into work

Project description

• YMCA Training’s FND provision follows a sub-contractor model, working in partnership with specialist agencies to provide holistic support for participants

• YMCA Training Ipswich supports participants with complex needs to access employment

• The Centre has successfully adapted its provision to achieve high numbers of job entries through the FND programme

• YMCA Training Ipswich works effectively with Jobcentre Plus, to offer customers work trails with a guaranteed job entry

YMCA Training Ipswich works closely with their prime contractor for the FND programme, TNG. Customers complete an Employability Needs Questionnaire at TNG, and the score determines whether they remain at TNG or are referred to YMCA Training Ipswich. The Centre supports customers across the age range, from 18-60 years of age. Customers are referred from TNG to YMCA Training Ipswich from Lane 2 and Lane 4 (the latter being less job ready). YMCA Training Ipswich currently has 400 customers on the FND programme, and receives 25-30 referrals from TNG a week.

Some customers are long term unemployed, and have been on a number of New Deal programmes, whilst others have been made redundant in the recession. All customers attend an initial partner interview to identify those with complex needs, which may arise from medical conditions or lifestyle choices, such as alcohol and drugs issues, and several customers have a criminal record and are on the sex offenders register.

Many of the customers have lost their self confidence and self worth in their own ability and therefore require support to re-enter employment. All customers attend an induction at YMCA Training Ipswich, covering health and safety, safeguarding, bullying and harassment, and explaining the purpose of the FND programme. YMCA Training Ipswich works closely with probation workers, NORCAS, Suffolk Association of Voluntary Organisations, and SNAP, who provide counselling services and support clients with financial, housing, alcohol and drugs problems.

The Centre operates a zero tolerance approach to alcohol and drugs. A high proportion of customers require ESOL, (English as a Second Language) support, and so the Centre has established a partnership with Otley College, which delivers literacy and numeracy classes in-house at the Centre and support customers to gain Level 1 qualifications.

All customers complete the mandatory elements of the FND programme, such as the induction and CV writing module, and participate in fortnightly one-to-ones with their Training Adviser to determine their personal requirements and update their work focused action plan. The Training Advisers also deliver Goals training, which provides motivational support for customers to help their progression towards the labour market.

YMCA Training Ipswich has a strong employer network. For example, companies such as Tesco, Wicks, B&Q and McDonalds conduct mock interviews at the Centre. This approach is very successful, helping customers prepare for real interviews, and providing a forum for employers to meet potential candidates:

“The employers come in and do interview techniques with [customers] and explain what they would be looking for in an employee. We’ve have some fantastic feedback… Employers wants to help the community and it promotes their company as well, and [customers can ask] about work experience, or job opportunities, and [employers] will distribute application forms and look at their CVs and give constructive feedback, so it’s a way of recruiting” YMCA Training Ipswich Employment Engagement Adviser.

YMCA Training Ipswich has developed this strong employer network by highlighting the reciprocal benefits to employers:

“We can do a one stop shop for you, we can sift the CVs, we can offer you facilities for interviewing, we can have customers here ready for you at certain times and we can do the whole process for you” YMCA Training Ipswich Centre Manager Sally Smith.

YMCA Training Ipswich also provides practical support for customers, ensuring they have appropriate clothes to attend interviews, buys specialist clothing required for certain jobs, and pays for CRB checks. The Centre also conducts in-work calculations for customers, to check if they are eligible for benefits or tax credits, and to determine if they will be better off in work. This can be a particular issue for certain groups, such as lone parents, who often require childcare support to enable them to return to work. The Employment Engagement Adviser will also negotiate with employers where appropriate to ensure lone parents can afford to move into work.

YMCA Training Ipswich works effectively in partnership with Jobcentre Plus, to offer customers work trails with a guaranteed job entry. The work trial is the same as a work placement, but has the advantage of a 99.9% guarantee that it will lead to paid employment:

“The work trials, we are very lucky, we’ve always had very good relations with Ipswich jobcentre…the members of staff in the work trails team and the work subsidy team before them, we build good relationships with all of them…We work in partnership with them, and that has really helped us” YMCA Training Ipswich Centre Manager Sally Smith.

This arrangement means that Jobcentre Plus consult YMCA Training Ipswich to identify suitable candidates for their work trials. For example, Rentakill recently contacted Jobcentre Plus to recruit 36 people across the business. Jobcentre Plus consulted YMCA Training Ipswich, and the collaboration resulted in 15 FND customers from YMCA Training Ipswich gaining work trails. YMCA Training Ipswich also liaises effectively with their prime contractor, TNG, to discuss employment opportunities.

The Employment Engagement Advisers from the two organisations discuss local vacancies to ensure jobs are matched to the most suitable customers. This is a win-win situation for both YMCA Training Ipswich and Jobcentre Plus, as it improves sustainable job outcomes for both organisations.

YMCA Training Ipswich has a high proportion of employers who have recruited from the Centre over a number of years. The Centre works with employers who are committed to offering customers paid employment following the successful completion of their work placement. The Centre Manager explains their successful approach to working with employers:

“It is being honest with employers, we do have customers with chequered histories and we are always open and honest… we ring them every Monday to check the customer has turned up and see if there are any issues, and the EEAs do go out and talk to the employer and customer once a fortnight” YMCA Training Ipswich Centre Manager Sally Smith.

Empowering participants to find and retain employment

• 79% of customers at YMCA Training Ipswich recently ranked the modules a grade 1 or 2 (according to Ofsted criteria)

• Employers and employees alike view the FND provision at YMCA Training Ipswich to be an effective job matching and recruitment service

• YMCA Training Ipswich records high numbers of job entries, and work trials which are guaranteed to lead to paid employment

• YMCA Training Ipswich supports customers into work by conducting in-work calculations, to identify if the customer is eligible for any benefits or tax credits

FND customers are very satisfied with the support they receive at YMCA Training Ipswich. 79% of customers recently ranked the modules a grade 1 or 2 (according to Ofsted criteria). YMCA Training Ipswich reports consistently high rates of customers completing work placements. The Centre places customers that are job-ready into work placements as soon as possible:

“We have 72% of people in work placements at the moment, we’ve always been very very high, when we compare our weekly stats, we are consistently high” YMCA Training Ipswich Centre Manager Sally Smith.

YMCA Training Ipswich is committed to placing customers in suitable work placements, depending on their distance from the labour market. For example, those furthest from the labour market often complete an initial work placement with a charity to update their employability skills and to gain a reference to help them progress into paid work. The success of YMCA Training Ipswich has recently been noted by their prime contractor auditor:

“The audit by the prime contractor flagged us as being particularly good with work placements…some of our customers haven’t worked for 25 years, so they aren’t going to have up-to-date skills….work placements give [customers] a bit more confidence… being in a customer focused role. So they do a soft work placement that will give them the reference they need for their CV. Then we will look at the types of jobs they want, but it is a step in the right direction” YMCA Training Ipswich Centre Manager Sally Smith.

YMCA Training Ipswich reports one of the highest number of job entries across the YMCA Training network:

“Our target with TNG was to get 41 short jobs and we’ve currently got 45, so we are slightly over” YMCA Training Ipswich Centre Manager Sally Smith.

The Centre encourages customers to undertake self-directed activities where possible, to develop their sense of responsibility and ownership towards securing employment. For example, the Sabo website provides ICT guidance. This works particularly well with mature customers, to improve their CVs:

“It is flexible and tailor made to their requirements…It is more self directed… We set them realistic targets that will help them move forward in life” YMCA Training Ipswich Centre Manager Sally Smith.

YMCA Training Ipswich has a strong employer network. The Centre Manager is Chair of the local business forum. The Centre holds employer liaison events. For example, YMCA Training Ipswich hold an annual event at Jimmy’s Farm and invites its employer network. Over 90 employers attended the event last year. YMCA Training Ipswich is nominating Jimmy’s Farm for YMCA Training’s national employer award, in recognition of their support. Jimmy’s Farm provides e2e placements for YMCA Training Ipswich, in addition to hosting employer events.

The employer liaison events provide a valuable opportunity for employers who have recently joined the network, such as Calsberg and Asda, to network with companies who have worked with YMCA Training Ipswich for a number of years.

“All the companies network and it helps us sell what we do, its great…we try and look after [employers]…we build relationships with them and then a lot of our companies recommend us to other companies they know” YMCA Training Ipswich Coordinator.

Some employers contact YMCA Training Ipswich to recruit staff:

“We will select the clients for them, preinterview the clients, like a recruitment agency, but free of charge” YMCA Training Ipswich Co-ordinator.

YMCA Training Ipswich matches FND customers to job vacancies, to support people to make a sustained transition into work:

“We look at the individual and their skills and match them to the company…If something came up that we knew would be ideal we discuss it with them. We match the person to the role…It is no good putting someone somewhere they aren’t going to last, they won’t be happy and it spoils our reputation” YMCA Training Ipswich Employment Engagement Adviser.

Team working is a key success factor in the YMCA Training Ipswich approach:

“I’m very lucky, I’ve got a very good team, we all work well together, we are a team and without each other we couldn’t do it. We all chip in” YMCA Training Ipswich Centre Manager Sally Smith.

“I think we are very successful because we have such a dedicated team, they are very motivated, everyone wants to help and support people. We are very supportive of each other, there can be some challenging environments, and we have got some very strong relationships with local employers who are very happy to help out” YMCA Training Ipswich Employment Engagement Adviser.

Effective team working is also evident in YMCA Training Ipswich’s work with partner agencies:

“We work very very closely together with the job centre, as soon as they are told of a work trail they will tell us and we will try and fill it with our people. I have been in place for ten years and over time have built up a relationship with the job centre, all the staff know the advisers” YMCA Training Ipswich Co-ordinator.

The Employment Engagement Adviser provides on-going support for customers completing work placements:

“We do tell them, ‘any issues or concerns just pick up the phone and talk to us’, we don’t forget you… We also say that to the employer as well: ‘If you have any issues please talk to us and we will try and resolve any issues’. People have talked to us about little things, and we have been able to put their mind at rest, or directed them where they need to go…The placements are really good, it gets [customers] back in a routine and communicating with people. They will think ‘actually I enjoyed that, I’m going to start looking for that kind of job’. It widens the scope for their job search”

YMCA Training Ipswich Employment Engagement Adviser.

YMCA Training Ipswich have placed fifteen customers in work placements in the School Health department of Children’s Services, St Helen’s House, assisting with filing duties:

“We’ve had help from YMCA Training for two-three years on a volunteer basis…we know quite quickly when we

have a very good person… the people seem to enjoy it and it gives them more confidence. Its beneficial to us because we don’t have the staff capacity to deal with all the work we’ve got” Deputy Team Leader, Children’s Services, St Helen’s House.

The customer felt the support from YMCA Training Ipswich assisted her job search because:

“It was more individually tailored for different needs. You only had to go in once a week to do the job search and have appointments with your Training Adviser… they gave you pointers about how to approach interviews…they were really good and supportive, if you had a problem you could phone them up at any time” Employee, Children’s Services, St Helen’s House.

The customer felt the work placement enhanced her CV by providing current work experience:

“If I hadn’t come here to do the work placement I don’t think I would have got the job…If you’ve been unemployed for quite a while, a lot of [employers] might be put off by that. If you get some work experience it does build your confidence…I hadn’t done that much office work before, so it was helpful” Employee, Children’s Services, St Helen’s House.

The work placement increased the customer’s confidence as interviews can be daunting:

“When you come on a work placement they can see you over a few weeks so you can show what you can do…I was more nervous because I really wanted the job and everyone was rooting for me, I didn’t want to let everybody down, but I managed to get it” Employee, Children’s Services, St Helen’s House.

From the employer’s perspective, the work placement prepared the customer well for the role:

“[She] did a brilliant interview and I think that’s because she knew where she was and what she was doing. She came across very well… We saw [her] confidence grow as she worked with us. She has fitted in extremely well, everyone has commented on it” Deputy Team Leader, Children’s Services, St Helen’s House.

An employer from a building contractor company approached YMCA Training directly to recruit an Assistant for their maintenance department. The company was very impressed with the customer’s CV and interviewing skills:

“[We were] very impressed with the CV. [The interview] was absolutely brilliant, it was quite an informal interview, to get an idea of the person…we were very impressed” Administration manger, Maintenance department, Needhams Building Contractors.

The work placement scheme appealed to the building contractor company because:

“The option of trialling someone for a while is a good idea…I wouldn’t have any hesitation in doing it again…there is no commitment there if the person didn’t work out, that is good…We’ve employed two people from YMCA Training and we have been extremely happy with both… I would say they are amongst the hardest workers we’ve got in the company” Administration manger, Maintenance department, Needhams Building Contractors

The customer had been made redundant the previous year and YMCA Training Ipswich supported the customer with job search and interview preparation:

“I had applied for a lot of jobs and…I went [to YMCA Training] with a very closed mind… I was very surprised at the feedback and what was offered to me…I’d only had one interview from a hundred jobs I’d applied for before…The difference was the face to face contact, [YMCA Training] offered to look at my CV. I found the [CV module] interesting, they made me change a lot of things in my CV, which I think helped me to get this job…it turned my CV around…It was the best interview I’ve ever had“ Employee, Maintenance department, Needhams Building Contractors.

The customer deputised whilst her manager was on holiday and received a salary increase in recognition of her progress:

“I have spoken to the MD and he thinks I’ve settled in well and he said there’s ways I could progress in the company. If I saw this job in the paper I would probably turn the page and think ‘that’s not even a job they would give me a interview for” Employee, Maintenance department, Needhams Building Contractors.

The customer has been nominated for YMCA Training’s national learner of the year award in recognition of her achievements. The support from YMCA Training Ipswich was particularly helpful in:

“Sorting out my tax credits. That was really helpful because I would have actually turned down the job based on the salary they were offering. The working tax credit that’s helped my salary…I’ve just had positively from them…they were very approachable – if you had a question and they didn’t know the answer, they would go out of their way to find out” Employee, Maintenance department, Needhams Building Contractors.

Supporting the new work programme

• YMCA Training Ipswich is well placed to implement the new work programme through its successful delivery of the Flexible New Deal programme. YMCA Training is well placed to implement the new work programme by building on its successful delivery of the Flexible New Deal programme. The Centre Manager at YMCA Training Ipswich attributes the success of their FND delivery to effective partnership working with Jobcentre Plus and matching customers to suitable employment opportunities. YMCA Training Ipswich operates:

“Very much like a recruitment agency. We visit the employers and build up a positive relationship, and visit [employers] when participants are there on placement. We support the employer as well as the participant” YMCA Training Ipswich Employment Engagement Adviser.

(more…)

Comments (31)

March 12, 2011

YMCA Training: No comment on publication concerns

Filed under: YMCA — Tags: YMCA, YMCA Training – getting ready for the Work Programme — Work Programme @ 10:10 am

We recently published a large snippet of the Ipswich section to poverty pimp YMCA Training’s “YMCA Training – getting ready for the Work Programme” publication; a small snippet of such is as follows:

Some customers are long term unemployed, and have been on a number of New Deal programmes, whilst others have been made redundant in the recession. All customers attend an initial partner interview to identify those with complex needs, which may arise from medical conditions or lifestyle choices, such as alcohol and drugs issues, and several customers have a criminal record and are on the sex offenders register.

YMCA Training has yet to comment – likely an active refusal to participate, perhaps they are too busy with these sex offenders or don’t think this is a serious matter at all and exited the claims (as quoted from themselves) – but communication isn’t their strong point (not in English anyway, perhaps German?) with exceptions to sanction threats. (more…)

Comments (3)

March 17, 2011

Training Wage and 3 year Sanctions

Filed under: Liberal Tory Coalition, Unemployment, Welfare Reform, Welfare State, Work Programme, Workfare — Tags: Training Wage, training wage act, Training Wage Bill — Work Programme @ 9:18 am

The Training Wage Bill 2011 has been published. If you are unemployed or in insecure work, you need to listen up. The Bill is worse than expected!

Any person who would otherwise qualify for entitlement to the national minimum wage, as defined in the National Minimum Wage Act 1998, shall not be so entitled if he or she has entered into a written contract of employment providing that his or her entitlement is to a training wage.

So the specifying of the words “training wage” somewhere in an employment contract, which may get overlooked by the to-be employee, will dissolve such persons entitlement to the National Minimum Wage. The employer must provide training, however, this isn’t the point. At current some employers pay out of their own pocket to train staff and some employers (especially those taking on new staff) might help the employee by paying for the training and spreading payments by weekly deductions. (more…)

Comments (7)

March 19, 2011

YMCA Training: Safeguarding

Filed under: Flexible New Deal, New Deal, Work Programme, YMCA — Tags: Safeguarding young people & vulnerable adults, ymca training — Work Programme @ 10:11 am

We recently published the Ipswich snippet from poverty YMCA Training’s getting ready for the Work Programme publication and subsequently how YMCA Training is refusing to comment about such publication.

To really rub salt in to the wounds, YMCA Training is very proud to disclose on their website how it safeguards children and vulnerable adults. This happens to be merely PR spin and to please both the DWP and Learning Skills Council (where the majority of their income is from). The snippets are as follows:

About Us: Safeguarding and Equality & Diversity

Safeguarding and Equality & Diversity

YMCA Training is committed to ensuring all our learners, staff and volunteers, are effectively safeguarded.

To help us do this we have a number of initiatives in place, including a team of local safeguarding advisers, a national safeguarding manager, comprehensive recruitment policies and a variety of training opportunities for staff and volunteers.

We aim to foster a culture of openness, safety and communication in order to deliver our vision of training in a safe environment.

Work with Us: Safeguarding young people & vulnerable adults

Safeguarding young people & vulnerable adults

The security and wellbeing of our participants is of overriding importance to us and we take great care to ensure that all new staff are checked for their suitability to work with young people and/or vulnerable adults.

If you are successful in your application to join us, your details will be sent to the Criminal Records Bureau where an Enhanced Disclosure Report will be prepared by Bureau staff. An Enhanced Disclosure will show all convictions, cautions and further relevant ‘soft information’ held by national and local police forces.

A copy of this report will be sent to you. The report will help determine your suitability for the post you have applied for or you are occupying. Please note: only those convictions, cautions etc that are relevant to the position will affect our decision in relation to suitability.

You must disclose any convictions (including those that are considered ‘spent’ under the Rehabilitations of Offenders Act and driving offences) on your application form or during the recruitment process and you should ensure that the references that you give are relevant and appropriate to your employment history.

YMCA Training reserves the right to rescind any offer of employment, or terminate your employment, if your CRB check or references do not meet the standards required.

Comments (3)

March 22, 2011

Training Wage Bill: FREE labour

Filed under: Government, Unemployment — Tags: employment contract, National Minimum Wage, Training Wage, Training Wage Bill — Work Programme @ 2:18 pm

We recently touched on the proposed Training Wage legislation, mostly on how employers can pay lower wages and the implementation of 3 year sanctions. What we didn’t mention was how employers are currently discouraged to defraud their employees and how employers can employ a person under this Training Wage Act (if it receives Royal Assent) at the same rate contractually as the National Minimum Wage but can opt out of paying their employees at all. (more…)

Comments (7)

Older Posts »

	Work Programme on Hardest Hit Protests.
	Average Joe on Hardest Hit Protests.
	Crystal Balls on Hardest Hit Protests.
	Soothsayer on Hardest Hit Protests.
	Val on Hardest Hit Protests.