Popel Vooje
|
Edited Feb 20, 2012, 16:52
Workfare "providers"
Feb 20, 2012, 16:52
|
Just in case anyone hasn't already seen it, here is a list of all the emplyers that are currently participating in the DWP's mandatory forcing of unemployed people to work 30 hours a week with no recompense other than JSA and expenses. I'm boycotting them all until further notice.
http://www.boycottworkfare.org/?page_id=16
|
Stevo
|
Re: Workfare "providers"
Feb 20, 2012, 18:43
|
Looking at that list, not only would a lot of those jobs be rotten for the unemployed person forced into working without actual pay but it would be likely to undermine people actually employed there's job security wouldn't it?
Presumably has been said before but if you were one of those employers able to employ somebody who was payed through state benefit, what benefit do you have in employing somebody at minimum wage?
Would think the incentive would be to get rid of actual employees for workfare temps.
Hasn't something similar pretty much happened in a lot of places already where people aren't allowed to rise above the status of temp to a more permanent position and services subsequently suffered?
Stevo
|
PMM
|
Re: Workfare "providers"
Feb 20, 2012, 18:49
|
|
http://thethirdestate.net/2012/02/workfare-in-context/
|
sanshee
|
Edited Feb 20, 2012, 19:44
Re: Workfare "providers"
Feb 20, 2012, 19:33
|
I was on a few YTS shebangs in the late 80s/early 90s.
One was with the supermarket 'Fine Fare', if I remember rightly.
At the time, it was pitched as top notch training.
It took me less than half a hour to become a whizz at operating the checkout, but the training period was two years!
Think I got the princely sum of £29 pw for it, rising to a big fat £35 once I reached 17.
Lots of unsavoury stuff going on here.
x
|
mingtp
|
Re: Workfare "providers"
Feb 21, 2012, 03:04
|
|
PMM wrote:
Thanks for posting that link, it was a good read.
|
MrsSevenrealm
|
Re: Workfare "providers"
Feb 21, 2012, 08:23
|
I remember being 17 and going down the Jobcentre in Nelson looking for gainful employment, having worked in retail in the hols since being 14 (pretty nifty with a pricing gun) and being redirected to the careers office. A spring in my step and a song in my heart, only to be informed that being under 18 I needed to get myself a YTS placement. But having rent to pay at £20 a week's no good if your wage is just under £30. So I lied about my age to employers which worked swimmingly, and upped the hourly rate. I'm not into slavery, I thought we'd abolished it.
The only justification for Workfare that I'm willing to consider is for young adults or those who have never worked to get them into the spirit of things. Even then, surely they should go to the top of the list re available jobs if they "perform?"
Not much for the argument "just create more jobs" as round these parts you need to speak Polish to get them. Just ask my neice and nephew- they're finding it tough to keep a job. This country has gone way past farcical whichever way you want to look at it.
|
Rhiannon
|
Re: Workfare
Feb 22, 2012, 08:24
|
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/feb/21/back-work-scheme-disarray-tesco
encouraging? (even if it's because they fear bad publicity and a drop in sales. Or perhaps they do have some decent people working for them)
and talk about the extreme reactions from its supporters. If there's work there enough that people are given a job, why wouldn't they be paid to do it? It doesn't make any sense. Unless you're a git.
|
