It's free to register, to post a question or to start / join a discussion
Jobs online - take it ...or lose your benefits ... ultimatum from Ian Duncan Smith.
Likes # 0
Posted December 20, 2012 at 2:32PM
Ian Duncan Smith is rolling out his online-strategy in the new year to get benefit claimants back to work.
Will it work. Sorry no links at the moment.
Likes # 0
Posted December 20, 2012 at 7:50PM
For me one of the key facts in all this is the statement in the Telegraph piece that "most people on benefits are actively looking for jobs"
I imagine that's true, and assuming it is, that's what the benefit system is for, isn't it - to provide people who have no work with some support while they try to find a job?
I have no argument with a government that wants to ensure that public money is being spent properly, and that people who have no intention of working are weeded out and penalised in some way, but surely the main thrust of the government's efforts should be to stimulate job creation.
Sometimes I get the sinking feeling that Ministers have become obsessed with cutting expenditure instead of being obsessed with stimulating the private sector.It's the private sector which will, in the end, be the country's saviour in economic terms.
Perhaps I'm being far too naive, but I believe this apparent policy of snooping and monitoring, and dragging every ounce of flesh from us all is going to weaken our morale to the point where we'll lose our will to fight.
Likes # 0
Posted December 20, 2012 at 7:52PM
Spider9 -"We need urgent change" but NOT his silly way of having forced street cleaning.
That was just one example - but what do you think is wrong with people who are looking for work - working?
There are lots of people on under £10k PA that pay tax to allow the unemployed to stay at home.
Likes # 0
Posted December 20, 2012 at 8:07PM
Maybe they should go round the pubs and then, like the Press Gangs of old, drag them from their pints kicking and screaming, in to a factory somewhere.
Now as an ex-pub manager I can vouch that there are lots of people who spend all day and every day just drinking in pubs. Where they get the money from I do not know, But I knew people who had never done a days work in their lives and had no intention of doing any either. Mind you as an employer I wouldn't have taken them on either. Come to think of it, the old press gangs would have thrown them overboard after a couple of hours too. What always has annoyed me is the hard workers are subsidising these layabouts.
Please note I am not tarring all public house users with the same brush, I also had some customers who were the salt of the earth. Quite a lot of them actually, but there were too many layabouts who knew how to milk the system. They are the problem.
Likes # 0
Posted December 20, 2012 at 8:38PM
If anyone 'signs-up' ...they automatically consign themselves to be 'able to communicate' ...... that's a laugh.
Likes # 0
Posted December 20, 2012 at 9:42PM
You treat people like mere numbers and would presumably be willing to make anyone, regardless of skill or qualification, do any kind of work just to punish them for being unemployed - regardless of whether any suitable job was available.
What's the next step in this grand plan? Return of workhouses, perhaps?
I'm with FE on this - creation of jobs, not punishing the unemployed, is surely the way forward. I fear for our society if the government continue their chosen path.
Likes # 0
Posted December 20, 2012 at 11:56PM
Spider9 -creation of jobs, not punishing the unemployed"
Yes we do need more jobs in the private sector - but high tax's to pay for the unemployed stop a lot of entrepreneurs having a "go". How is giving a job to the unemployed a punishment? Most people ,by far, would give up their job if they won lotto type money - they would all love to have found the perfect job but they don't exist. The state give the unemployed money to help them - is it so bad to expect something in return?
Some one mentioned "workhouse" - if we put the young girls with kids in one area, private quarters, some could go to work some could baby sit and it would give them something to aim for instead of having a house a lot of workers can only dream of.
Likes # 0
Posted December 21, 2012 at 12:14AM
"The state give the unemployed money to help them - is it so bad to expect something in return?"
It can be argued that the State does get something in return,it gets the taxes that the employed person pays, and the taxes that the employer pays on the money that is generated by the employee. We operate a welfare state, and it's a good thing in principle - the idea that society helps those who are unable to help themselves.
In practice it encounters problems because not everyone plays by the rules - people cheat the system. When it happens we need to take steps to tackle the problem. My argument is that we need to be careful not to throw the baby out with the bath-water. Our economic future depends heavily on private sector buoyancy, and that means job creation. More employment will create more wealth, but I don't see how the present government is doing much to encourage the private sector - the focus appears to be on cutting public sector expenditure.
There's a vicious circle here; the exchequer relies heavily on tax income from private sector employers and employees,and at the moment those revenues are falling - the government must borrow to meet public expenditure requirements. Revenues will only rise if the private sector grows and employs more people, and so it goes on, around and around.
Likes # 0
Posted December 21, 2012 at 1:54AM
The forum editor made a good point at 7.50pm yesterday "Where we'll lose our will to fight".
Because from my side of the fence and a number of other people I know, we often discuss these things, and in a nutshell we are all getting rather fed up with the way things are ending up. Because it would appear that those who are supporting this country reap the least benefits, and at the same time are being punished for asking for fairness.
It doesn't matter what government is in charge, because they all seem to baulk on what is the correct and fair method, instead they go for ideas that are not of sound thinking.
Regarding the "will to fight", was possibly a wake up call for the government with the recent riots, that got most people and authorities by surprise. I saw a number of video's and interviews about the riots,and the people present, and in the main, it appeared the events were due to peoples boredom, and especially for those younger people.
Is there a solution to 'back to work', because I am sure there are many ways to resolve this issue. People who are on benefits are already being paid, so why not work for it. Simple tasks like keeping your own community clean and tidy is but one suggestion. The Probation Service already have and use similar schemes to get people back into work. Some charities also run work schemes,especially when some funding is available.
So there are solutions out there, but no doubt some people may readily accept some of these schemes, when other might need that little extra push, and perhaps the sooner the better?.
Perhaps as a final note this early morning. I get rather annoyed listening to politicians saying that people should work past retirement age, yet at the same time, you see young and capable people out there on the streets already in retirement, and in some cases never had a job of any kind since leaving school.
Likes # 0
Posted December 21, 2012 at 2:18AM
"...instead they go for ideas that are not of sound thinking."
But if they agreed with you it would be sound thinking,is that what you mean?
All of us like to think that we have the answers,or at least that we have better ones than the government does. That's always been the case, and always will be. The reason is simple of course - we don't have access to all the information that the government has.
We don't know why the government takes this decision,or passes on that option, but that doesn't stop us from criticising what it does. It's the same for all governments, and it has been that way for as long as we've had any form of central government.
People will work past retirement age for various reasons, one of them being that the money enables them to carry on living at a higher standard than might otherwise be possible, and thanks to advances in medical care many people are perfectly fit and able to carry on. Indeed, businesses are discovering that older people often have a real contribution to make, thanks to their long experience,and the skills they have developed over their working lives.
I don't see it as a problem at all, provided these people aren't working because they have to in order to enjoy a reasonable standard of living.
Likes # 0
Posted December 21, 2012 at 9:11AM
An interesting point was raised by an interviewee that was actively seeking work by way of dozens of job applications a month on the radio last night.
His point was that although he was getting some positive replies to his paper applications, and words of hope and suggestions to try Mr X that they thought might be of help because his CV was good enough to stand out from the rest. If the system became a simple click here to apply and upload your Job Centre approved and formatted application, then you just become part of the rest that only have to 'click to apply', to make up their weekly quota.
He pointed out that, however many people you force to apply for any one job, there is still only that one vacancy, and the old system still greatly benefits those that can point out in a well worded application to the employer why, and that, you are better than the rest. Quality rather than quantity he was getting at.
Reply to this topic
This thread has been locked.