Boycott Workfare

[Rave]

http://www.boycottworkfare.org/

So apparently the solution to the unemployment crisis and the massive benefits bill is not for companies to create more jobs and pay a living wage. No- apparently the way forward is for the government to keep on paying the benefits while providing free labour to large and profitable businesses.

Unbelievable.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think JSA should be a free ride, but this is taking the piss.

[dave87]

You have a point, but:

Where is the incentive to provide (even limited) work experience to the longer term unemployed?

I must admit, I haven't read the details of Workfare, and will refrain from saying any more until I have, but the major barrier to people getting off JSA, is, as far as I'm aware, a lack of relevant, up to date, marketable skills.

If this goes a way to address that, then I'm all for it. As long as it doesn't eliminate the market for full-time employees, employed in the normal way, and has limits to the length of any employment with the company.

[jetfire]

looks like tesco is trying out slave labour

http://intensiveactivity.wordpress.c...s-grow-latest/

[Bunjiweb]

If the muppets would get off their back side and go and get one of the MANY jobs that are available, without getting self-righteous about whether the job is "below their skill set" or not their "chosen profession" then they wouldn't be forced in to doing work un-paid, but if nothing else it shows to prospective employers that they are willing to work and not just looking for a hand-out.

The only down-side that this system has exposed is that bad managers will then take away much needed overtime from those who need it because the hours can be filled by what certain Daily Mail / Daily Star readers are calling "Slave Labour".

[TeePee]

I don't think this should be happening.

People who are out of work should be given a choice to work on projects like collecting rubbish from the side of the road, and other projects which benefit the taxpayer (and preferably save him us some money), in exchange for a small subsistence allowance, and potentially a reference.

Companies should not be profiting by exploiting cheap labour paid for by the taxpayer, and similarly those out of work should not be comfortable at the taxpayers expense.

[Tumble]

This was covered by Jeremy Vine on Radio 2 the other day. They had a woman on who had been made redundant from a large supermarket.... the problem with this was that they had taken on 3 guys on this workfare scheme for free. The placements last 13 weeks - when that period is up, the hapless sods just get emptied and replaced by a new lot. Effectively meaning that places like Tesco et al are getting free labour (and tax breaks for participating in the scheme), and they won't employ people properly because they don't need to. I think the system is a touch broken - because apparently this practice is all above board and completely legal...

[TheAnimus]

I really dislike this scheme because ultimately the companies in question have to do little to demonstrate what the apprentice will learn, and that they aren't using them as a substitute for a paid worker.

But I don't think its any worse, as far as the un-employed person goes than our current system which rewards destructive behaviour.

Its the other people working / would have been working at tesco I feel sorry for!

[directhex]

You have a point, but:

Where is the incentive to provide (even limited) work experience to the longer term unemployed?

I must admit, I haven't read the details of Workfare, and will refrain from saying any more until I have, but the major barrier to people getting off JSA, is, as far as I'm aware, a lack of relevant, up to date, marketable skills.

If this goes a way to address that, then I'm all for it. As long as it doesn't eliminate the market for full-time employees, employed in the normal way, and has limits to the length of any employment with the company.

There are two key problems with the scheme:

1) You need to be offered an interview at the end of your placement. There do NOT need to be any positions available when you take this interview - or indeed before you start the post. It's entirely for show.

2) If Tesco can hire someone on minimum wage, or get someone in for free via JSA, which are they going to do? Workfare makes unemployment worse by essentially making JSA the new minimum wage - paid for by taxpayers

[BobF64]

I really dislike this scheme because ultimately the companies in question have to do little to demonstrate what the apprentice will learn, and that they aren't using them as a substitute for a paid worker.

Yes, they should sort this bit out.

I can see the value in the theory behind the scheme, in that the unemployed person gets "experience" and has a nice little routine that may help them prepare for a full time job, and in that respect, its no different to shops taking on work experience kids.

What I do think people miss is that they think its taking jobs from others.
I'm not so convinced of that one, I think its more likely that without the scheme, the shops would just make the current employees work more for less.

Its like most government schemes though, well intentioned, but terribly implemented.

[Kumagoro]

I am all for the long term unemployed as in over 2 years unemployed to be forced into work. But I don't think working in tesco would be that useful.

They should do community service.

[Knoxville]

If the muppets would get off their back side and go and get one of the MANY jobs that are available, without getting self-righteous about whether the job is "below their skill set" or not their "chosen profession" then they wouldn't be forced in to doing work un-paid, but if nothing else it shows to prospective employers that they are willing to work and not just looking for a hand-out.

The only down-side that this system has exposed is that bad managers will then take away much needed overtime from those who need it because the hours can be filled by what certain Daily Mail / Daily Star readers are calling "Slave Labour".

I'll bite, and for the record.. It falls under the definition of forced/compulsory/slave labour as far as the ILO are concerned too if you read through their guidelines.

As one of the "muppets" on JSA that's been unemloyed over a year, having eventually had to give up my self employed sales position (that I hated but stuck with because I would rather be working) because I physically could not live on that wage and couldn't find ANYTHING else...

As one who applies for half a dozen jobs a week, most of them "below my skill set" and not my "chosen profession" and volunteers when he can in charity shops in his local area I'm not going to lie, I take exception to that kind of attitude. I'm twenty five, educated, have relevant work experience from when I was younger but not all too long ago I was told by Asda I was unsuitable to so much as stack their shelves.. Why? Because not only do I cost more than a sixteen year old they can pay less, I cost a lot more than three or four people on the work programme.

I am willing to work, I am looking for work but I am not willing to spend my time furthering the profits of a large multi-national corporation for absolutely zero wage. Regardless of the illegality of the program or the fact that the DWP are currently being taken to court over implying that it's "mandatory" it's immoral in my opinion to spend your tax money to help Tesco/Poundland etc's profits. If I was paying taxes right now I certainly wouldn't want that money going into those pockets...

Anyone that would like to accuse me of being lazy can carry on, after all, I'm unemployed, I've got more time to prove you wrong than I need

[mmh]

Whilst doing jobs for non-government benefit I feel is completely wrong on a moral standpoint and a legal standpoint. I do however feel that people who are claiming benefits should do "something" to "earn thier keep" - theres how mnay thousands of jobs in the public sector? surely some of the people drawing dole should be able to contribute towards the society they live in for the money they earn.

Even if its only the hours that would equate to minimum wage based on what they get.

Doing something woul be better than them getting it for nothing.

Although i've only ever been on the dole for 6 months, so I can't say what its like to be on it for a long time, bu there are people like Knox who are trying to get a job and not being able to find one and its a good fallback. However there are people on it who have never worked a day in thier lives and completely depend on the state to give them wat they need. This, IMHO does nothing to further the human race, or indeed our society, and an end should be put to the "handout" entitlement culture that labour has brought forward.

[Rave]

This was covered by Jeremy Vine on Radio 2 the other day. They had a woman on who had been made redundant from a large supermarket.... the problem with this was that they had taken on 3 guys on this workfare scheme for free.

Yes, this. Here we have a scheme intended to reduce the cost of paying unemployment benefit....which is almost certainly actually going to increase the cost to the state, because it incentivises employers to lay off NMW workers and replace them with, essentially, free labour from people who are receiving JSA and will continue to receive it.

It's complete madness. There's no other way to describe it.

If you want to utilise our 2m+ unemployed people to do something useful rather than have them sitting at home, get them to do stuff that will actually help to put the UK back on a competitive international footing, like building council homes to combat our current chronic shortage, or building a national water grid to do something about the hosepipe ban us southerners are facing in the next few weeks, apparently. Don't send them out to displace workers who already have a job.

[DR]

I know - people complain about no jobs... How can companies hire people in a recession?

Then the next step - I actually think experience is worth more than qualifications - I've hired people who have less qualifications but experience.

I don't have an issue with internships - I also think it's worth giving people a chance.

How long should the country pay for lifestyles of people who choose NOT to work since it's an easy ride....?

I don't think companies should have slave labour but we don't know the calibre of people who are actually taking this up.

[Splash]

How long should the country pay for lifestyles of people who choose NOT to work since it's an easy ride....?

And how do we differentiate between those and those like Knoxxeh? It's easy to make sweeping generalisations, but the simple fact is that there isn't a job for everybody, especially in this climate.

I don't think companies should have slave labour but we don't know the calibre of people who are actually taking this up.

Regardless of the calibre of people being employed we have a minimum wage. If people are being employed at those rates then it should be the companies paying, not the chuffin' taxpayer. All Workfare seems to be doing is helping these companies lay off those on low rates and get free labour. Were I in a position where I was out of work I have no objection to working for a charity, or something that improves my local society, but I object to the idea of being forced to work for a company that makes a profit of £107 a second.

[aidanjt]

I know - people complain about no jobs... How can companies hire people in a recession?

And how can a recession end if companies don't employ people? It's a vicious circle.

How long should the country pay for lifestyles of people who choose NOT to work since it's an easy ride....?

So there's a job available for each of the 2.67 million people who're unemployed? If a well educated, experienced, and very active job seeking chap like Knoxville is having trouble finding work, how do you think things are going for the poorly educated youth?