Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11704765

It looks like the government is trying to reintroduce indentured servitude

If you don't do the work, you won't get any benefits. If people have to do this work surely its taking a job away from an employed person? Or are they going to take it from the community service of criminals?

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

Oh come on even I who view this government with some cynicism think that's overstating the matter.Picking up litter and digging council gardens is hardly punitive.

Mind the people who usually do it won't appreciate their jobs being taken over in this way especially if they are the ones whose jobs get cut..

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

I'm forced to work, why shouldn't everyone else be too?

I'd like to sit on my arse all day earning a nice wage through benefits with a free house but unfortunately I have to work instead.

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

But if they have to do work - how can they look for a job?

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

and of course the quality of the work will be poor

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

30-hour a week for £65 thats less that minimum wage.
http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/employme...ay/dg_10027201
is that not against the law
and all that money for protective clothing

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

They are the law! :)

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

that don't mean they can break it

---------- Post added at 00:52 ---------- Previous post was at 00:48 ----------

look,s like they all don't sit on there arse

---------- Post added at 01:08 ---------- Previous post was at 00:52 ----------

went on one of these schemes in the 80s 16 of us got to sit in a garage all day talking.
as the forman was also unemployed.
3.3 million were unemployed
we got £10 extra on top of the benefits

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

the same way 'they' do now ;)

- newspapers, websites etc will still be available ....

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

For around 18 months I did a full-time job and looked for work. I'm sure they can do as well.

In fact with the right websites I can apply for dozens of jobs an hour. Some applications take longer and some chats with agents can drag on but they won't be working that hard they can't look for work.

And besides this is for the long-term unemployed. They already had a considerable chance to look for work themselves.

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

Who is it that you think "forced" you to work?

Why do you feel that the genuinely ill, who I assume you include in "everyone else", should be "forced to work"?

Nobody "earns" anything on benefits - particularly not a "wage".

That aside, why do you feel that vulnerable people should not be afforded assistance in the shape of housing benefit?

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

OECD 'concerned' after UK government axes job programmes

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2...obs-programmes

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

Because I am not rich? I certainly don't work for fun.

Read the article again - it is the long-term jobless not the long-term sick


Again - read the article. This isn't about sick or "vunerable" people. It is the long-term work shy that won't work because they know the government will give still give them money if they don't.

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

Sorry, I'll ask you again. Who "forced" or forces you to work?

There is no distinction made in the article. Are you saying that the long term jobless, irrespective of the circumstances which lead to their being "jobless", should all be tarred with the same brush?

Sorry, point of fact. Long term "work shy" is your chosen terminology - not what I am referencing.

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

Self-preservation. I certainly wouldn't work if I won the £113m lottery.
Yes there is. It says "job-seekers benefit". Not incapacity benefit or other benefits. By definition via the government: "To get Jobseeker's Allowance you must be:

* available for, capable and actively seeking work"

I stand by what I say. There are people that literally make a careet out of dodging work. Deliberately sabotaging their CV, throwing interviews, getting fired...If they put as much effort into doing work as they do avoiding it they'd actually quite a lot.

I should not have to work just so I can fund those that don't want to. Make me out how you will with your asides - I don't care and won't apologise for it.

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

Funny, to me it looks like they are trying to remove the ability of some to choose benefits as a lifestyle choice and who don't contribute anything.

Personally I think it's a great idea.

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

I wonder who's going to pay for the travelling costs to get to this work. I can't imagine genuine claimants having much money to do so. I think they'd rather spend it on surviving and trying to get a job

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

I know how you feel :tu:

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

What travel costs ? picking litter and doing a bit gardening or removing graffiti can be done locally .

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

Yet these will have to be supervised.. So that'll mean a few centres dealing in every county..

I can understand making people do these jobs if they are long term but what about the people who already do these jobs for the council?? Also what about the requirement to look for work whilst signing on?? Surely all this will do is put them in a never ending loop of menial work to get dole, unable to find work due to doing menial work for the dole..

Not really well thought out but still in it's early days

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

yes i daresay they will have to be supervised ..by the same supervisors who already supervise rubbish collectors ,what about the people who already do these jobs ? do you think that they are all going to be sacked ?all it will mean is there will be more litter pickers ,more graffiti will get cleaned and more council gardens will get dug ,i realy can't understand peoples objections .As long as we don't stigmatise ALL unemployed people i don't have a problem with this at all

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

Brilliant idea :tu:
Litter picking would be a good start. Perhaps then they will stop littering when they have to pick it up themselves.....

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

I think it's stupid. it exploits the unemployed. you can't make someone work for 30 hours a week for 4 weeks for their benefit, where the same work would have to be paid a minimum wage to anyone else or would be done by someone as a punishment.

the people they put on this punishment course will just prat around. if they abuse the public for staring and pointing will they get hit over the head by a supervisor? will they be allowed to speak to the public? will they have to wear an identifying orange label on their back saying 'claimant sponger'? will they be looked at with disgust by the working class?

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

You don't seem to understand the logistics and costs as to supervising people like this..

1# There will be approval needed for supervisors
2# The costs involved and type of supervision needed will mean that these will not be the people who normally pick up the litter and will expect twice the wages of the original people.
3# The council will be expected to pay the supervisors
4# the original litter pickers will not be needed as the council have now a glut of litter pickers though they'll probably get more work from the one they just fired than a dozen of the new people who they don't pay for and don't want to be there..

50+ years ago I would have agreed with you but now everything is so compartamentalised (sp?) that it will be a drain on the economy and in the end is just a way of getting people off the unemployment figures :(

Instead what they need to do is to bring back training, bring back support for new businesses and create the jobs instead of pushing people sideways into meaningless labor.. That way they'd have a hope of cutting off benefits to those who do nothing and they would then be forced into jobs that are there and not poverty

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

But isn't there already supposed to be measures in place for these kind of people where they get sanctioned for not looking for work. when eventually they don't get any benefit at all?

or is that rule causing, or going to cause poverty and forcing them to commit crime to survive?

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

Can't see much wrong with this.

It's a 4 week placement to do community work for charities and local councils. If it's targeted at people believed to be sabotaging their chances of work then all the better.

Where's the problem of getting people to put something back into the community while they are receiving benefits. Allowances need to be made for people looking after children, working during school hours only for example.

JJ

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

I think people are looking for problems that don't exist ,most of what you say above already exists ,all it will mean is that there will be an extra workforce and suprevisers will have more men to get the quota of work done and since the LA's are always pleading lack of manpower for reductions of services then they will welcome it ,as will most council taxpayers
Anyway as you said earlier it's early days yet and the final system hasn't been worked out yet .I would suggest that any body put on these schemes may get a top up on their benefit to meet minimum wage ,which in turn begs the question as to why not just give them a job picking litter,digging gardens or cleaning graffiti anyway on minimum wage

---------- Post added at 09:49 ---------- Previous post was at 09:44 ----------

not sure about that ,but it was the labour gov that mentioned it and then probably decided to go the easy way and just keep giving people money cos it's easier than addressing the problem .This solution,i would hope, will only be meant as a short term money saving solution untill finances have improved along with the job market and real training can be given with the prospect of going into real jobs after the training ,plus it will have the desired effect of weeding out career claimants

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

But what about them losing their benefit completely, the original tough sanctions? will we think it's ok for them to carry on claiming and having no intention of finding work because they've done some free labour?

do these people go back to the original rules and sanctions after they've done the 4 weeks, or do they now have the publics blessing of trouble free benefits?

---------- Post added at 10:22 ---------- Previous post was at 09:52 ----------

The government will have to pay for wages, tools, protective clothing, transport costs, insurance, and a lot more.
the people doing this free labour would be under the care of the government at the time. all responsibility would be with them.
they are prepared to fund this. and a lot of jobs will be replaced by the use of free labour which will and can make these positions redundant.

This is in addition to the already existing rules of where if you don't look for work you will have your benefits stopped.
in those 30 days you won't be looking for work.
isn't it the case that there are already 30 days unpaid work placements on the government schemes they get sent to? and they are for people who don't fit into the "play ball or it is going to be difficult" catagory, but the 'it will give you some work experience and something to put down on your CV'?

unless we make the distinction between the two that the one is punishment, and the other is help.

I wonder what colour they're going to paint the mini buses?

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

not really ,because if they turn up on time and do the work they get paid ,if they don't turn up they will not get paid ,simple realy ,all they have to do is get out of bed at the required time and go outside ,a strange concept to some but doable and if the same people still refuse to look for work then they will have to do it again ,and hopefully after going through this cycle the message will sink in that they will have to work so why not get training to do a job where they won't get paid a pittance ,plus getting back into the work habit counts for a lot

---------- Post added at 10:27 ---------- Previous post was at 10:23 ----------

they won't be paid a wage they will continue to get benefits

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

The wage earners will be those employed to be responsible for the dolers. they're not going to put someone who's being punished incharge of them.

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

I suspect that the idea of this is to make proper paid work more appealing than the unpaid option. Get the long term unemployed (who have no intention of working) off their arses and into work.....

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

Say a claimant that was on this course. they turned up everyday on time and did outstanding work. work worthy of someone being paid a full weeks wage?

what happens to him or her when they go back to normal of not meeting the expectations of looking for work. do we send them back to do another 30 hours of outstanding work for £65?
(£170 if being paid the legal minimum wage)

or are we not expecting outstanding work from them in the first place, so we're actually eventually rather shocked that this and other persons are doing this constantly for a mere £65 a week?

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

Speaking as someone that used to a) be an unemployed person on a back to work program, and b) as a supervisor of the same program, this has good and bad points.

The supervision element of this is vital to get right, people that are in supervisory positions overseeing litter picking and garden work etc with this client group are not equpped to deal with un-employed people, it's a different kind of supervision requiring not just supervisory skills, but a range of extra skills that you wouldn't normally use with paid employees. Using myself as a case in point, these skills can be gained if you're of the right disposition, so i'm not posting this as a negative or a positive.

As the the distinction between able bodied and the disabled, if JSA/ESA etc are to be replace with a single benefit then i'm not sure there will be any seperation at all, it'll just be a "you've been claiming for x number of months, you're going to do this". Also even if a seperation is achieved, more and more legitimately disabled people are being judged capable of work.

Even withstanding this, if I had been unemployed for the length of time that meant i'd be madce to one of these activities I wouldn't really have a problem with it, however, where is the office based option to all this? I am not capable of manual work, my balance and co-ordination is sufficiently bad to make me a danger to myself and others, infact i'd say my lack of balance possibly excludes me under health and safety. I would be happy to take part, and have done in the past, in unpaid office based work for charities and community groups etc.

In summary, what is being proposed is not a bad idea in itself, but the implementation may be, options need to inserted in to any scheme of this nature to cater for people that are not capable of manual work, but are capable of office based duties.

Also, if charities are going to take on some of this "work provision" then the government has to work out how to pay for it. I was talking to a director/trustee of one such charity the other day, whoose main area is co-ordinating volunteering in the local area, they has seroius misgivings surrounding their ability to provide such a proposed scheme, as according to the meetings that they have attended so far, there will no extra or very little funding/financial incentives for any extra resources to run these schemes.

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

Indeed, neither would I. However it is you who "forces" yourself to work. There is an alternative but you've made your disdain clear by lumping those who are genuinely incapable of work and those who "milk the system" together as the "workshy" which isn't quite true.

A bit of forward thinking wouldn't go amiss. Jobseekers allowance is to be scrapped / rebranded as part of the universal benefit proposal. As the report says "The Welfare Reform White Paper, set to be unveiled in the coming week, will set out Mr Duncan Smith's plans for a universal credit to replace the range of benefits currently claimed by the jobless".

This is clearly not specific to jobseekers allowance (not "benefit" as you suggest).
I have never said that wasn't the case. I acknowledge that there are such people. It is you, together with Iian Duncan Smith, who seems incapable of making any distinction between them and genuine claimants.

This policy is a farce. It's a weak and ill thought out attempt at trying to be seen to be fighting fraud - nothing more.

Anyone looking at this objectively would see how flawed it is.

By way of example. All of the claimants affected (whether fraudsters or genuine claimants) will have to be paid the national minimum wage for the duration of any work carried out (an extra cost to the treasury). Are we to believe that by doing this work and taking themselves beyond the allowed benefit income thresholds that their entitlement to WTC, housing benefit, income support etc will be frozen - revaluated during / after the four weeks or is this simply a once a year top-up or bonus for those on benefits who are fit to work?

It's nothing more than a paper exercise which will, at every level, cost the treasury more money to implement than it will save.

As stated previously, you are also "funding" the ill who cannot work and those who are genuinely unemployed through no fault of their own. This is not a one size fits all problem and, as such, it is extremely naive to adopt a one size fits all position.

[QUOTE=punky;35118857Make me out how you will with your asides - I don't care and won't apologise for it.[/QUOTE]

I don't expect nor want you to apologise. I just thought it sad that you have evidently bought into the media campaign to stigmatize all benefit claimants as "workshy" ****.

Each to their own I suppose.

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

A) who is being punished?

B) supervisers are already in place supervising LA work crews

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

Those that have no choice but to go out and work 30 hours a week for a month for their benefits?

there's 2 sides to this.

I hate benefit claimants
well you'll be pleased to know that we are introducing a 30 day compulsory work scheme where these dossers will have to do free labour they'll get no more of your hard earned taxes. the message is a hard one.

I think benefit claimants are being exploited by this
well I can assure you that that is not the intention. we want to give these people something to do with their time. we know how depressed they may be from not being able to find a job in this depressing recession. so this will pick their spirits up tremendously.

LA?

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

You just won't admit you didn't read the article properly and and were wrong? This scheme does not include those incapable of work. Even if this unified benefits system comes in people still won't be able to claim incapacity benefit and job seekers allowance simultaneously. They are mutually exclusive. So i'm afraid the vision you have of cancer victims undergoing chemo and one-legged, half-blind people hopping being made to pick up litter while IDS stands there in a Roman emperor costume with a whip.

And i'm surprised you of all people appear to be suggesting I claim benefits through deception?

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

Local Authorities Gary, Alternative and possibly the more correct term for Councils.


I still think some key points are being missed, few of them that instantly spring to mind is:

1) More people are being judged as ineligible for IB/ESA, not due them suddenly recovering, but due to the benefits system eligibly and assessment procedure changing. My mother in law is 90% blind, and has near zero feeling in her legs, but according to the DWP, she is capable of work. Two appeals and lots of arguments between the DWP and her consultants, the DWP have finally backed down. They have told her though, that when he re-assessment is due, she's is likely to have to face the same fight all over again.

2) LA's do have supervisors responsible for litter picking, gardening etc, but not on the scale you'd need running the program being discussed, and also as already pointed out, with supervisors lacking the skills for that kind of workforce.

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

Life is rarely that binary/black & white, Gary.

We need (imho) to be careful about these sorts of things, because whilst the intention may be honourable, it soon descends into "work-shy" versus "hard-working tax-payers", and as we know from this forum, whilst it is easy (and often makes us feel better) to pigeonhole people into simplistic categories, we seem to end up putting applying labels to large numbers of people, when the labels actually apply to small numbers of abusers of the systems.

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

Oh. well they'd have to employ some more then.

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

Look at it this way Gary ,the welfare system is rapidly aproaching the 200 billion mark ,we have to controll this figure and if that means people will no longer get free money for an indefinate period then tough ,if people think that being asked to clean up their own communities ,dig a few gardens for old folk ,or mow the roadside verges in your area (i seem to remember that you were quite indignant that your LA had stopped doing this because of lack of funds) is being exploited ,then tough ,i suspect that it is their own fear of losing the free ride they have been on for the last 10 years or so that makes people think like that .
Having said that ,if this policy does come to fruition,i strongly suspect that the devoutly workshy will find a way around it ,after all they have managed to work the system to their benefit for years ,and i daresay that some will continue to do it

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

I have been un employed since Oct 08 and hate it, I have applied for so many job and in all that time, have only had two interviews, (Shocking I know) and I just would like to get back into work and will take anything I can get.

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

It's you who has read the article from a jaundiced perspective, not I.

It makes no distinction whatsoever nor indeed does it make any "mutually exclusive" reference(s) to those who are fit for work, those who are incapable of work and those who don't want to work because they don't feel the need to.

It makes a very clear reference to "a universal credit to replace the range of benefits currently claimed by the jobless"

They are mutually exclusive yes, but you missed the bit where the Employment Support Allowance crept in. Incapacity is soooo 2008. You see what they did there? They used the word "Employment" in the allowance title. Receipients of the Employment Support Allowance are also subject to a Work Capability Assessment. As such that particular allowance falls under the "jobless" caveat.

I'll not deign to address the specific sensationalization of Duncan Smith which you're engaging in in your attempts to try to belittle the genuinely ill but what I will do is tell you that beyond the rabid headlines which you have such difficulty seeing past there are many stories of sick people being "forced" to work.

It might also come as a surprise to you but there are many people who are one legged or half blind or indeed cancer patients in receipt of chemotherapy who elect to work. The will to work whilst suffering an illness or disability is not, to coin a phrase of yours, mutually exclusive to those who not in receipt of benefits.

That is not at all what I suggested, nice strawman though.

I merely mooted the point that if you felt that you were being "forced" to work simply to "fund" the "workshy" then perhaps you could take a leaf from their book simply give up and join their ranks. I never once suggested that you should perpetrate fraud by claiming benefits "through deception".

Still, at least we're making headway. You now suddenly appear to be able to differentiate between fraudsters and genuine claimants - that's a start.

EDIT:

As Hugh says above:

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

and who would we use to fill those vacancies ...mmmm let me think ...oh i know, the people who genuinely want to work will be able to undergo training to supervise the people who have to be forced onto the schemes

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

I'm in two minds about this. I don't think anyone should be forced to work for less than the minimum wage, if only to avoid taking proper jobs out of the economy and shifting them onto a second-rate tier of work. I'd be happier if people on this scheme would receive minimum wage (which would be subtracted from whatever benefits they receive and any surplus being paid out).

On the other hand, it seems this would not be a blanket measure, but rather temporary placements targeted at people who appear to be cheating the system. If used sparingly, I can see good sides to this. Minimum wage would still be a good thing though, and I'm rather skeptical about the potential for mission creep.

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

As i pointed out earlier if people are going to be paid minimum wage for this work then we might aswell just create the jobs and pay them ,this is going to be classed as voluntary work that the serial claimants will be forced to do in return for benefits (yes i see the contradiction:))

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

But we are stooping to the level of finding any excuse not to pay out to save money. if we weren't in this mess we probably wouldn't be thinking of ways to stop benefit money from being paid out.

We have to assume that these jobs will not have been done by somebody being paid to do them. then we have to think if these people are busy doing these then 'they' are stopping them from being able to look for work.

again, we have to assume that this will only be for those that have been on benefits for around 10 years, and not people who have been for a few months. or even suspected of working whilst claiming.

if they stuck to the original policy of not looking for work then no money, then nobody will get away with anything.
but I believe that they know that if they stuck to that there would be people who would have no choice but to rob and steal in order to survive.

these people are not stupid. nor are they soft. if they want money they won't care how they get it.

---------- Post added at 12:23 ---------- Previous post was at 12:21 ----------

Shouldn't that be 'people who don't want to work'?

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

If it's "compulsory" it cannot, by any definition, be classed as voluntary.

As I pointed out earlier given the minimum wage legislation and the effect that earnings will have on interdependant benefits (housing, childcare etc etc) this programme will end up costing the treasury more than it could ever possibly save.

It reads well to a certain demographic but it does not withstand much scrutiny.

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

YAY you finally get it ,we are in a mess so we have find ways to save money and the moral implication is to stop people thinking they can continue to claim benefits for no good reason


Most of the jobs that the benefit claimants will be asked to do will already be being done ,just at a much reduced rate ,for example we know get the street cleaners around our area once a month instead of once a fortnight with some additional "benefit volunteers" for want of a better phrase they will now get done more frequently ,nobody will lose their job ,and the claimants will be able to look for work in the 10 hours they get off a week ,or at week ends

not sure what the definition of long term unemployed is at the moment

For some "robbing and stealing to survive" means "robbing and stealing to get a better telly"

---------- Post added at 12:41 ---------- Previous post was at 12:36 ----------

Yes it does ,the demographic being the ones over taxed to pay the 200billion bill ,but i accept that it will be a hard policy to implement correctly so it has the desired effect

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

I had it all the time. the goal is to exploit them by doing unpaid work which will save them money by not having to pay somebody to do it. and all in the name of punishment or well being. depending on who's asking.

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

I can picture now a load of fifty-something males, who can't get a job because of their age, in somewhere like Newcastle going out and clearing the litter, and then being injured on the scheme and unable to work for a little while.

It's quite possible that the poor parts of the nation will have some of the cleanest streets in the country; no jobs but the cleanest streets

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

This is the most pathetic idea that l have heard from this idiotic government.

The councils are making cutbacks galore, so how do they get the streets cleaned and graffiti cleaned - bingo, get the unemployed to do it, they are not stupid are they. What they should be doing is investing in getting work brought into this country, therefore taking the unemployed off the books.

There are some decent hard working people out there, who do not have a job, is the government going to tar them with the same job, and not only that there basic human right are effected, as it is there right to claim benefit.

What this stupid government have to do is shut the door on people coming in from other countries and taking all the jobs at a cheap price.

The laugh of all is that when you go for a job at the JC, they send you to an agency for the job, and they are making the money, not the worker.:mad:

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

shame i thought we were making progress ,they will be getting paid ,the benefits they get ,and if you take the JSB,HB, free prescriptions ,free dental and all the other freebies then they won't be far short of minimum wage for 30 hours

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

As the 'government' will be responsible for them whilst they are in their care. they would have to take them to the hospital if the claimant so wishes. they'd have to make sure that all are pampered so as to reduce the likelyhood of being sued on the no win no fee scheme :D

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

I'm afraid that your idea of Newcastle being poor is deluded ,you are subscibing to the "poor northeners" mentality that shows a distinct lack of understanding

personaly i can see a lot of career claimants crapping themselves if this policy comes to fruition ...ALL OVER THE COUNTRY NOT JUST THE "POOR PARTS"

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

If they were getting paid they'd get an extra £100 on top of their benefits. all the extras are irrelevant. they're paid for from taxes, which I and many others might say it's ok for me to pay. so who are they to say that I say otherwise?

as Arthur says. like it or not, claiming benefit is a right. it may have certain conditions added to it all the time (including this one) where it is believed that these are actually legal, and not just what they say?

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

I'm doing a temp job (no end date has been given), I have more or less been forced into it.

It is minimum wage, a drop of 50% of my previous salary.

The govenerment should heavily peanalise companies that close down UK sites and move overseas. This is what happened to me.

So I'm a high skilled work in an indusrtry that is still closing UK sites in favour of moving outsite UK.

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

absolute rubbish gary ,claiming benefits is most definitely not a right ,it is a privelidge born of a caring society

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

Actually, I was making allusions to parts of the country that currently have large numbers employed by the Government, as these people get made redundant they will move into the realms of the unemployed and if there are no jobs for these people eventually they will become long term unemployed and will fall under these plans

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

It's there in the previous link - people with terminal illnesses being taken off benefits and put in a position whereby they are forced to work to survive. It may not be specific to picking up litter - and it may be uncomfortable reading for you given your stated position - but it is a fact.

Legally is the key here, obviously.

"Not wanting to" work and "not being able to work" are two very different things. Not wanting to work is hard for any third party to discern. However not being able to work is, by comparison, fairly easy to identify.

Forcing people to work for four weeks will not change the mindset of those who do not want to work. They will simply comply with the requirement (costing the treasury more money) and then revert to form. It will do them no discernable good.

It is a pyrrhic victory of sorts - at best.

Forcing people who are genuinely not fit to work to work for four weeks serves no purpose and represents the potential threat of an even greater long term fiscal cost.

Yes, you see the difference in your example is that he achieved what he did at his own volition - he wasn't "forced" by a third party. He also acted primarily due to his own acknowledgement of the onset of mental health issues (low self estreem and depression).

Some people are not that lucky.

As I stated earlier I acknowlewdge that there are vast numbers of people in receipt of benefits who should not, ordinarlily, be in receipt of those benefits. There are very real problems with this proposal by Duncan Smith and I feel he is playing to the gallery rather than trying to get to the root causes of the problem. Perceived entitlement and fraudulent claims being but two of those issues.

I'll people should be cared for, not stigmatized and lumped together with ner do wells who exploit a system.

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

http://www.sheffield.gov.uk/in-your-...its-your-right

HB is irrelevant in the case of claiming benefits, and the thinking of having to work a 30 hour unpaid week to make up for it.

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

well apart from this post not making any sense at all it just doesn't make any sense :confused:
Arthur it is not a basic human right to claim benefits that is the mentality that needs to be stamped out

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

If that is the case, then don't immigrants have a legal right. or is it just a caring society?

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

I think you'll find that claiming benefits is a right in the event that your circumstances - at any given time - meet certain criteria.

That link also gives some valuable insight as to what is and isn't considered "voluntary work".

Interestingly it states.

How voluntary work is defined

In terms of benefits and tax credits, you will be considered as being a volunteer if you:

• do not receive any money for the work you do (this does not include expenses)
• are not legally obliged to volunteer
• do something for a not-for-profit organisation
• do something for someone who is not a family member

So "compulsory" work (ie. undertaken as a result of a legal obligation as Duncan Smith appears to be proposing) is not "voluntary" and should, therefore, attract the proper remuneration.

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

A legal right is totally different to a "basic human right" which you and Arthur seem to think is the case for claiming benefits .We as a society could withdraw the legal right to claim benefits at any time ,it is our wish as a society to have this system as a safety net to prevent people living within our society from starving or falling into poverty

---------- Post added at 13:40 ---------- Previous post was at 13:32 ----------

and as i pointed out it is a legal right not a basic human right which would appear to be the way some people percieve the benefit system


and as i also pointed out earlier JSB/UB+HB +other free stuff = proper remuneration imo

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

Martyh

You seem to be suffering selective amnesia. You didn't state it was a legal right what you stated was;

Which is quite specific in its inaccuracy.

With all due respect, if you genuinely believe that rubbish you need help.

Here are a few "real world" UK figures for you to get your head around.

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

I will put it this way, over my working life, l have been unemployed three times.
I was out of work for TWO YEARS, then 12 months and then 6 months.

In that time, l did not get any help whatsoever from the JC, l had to look for work, and there wasn't anything out there, that we pay a decent wage. People keep saying go a for a low paid job, how can you the Government puts guidlines down to claim and 'support' for new jobs. And this doesn't work. Some jobs take you on, just to take you off the register.

What really infuriates me is there is not any decent wage paying jobs out there to get and support your family, ok you have free treatment etc, but do you know how embarrasing that is for the people who want work but cannot get it, Its an insult for the government to say, they have to clean streets etc, all this is to save money from local councils, it like doing community service.

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

So it's a human right and not a legal right to claim benefits in your own country?

why do they put something like "this is what the law says you need to legally live on" ?

---------- Post added at 13:44 ---------- Previous post was at 13:43 ----------

It was actually the other way around. but nevermind.

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

As MR A pointed out it is a legal right providing certain criteria are met

there has to be a minimum ammount decided upon ,the amount the gov has decided is the minimum to live on is always open to controversy but it is the legal minimum the welfare system has to pay a claimant when he/she exercises their legal right to claim benefits so they can maintain their basic human right of living above the poverty line

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

LOL ok.

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

i was responding to arthur and gary's claim that it was a basic human right which it most definately is not

simply pointing out that if the majority of UK people wished to not have a welfare system then we wouldn't have to have one .It's not there because the government or the EHCR say we have to have it it's there because we say we want it

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

I said it was a legal right. to which you said it's not, it's a human right. to which according to what you're saying now. it's not that.

Yours confused,
Gary.

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

Might as well step into the firing line i think this is badly thought out and is being done to pander to the ever growing number of people that believe our benefit system is completely out of control. One of the first things for some to understand is that most people that are unemployed would actually welcome the oppurtunity to do something like this as one of the biggest problems with getting a job after a period of unemployment is that you are seen to have been idle and doing nothing and the adjustment back to work could or will be too hard for a company to take a chance. I myself have encountered this many times before i finally had to admit the extent of my condition and cease looking for work.

As i have said before we are constantly told in this country that we have skills shortages that mean we have to take people in from other countries all the time while we have at least 1.4 million people that could be trained to fill those skills shortages. Right now this is being presented as applying to the long term unemployed but make no mistake this government is coming after many people who are sick and unable to do work Mr.Angry is quite correct in that and read a little more on some of the other things mr duncan smith has said and it becomes quite clear.

As usual in this country we have a problem no one denies that but instead of taking a long term view of it setting up proper resources that will enable us to fill skills we need we will take the short term headline grabbing approach. Label whole groups of people as something they are not and allow the media to do the rest to get the majority going along with what is an unfair and unjust scheme.

There are those who are lazy, workshy and good for nothing, again no one denies that but they are not as large a group as some would like us all to believe and in fact i will go so far as to say they are a tiny minority. I think this is an issue where actually spending money and setting up the resources to allow us to train the unemployed to fill our skills gaps is a far better approach then pandering to the "everyone on benefit is a workshy scrounger" brigade who so fortunately have a large media section dedicated to promoting that belief and stirring up hatred towards people they claim fall into that category.

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

---------- Post added at 15:19 ---------- Previous post was at 15:18 ----------



---------- Post added at 15:23 ---------- Previous post was at 15:19 ----------

you said neither you implied agreement with arthurs post that it was a basic human right which i disagreed and said it was most definately not ,it may be a legal right ,read the posts not what you wish them to say

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

We can stop this pointless argument now. Its a legal right. Move on.

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

This initiative isn't aimed at them. Its aimed at those who wouldn't welcome the opportunity to do something.....

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

so who decides who want's to work and who don't.
i QUOTE this is aimed at the claimants doing undeclared jobs on the side

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

i would say it is aimed at the long term unemployed ,if that means 6months or 12 months hasn't been made clear yet .

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

just because you are not qualified to do a job or your to old or to young.
or you face dont fit don't mean you don't want to work

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

In some areas of this country it is quite easy to be out of work for over 12 months despite best efforts to find work and that is something that has to be remembered. This does smack a little of exploitation to me if it isn't done the right way i really hope it is although as i said i would much prefer they train people to fill skills gaps rather then keeping taking skills from other countries.

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

i haven't said so :confused:

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

Exactly how much travelling do you think the claimant is going to have to do?

I actually had a friend like that. He and his girlfriend were living off a combination of her wage (which was lower than mine at the time) and his benefits. While they actually had an OK lifestyle (she knew how to make clothes and was good at growing her own food, so she actually made a lot of the stuff they used, wore and ate), they didn't have a lot of money.

She worked with me, and I could see where she came in through my office window. Every morning, the BF would walk her to the gate, wait for her to get out of sight, then vanish into the pub which was next door. I saw this, every morning.

I knew him for about 4 or 5 years, and in all that time, on the few occasions when he did get a job, he never lasted more than 1 week before being fired due to attitude problems. And yet, on a personal level, he was a very nice man.

That is the sort of person we need to stop claiming benefits.

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

I can't say I really like this.

While I'm all in favour of reducing the welfare bill and beating people who make a career of welfare back into work with giant tax payer funded sticks this is a quite illiberal, authoritarian way of going about things.

This feels like authoritarianism and big government, aspects of things you don't expect from Liberal Democrats and Conservatives respectively. From the Tories in fact I expect neither.

If the government think these people are playing the system the obvious approach to me would be to change the system so that those who demonstrably avoid work are unable to continue to game it.

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

You are still convinved that this will affect people that are medically incapable of work without providing any evidence of this. You mention a white paper but that's barely consultation, let alone law. Yet, you still you cling on to this notion that the genuinely ill will be forced to work. Couple this with your nasty little asides trying to paint me as a nasty little Daily Mail reader who is advocating the return of Victorian workhouses and sending orphans up chimneys. You point back to some claimants going through a despute over their benefits with the DWP. Well, it's been going on years and neither the coalition's, IDS' or my fault. It is a despute which has no relevence to this article. Which sums up a lot really as to why you mentioned it.

Given the above i'd suggest you're a lot more prejeduiced than you think.

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

Don't you think that we have tried the softly softly approach and it hasn't worked ,even made things worse

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

Just heard on the news that it's all claimants that have been out of work for a year or more to do 30 days "voluntary" work for their benefits. so much for picking on only a certain few.

it's going to have to be a massive thing then.

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

:tu:

You big Pink Bedwetter :)

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

They had a system in place already. if you don't show that you're looking for a job and/or you get pulled up about it you get your benefits stopped for a certain time. repeat offences mean losing it for longer.

that wasn't good enough to weed out the genuine ones. they've got a bigger net to catch a significant load more instead.

which will probably make/save money for somebody somewhere. the unemployed get to work for their benefits and some of us will think it's ok that they don't get the legal minimum wage for manual labour in this country.

but because they might be seen as 'second class' anyway. we don't care.

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

Problem is though that system wasn't working ,this system will have the benefit of stopping people working on the black market and claiming benefit ,it will get people back into the routine of getting up and working ,and it will make people realise that the good old days of the state supporting you for life are over

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

:clap:

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

Working in what way? they weren't saving much money or people were actually not breaking the rules?

Yes, it covers everything. just like I said earlier. depending on who's asking you get a different answer.

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

I wonder where this'll end up going, wouldn't be the biggest shock if it led to privitising refuse collection, road sweeping and park keeping, whilst appealing to huge swathes of Daily Mail readers at the same time, just a thought...

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

Yeh, eventually the LAs will have an unemployed workforce doing the jobs that they once had to pay someone to do.

all in the name of depending who's asking.

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

Punky, Again I refer you to the link earlier - there are various instances - not to forget the anecdotal evidence in this thread from those at the "coal face" per se.

Again, see above. There are very clear examples of genuinely ill people who are not on benefits being forced to work through necessisty. Are you seriously, in your naivety, trying trying to say that ill people on benefits wont be forced to work when there are those not in receipt of benefits who are managing to work through necessity?

Catch a grip man.

It was never my intention to portray you in that light. If that's how you think I and others see you then go ahead, knock yourself out. If the hat fits then wear it.

You see that's part of your problem, you cannot differentiate between sick claimants and fraudsters. Even when presented with the facts you opt for your black and white "a despute over their benefits with the DWP".

It is, regrettably, not as simple as a dispute. It is a realignment and determination which adversely affects the sick and most vulnerable in society. Nobody is saying it's your fault but you'll find that it has every relevance to this article.

Allow me to explain it to you. The sick people referenced in the earlier link have been deemed fit for work by way of their Work Capability Assessments. Now, lets take by way of example the cancer sufferer. Has his or her cancer been cured or has it abated as a result of the WCA?

No, sadly it hasn't.

However, in order to receive any benefit he / she will have to claim Jobseekers Allowance as it is the only other living benefit available to him / her. Doing so will put him / her in the firing line for this "new" proposal from Duncan Smith.

Given the scenario I have outlined please explain to me, and the nation, how you and Duncan Smith - given the fact that these ill claimants have no alternative but to claim a jobsearch activity related benefit - would ensure that sick people will not be forced to work given that this very same process places those found capable of participation in the Work Related Activity Group element of the ESA are classed as fit for work or work ready.

Like yourself Duncan Smith hasn't thought this one out. He's had three years to think this nonsense up and this is all he can come up with - punatitive measures against the sick rather than addressing the fraud.

I await with baited breath your next attempt at avoidance of the facts by denial.

Yes. I'm prejudiced against prejudice - and I'm not afraid to say it.

I'm surprised you appear so affronted by the fact - sorry to have offended your obviously Victorian sensibilities.

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

Yeh, you can put it on your CV. "I attended this compulsory 30 day, 30 hour week thing to show that I am employable. I didn't do it because I would starve and not have any heat in my home otherwise. I could have not turned up if I so chose. but I stuck it out. so please Mr, give me a job mate?"

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

It really is quite dark and gloomy in your world - you seem to focus almost exclusively on the very negative aspects of any situation, rather than on "what is good, what is bad, and what could be improved upon".:(

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

What about if I do the reality, I mean negative things. and you do the positive?
I can do positive. he can enclose this in his CV. a reference from his charge hand.

We didn't have to sit outside his house in the minibus bibbing the horn until he got his lazy self out of bed. he was always there with his packed lunch eagerly waiting to be picked up to be taken to the park. where he would actually want to cut the grass and not kick a football around and chat up the local tarts smoking weed till knock off time.

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

Well, I've got my order in already :)

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

so how would you tackle workshy claimants ,or long term unemployed .Since both you and MR A have poo pooed the idea i would think you have a better solution ,or is it just a case of the government suggested so lets slag it off

Re: Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour
 

Sums it up, really.

I would rather think the best, and be occasionally disappointed, than expect the worst (and have the concomitant attitude and outlook) and be occasionally surprised by good things (and even then, having a negative outlook would probably poison the positive points).

Good luck in your world - I am glad I don't live in it. ;)