Unpaid workschemes are illegal

Because all unemployed are being criticised and made to feel they are a burden on society and most of them are not they are people who through no fault of their own find themselves unemployed and are stuggling because the area they live in was the area that lost some industry. What made this wrong was the threat aspect of it, as if you ASKED most unemployed to do some community work a few hours a week it might shock some of you to learn they would do it. Hell i took a training position because it paid a tenner more a week it cost me fifteen to do it but most unemployed do want to work and are happy to spend time in work related activities if they cannot get a job.

Honestly the way some on here preach the only thing they make clear is how long it is since they had to look for work and jump through the hoops that you have to to get a job. I have only stopped looking for work in the last year and a half because i had to be honest with myself that i couldn't do even a part time job anymore. While i was on jsa i was part of a bunch we all signed on on the sameday and i still remember to this day the longface that hit them one by one as we did our rounds of the boards only to find when we picked a card or ten that all of them were gone and the same constant excuse "oh that card should have been taken down".

Some of you need to stop implying that all or even a sizable minority of unemployed people do not want to work because your wrong though i doubt any of you will ever concede that. Also the rhetoric around this debate needs to come back to a more adult and reasonable tone because why would a firm give a job to someone longterm unemployed when they constantly hear that anyone who is longterm unemployed is workshy.

[mertle]

whats the legal implication what hoban comments. Been on telly tonight on the 6 oclock news he going ignore the court ruling has no intentions stopping them.

Surely that illegal and contempt of court should be jailed. If business or individual ignored the courts carried on surly would be summoned and jailed.

[Osem]

Originally Posted by danielf

Speaking of 'obligations to society': it seems a little wasteful to me to have people with degrees stacking shelves and mopping floors. I think she's better placed and of more benefit to society doing volunteer work for a museum.

You've clearly never shopped at Poundland...

---------- Post added at 18:32 ---------- Previous post was at 18:28 ----------

Originally Posted by martyh

Exactly right ,trouble is that no matter how many times that is clarified some on here take it that all unemployed are being criticised

Well you see by doing that people can deflect the argument into one of blind prejudice against an entire group as opposed to that proportion (large or small) who deliberately and cynically abuse the system and ought to be dealt with because they make is so much harder for the genuine to claim the support they're rightly entitled to and rebuild their lives.

Originally Posted by mertle

whats the legal implication what hoban comments. Been on telly tonight on the 6 oclock news he going ignore the court ruling has no intentions stopping them.

Surely that illegal and contempt of court should be jailed. If business or individual ignored the courts carried on surly would be summoned and jailed.

who's hoban ?

[Ramrod]

Originally Posted by Arthurgray50@blu

To me its very cruel that the Unemployed are treated so badly, a large majority of the unemployed, have become so by fault of there own.

I don't think you meant that.

It should be the government that invest in this country to bring employment to the unemployed.

Shouldn't the unemployed be the ones who try to bring employment to themselves? I have always felt that finding a job is up to me, not the govt

---------- Post added at 18:47 ---------- Previous post was at 18:44 ----------

Originally Posted by RizzyKing

<snip>all unemployed are being criticised <snip>

I don't think that the general tone of this thread backs up your statement there. But there are plenty here who seem to be claiming just that......

Originally Posted by Ramrod

I don't think you meant that.Shouldn't the unemployed be the ones who try to bring employment to themselves? I have always felt that finding a job is up to me, not the govt

seems we are dying breed

When i was young the stigma of being unemployed and not bothering to look for work ,any work ,was terrible .It forced people to get out the house and physically walk around any potential employer and ask them for a job ,even do a days work for free to show you could do the job .Now people expect the government to do all that for them ,they expect that firing off a few cv's is all they have to do .

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by martyh

who's hoban ?

mark hoban mp

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Hoban

[Gary L]

Have you seen how arrogant the DWP are on the news?

how can it all be for the benefit of the unemployed, when it's quite clear that he's against them by what he says. and the stance in how he says it?

they all have this thing where they say "the taxpayer"
(the tax payer vs the unemployed)

they hate the unemployed. they're ****.
it's all coming out now

[mertle]

Originally Posted by martyh

who's hoban ?

Mark Hoban MP

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Hoban

Was responding about the court hearing. Whether he was speaking on his own belief or on behalf of the govenment I dont know.

Originally Posted by mertle

Mark Hoban MP

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Hoban

Was responding about the court hearing. Whether he was speaking on his own belief or on behalf of the govenment I dont know.

I think what he was saying was that the schemes will continue as they are not illegal ,that has already been decided in the ECHR.What is unlawful is the regulations the governement use underpinning the schemes ,so make the regs lawful to satisfy the courts and they will continue

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by martyh

Exactly right ,trouble is that no matter how many times that is clarified some on here take it that all unemployed are being criticised

It's because all the grenades you keep throwing in the jobcentres are not taking prisoners.

you pick a few out afterwards and say "not you, sorry"

[Gary L]

Looks like we'll be going down this route now

Forced or Compulsory Labour

.The ECHR in the case of Van der Mussele 8919/80 affirmed that the ILO conventions were the starting point for interpreting Article 4. The conventions, defined forced or compulsory labour as being 'all work or service which is exacted from any person under the menace of any penalty and for which the said person has not offered himself voluntarily'. To that end, the section 71 offence will require an element of coercion or deception between the defendant and the victim.

http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/s_to_u/s...ulsory_labour/

Originally Posted by Gary L

Looks like we'll be going down this route now



http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/s_to_u/s...ulsory_labour/

I think that was kicked into touch last year when the courts ruled that compulsory work schemes did not break any human rights rules

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by martyh

I think that was kicked into touch last year when the courts ruled that compulsory work schemes did not break any human rights rules

You know where I tell you that thing at a later date "I told you so"?

well

Originally Posted by Gary L

You know where I tell you that thing at a later date "I told you so"?

well

you'll be wrong Article 4 was dismissed last year

http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2012/a...wful-poundland