Feckless benefit claimants to be put to work – OR ELSE!

Elfinsafety – Member

But 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?

This service will be financed through Council Tax, which of course will be paid by many of those people who speak other languages

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.
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 “job” ?

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 – Member

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?

Straight away apparently.

“The placements would be provided by charities and local councils, as well as private companies“

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 – Member

An 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 huge 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 criminals.. 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 feckless 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 **** 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 feckless 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.