Graduate takes DWP to court

[chesters1]

243 quid a week isnt much good when a single room will cost £600 a month if shes at home then minimum wage is fine if shes within walking distance

i just wonder how many graduates think theres jobs waiting for them out there nowadays

 

the government seem to be hung up on people not getting a job when theres just as many forbidden to get one in the immigration stakes but get benefits either send them home or face up to europe and tell the legal ones to go home then theres no excuse

Edited January 12, 2012 by chesters1

[Steve Walker]

The function of the scheme is supposed to be to enable youngsters with no work experience at all to get a reference. It's simply meant to show that they can get out of bed, get to work on time, do as they are told, get on with their colleagues, have a good attitude, etc. The placements are short and often relatively few hours a week. The scheme is optional, but once they have taken it up they have a limited cooling off period to back out before they are expected to complete the placement or lose their benefits. The scheme solves problems with informal work experience arrangements relating to loss of benefits and minimum wage legislation - basically, if a kid knocks on your office door and says "can I do a week's work experience with you, I will work for nothing, I just want a reference", you can't legally allow it. Around 50% of youngsters who take part in the scheme come off benefits at the end of it.

 

The rules of the scheme for employers wanting to take part are:

 

We want you to be innovative and offer placements that provide a real insight into a working environment. We won’t be prescriptive about the structure of placements or make you fill out unnecessary forms and paperwork. However, we’ll ask you to:

 

* provide work experience placements which are suitable for young unemployed people with little or no work experience

* comply with all relevant legislation

* guarantee that placements are in addition to existing or planned vacancies and that no-one has been dismissed or made redundant so the placement can be offered

* allow participants to carry out reasonable job search activity and attend interviews with prospective employers and fortnightly job search reviews at Jobcentre Plus

* share information on participants withJobcentre Plus

* provide participants with a reference at the end of the placement.

 

This girl - well, maybe mistakes were made in that she claims she had previous recent work experience of part time retail jobs while a student, so didn't really qualify for the scheme. She says that she wasn't made aware of the cooling off period when she could have backed out. Despite that, I don't have a lot of sympathy for her. So she had to do a bit of what she saw as menial work that was beneath her, working with common people, boo hoo, so what. If she had enough retail experience to get a retail job, why hadn't she got one to tide her over until she finds the permanent position she really wants?

 

People are looking at this and seeing it as slave labour for supermarkets - that's not the sort of attitude that is going to help them get a job.

[chesters1]

theres a far more draconian one for those unemployed for over 6 months (or was 10 years ago it may have changed) where a mandatory job is given to a "client" a tenner a week extra is paid to the "client" and his fares paid.the company gets £75 quid a week to hide this statistic from the unemployed figures as it was training the lucky slave was no longer unemployed until the scheme ended

40 hours a week ,no job at the end ,as you say it proves not a lot more than the forced labour can get out of bed and find his way to the place of work

 

i did a "training" course in 2001 and despite it being mandatory was the only one left on it by the end ,a silly american company trying to build up the "client" ,become socialised and solve theoretical problems and such twaddle ,it no doubt achieved little but as there were 3 "advisors" per 12 "clients" probably cost a fortune ,i did well as there was no public transport i received a petrol allowance based on miles and as i was on my honda made a nice bit of cash ,thank you

i forgot i still have the shredder i bought with the £25 token given to complete the course ,as you can see there's no restriction on cash to manipulate the statistics

part of the course was an hour a day prospective interview palava where you send your CV to prospective job providers ,a phone book was handed out to each "client" and you merely chose 6 names and addresses to fulfil the criteria ,in over 400 (lot of free stamps!) i got 2 replies i still have the letter from one loonatic religious group and occasionally display it on here

 

the best thing to get people working is jobs ,pointless spending millions on people training to do something that isnt available when theve finished ,the biggest stumbling block for those that want to get trained for a real job is the 16 hours a week criteria any longer than that and its no JSA ,i managed to get around it somehow and got a 2 year course squashed into one to get a C&G in electronics and them wangled the UNI to pay for the other year after they saw i was silly enough to want to work there!

not easy to get a course the Job center only offered 4 rather silly ones meant for school leavers but with a little research the rules can be made to work two ways but that will have changed i'm talking 1994 ish now

Edited January 12, 2012 by chesters1

[Andrew]

No need to be sorry about it mate, far from it. It shows the state of the country when someone can take HMG to court for something like that, no doubt her human rights were abused.

I too have no sympathy for the girl, she's one of thousands who do the self and same thing, if she wins her case, will that be the opening for the other unemployed people in the same boat as her to take legal action ??

[chesters1]

trouble is theres a huge gulf between parliament and ministries ,parliament discusses (or is supposed to) the governments law making and once it passes the ministries enforce what they think the government means .

half the laws are so weak ministries can make up and use rules that are supposed to be laws but are in fact nothing of the sort ,if they get clobbered in the high court then they've been operating above the law .

i thought the high court was the last step after you went through all the venues in the UK system? and i think today there's a higher one ,the government for years has been snipping away at legal aid so only the rich can get to court (we cant have riff raff making things hard for us ruling classes) ,it doesn't always get its own way

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13371880

 

under the terrorism laws you can be stitched up very easily and never know why thats the trouble with corrupt governments they have things to hide and rights to take away and the power to do it ,or so they hope

Edited January 12, 2012 by chesters1

[Andrew]

trouble is theres a huge gulf between parliament and ministries ,parliament discusses (or is supposed to) the governments law making and once it passes the ministries enforce what they think the government means .

half the laws are so weak ministries can make up and use rules that are supposed to be laws but are in fact nothing of the sort ,if they get clobbered in the high court then they've been operating above the law .

i thought the high court was the last step after you went through all the venues in the UK system? and i think today there's a higher one ,the government for years has been snipping away at legal aid so only the rich can get to court (we cant have riff raff making things hard for us ruling classes) ,it doesn't always get its own way

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13371880

 

under the terrorism laws you can be stitched up very easily and never know why thats the trouble with corrupt governments they have things to hide and rights to take away and the power to do it ,or so they hope

 

 

Yes and a theiving MP got legal aid, a 60k + per year plus perks ? Strange.

[ColinW]

243 quid a week isnt much good when a single room will cost £600 a month

 

That's why I said it would be a different matter for someone with a family to support. It doesn't cost £600 a month for a single room round here, that would get you a nice three or four bed semi! When I was her age I shared a house with three other like minded yobs. Best time of my life!

 

Most students have no idea about the real world. I work at a university and until recently we had a Forensic Science degree course. This was popular (more students doing that than doing electrical engineering!) because it looks great on CSI and NCIS. The trouble is that there are probably only half a dozen real forensic scientists in the whole country! I bet nobody who graduated from that course ever got the job they wanted. That's not the university's fault. They are a business these days and sell whatever courses put bums on seats. The government couldn't care less. It keeps kids off the dole and it costs them very little now there are no grants to pay.

[chesters1]

we were shocked at the prices around here ,oop norf you could buy a street of houses for that council tax on top ofcourse ,a bit cheaper in aldershot though but probably the mountain dwellers snapped them up

this bit is amusing in my link

 

"She had stood by the Cenotaph memorial to Britain's war dead in Whitehall, near Downing Street, and recited the names of 97 Britons killed in the Iraq war."

 

Ms Evans was convicted of breaching the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005.

Edited January 12, 2012 by chesters1

[Andrew]

we were shocked at the prices around here ,oop norf you could buy a street of houses for that council tax on top ofcourse ,a bit cheaper in aldershot though but probably the mountain dwellers snapped them up

this bit is amusing in my link

 

"She had stood by the Cenotaph memorial to Britain's war dead in Whitehall, near Downing Street, and recited the names of 97 Britons killed in the Iraq war."

 

Ms Evans was convicted of breaching the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005.

 

 

Who is she Chesters ?? and what was the crime, fiddling the government out of benefits ?

[chesters1]

probably none of that ,some of that or all of that .

her crime seems to be reading out loud ,dammed lefties

 

 

a vegan bloody cook what the hecks left you can cook!

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4507446.stm

 

OH its combined with ringing a bell as well ,bloody terrorists!

 

good job we have the law and our police she looks pretty desperate ,was their a bomb in those nut cutlets

Edited January 12, 2012 by chesters1