Subscribe now and choose from over 30 free gifts worth up to £49 - Plus get £25 to spend in our shop
I just heard an announcement on the news about the most ridiculously ill-considered proposal to force the long term unemployed to do a month's worth of community service which would include what they described as "menial tasks" – painting, decorating, building work, cutting grass. To be administered by local authorities.
Iain Duncan Smith's "bright idea" has more holes than a colander! He was useless as Conservative party leader, he is still useless!
The long term unemployed have serious issues which need a tangible solution, not a vote winning “punishment”, doing something which the powers to be clearly regard as degrading.
It sickens me that many in society think of building work as menial. There are many highly skilled difficult trades, but the supercilious chattering classes who denigrate such difficult jobs wouldn’t know a day’s graft if it whacked them in the face, let alone how hard it would be to face the prospect of an unrelenting lifetime of health damaging, undervalued, under paid graft!
Painting for example is not easy. Many people think if you can hold a brush, you can paint – nonsense! Most people can’t and this includes a lot of tradesmen. If it wasn’t for the deep seated social hierarchy issues in the UK, if workers were shown some respect for doing difficult low paid jobs, we wouldn’t have this situation.
We now have deadlock with this problem because we have allowed a load of European immigrants to come and take on these tasks. I bet these people are disgusted with our attitude to them, but they’ll suffer it because the paltry sums they earn here go a very long way back where they come from. Most aren’t here to stay and I don’t blame them!
If you think about the practicalities of getting the long term unemployed working, they will need training and close supervision which will cost a lot of taxpayers’ money. If council’s are administering these schemes, you can be sure that they won’t make much money from selling these services (if any). Who would want to pay for this service anyway? It’s little more than a political stunt which will anger and alienate those finding it impossible to get a job. After a month, or two, or three, they will be back where they started.
What is needed is professional counselling and career development. Each individual needs to know their strengths and weaknesses and help in rebuilding their confidence. To find out what they realistically might be able to do for a job which would suit them and they would find bearable. They need a tangible route map out of the benefit trap they are in, which would involve getting retrained and/or qualified with people to mentor them and help them find work. There are enough workers sitting in jobcentres to do this, but I doubt if they have the skills, or the character for such challenging work. Getting claimants to sign their name once a fortnight is far easier! Do they do anything else?
If there weren’t such huge disparities in what people earned, those at the bottom of the ladder would feel they were in with a fighting chance of digging themselves out of the mire to live an adequately comfortable life. Whereas now, they are just looked down on as scum and will be struggling interminably, job or no job. They feel it’s a waste of time trying to get work as they will gain nothing from it and stand no chance of getting ahead when comparing themselves to those who are vastly more fortunate and privileged.
I conclude that the country needs a much more horizontal hierarchy, both financially and socially, but successive governments and banks have done much to exacerbate this problem. We have "sleepwalked" into unsustainable debt, living way beyond our means and have lost the value in many things. I can’t see the status quo changing, can you?
I don’t trust any politician, whatever their political persuasion. Their arrogance and incompetence knows no bounds. In light of this, our democratic system is a FAIL!
Completely agree.
+1
Bloody hell; you feeling ok, Spongebob?? 😯
Elfinsafety - MemberBloody hell; you feeling ok, Spongebob??
Indeed.
As well as what you say of course they need jobs to do as well.
Bloody hell; you feeling ok, Spongebob??
Perfectly thanks Elfinsafety! You are perhaps now beginning to see i'm not the narrow minded **** you often think and suggest I am.
Every situation has two sides!
The range of opinion within a political party goes from moderate to fanatical and there is always internal disagreement and division. These people can't help themselves because they are "all ego"!
Every party has it's embarrassments, but then democracy is all about free speech isn't it? A political party is a continually evolving creature.
I therefore think that aligning one's self with a political party and it's ideals is possibly the most stupid thing one can do!
Life is a learning curve!
Painting [i]well [/i]may be a professional trade, but any foo can slap some paint on a wall to, say, cover up some graffiti. Given that it's the great unwashed that's defacing the place to start with, how is covering up their own mess not a good idea? Grass cutting, litter picking, tidying up the community, this is bad?
Maybe it's an environment thing. Perhaps in middle-class suburbia what's required is skilled work by the poor unfortunate people who are desperate to work and can't. Round here though, where urban decay is rife and a percentage of workshy scumbags simply don't want a job and are happy to spend their days watching Jeremy Kyle and reproducing, I'd hazard that that's not always the case.
Doesn't the concept basically mean they would rather the unemployed got money for doing [i]something[/i] than nothing? I'm not really sure that's a [i]bad[/i] idea?
it's a pointless headline grabber for the mail/express brigade. it will be expensive and complicated to run. it will achieve little actual public good. oh, and there's no jobs for all these hundreds of thousands of ****less individuals to get in the end anyway.
oh, and by the way, notice how no one ever puts a number on the amount of people who are allegedly getting benefits without ever trying to get a job? that's because no one has ever tried to find out how many there are. it's easier to just blame them all for not trying
oh, and also, it's funny how the rich need carrots to get them to work, while the poor need sticks...
David Cameron is going to make it harder to claim benefits.From tomorrow the forms will only be available in English
happy to spend their days watching Jeremy Kyle and reproducing, I'd hazard that that's not always the case.
Or appearing on Jeremy Kyle
There is a lot of work that could be done by ****less wasters ,clearing ponds(about right for pond life) path and scrub clearance ,painting walls ,litter picking the list is endless and could help ease the burden on those of us who pay tax.It should be done properly with training to enhance their ability to get proper employment though.
David Cameron is going to make it harder to claim benefits.From tomorrow the forms will only be available in English
Ah, that's more like it. I was starting to get a bit worried, with Spongebob's defection! 😀
oh, and also, it's funny how the rich need carrots to get them to work, while the poor need sticks...
And the rich also get carrots not to work i.e. extended garden leave and huge bonuses when they leave a large corporation in a worse state than before they arrived!
If you are bottom of the pile and do a bad job, you are out the door straight away and without a penny.
Conversely, if you are top of the pile you will be rewarded with millions of pounds in severance and be allowed to go and wreek havoc at huge expense to another business. And so the cycle of expensive damage perpetuates.
I used to work out in a gym where a couple of guys would do anything other than lose their benefits - one worked cash in hand the other just didn't work. I think the above scheme might have an impact on them - probably just pi55 them off really.
Given that it's the great unwashed that's defacing the place to start with, how is covering up their own mess not a good idea?
Banksy's quite a wealthy man now, actually...
[b][i]Oh come, all ye vengeful,
Blinkered and self-righteous,
Oh come, ye oh come ye
To vent all your bile.[/i][/b]
[b][i]Once in Royal Tunbridge Wells
Stood an outraged disgusted man.[/i][/b]
Surely the "long term unemployed" includes people who want work and can't get it. After all, we're always being told that the number of unemployed is going to rise under the new government. In that case, getting involved in something like this would help develop new skills and might make them more attractive to employers - [i]when jobs become available[/i].
David Cameron is going to make it harder to claim benefits.From tomorrow the forms will only be available in English
So why is this a bad thing? Should we allow parallel communities to develop or try to force integration on incomers? If you come to the UK should you not try and adapt to what exists rather than try and create a new version of where you have come from.
I know the UK is a mongrel country that has developed from immigration, but each wave has in time been incorporated into the whole and not left within a walled enclave. I would say that language is one of the tools to enable integration.
I think that's a joke, mrmo.
Given that it's the great unwashed that's defacing the place to start with, how is covering up their own mess not a good idea? Grass cutting, litter picking, tidying up the community, this is bad?
It is bad! It places benefit claimants in the same category as criminals who are serving community service orders. That's what's fundamentally wrong with the idea! It's in effect a punishment intended to show everyone who's boss, to make working people feel better about the high taxes they have to pay to support these people who are an unecessary burden on society. An uncomfortable humiliation for benefit claimants - a stick!
The government aren't giving benefit claimants genuine support to find a job and this is what i object to. This is what is wrong with Jobcentre Plus. They have thousands of jobs on their books, but are not a recruitment service!? Er, WHY NOT?? Why do they even exist???? If one of the numbskulls responsible for the nation's Jobcentres had thought about it, he/she would have seen an opportunity to earn a commission for each person who is placed in one of these jobs! But hey, that would be far too commercial wouldn't it? Far too right wing! They wouldn't want to mitigate their cost to the public purse now would they, or perhaps making money goes against their political ideals!?
What is needed is a tangible solution to end benefit culture. Spending money on doing this would be far better than this wasteful stunt.
And no Elfinsafety, your perception that I have defected is wrong. I am merely pointing out that i have the capacity to see the bigger picture and that i don't blindly follow political ideals to the detriment of common sense, fair play and the greater good of our country. I am big enough to admit nobody is perfect and sometimes i'm wrong. Maybe you should try the same sometime!
I do agree that those who simply refuse to do anything to help themselves need a rocket up their backsides, but only after they have been given a fighting chance!
The proliferation of a work shy, lazy, good-for-nothing underclass stereotype is very worrying. But i guess it makes it easier when pandering to voters. How about the government tries to solve the myriad underlying issues that cause high levels of unemployment amongst particular groups in particular areas.
Expect private sector companies to administer this workfare approach as seen in the US.
From the news nibbles of STW....
An army of unemployed people in south Wales is helping to keep mountain bikes on the move along the trails in Afan Forest Park. In a real community effort, jobless men and women are carrying out essential maintenance work on the Forestry Commission Wales bike trails which attract thousands of visitors and bring a much-needed economic boost to the area. It’s hoped their work will equip the team with new skills and help them in their search for a job. Annie Harding, Skills and Training Unit Manager, said, “This is an excellent opportunity for our learners to gain recognised land-based qualifications in a real working environment whilst making a huge contribution to the local community.”
So why is this a bad thing? Should we allow parallel communities to develop or try to force integration on incomers? If you come to the UK should you not try and adapt to what exists rather than try and create a new version of where you have come from
You listening Capello and Tevez?
Mrmo; it's not actually true, Edric is just trying to be inflamatory.
Under current UK Equal Opportunities legislation, each British citizen is entitled to have information provided by the Government or local authority, to be presented in a form which they can understand, be it another language such as Welsh, and in Braile and in audio form for the blind. In areas with large numbers of people who speak other languages, the local authority is responsible for providing such information as and when it is required. This service will be financed through Council Tax, which of course will be paid by many of those people who speak other languages...
Whilst of course people should be encouraged to learn English, they cannot be forced, and for some it may be far more difficult than for others. People living in communities which are heavily populated by those speaking other languages will make slower progress learning English.
I am big enough to admit nobody is perfect and sometimes i'm wrong. Maybe you should try the same sometime!
I would, but I'm never actually wrong, though. 😕
Except for one time, a good while ago, but I'd not been well. I did accept that I'd been wrong, and admit this. Was just the once. I won't let it happen again. 😳
Good to see you presenting a well thought out fair-minded point of view, Spongebob. Fair play to you.
" He who does not work neither shall he eat" Vladimir Ilyich Lenin 1917 and I believe he stole it from the bible.
Given that all the grass gets already gets cut and graffiti is already cleaned up etc etc etc, who is going to be losing their job to provide the workload for the dole dodgers?
You are.
Sounds a bit like slave labour to me.
Also, how are people meant to seek a job if they are being forced to work?
Mrmo; it's not actually true, Edric is just trying to be inflamatory.
Sorry, it was a joke I received by text yesterday!
Haven't read the post fully but I cant see what's wrong with making people do say 10 hours of labour within the community each week, in order to qualify for jobs seekers allowance
Its the "or else" that is the issue. This sort of idea could be useful if it has a carrot. £40 a week on top of your dole for working in community projects? Provides real jobs for tradesmen / foremen / supervisors as well and could do a lot of good.
it's a pointless headline grabber for the mail/express brigade.
It's actually a very clever ploy imo.
The Tories have to deal with the awkward little problem that unemployment is set to go up dramatically as direct result of their economic policies. What better solution than to blame the unemployed for that ?
As people see gangs of unemployed doing 'community service' (a punishment normally dished out to anti-social individuals) such as picking up litter etc, some people at least, will see the unemployed as lazy anti-social individuals who deserve to be treated with contempt.
It will shift the blame away from the government and onto the unemployed, despite the fact that unemployment levels go up and down according to the state of the economy, and have nothing whatsoever to do with changing levels of "laziness".
Many of course will not be taken in by this cynical ploy. But there are enough people who are incapable of thinking for themselves, like Edric 64, to make it worthwhile. And of course it has the added attraction of getting work done for barely subsistence wages well below the legal minimum.
It will shift the blame away from the government and onto the unemployed
Substitute unemployed for general population and you've understood the 'Big Society' concept.
Dave created the 'Big Society'. He's done that for 'us'. Beautifully it is 'us', it is society and not government, that will be the reason that it wasn't a success.
Given that all the grass gets already gets cut and graffiti is already cleaned up etc etc etc, who is going to be losing their job to provide the workload for the dole dodgers?
Plenty of places where it doesn't happen, and usually mainly in the places where there's plenty of jobless.
Personally I have no problem enforcing work for benefits, however I see it being hard to enforce. It doesn't have to be exacting work - there's plenty of jobs like painting coucil railings, clearing ponds, etc etc that can be done by anyone with virtually no skills. While I can see the point the OP was trying to make, I wonder what world he lives in.
Those finding it hard to get a job are not likely to be angered by a scheme that means people don't get money for nothing while having never paid in. I'm not sure where people are seeing the contrary, but most of the people on benefits and non-workers currently have newer cars, bigger TVs and nicer toys than I do, and spend half the day in the pub. I don't know how they play the system so well, but they do, and I'm paying for them to be sat at home while I work 12 hour days. If someone CAN work for their benefits, they should. There are hundreds of people out there with sufficient skills to do the more basic jobs in life, and plenty of extra people could be "employed" to do stuff like litter picking (which is already done, but limited due to costs) to keep the place looking nicer and operating better - and so they should.
If you live in a society, not earning your keep and accepting hand-outs should not be an option. Be that through learning new skills/trades for later use or manual labour, I don't care, but be a producting member of society, don't expect others to look after you.
Those skilled, put out of work now by the financial probles could be employed by the state to teach those who normally refuse to work. And there are people who REFUSE to work. I don't blame them, they can sit about and do nothing but fill in a few forms and do the occasional interview, push out a few kids and be paid for it. The only question is how to determine who's a sponger and who's a victim so as not to upset the rather sensitive souls who can't see the greater reasoning.
I was in favour of similar things to this years ago ,such as bringing back the workhouse to get the homeless off the streets.Bed and board and medical help in return for work in the community .Managed the right way it may actually get people trained and fit for the workplace.
It places benefit claimants in the same category as criminals
Are those who don'twork because they cannot be bothered,criminals? Ater all they are defrauing benefits if they aren't trying to seek gainful employment.
Many valid points on here.
Surely though... as soon as these people are 'working' for their benefits then they should, at the very least, be being given the minimum wage for the jobs they are doing? Or are we classifying a whole load of manual work as not being worthy of the minimum wage?
Under a political ideology that believes in a smaller state, how long before the 'unemployed' under this system are being directed in their duties by private contractors?
Personally I have no problem enforcing work for benefits
Course not, unless it's you being forced...
If you lost your job, would you have 'no problem' in being forced to do shitty jobs? For an indefinite period, perhaps several months even years? For **** all extra? Would you bollocks. So stop talking about things which don't affect you, in such an arrogant manner. Start, instead, to put yourself in the place of someone it might. That way, you might gain a wider and more informed view of things.
We have something called a Minimum Wage. If people have to work, then pay them the minimum wage. Otherwise it makes a mockery of that 'employment right'.
The Community Service system is largely a joke, and actually produces **** all of any real worth. I've known several people who've done it, and none of them have done more than a third of their 'sentence' anyway. Usually involves shitty tasks like clearing up weeds and rubbish. Essential, but if you apply that to people looking for work, how on Earth are they sposed to gain self-respect doing something that criminals are forced to?
Where I live, there is a lot of unemployment, yet loads of jobs. Thing is, many 'locals' won't get the jobs, because the local employers tend to favour people from 'nicer' areas, or places like Canada, France, Germany, the USA, etc. If the employers were forced to have to employ the bulk of there workforce from the area they are based in, and provide training, then this situation wouldn't be nearly as bad. But local education has been slashed over the last decade, leaving very little in the way of adult training and education. Leading to a poorly skilled and undereducated population who are then forced to have to pay massive premiums for accommodation and watch 'outsiders' waltz past flaunting their wealth. Wonderful.
Britain needs to start ****ing investing in it's own people again. Look at getting people skilled, educated and trained so that they can empower themselves instead of relying on state intervention.
But that would mean we'd have to raise taxes for a while....
As you were. Nowt to see here, move along.
Elfinsafety - MemberBut that would mean we'd have to raise taxes for a while....
Hypothecation? A bit like the NHS, I'm sure folk wouldn't mind taxes being put up in some areas if they were sure that's where the money was being spent.
unless we are returning to full employment why beat these people up better to have "happy" unemployed people than unhappy unemployed people surely? Either way we can guarantee we have some so penalising them seems a tad pointless and overly harsh.
Given that it's the great unwashed that's defacing the place to start with
what no one in employment commits crime you sure about that?
It is much harder to work if you cannot speak the language. We should encourage [ I guess to the just short of compel] people to learn the language. It is much harder to contribute/integrate if you dont know the language. It is often a way of controlling your women as well.This service will be financed through Council Tax, which of course will be paid by many of those people who speak other languages
I also noted they were going to let you keep some of your benefits once you return to work and I am again very happy to subsidise peoples' wages God forbid multinationals should pay above the minimum wage when we can sunsidise them for them and they can make more profit
Where does the minimum wage come into this scheme? Cannae have folk working for below the minimum wage surely.
If you live in a society, not earning your keep and accepting hand-outs should not be an option.
So here's an idea.................how about offering them a [b]"job"[/b] ?
Instead of all this other nonsense.
I know it's a bit radical, but I'm thinking along the lines of saying to them "Here's a for you job - you start on monday and you get £x amount every week".
You repeat this to all the 2.45 million unemployed (although I would treat school leavers as a priority) We'll see what the unemployment figures are after that.
Blimey.... great post, Spongebob. 😀
Never thought the day would come, but I agree 100% with spongebob too 🙂
In principle this ought to be a good idea but unfortunately there is a long list of caveats to that statement. The first is that it must not be seen as a punishment for failing to find work. It should be viewed as giving those people unfortunate enough to not be able to find work an opportunity to contribute in return for their benefits (which if you think about it is er, working for a living). Ideally those prepared to take up this opportunity should get a higher level of benefit or put a different way a wage. All this would help to reinforce the positives and reward those prepared to do something. However it must be voluntary, and incentivised, i.e. higher benefits or it will be by default seen as punishment.
Second key caveat is that whatever these people do it must not under mine work that we as a society would otherwise have paid for. It needs to be considered more along the lines of we have a valuable resource being wasted which is costing society and the individuals concerned which could actually be turned to both parties advantage. Think hopw the lottery was originally set up, a way of funding worthwhile projects that would not normally have been paid for by the state, unfortunately that also got screwed up by the politicians who eventually saw it as a cash cow to wase public spending.
It needs to be meaningful work properly supervised so it actually acts as training for people who have been long term unemployed. Getting people back into a work place and feeling that they are doing something worthwhile is a more valuable than a lot of the skills course the unemployed are forced to do.
Unfortunately it will if implemented be cocked up like most of these things and ultimatley become a very negative thing and stigmatise the long term unemployed even further.
We do though have to wake up to the fact that times of full employment are scarce so some poor sod is going to be unemployed long term, we just need to decide whether we are going to chuck them into the benefits blackhole or try and help them maintain some dignity and work ethic (most people don't want to rely on charity / benefits despite what the daily wail says).
Just rereading a few of the posts above before submitting this.
Spongebob makes a good point about job centres, they really don't fulfill their role. They ought to be the first point of contact for any employer looking tot recruit, unfortunately they are really just benefit administration centres.
Another good point is the one about a minimum wage, this one policy labour brought in that I applaud. The really difficult issue is when does 'work experience' for want of a better phrase just become a bloating of the state / massaging of the unemployment figures?
As usual the politicians are trying to score cheap points annoucing an on the face of it very simple idea which in reality is actually very complicated on both practical and moral levels.
It is much harder to work if you cannot speak the language. We should encourage [ I guess to the just short of compel] people to learn the language. It is much harder to contribute/integrate if you dont know the language. It is often a way of controlling your women as well.
You do though. TO apply for an Indefinite Leave to Remain (ILR) you have to either show progression in one level of English e.g pre-entry level to entry level 1. Or if you are at Level 3 or above, you have to pass the life in the UK test.
There are ways around it, with short courses etc, but the ESOL courses have to have citizenship content in them as well as English.
I think that's a joke, mrmo.
Flaperon, i know it may be a joke, still wonder about the answer though, i remember some brits in spain complaining that the doctors spoke spanish. Shocking that.
Surely if you want to live somewhere you should make the effort to learn the local language.
If people have to work, then pay them the minimum wage. Otherwise it makes a mockery of that 'employment right'.
Fine in principal Elfin but for many of the 'long term unemployed' that would mean a considerable income cut and plunge them and their families into even greater hardship.
As has been said already, an incentive to work and receive training within a community based project/job would be far more beneficial on many levels.
The Southern Yeti - MemberUnder a political ideology that believes in a smaller state, how long before the 'unemployed' under this system are being directed in their duties by private contractors?
Straight away apparently.
[i]"The placements would be provided by charities and local councils, [b]as well as private companies[/b]"[/i]
http://www.channel4.com/news/jobless-who-refuse-manual-work-could-lose-benefits
So free labour for private companies then.
And another reason why they could lay off some of their staff/not employ extra staff.
These companies must be praying that the Tories will push unemployment higher - much higher.
I don't think they'll be disappointed.
An important point of clarification please - if these people don't count towards unemployment figures, where does that put TJs hat-eating promise?
Quirell- you know more than me here or you have Googled well 😉 - what about marriage - to a UK citizen- do you still need this? I though that was automatic - well above certain age to discourage arranged marriages. Is it ?
ernie they can get free labour at the minute from E2E for young people [ Foundation Learning now] and many companies do this. i wont name the local ones to me.
I suspect many "third sector" organisation - who have lost council money - will be chomping at the bit to do this [shudders] we may be one of them and I work most closely with Job centre and have the correct quals - wish me luck I may need it- goes of to watch League of gentleman Job club bits
"The placements would be provided by charities and local councils, as well as private companies"
Jesus! That really is laughable.
Well I thought I was just being cynical. Now, wouldn't it be a surprise if members of the Tory elite also had commercial interests in such companies?? 😯
Coffeeking
"most of the people on benefits and non-workers currently have newer cars, bigger TVs and nicer toys than I do, and spend half the day in the pub."
I think this is a little exaggerated perhaps.
druidh - MemberAn important point of clarification please - if these people don't count towards unemployment figures, where does that put TJs hat-eating promise?
I make the rules
yes their toys are rubbish but the rest is true
Baws
I think this is a little exaggerated perhaps.
You know how old Coffeeking's car is or how big his TV is then ?
Do tell ............has he got a right old wreck and a tiny TV ? 😀
EDIT : No, just realised I got that wrong......he's got a brand new car and [i]huge[/i] TV ?
Quirell- you know more than me here or you have Googled well - what about marriage - to a UK citizen- do you still need this? I though that was automatic - well above certain age to discourage arranged marriages. Is it ?
Nope. There is no right to abode if married to a UK citizen. The same hoops have to be jumped through. Know them too well.
ta
but most of the people on benefits and non-workers currently have newer cars, bigger TVs and nicer toys than I do, and spend half the day in the pub.
the people you refer to in the above quote are [i]criminals[/i].. plain and simple..
honest benefits claimants live a very meagre existance.. sometimes with a spare five quid occasionally at the end of the week if they miss out elsewhere..
It is much harder to contribute/integrate if you dont know the language. It is often a way of controlling your women as well.
This is true. I know for a fact that within the Bangladeshi community round here, some of the men actively prevent their wives from learning English, to keep them subjugated. A decreasing problem, however.
Fine in principal Elfin but for many of the 'long term unemployed' that would mean a considerable income cut and plunge them and their families into even greater hardship.
Do what? 😕
Bollocks to this; I'm off to Catford!
+1 Yunki
All this is just moron-baiting crap. I think you'll struggle to find many people (apart from the crooks themselves) who think;
"No I don't think they should crack down on benefit fraud, fair play to them the cheeky scamps."
It's a lazy headline.
However, while all the clowns are whipping themselves in to a frenzy, the genuine poor get tarred with the same brush. Take a look round the poorer areas of the UK, there are not streets rammed with new motors.
Another 'idea' dreamed up by some witless politician looking for headlines. There's been loads of similar schemes in the past - New Deal in the 1990s and Future Jobs Fund which is being scrapped by the Condems - none of which has made a significant dent in unemployment. And the Condems are going to add to an already unacceptable level of unemployment by putting another half a million public sector employees on the dole, thereby increasing the amount of welfare benefits to be paid out.
Perhaps if previous governments hadn't privatised everything they could have created more jobs through investment in core infrastructure services such as the utilities, transport etc. Unfortunately we are now left with private sector organisations running these services with a focus on doing less for more e.g. bus services in most of the UK.
Do what?
Think about it Elfin - but if I need to spell it out, minimum wage is considerably less than some people receive in benefits. 🙄
I would really love it if all those here, who are so quick to label the unemployed as all ****less pond life types, to get to experience what its like to lose their jobs and struggle to find employment.
Its clear to see why this country is in a mess and debt ridden. But I guess to spell it out would make you racist in the eyes of the PC brigade.
Oh go on Mooman, tell us? Was it Johnnie Foreigner that took our jobs?
just a thought, would forcing the unemployed to do a months work at short notice potentially catch those doing cash in hand work?
Catford?? 😯
Where I live, there is a lot of unemployment, yet loads of jobs. Thing is, many 'locals' won't get the jobs, because the local employers tend to favour people from 'nicer' areas, or places like Canada, France, Germany, the USA, etc. If the employers were forced to have to employ the bulk of there workforce from the area they are based in, and provide training, then this situation wouldn't be nearly as bad. But local education has been slashed over the last decade, leaving very little in the way of adult training and education. Leading to a poorly skilled and undereducated population who are then forced to have to pay massive premiums for accommodation and watch 'outsiders' waltz past flaunting their wealth. Wonderful.Britain needs to start ****ing investing in it's own people again. Look at getting people skilled, educated and trained so that they can empower themselves instead of relying on state intervention.
Sounds like an admission that Labour were doing nothing for British citizens in respect of education or employment!
I fon't agree though, education to the point of higher education has improved, it's the disconnect between higher education establishments and business that's a problem. Actually, I blame business because they are too mean to develop staff and give staff high value skills. They fear the recipient of such training will leave for better pay elsewhere, rather than see thay are adding value to their team and paying them for the extra profit they will bring, but that's another thread.
In a world increasingly orientated towards contracting and temporary work, training and other responsibilities get shifted from employer to employee. No wonder we are falling behind in the UK.
Actually, having worked in an area in London just like this, I discovered there were very may people from other countries like South Africa, New Zealand, Aus etc. So it's not just people in the locality who are disadvantaged. I cannot believe those aliens were all better than any British person, the argument business always makes to justify hiring them. I think the people who get hired, just happen to be in the network, in the loop and companies take the path of least resistance. I've witnessed the New Zealander/ Auz rite of passage for 25 years - work in London for a couple of years to afford exploring Europe. I'd have no problem with this if every British applicant capable of doing these jobs had got a look in!
In America, employers have to demonstrate that no American citizen is available to fill a position before an alien. Britain should do the same! That isn't racist because British people comprise of many people of different ethnic origins. It's about the ingress of aliens who take away opportunity for people who are British citizens.
This proposal shifts the focus away from government as an earlier poster suggested. No mainstream political party has the balls to tackle the problem of working class and not so working class people having their job security undermined by a large influx of aliens, (be them legitimate workers or not). I think the EU should give us a grant for taking so many!
Mooman, the tax credits scheme is supposed to fill the hole left in a claimants income. (I suspect it doesn't though). This is similar to the £140 a week pension promise which will put a lot of pensioners into poverty due to this being the level where other benefits cease to be payable, council tax help and sheltered housing costs. It leaves people to decide if they will eat every day or pay their housing costs not a FAIR choice.
The lack of employment opportunities can be laid squarely at those businesses that decided they no longer need to train anyone just hire someone all ready trained, the migrants are skilled and trained so hire them. Business needs to be reminded that they can not just take they have to give as well else they are part of the problem.
It places benefit claimants in the same category as criminals who are serving community service orders.
Only if you equate "working for money" with "punishment."
Given that all the grass gets already gets cut and graffiti is already cleaned up etc etc etc, who is going to be losing their job to provide the workload for the dole dodgers?
Does it? Not in my experience. And with the amount of cuts local government have just had foisted upon them, I don't expect that'll be the case for much longer everywhere else either.
Walk through the town in say Accrington, Blackburn, Burnley, and then tell me that the streets are being cleaned of graffiti and litter effectively, or at least that it wouldn't benefit from a little extra TLC here and there.
If you lost your job, would you have 'no problem' in being forced to do shitty jobs? For an indefinite period, perhaps several months even years? For **** all extra?
I wouldn't, I'd welcome it in fact. It be preferable to sitting on my hands all day, and might spur me into looking for work a bit harder. It wouldn't be an indefinite period if I was actually looking for work, and it wouldn't be for '**** all extra,' so much as earning money rather than having it given for free. I'd actually be a lot happier about signing on if that were the case, it'd give me some sense of pride and self-worth rather than feeling like I was a charity case.
what no one in employment commits crime you sure about that?
That isn't what I said, or what I meant. I'm sure it's not a 100% split, but I'd be shocked if there wasn't at least some correlation between unemployment and minor antisocial crimes such as vandalism and littering.
"Here's a for you job - you start on monday and you get £x amount every week".
Isn't that exactly what this is proposing - a few hours work each week in order to earn your 'benefits'?
I would really love it if all those here, who are so quick to label the unemployed as all ****less pond life types, to get to experience what its like to lose their jobs and struggle to find employment.
Been there, done that. Again, this might be different in different areas, but I have first-hand experience regarding the prevailing demographic that patronised my local Job Centre.
ernie_lynch - Member
"The placements would be provided by charities and local councils, as well as private companies"
See, I remember when such "placements" were known as "jobs" and carried with them payment. Such an oldfashioned concept I guess.
I've got nothing against some of the basic concept, tbh... Some of the reasoning is that getting long-term unemployed back into a working routine is often beneficial for the individual, and I can see that- I'm getting laid off at the end of the year and I can see me instantly losing all my routine and just sitting on my arse, it's not that I'm lazy... OK I'm lazy, but it's work that gives my days a structure and I'm not sure how well I'm going to adapt to losing that. I may just have to post on Singletrack for 35 hours a week.
But the practicality of it is horrible... It'll end up costing money, that's inevitable, and if the work they're doing is at all meaningful then it'll be taking work away from those who want to work, that's also inevitable. So where's the actual benefit?
Slightly-paid near-voluntary work seems like a good way forward, especially where it teaches a skill but this is just showboating. IMO of course in case that guy who takes offence when I don't say IMO reads this and goes mad again.
The Tories have to deal with the awkward little problem that unemployment is set to go up dramatically as direct result of their economic policies. What better solution than to blame the unemployed for that ?
that's the bottom line. Somehow unemployment is always the price we have to pay when the tories get in. It's part of the seesaw of British politics.
I had hoped the dem part of the condem coalition might help to break the seesaw, but I disappointed so far, the tories just give as many sh1t jobs to the dems as they can get away with and still manage to come out with self-defeating ideas like this
+1 to Spongebob, Sandwich, Cougar and Northwind - it's nice to hear some common sense talked on here for once instead of the usual bullshit by the usual suspects 😉
I may just have to post on Singletrack for 35 hours a week.
Isn't that what we all do?
I can't really be bothered reading the rest of the thread but here is my 2p.
There are a lot of people out of work who are actively seeking a job every day. They have cover letters, replies, interviews etc etc to prove this. Let them be, keep paying their benefits until they get a job.
There are a lot of people who choose not to work at all. They don't have the paraphernalia above. Take their benefits away. Put them to work for their benefits. If they don't work, tough, they can starve.
Many, many, many people in the world would jump at the chance to work for benefits. We need to take a hard line with the spongers to cut out this sub culture.
OK, we've got two basic concepts here
i) Pay people to sit at home on an endless benefit, hoping that they feel motivated enough to spend forty hours a week searching for work
ii) Pay people to get up in the morning and go and do something useful to the rest of society in return for their benefits.
hmm, 😕 difficult one!
Yes, it is exactly that simple.
OTOH, I did like hearing the news telling us that people will be "forced to volunteer". Hmm.