More Benefit Sanctions required says back-to-work firms.
Discuss issues related to the politics of the UK, such as the actions of any MP, any current or potential law, or any other factor affecting the British political system.
| Announcements | Posted on | |
|---|---|---|
-
- Reputation:
- Thread Starter
- TSR Legend
- Location: Wigan
- Posts: 11,867
- Warning points: 5
More Benefit Sanctions required says back-to-work firms.http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/20...?newsfeed=true
From the comments section:
........"Richard Whittell from Corporate Watch said the Work Programme appeared to be focused on slashing benefit rather than putting people into work. "These figures give the lie to the government's claims its welfare reforms are about helping people into work,"........... -
- Reputation:
- TSR Demigod
- Location: Manchester
- Posts: 7,160
Re: More Benefit Sanctions required says back-to-work firms.Are you still complaining about being on the dole, as you seem to have been doing since at least 2010?
Last edited by marcusfox; 09-07-2012 at 23:53. -
- Reputation:
- PS Helper
- Peer Of The TSR Realm
- Location: Harrogate
Re: More Benefit Sanctions required says back-to-work firms.What's your point?(Original post by Martyn*)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/20...?newsfeed=true
From the comments section:
........"Richard Whittell from Corporate Watch said the Work Programme appeared to be focused on slashing benefit rather than putting people into work. "These figures give the lie to the government's claims its welfare reforms are about helping people into work,"...........
probably because he's in his late 30s early 40s living at home in his mums basement eating cold beans straight from the tin. Hasn't done a days work in his life and is getting scared he'll be forced to.Last edited by crocker710; 09-07-2012 at 23:53. -
- Reputation:
- Thread Starter
- TSR Legend
- Location: Wigan
- Posts: 11,867
- Warning points: 5
Re: More Benefit Sanctions required says back-to-work firms.I'm not complaining; I've had a supra-pubic catheter in for a year and a half.(Original post by marcusfox)
Are you still complaining about being on the dole, as you seem to have been doing since at least 2010?
So what do you do then? -
- Reputation:
- Thread Starter
- TSR Legend
- Location: Wigan
- Posts: 11,867
- Warning points: 5
Re: More Benefit Sanctions required says back-to-work firms.My point is that similar to the comment I posted taken from the report.(Original post by crocker710)
What's your point?
probably because he's in his late 30s early 40s living at home in his mums basement eating cold beans straight from the tin. Hasn't done a days work in his life and is getting scared he'll be forced to.
-
- Reputation:
- TSR Demigod
- Location: Manchester
- Posts: 7,160
Re: More Benefit Sanctions required says back-to-work firms.I'm not familiar with that medical device or how it restricts you. But if that restricts you from working, you should be eligible for a disability benefit, not Job Seekers Allowance.(Original post by Martyn*)
I'm not complaining; I've had a supra-pubic catheter in for a year and a half.
So what do you do then?
As you don't seem to be eligible, (as you have been complaining about JSA and various sanctions you have had for a long time) it's reasonable to expect you don't have a medical condition that prevents you from getting a job.
What I do is irrelevant to the thread really, considering I haven't been here moaning about how crappy benefits are for two years.Last edited by marcusfox; 10-07-2012 at 00:15. -
- Reputation:
- Overlord in Training
- Posts: 2,519
Re: More Benefit Sanctions required says back-to-work firms.Helping people to work will only work with people who want to work. Others will have to be pushed into work, and that is what the sanctions are for. Eventually, the state has to stop subsidising people to hunt for their dream job, and just make them take what they can get.(Original post by Martyn*)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/20...?newsfeed=true
From the comments section:
........"Richard Whittell from Corporate Watch said the Work Programme appeared to be focused on slashing benefit rather than putting people into work. "These figures give the lie to the government's claims its welfare reforms are about helping people into work,"........... -
- Reputation:
- Banned
- Posts: 2,651
Re: More Benefit Sanctions required says back-to-work firms.OP makes a completely valid thread which you evidently dislike but haven't got the brains to come up with a counter argument so you just write a completely useless post?(Original post by marcusfox)
Are you still complaining about being on the dole, as you seem to have been doing since at least 2010?
I wish I had the mod's power to delete such things...
... same applies to this little boy.(Original post by crocker710)
What's your point?
probably because he's in his late 30s early 40s living at home in his mums basement eating cold beans straight from the tin. Hasn't done a days work in his life and is getting scared he'll be forced to.Last edited by EffieFlowers; 10-07-2012 at 00:37. -
- Reputation:
- TSR Demigod
- Location: Manchester
- Posts: 7,160
Re: More Benefit Sanctions required says back-to-work firms.You can report my post, a mod would then look at it and if it merits deletion, delete it. Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean it warrants deletion.(Original post by EffieFlowers)
OP makes a completely valid thread which you evidently dislike but haven't got the brains to come up with a counter argument so you just write a completely useless post?
I wish I had the mod's power to delete such things...
OP has been posting threads moaning about JSA, (often about various sanctions) for at least two years and is still posting threads moaning about JSA.
JSA is Job Seeker's Allowance, if you've been signing for JSA for two years and still can't figure out how to do it correctly so as to avoid sanctions, it's not looking good for you.
Personally, for people who are fit and able to work and have been claiming JSA continuously for at least two years should face increasingly tougher sanctions if they aren't complying with the conditions of their JSA.Last edited by marcusfox; 10-07-2012 at 01:28. -
- Reputation:
- PS Helper
- Peer Of The TSR Realm
- Location: Harrogate
Re: More Benefit Sanctions required says back-to-work firms.who you calling a little boy? I think we're talking about things that you shouldn't worry your pretty little head over.(Original post by EffieFlowers)
OP makes a completely valid thread which you evidently dislike but haven't got the brains to come up with a counter argument so you just write a completely useless post?
I wish I had the mod's power to delete such things...
... same applies to this little boy.
OP hasn't 'made' anything, he's linked an article and copied a comment from it. He's added nothing of his own opinion. You can't counter an non-existent argument ... so when you grow up a bit little girl come back with a retort worthy of spending my time on. -
- Reputation:
- TSR Demigod
- Location: Manchester
- Posts: 7,160
Re: More Benefit Sanctions required says back-to-work firms.A ten day old article at that, one wonders if he searches the Guardian for articles that criticise the benefits system.(Original post by crocker710)
who you calling a little boy? I think we're talking about things that you shouldn't worry your pretty little head over.
OP hasn't 'made' anything, he's linked an article and copied a comment from it. He's added nothing of his own opinion. You can't counter an non-existent argument ... so when you grow up a bit little girl come back with a retort worthy of spending my time on.
In any case. Who gives a monkeys if the bosses of these companies are saying that more sanctions should be dished out to people who aren't making more effort to find work.
That decision has nothing to do with them and they have no control over getting someone sanctioned, it's the Jobcentre staff who decide whether or not a sanction should be applied. -
- Reputation:
- Adored and Respected Member
- Posts: 583
Re: More Benefit Sanctions required says back-to-work firms.This is all media driven stuf, TAX evasion is far bigger issue than people taking 50 pound a week in my opinion. Literally billions is robbed from HRMC through tax evasion compared to benefits payouts. Rather than cut benefit why not reform and streamline the benefit system so the most needy receive it?
Last edited by onda; 10-07-2012 at 01:40. -
- Reputation:
- Thread Starter
- TSR Legend
- Location: Wigan
- Posts: 11,867
- Warning points: 5
Re: More Benefit Sanctions required says back-to-work firms.You weren't supposed to get the point. The thread is about benefit sanctions, and how firms are demanding more.(Original post by crocker710)
Sorry for not being able to read minds. It might help if you stated that.
-
- Reputation:
- Thread Starter
- TSR Legend
- Location: Wigan
- Posts: 11,867
- Warning points: 5
Re: More Benefit Sanctions required says back-to-work firms.You don't push people into work by punishing them with sanctions, they are not dogs, they're human beings.(Original post by chrisawhitmore)
Helping people to work will only work with people who want to work. Others will have to be pushed into work, and that is what the sanctions are for. Eventually, the state has to stop subsidising people to hunt for their dream job, and just make them take what they can get. -
- Reputation:
- TSR Demigod
- Location: Manchester
- Posts: 7,160
Re: More Benefit Sanctions required says back-to-work firms.No, you punish people with sanctions because they haven't been complying with the agreements they have made with the Jobcentre to improve their chances of getting into work, which include, but are not limited to attending training schemes and appropriate efforts to find a job.(Original post by Martyn*)
You don't push people into work by punishing them with sanctions, they are not dogs, they're human beings.
After all, the aim of Job Seeker's Allowance is to support yourself whilst you are between jobs or whilst you find your first job.
So it is entirely logical and appropriate to punish people with sanctions if they are not making the appropriate steps to find work to incentivise them to make more effort or otherwise save the taxpayer money from those who aren't genuine job seekers.Last edited by marcusfox; 10-07-2012 at 14:46. -
- Reputation:
- Thread Starter
- TSR Legend
- Location: Wigan
- Posts: 11,867
- Warning points: 5
Re: More Benefit Sanctions required says back-to-work firms.That's a big difference to: punishing people with sanctions in order to get them back to work.(Original post by marcusfox)
No, you punish people with sanctions because they haven't been complying with the agreements they have made with the Jobcentre to improve their chances of getting into work, which include, but are not limited to attending training schemes and appropriate efforts to find a job.
After all, the aim of Job Seeker's Allowance is to support yourself whilst you are between jobs or whilst you find your first job.
So it is entirely logical and appropriate to punish people with sanctions if they are not making the appropriate steps to find work to incentivise them to make more effort or otherwise save the taxpayer money from those who aren't genuine job seekers.
-
- Reputation:
- Peer Of The TSR Realm
- Location: Wales
- Posts: 1,912
Re: More Benefit Sanctions required says back-to-work firms.Martyn* - what about sanctions don't you understand? They're handed out when people don't seek work. The benefit they are claiming is jobSEEKERS Allowance. It's right there in the name that to get it you have to seek work.
Everyone who gets one can challenge it if they don't think it's fair. Someone on the other side of the country to them looks at the evidence the claimant and the Jobcentre provide and decide whether the sanction stands. Before you say it's biased, it's not. Plenty of sanctions are overturned if the claimant can provide more evidence to show they're following the rules.
