The Student Room Group

This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

Jobseekers allowance should be scrapped and replaced with paid hard labour

Scroll to see replies

Reply 20
goodmen
I think people should be forced to work after say 3-6months. You shouldnt be allowed to turn down jobs after that



You're not allowed to turn down jobs at any time while on JSA. People in this topic have no clue about how it works.
Quady
Worst arguement ever. I hope it was tongue in cheek, otherwise its scarily PCS like...


Well the first part of my post was true, I wouldn't want to loose my job! The 2nd part was just an argument the OP could use. Trust me, I don't agree with most of the things the PCS say!
Reply 22
Blátönn
I don't think it need be 'hard labour'; there's no reason to punish them. However, they should be made to apply to a reasonable job if it's available i.e they shouldn't have to be a Sewer Cleaner if it's there, but if there's an opening in a shop, factory, cleaner, et cetera. Of course this only applies to people claiming benefits.


goodmen
I think people should be forced to work after say 3-6months. You shouldnt be allowed to turn down jobs after that


I was under the impression that points along these lines were already being implemented and have for a while...
Reply 23
didgeridoo12uk
I have a debate next Friday arguing for the above point.


Expanding on Dez's point, if you keep JSA the same and its only a day and a half of work a week it would cost far too much to administer to be worth while.

If it was a full week paid at minimum wage then wheres the work they are supposed to do? Again it would cost a lot for such a scheme.

Or did you actually mean breaking rocks? In which case people would have less time to get a job and there would be 'point' in doing it, again, the administation cost would be very high.
Reply 24
Ryouga
True true, like in my thread it seems like its a case of people see benefits as free money so they should be glad of it and take any job, I agree with the fact that people should be happy they even get it but it shouldnt be an excuse to treat them worse.

It would create a massive divide in class, the rich would stay rich, and the poor would not be able to use their potential skills because they would be in the worst jobs.

The problem with the benefit system is it doesnt seek to improve the people on it just as said force them into work which helps with its own destruction since people dont feel as if they are good enough to work, or feel like they are being forced into a job below them as certain jobs are stigmatised.


In my opinion, those on benefits should take whatever job they're told to take, no matter what.

They shouldn't get a choice in the matter.
Reply 25
clair1987
Think about it this way - Say a newly graduated nurse/s couldn't get a job, what benefit is it to society to send this person on a 'training' course whereby they will complete a 6 week placement in a retail store?


Have you been reading my thread?! (not a nurse but been told I have to do a 6 week placement in a retail store unpaid apart from basic benefits)
Reply 26
ogloom
messing with benefit thieves. The humanity!
EDIT: reintroduce Gulags for those who choose not to work.


the gulags comment made me laugh -as for the topic, I'd argue that the system is flawed and people instead signing up for benefits, should be able to sign onto a register similar to a agency - the second a minimum wage job is available, they should HAVE to take it or cease receiving their benefits!
the reason a lot of people are on job seekers is because there are no people requiring employees.

So providing someone is sending off many job applications, it's not their fault if they can't get a job stright away. Unfortunately, with the competition to get jobs, I think many people have gone through a breif period of unemployment.
Reply 28
cpj1987
In my opinion, those on benefits should take whatever job they're told to take, no matter what.

They shouldn't get a choice in the matter.


I cant tell if you are joking or not.
Ryouga
Have you been reading my thread?! (not a nurse but been told I have to do a 6 week placement in a retail store unpaid apart from basic benefits)


Yes :smile: But this is also what I study for my degree :biggrin:
gateshipone
Since that would put me out of a job (I work in a jobcentre) I'd say it's a bad idea. There are thousands of people working for the DWP who would be made unemployed if hard labour replaced JSA.


Well in my experience the majority of 'advisors' at the Jobcentre are vile so I'd feel fairly blase about the idea that they would have to work hard labour.

Tbh OP, the whole JSA system is such a mess that it might do the country good. But as someone who claimed JSA once upon a time I feel the need to say no. It helped me ever so slightly even though it was like trying to squeeze water from a stone.
Reply 31
cpj1987
In my opinion, those on benefits should take whatever job they're told to take, no matter what.

They shouldn't get a choice in the matter.


They already have to. The problem is finding jobs for them.
Reply 32
gateshipone
Well the first part of my post was true, I wouldn't want to loose my job! The 2nd part was just an argument the OP could use. Trust me, I don't agree with most of the things the PCS say!


Thats ok :smile:

But the DWP can't just keep jobs that aren't needed in non economically beneficial roles (ie all most of them). You're assuming you (and others) couldn't get a job elsewhere.
Reply 33
Ryouga
I cant tell if you are joking or not.


I'm not.
Reply 34
laurakate1988
the reason a lot of people are on job seekers is because there are no people requiring employees.

So providing someone is sending off many job applications, it's not their fault if they can't get a job stright away. Unfortunately, with the competition to get jobs, I think many people have gone through a breif period of unemployment.


Yes and no, I have lived in towns where there has been thousands unemployed and say 15 jobs in the entire jobcentre and around 10 of those self employed, and needing a car.

And I have lived other places with loads of factories and call centres and a reasonable amount of jobs going but still no way everyone unemployed should or could be hired.
Benefits should be stopped but some more services created. For example supermarkets for the poor (ie food for children who are starving). More jobs in industry, ie government owned factories etc. More nurses and careworkers for elderly and disabled, NOT money to buy their own things.

Lets stop this awful benefit culture.
Reply 36
del1507
They already have to. The problem is finding jobs for them.


There are plenty of jobs available, but too many people on benefits consider themselves to be too good for certain jobs, and will find ways around getting those jobs so that they can either (a) spend more time on benefits to avoid work or (b) spend more time on benefits whilst they look for a job they consider good enough for them.
Long term unemployed ie more than a year - YES
Short term (Ie those hit by job losses) - NO

It depends on the circumstances really as of someone had contributed to NI for many years they deserve the help to find a job that suits them where as if all the person has ever done is scrounge off the state then yes they deserve to be made to work!
Reply 38
cpj1987
In my opinion, those on benefits should take whatever job they're told to take, no matter what.

They shouldn't get a choice in the matter.


So an experienced Managing Director should be forced to work at Tesco self stacking ruining their future employability at a similar level?

Theres a lot to be said about getting people into the right jobs.
Reply 39
Quady
So an experienced Managing Director should be forced to work at Tesco self stacking ruining their future employability at a similar level?

Theres a lot to be said about getting people into the right jobs.


Well, I'd say yes, personally.

Latest