Quote:
Originally Posted by RizzyKing
I have suggested it in the past hand the assessment process over to the NHS in fact I've said it more then once over the last few years as the doctors that deal with people. Anyone claiming disability benefits longterm has at least one consultant who are far better placed to give an accurate assessment then someone who attends company courses some of which last a whole 12 weeks to become an assessor. Consultants these days do not keep people on their lists if they don't believe there is an issue and have the distance from patients to render an objective assessment.
Yes the DWP does have an agenda and that agenda is to lower the numbers claiming benefits regardless of whether those people are genuinely entitled to them or have conditions that more then eligible. The private company's conducting the assessments take their lead from the DWP and act accordingly this was shown by the documentary that was made when ATOS was the main one doing the assessments and the trainers told the class that the DWP expected a set failure rate.
I dont have an issue with the assessor's how could i they probably were out of work before getting their job and as someone who wishes i could work i understand taking anything rather then nothing but that doesn't excuse the DWP or the company's themselves. If you want proif look at the tribunals it's a ridiculously high level of judgements for the claimants and still the DWP doesn't improve the assessment. They would rather change the tribunal process and prevent their bad decisions being overturned and that's what they are doing now removing advocates and other resources the claimant had to help them.
|
Perhaps it is felt that consultants are not best placed to make objective assessment given that the decision comes with the inevitable baggage of disappointment in some cases? Perhaps the consultants just don't have time and that this is a burden they can do without? Perhaps consultants themselves don't want the responsibility?
The DWP evidently feel that its assessors are appropriately prepared to discern between genuine claimants and fakes and to be fair 3 months of intensive training backed up with a decision process doesn't seem unreasonable. Perhaps gaining on the job work experience after initial training is perceived as prejudicial but the 'protection' afforded by Tribunals seems to be covering that?
I don't know the reasoning behind the system but I know there has to be one. It is investigative by nature which seems to raise the heckles. Maybe when a full database has been created, qualification won't be so onerous. From what I've read here no genuine claimants have missed out and the system should safeguard the future for those who will continue to qualify and that's a positive isn't it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by RizzyKing
Out of curiousity are you in the system Kursk?.
|
No. But I know lots of mums and dads, sons and daughters who work hard in public service and get nothing but moan after moan about how rubbish they are. They're not on BBC wages you know yet they manage to deliver service we should appreciate, not berate.