This is a guest post written by @pseudodeviant who blogs at pseudo-living.blogspot.com
So that’s it.
Tonight Lord Best forwarded an amendment to the WRB, asking that the government did detailed research on the impacts of the bill so that if it does - as many fear - cause more harm than good it can be dealt with quickly.
Lot’s of Lords spoke in support but eventually Lord Freud convinced the Peer that his amendment was not necessary and Lord Best withdrew. Now there will be no more ping-pong between the Lords and the Commons. The bill will become law. It just has to get Royal Assent, and that is a given.
It’s so sad to think that all the amendments put forward to help those who are vulnerable have systematically been denied by a blinkered government waving ‘finacial priviliage’ at any hint of Lords opposition.
Is this the end? No.
The big fight is just beginning.
Lawyers and Human Rights specialists are gearing up to fight it as are we. Remember the Poll Tax made law but was eventually defeated. We can work towards more protests and direct actions in the coming year.
The PIP consultation is currently ongoing so we have a chance to mitigate some of the damage it might cause. Go to wearespartacus.org.uk and you will find easy read documents, help and a sheet you just have to fill in to send off to the DWP so your voice is heard. There is even a forum you can join to get help and meet others like you. I’m making the most of it 😉
In a year and a bit we’ll have another general election and we can show the government exactly what we think of them. We’ll also have had our chance to get our stories out nationally by then.
It’s important we try to make this a major area for Labour and other parties to focus on so they don’t forget the WRB should they come back into power. We can keep up the pressure there.
And those are just the first things off the top of my head.
Let’s no get too disheartened about this, there is still plenty more we can do.
The government today caved in to bad publicity and agreed to remove the possibility of sanctions from those who refuse to take part in the work experience scheme. Those guilty of gross misconduct may still be sanctioned with removal of benefits.
However, a DWP spokesperson confirmed to me this afternoon that it is only the work experience scheme which is affected by this change. Those on the work programme, which is run by third party providers such as the disgraced A4e, may still face sanctions if they do not cooperate with the programme. As detailed in the previous article on this site, it is mandatory to attend the work programme after a set amount of time receiving Job Seekers Allowance or Employment Support Allowance. The DWP spokesperson pointed out that the work programme provides much more than just work experience placements and referral to the programme does not necessarily mean undertaking work experience.
In addition to the work programme there are several other schemes involving compulsory work including the community action programme and mandatory work activity. There is also the possibility that those who refuse work experience may be picked for mandatory work activity, and then sanctioned if they refuse to take part in that.
I discussed with the DWP the issue of those who are receiving ESA and placed in the work related activity group being referred to the work programme and possibly for work experience. This is problematic since at the current time many people overturn the decision to place them in the WRAG on appeal and appeals can take a year in many cases so that people who are not fit for the work programme, never mind fit for work might be sent for work experience. The spokesperson did point out that people can present evidence and ask for a reconsideration before going for an appeal, although since at least 40% of those who appeal their decision go on to overturn it I do not think this is enough to ensure that everyone on the work programme is physically and mentally up to the task.
As it stands then, the removal of sanctions from the work experience scheme is a minor victory but the danger is that it will convince the public that all is well once more and the anger over people being made to work without pay may cool. Jobseekers and sick people can still be referred to the work programme where companies such as A4e can send people to do unpaid work experience or face loss of benefits. In the case of those who recieve ESA there is no limit to the length of time they may be made to work without pay. Bizarrely, now that sanctions for refusing work experience have been removed, it may be the case that only people over 24 and those who are officially too sick to work can be forced to work unpaid.
The government are relying on technicalities to claim that unpaid work experience is voluntary. In fact they claim that they are entirely voluntary which is blatantly not true. There are multiple schemes which involve unpaid work. Some of them are:
The Work Experience Scheme
The Work Programme
Mandatory Work Activity
Community Action Programme
Sector-Based Work Academies
Government ministers have been trying to direct attention to the first of these, the work experience scheme, which is almost voluntary. Technically a job seeker has the option to attend work experience or not. The acknowledged element of compulsion is that once someone has been in a work experience placement for a week they can be sanctioned if they leave it. In practice, job seekers may be sanctioned if they refuse to start a placement too. The wording of the standard letter on being sent to do work experience is very strong and does not give the impression that the placement is optional, and people on the scheme have frequently reported that their advisers led them to believe that they had no choice.
The second scheme on the list, the work programme, leads do compulsory unpaid work in two steps. First, referral to the work programme - where a contracted provider administers training, skills development and work experience for the job seeker - is mandatory after a defined time period. Job seekers aged 18 – 24 will be referred after 9 months, aged 25+ after 12 months, and ESA claimants in the work related activity group within 3 – 6 months. Secondly, once on the work programme it is mandatory to take up a work experience placement when ordered to by the company running the programme.
The third scheme, mandatory work activity, speaks for itself. It is up to the Job Centre adviser to choose whether or when to send someone for mandatory work. It is supposed to be used when job seekers have behaved badly or refused to comply with direction from the Job Centre, and to provide discipline for those who have never worked. In practice it can be used vindictively by the adviser with no recourse for the job seeker. Unpaid work under this scheme is supposed to only be work that directly benefits the community but again in practice things are different and the work can be something that does not benefit the community directly, but instead brings profit to an employer who does some community work as well.
Government ministers and the DWP have tried to portray these schemes as being for young people aged 18 to 24 however that is not the case. People of all ages have been sent to do unpaid and unskilled work including those with decades of experience or multiple qualifications in their subject.
Here is an image showing the standard letter sent to job seekers on being sent to do work experience:
The letter states:
Please note that if, without a good reason, you fail to start, fail to go when expected or stop going to the provision mentioned above (as in Section 19(5)(b) of the Jobseekers Act 1995), any future payments of Jobseeker’s Allowance could cease to be payable or could be payable at a lower rate. You could also lose entitlement to credit of National Insurance contributions. (Emphasis mine)
DWP memo DMG 08/11 JSA and work experience includes proof that people can be sanctioned for refusing to undertake unpaid work. Here’s a screenshot in case that document disapears:
WORK EXPERIENCE AND SANCTIONS
6 From 5.4.11 JSA may not be payable or it may be payable at a reduced rate to
claimants who are entitled to JSA
and have
3. after being notified by an Emp O of a place on a Work Experience, without good cause (see DMG 34751 - 34752)
3.1 refused or failed to apply for it or
3.2 refused to accept it when offered
or
4. neglected to avail themselves of a reasonable opportunity of a place on a Work Experience (see DMG 34757 - 34758)
14. Where you are providing support for JSA participants, which is work experience you must mandate participants to this activity. This is to avoid the National Minimum Wage Regulations, which will apply if JSA participants are not mandated.
I also have letters sent to Aldston about the Community Action Programme which use similar terms to those used for the work experience scheme. See more at Aldston’s blog.
Apart from all that proof that unpaid work is mandatory, we also have strong indications that work experience placements are not helpful.
The DWP themselves comissioned a review of Workfare schemes in other countries, and you can read that for yourself - A comparative review of workfare programmes in the United States, Canada and Australia
Their report concluded that Workfare schemes may actually make someone less likely to find work:
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.
Full Fact have discovered that rates for leaving Job Seekers Allowance are the same whether work experience is taken or not.
There is evidence that job seekers are being used purely as free unskilled labour rather than given beneficial experience:
The standard letter sent out by the Job Centre to people who have been told to attend work experience gives an extremely strong impression that there is no choice and that the claimant will lose benefits if they do not attend. The letter says:
Please note that if, without a good reason, you fail to start, fail to go when expected or stop going to the provision mentioned above (as in Section 19(5)(b) of the Jobseekers Act 1995), any future payments of Jobseeker’s Allowance could cease to be payable or could be payable at a lower rate. You could also lose entitlement to credit of National Insurance contributions. (Emphasis mine)
Although Chris Grayling and other ministers insist that the work experience scheme is voluntary, and that the claimant can withdraw in the first week, and point out that the above letter is sent to people after they have “volunteered” for the placement, the letter clearly states “If…you fail to start” which leaves no room for doubt that the placement is mandatory. Job seekers are also commonly led to believe in person by Job Centre advisors that the work experience is not optional. Channel 4 News interviewed several people who confirmed that they had been led to believe that they had no choice in taking work placements.
Cathy Newman of Channel 4 News confronted Chris Grayling with the evidence:
Grayling makes astonishing claims in the face of evidence. First he responds with misdirection and denial:
“It could be related to a scheme which has a training module attached.”
“Let’s be absolutely clear, the scheme is voluntary.”
“Cathy, I’m afraid that’s simply not true”
Worse, he tries to get very manipulative about this:
“I’m sure you’re not telling me that I’m not telling you the truth. I’m looking you in the eyes through the camera and saying to you this is a voluntary scheme.”
Except she IS telling him that. At the start of the interview Cathy Newman said:
“Either the letter is misleading or you’re misleading.”
Finally Grayling goes for claiming he hasn’t seen the evidence:
“Look, I haven’t seen the letter that you’ve got.”
However, as Cathy Newman tweeted after the interview, it was sent to him earlier in the day.
What it boils down to is this. The scheme might technically be voluntary. However, if Job Centre advisers tell people that they have no choice, and if official letters state very clearly that you can lose benefit if you do not start the placement, and if job seekers are not told that they can opt out in the first week without penalty, if everyone across the UK is under the impression that the scheme is mandatory, then the scheme might as well be mandatory.
I have been using this pill tray for a few weeks courtesy of Eleanor Independent Living Aids. The concept is simple but incredibly useful - it combines a pill tray and alarm clock in one.
The Super 8 is a blue rectangular box made of two halves folded together in a clamshell format a bit like an older folding mobile phone. From the outside there isn’t much to see apart from a battery compartment on one edge and a red LED light on the front. The Tabtime is easy to open: the right edge has tabs with cutaway parts to allow easy opening with less-than functional fingers and the magnet which holds secures the Tabtime has just enough force to keep it shut but opens easily with minimal pressure.
The Tabtime opens to reveal a pill tray on the right with eight compartments and a large clock on the left. The pill compartments are again easy to open, with a tab protruding from the edge of the lid which can be lifted easily. For the most part the lids are secure, although I did find some becoming loose when opening the opposite compartment. This isn’t a problem when the device is closed as the compartments are kept shut by the folding of the two halves. I found the compartments are about the same size as my seven-day pill tray with enough room to hold quite a few tablets, or four of my huge Metformin tablets.
Turning to the clock then, it has a nice large display which shows the the current time, and it has several buttons for setting the timers and a volume switch with options for Hi and Lo. Personally I have the volume always set to high as I have found that the low setting is not audible from the next room, or when the Tabtime is kept in a bag while outside. The high volume setting is loud enough most of the time but could do with being a little bit louder.
The Tabtime very usefully has a timer for every pill tray, eight in all. Used in this manner it is possible to have an alarm go off at the same time every day for each set of pills. On opening the Tabtime up after an alarm has sounded the screen shows a number along the top edge to indicate which alarm sounded and which compartment to take pills from.
If like me you don’t always take pills at specific times, painkillers, for example, there is also a countdown timer which I keep set to four hours. After taking my painkillers I can bring up the countdown timer on the screen - an action which unfortunately requires nine presses of the Mode button to cycle through the eight alarms - and press the Minute button to start the countdown to my next dose. Used in this way it does not give the benefit of indicating which pills to take, but that isn’t a problem if working through the compartments in numerical order. The red light on the front of the Tabtime is very useful since it starts to flash when an alarm sounds and it will keep flashing until the Tabtime is opened, even if the alarm sound stops. That makes it easy for me to know when I can take painkillers by looking for the red light even if I miss the alarm.
Of course eight compartments isn’t enough to replace my seven day pill tray. I tend to use my larger tray as usual, but keep painkillers in the Tabtime where I can make use of the alarm. When I go out I can fit my painkillers and all the other pills that I need for a day in the Tabtime and keep it in my bag.
The Tabtime isn’t perfect. It could do with a louder alarm, and perhaps an extra button to access the countdown timer in a less tedious way but it is very useful as a reminder while at home and for carrying pills when I am out. It serves its purpose very well and if you have to take a lot of pills then I can thoroughly recommend that you get one.
The government have been consistently claiming that the Work Experience Scheme and the Work Programme are entirely voluntary, and that only Mandatory Work Activity is compulsory. They were lying, and now we have proof.
I previously pointed out that a DWP document proves that referral to the Work Programme is mandatory in many cases. This image taken from page 7 of the DWP Work Programme Statistical Release states that job seekers aged 18 - 24 will be referred after 9 months, aged 25+ after 12 months, and ESA claimants within 3 - 6 months.
Referral to the Work Programme does not automatically mean being sent to work in an unpaid work placement, but it does give full power over your future to the contracted Work Programme provider company. Thanks to the investigative work of Johnny Void we now have proof from a DWP guide for Work Programme providers that when a provider sends a job seeker to a work placement it is compulsory. Here is an image from the relevant page of the guide.
Paragraph 14 states:
Work Experience for JSA Claimants
14. Where you are providing support for JSA participants, which is work experience you must mandate participants to this activity. This is to avoid the National Minimum Wage Regulations, which will apply if JSA participants are not mandated.
However, if you try to read the original document from the DWP website at this point that isn’t what you see. Instead you will see this page:
The documents has been modified. The original paragraph 14 is gone and paragraph 15 has been relabelled as 14. Also note that the European Social Fund logo has been removed. Despite the changes, the version number of the document, shown at the bottom right corner, is V2.00 in both cases. Credit again goes to Johnny Void for spotting that the document had changed and finding the original document lurking in the Google cache.
You can check the Google cache for the original document at least until it updates to reflect the new one, and you can check the revised version from the DWP website. I have saved copies of both the original and the revised documents here. (My copy of the original was saved as a PDF from the Google cache.)
Éoin Clarke has also discovered that the DWP have removed the latest version of the Work Programme prospectus from their web site, although the 2010 version is still available. The prospectus has a similar table to that at the top of this article. I have saved a copy of that document here too.
Not only do we have proof that Chris Grayling, Iain Duncan Smith, David Cameron and the DWP were all lying, we also have proof that the DWP silently modified their documents to remove the evidence.
We are at war with Eastasia. We have always been at war with Eastasia.
Yes, I’m afraid this is yet another blog post on Workfare and Chris Grayling. Sorry. I just couldn’t let this one go. Employment minister Chris Grayling spoke to Radio 4’s Today programme this morning at length and lied his way through the whole eleven minutes. You can have a listen in this Audioboo:
I started to transcribe the parts that were blatant lies, but I gave up because it was going to be so long. Instead I will highlight a couple of points. Grayling repeatedly asserted that the Work Experience Scheme is entirely voluntary. On paper, it is. In practice once a Job Centre adviser has suggested that someone should go for work experience, if they refuse then they are likely to be sanctioned (lose benefits) for being uncooperative or referred for Mandatory Work Activity which is definitely not voluntary. In addition, a person will lose benefits for at least four weeks if they drop out of a work experience placement after the first week, so it is definitely not voluntary after week one.
Grayling mentioned Mandatory Work Activity. He said it would only be used “when a job centre plus adviser feels that somebody has gone off the rails or they’re not trying or they’re really kind of out of sorts.” The DWP say that it would only be used for people who need to learn the discipline necessary to hold down a job because they have never worked, however we know that MWA can often be used as a punishment for disagreeing with an adviser or simply because an adviser doesn’t like someone. There is an article in The Guardian detailing the case of a graduate who has previously worked (for pay) in McDonalds and Morrisons and yet was sent for MWA. According to James Ball of The Guardian, in November 8,100 people were sent for mandatory work activity, which is 1,500 more than those sent for work experience.
He said that MWA is only used for “community benefiting projects” which is not true. MWA can be for a for-profit company as long as that company undertakes some community work.
He said that the only scheme which involves mandatory work is the Mandatory Work Activity scheme. This is not true. People can be forced to take part in The Work Scheme, as you can see for yourself in this DWP statistics release. [PDF] The image below shows page 7 from this document with the word “Mandatory” clearly used over and over again. This is regarding referal to The Work Programme, however once on the programme the private company providing the services such as the disgraced A4e can and do send people for unpaid work.
“They’re coming under pressure from a big internet campaign that is being run by an organisation that is a front for the Socialist Workers Party.”
“It’s a false campaign […] My own email address was hacked by this organisation and used to lodge a complaint with Tesco so I don’t accept that the scale of the campaign is very large, it’s a small number of activists who are deliberately targeting these companies and trying to destabilise them.”
I have no doubt that there are some members of the Socialist Worker Party who object to Workfare schemes, but his assertion that objections are being run by an organisation that is a front for the SWP is just ridiculous. For a start, campaigns aren’t being run by any one organisation. There are multiple groups and all sorts of people objecting and campaigning. Boycott Workfare and Right to work are just two of those groups.
Grayling’s claim of hacking stems from his complete failure to understand IT and his labelling what he doesn’t understand as hacking. According to the Today Programme some time after Grayling’s interview:
Mr Grayling clarified his statement, saying that his email was not hacked but that his email address was used on a complaint lodged with Tesco.
Information seen later suggests that Grayling was in fact copied in to an email sent to Tesco by putting his email address in the CC field. If that is true and Grayling can’t tell the difference between being copied in to an email and computer hacking then I suggest that he has some serious defficiencies in his knowledge and needs to go on some remedial courses before he continues in his role in government.
Grayling stated that 50% of the people who start the work experience scheme are off benefits within eleven weeks. This is the only statistic that he was able to quote about results of any of these schemes, and it does not shed any light on how many of those people find work rather than simply stop claiming benefits and rely on parents or partners for room and board or end up homeless. He says “We know that a large number of those young people are actually staying on in employment with the employers who give them the placement” however he is unable to quote any proper reference for that claim and it appears to be purely anecdotal. Certainly Tesco have publicly said that of the 1,400 people that have been on the work experience scheme with them, only 300 have been taken on permanently.
“All of the evidence that we can see is that this does better than simply leaving people on JSA.”
The evidence that I have seen suggests that people do equally well on JSA or on the Work Experience Scheme.
Grayling claimed once again that no companies have pulled out of the work experience scheme. Some companies have demanded guarantees that no one would lose benefits over refusing or dropping out of the scheme, but quite a lot have pulled out entirely.
The presenter touched on an important point when he said that Cait Reilly “was under the impression that she was being forced to do it.” The phrase normally used by the Job Centre is “Your benefits may be affected if you do not attend” or something very similar. This phrase is used for all sorts of things, not just work placements. It is used for the work capability assessment for ESA, which is certainly not seen as optional by most people! It was used when I claimed incapacity benefit in 2005 and was instructed to attend the Job Centre to talk to a disability advisor about possible work. It didn’t seem optional to me. Basically, on paper many of these schemes may be optional but in practice if people don’t do as they are told by the DWP they lose benefits. If the Work Experience Scheme is optional then Chris Grayling needs to inform the Job Centre of that fact.
I heard yesterday that Chris Grayling had said that people protesting against work placement schemes were “anti-capitalist extremists.” I know I was offended by that, so I hunted it down on BBC iPlayer to see what he actually said. I’ve transcribed most of it here. Skip past the quote if you just want to read the worst parts and my response.
Employment minister Chris Grayling:
This is actually a protection for employers. If you’re a small business, somebody comes to do work experience, you buy them a uniform, you arrange mentoring support for them in the organisation, and then a couple of weeks later they don’t bother to turn up, erm, we’ve got to be very careful before we say there are no circumstances in which anybody will face any consequences for messing around on the scheme. But let’s be clear, it’s a voluntary scheme, you choose which sector you get work experience, you have time when you start with a work experience placement to change your mind and leave with no consequences. So, you know, this is not about manacling young people, dragging them into tesco, doing forced labour, it’s a positive scheme which is oversubscribed. […]
Let’s have a sensible discussion, not in the face of, I mean what we’re getting at the moment, let’s be clear about this, what we’ve seen in the last few days, is a campaign that’s been run on the internet, by a small group of extremists, who are not the customers of any of these organisations, who are trying to completely misrepresent what is happening, and fortunately now I think we’ve got a bank of support that’s included today the independent newspaper which is not noted as a friend for the government […] right through to the other end of things, you know, columnists in the mail, Richard Littlejohn, you know, not naturally bedfellows with the Independent newspaper, but they’re all saying this is a good scheme. We’ve got to stand by it, we’ve got to protect it, providing short-term work experience placements for young people that is working and helping them get into jobs that is a good thing and I’m having none of this small group of anti-capitalist extremists who are driving an…[Presenter: But Tesco are not anti-capitalist extremists, they’ve heard the protests and they think they’ve got a point, Argos, apparently they’re meeting you next week, they think protesters have got a point. There’s nothing wrong with changing your mind when you’ve got it wrong.]
Well, I’m not changing my mind in a hurry in the face of instant headlines. I’m quite happy to discuss things but I’m not responding on the hoof to this campaign, it’s a disgraceful campaign against big companies that are doing the right thing.
Image by @DocHackenbush
Let me highlight just a few things that Grayling said here.
“you buy them a uniform, you arrange mentoring support for them in the organisation, and then a couple of weeks later they don’t bother to turn up, erm, we’ve got to be very careful before we say there are no circumstances in which anybody will face any consequences for messing around on the scheme.”
I can see that you don’t want people dropping out and costing employers, I don’t agree with punishment for that, but point taken.
“you have time when you start with a work experience placement to change your mind and leave with no consequences.”
Hang on… doesn’t that happen after the employer has bought a uniform and arranged mentoring? And I think that’s an admission that after that initial time, dropping out leads to an extremely harsh punishment of losing all income for at least four weeks.
“But let’s be clear, it’s a voluntary scheme, you choose which sector you get work experience”
No, mostly people get put into particular sectors by the Job Centre advisor either because of previous work history, or because that’s all they deem the jobseeker fit for.
“what we’ve seen in the last few days, is a campaign that’s been run on the internet,”
Most campaigns are run on the internet now, what’s your point? For some of us it’s the only way.
“by a small group of extremists,”
WHAT?
“who are not the customers of any of these organisations,”
Bullshit. Everyone buys food somewhere. Plenty of the people complaining shop at Tesco, although possibly not any more.
“who are trying to completely misrepresent what is happening”
This government minister is lying his head off, and WE are the one’s who are misrepresenting it?!
I think we’ve got a bank of support […] you know, columnists in the mail, Richard Littlejohn
Littlejohn is not exactly known for his tact, judgement or taste and in my experience it is best to take completely the opposite line to that taken by him.
“I’m having none of this small group of anti-capitalist extremists”
Grayling has NO evidence for his claim, and in fact labelling someone an extremist is so outrageous that I can’t even imagine how he got to that conclusion. Extremist is a word used about suicide bombers, people that flip out and shoot everyone they know, people that blow up aircraft. For someone in government to label someone an extremist just because they have a different view is ridiculous and must be curbed before any more dangerous comparisons are made.
“it’s a disgraceful campaign”
Did you get that? Telling the government that they are wrong is now “disgraceful.”
Chris Grayling, YOU are disgraceful. Your spin, your belittling language, your dismissal of objections even as you face making changes to keep your providers on board, your lies about how voluntary the scheme is, those are disgraceful.
You have probably noticed that this web site has had a makeover. I have been meaning to do it for more than a year but M.E. and depression have left me little productive time that hasn’t been taken up with other things. I did like the old theme that I was using, Piano Black, but it wasn’t without problems. For one thing, the main body was not wide enough which meant that most images had to be resized to fit and there wasn’t room for much text on each line. The patterned background, while pretty, was quite difficult for some people to read. A bit of an accessibility fail.
The old design
This new design rectifies those problems and a few others. The new colour scheme feels more like “me” since I have been tweaking it to how I like it. Inspiration was taken from my favourite computer game, Day Of The Tentacle. The background to the text here is smooth but if you still find it hard to read then you should look in the sidebar where there are buttons which allow you to turn on high-contrast text and to change the text size. I have a fantastic new title banner which was created for me by my sister @apricotmuffins. She has more examples of her work on her website at www.mariabovor.co.uk and I’m sure she wouldn’t mind a few paying commissions 🙂
The new design no longer shows the full text of my blog posts on the front page. Instead I have space for two featured articles at the top of the page, and then headlines with a small snippet of text further down. If you would prefer to read all the articles on one page then just click on “All articles” on the menu right at the top of the page and you will see them in traditional blog format. You can also go to various categories like politics, illness etc from the menu just under the title banner.
For those who are technically minded: I’ve built this site on self-hosted WordPress using the Genesis framework. I’ve started with the Prose theme for full control-panel access to tweak fonts and colours but I’ve added my own custom home page with extra widget areas to cope with my bio and the featured articles.
I hope you like it. If you have any feedback please don’t hesitate to leave me a comment below or send me an email. And while you’re here, I’d like to take the opportunity to remind you that I have a Facebook page, a Google+ page, a Youtube channel and I’m on twitter. I’d love it if you went and liked/circled/subscribed/followed. If you have a Kindle then you can have my blog sent to it automatically for 99p per month. I’ve never seen any money from it, but if enough of you subscribe then I might!
The government’s various work experience and work placement schemes have come under a lot of fire in the press and the news in the last few days and government ministers have been getting defensive about it in newspapers sympathetic to their cause. Unfortunately their response is to insult those who oppose their plans and mislead the public about what the objections actually are. Quoted in the Telegraph Iain Duncan Smith was quoted extensively in the Telegraph:
Mr Duncan Smith said he was “enormously proud” of the scheme and said its critics, who have branded it ‘slavery’, were indulging in “lies”.
“Over the past few days, the battle lines have been clearly drawn on the issue of youth unemployment. In one corner, we find those prepared to do everything they can to give a chance to young people who are looking for a job and help them gain experience of the workplace.”
“In the other, armed with an unjustified sense of superiority and sporting an intellectual sneer, we find a commentating elite which seems determined to belittle and downgrade any opportunity for young people that doesn’t fit their pre-conceived notion of a ‘worthwhile job’,” the former Tory leader wrote in the Daily Mail.
“Sadly, so much of this criticism, I fear, is intellectual snobbery. The implicit message behind these ill-considered attacks is that jobs in retail, such as those with supermarkets or on the High Street, are not real jobs that worthwhile people do.
“How insulting and demeaning of the many thousands of people who already work in such jobs up and down the country!
Of course, this isn’t what people have been saying at all. The overwhelming objections to these placements are:
People are forced to work for these companies or face losing their benefits for several weeks or months.
People are not paid and receive only the standard rate of unemployment or sickness benefits. (JSA or ESA)
The employers are getting free labour, subsidised by the government. (They get paid a fee too.)
Paid employees are facing reduced hours and reduced job security in the face of free labour.
People are being sent on placements inappropriate for the job they are likely to get because of their qualifications and experience.
No one claimed that a job in a supermarket stacking shelves or washing floors is beneath them, and yet this is the angle that Iain Duncan Smith chose to attack.
“I doubt I’m the only person who thinks supermarket shelf-stackers add more value to our society than many of those ‘job snobs’ who are busy pontificating about the Government’s employment policies. They should learn to value work and not sneer at it.”
I suggest that supermarket shelf-stackers are somewhat more useful and less dangerous than Iain Duncan Smith too.
Mr Duncan Smith added Tesco’s former chief executive Sir Terry Leahy “started life scrubbing floors at a Tesco store in his school holidays.”
But he got paid to do it!
Moving on, we find that Iain Duncan Smith has been allowed a whole column in the Daily Mail today to repeat his misdirected defence and his propaganda. Titled The delusions of X Factor and sneering job snobs who betray the young it even starts off with an insult, but it goes on:
In the other, armed with an unjustified sense of superiority and sporting an intellectual sneer, we find a commentating elite which seems determined to belittle and downgrade any opportunity for young people that doesn’t fit their pre-conceived notion of a ‘worthwhile job’
If you can’t win the argument, smear your opponents and call them “a commentating elite” and ignore their points in favour of answering a question that wasn’t asked.
It is up to young people to decide, voluntarily, whether they wish to take part in the scheme, and they can pull out of their placement during the first week without sanction.
This. Is. A. Lie.
Job seekers can face sanctions purely on the decision of the Job Centre advisor or private contractor hired to run these programmes. They MUST face sanctions under the rules if they pull out after the first week of the placement.
This is why the scheme has been so successful. The fact is that 13 weeks after starting their placements, around 50 per cent of those taking part have either taken up permanent posts or have stopped claiming benefits.
This statement is highly misleading. Only around a fifth of people who have worked for free on these placements has been given a job at the end of it. The rest have simply stopped claiming benefits, but have not necessarily found work. Many have simply become dependant on their parents, whether their parents have the income to cope with that or not.
Let me be quite clear: this Government does not have a workfare programme. Workfare is an American term used to describe employment programmes which force all jobseekers to work at a certain point of their welfare claim — a practice which we do not consider to be effective.
This is true, but also misleading. No programme in the UK is called “Workfare” however that is the name which all government work experience and placement schemes are collectively referred to as by opponents, and indeed, quite a lot of supporters too. In fact, the DWP report in 2008ahead of schemes launched by the government was titled “A comparative review of workfare programmes in the United States, Canada and Australia” and it also concluded that Workfare-like schemes were not only ineffective but actually reduced the chances of finding a job.
Here, in Britain, it is true that we have a programme which can require claimants to undertake a short period of compulsory work if we do not believe they are engaging properly in the pursuit of employment. But the programme is carefully targeted and — importantly — it is entirely separate from the voluntary Work Experience scheme which I described above.
This is again true but misleading. Compulsion is applied to a lot more than just The Work Programme - even to the work experience scheme after the first week, and before that if the Job Centre advisor so chooses.
However, it is clear that retailers and employers are with the public on this, or at least afraid of the fallout from the public view. Several flagship participants in the scheme have dropped out in recent days. Waterstones, Sainsbury’s, TK Maxx, Superdrug - and several others are questioning the government over their forcing people to work for them. Tesco has issued a press release today announcing that young people sent for work experience in their stores will be offered pay throughout their placement and a job at the end of it if they prove effective workers - effectively a job with a probation period.
Tesco press release 21/02/2012: offers choice on work experience
Tesco has today announced that from now on any young person accepted for work experience with Tesco will be offered a choice:
- - To participate in the Government scheme, which protects their benefits for the duration of the four-week placement. Tesco has suggested to the Department of Work and Pensions that, to avoid any misunderstanding about the voluntary nature of the scheme, the risk of losing benefits that currently exists should be removed.
- - Alternatively, to be paid by Tesco for the four-week placement, with a guaranteed permanent job at the end of it, provided they complete the placement satisfactorily.
Richard Brasher, CEO of Tesco UK, said “We know it is difficult for young people to give up benefits for a short-term placement with no permanent job at the end of it. So this guarantee that a job will be available provided the placement is completed satisfactorily, should be a major confidence boost for young people wanting to enter work on a permanent basis.”
Tesco committed 3000 work placements under the Government’s work experience scheme. To date around 1500 have been delivered. We will offer the choice of paid work and the jobs guarantee to all of the remaining placements we will deliver under the scheme. 300 young people undertaking work experience with Tesco have already found work with us and we are confident that many more will through this approach.
Related Links
Iain Duncan Smith: it’s better to be a shelf stacker than a ‘job snob’ [Telegraph]
