Claimants To Work For Benefits Is It Fair?

[gordiescotland1]

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/472791/Work-for-your-welfare-benefits-long-term-jobless-to-be-told-in-new-crackdown
What do people think of this story?

[naomi24]

kvalidir, I disagree that the government is attempting to create a divisive society. Why would they do that? There's no benefit in it. They know full well that wealth creates wealth - which is why Conservatives encourage people to buy property, etc., (not that I ever agreed with the sale of council houses without replacing the stock). The fact is the welfare system is much abused and terribly unfair, and hence desperately in need of reform. If you had a free hand, what would you do to remedy that?

I'll look back here tomorrow. Night.

[sherrardk]

If there are jobs to be done, create them and make them only available to the long term unemployed, at a living wage. The welfare bill for unemployed people is small compared to other welfare claimants. This is just a sop to shut people up.

[jim360]

I don't know if I'd call the current measures divisive, except perhaps in the sense of being open to the inference that the Government views long-term unemployed as mostly scroungers trying to milk the system and who therefore deserve tough measures. That can create a "them and us" situation which isn't really helpful. But that division's been created already by the media, TV shows such as Benefits Street and so on.

If anything, the problem is that the measures aren't divisive enough. All those on Unemployment benefits are being treated equally, regardless of the circumstances that led them to where they are. Undoubtedly some, and far too many, people on Unemployment benefits are playing the system in some way or other (it is certainly possible). And such people should be discouraged as far as possible from cheating the system, and measures like this might help doing that. Far harder to fake your way through months and months of unemployment if the signing-on process is daily rather than weekly/ fortnightly.

On the other hand, just as many, if not more, of those on long-term unemployment have got there not for want of trying to get a job but through no fault of their own. Specialist skills, perhaps, which don't translate elsewhere. Or lack of experience, in a market where "entry-level" jobs seem paradoxically to require months or years of prior experience. Such people are, nevertheless, being lumped in with the first group in this scheme, despite the fact that they ought to be treated differently. Instead of the threat of sanctions, the promise of relevant courses, and so on. Such courses are provided already but ought to be pushed even further forward. I don't see that voluntary work or bust is the help such people need.

This idea of treating everyone the same regardless of circumstances is at the heart of the government's attempts to reform the system -- but it's a false goal, because circumstances matter. How you got there is just as much a part of the story as where you are now, and the system is being changed to forget this. That, in the long run, is a reform that is doomed to fail.

[Ken4155]

The government would be put to better use - and recoup more much needed revenue - if they were to concentrate on tackling the much abused and terribly unfair banker's bonuses or the much abused and terribly unfair tax avoidance by big companies and the mega-rich.

[factor-fiction]

Ken- what is wrong with bankers' bonuses if the shareholders agree to it. Let the business run themselves without government interference. The term "bankers' bonuses" is banded around without any explanation of what it actually means and who these "bankers" are. Bonuses are taxable, by the way, sow we all benefit from them.
I agree with what jim says but I think the government is trying to send an important message to change attitudes to "entitlements" to those that have made little effort to contribute anything themselves. But as jim indicates, it could be a very blunt instrument if not used properly

[dunnitall]

Totally agree with you Jim, exactly what is going on and what needs to be addressed, well written post that makes total sense.

[sandyRoe]

If bankers bonuses were performance related they some bankers would need to be paying us. It's particularly galling to see people who have run businesses into the ground, and turned then to the taxpayer to bail them out, still demanding that they be paid a fortune in bonuses.

[factor-fiction]

I agree sandy except when those that get the bonus are in areas that have made a profit and met agreed targets. Anyway, this is an aside from the important issue of benefits- it just irritates me when people try to divert issues by throwing in other topics such as "bankers' bonuses"

[DrFilth]

hc4361 > jim, don't forget the people that have been kicked off sick benefits and on to unemployment benefits recently, <

hc4361 the ones that i know have just been kicked off full stop not moved onto another benefit

hc4361 would you spend £10 to claim 90p ?

> lozzer50
makes me laugh this, my hubby has been trying to get as job for 2 years hes applied for so many jobs we've lost count. the irony is he gets NO BENEFITS because im working. we get no help with anything a two wage house on one salary . yet people can come to our country claim everything under the sun without having worked a day over here. this system stinks! <

lozzer50 you like many others now know what is really happening in the real world, people see a few tv shows and overnight become experts on benefits and think you can just walk in the dole office and claim for every little thing

[Svejk]

everyone I know that lost their 'sickness' benefit had to go on jsa. perhaps the people you know are independently wealthy, dr f. how else could they survive?

[Svejk]

granted, they might have to go to the 'trouble' of applying for it.

[DrFilth]

Svejk , i along with many other people have worked since leaving school now due to ill health i am unable to work so i have to manage on my private pension.

the government have a figure which they think you can manage to live on and so long as you get that they don't want to know

that is why it is not worthwhile some people trying to claim as to get the 90p a week ( each person is different ) it would cost a lot more

the 90p figure come from an old workmate in the next street who went to the cab office , cost him £4-20p to get there, they worked out he is entitled
to the 90p a week.

would you bother claiming ?

[DrFilth]

sorry that should be £4-40p

[DrFilth]

try again that should be £4-40p bus fare not £4-20p

[Svejk]

exactly, dr f. the people I know don't have private pensions or other independent means so had to rely on jsa to live. if its 'not worth' you or your mates signing for jsa that's another story.

[DrFilth]

Svejk hence why i posted about lozzer above

when you phone the dwp it was an 0845 number i think the last call to them cost me about £9-80p to just speak for around 30 seconds, they keep you on hold and never have a local number if they had a local number it would have been free to call them