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
jbottle1
Nope, JSA is worth less than benefits. Whether you get one or the other depends upon your circumstances. You can't have a job + get benefits (its benefit fraud).
yes, you can. You can claim child benefit and housing benefit, as well as getting help with medical expenses and not have to pay council tax.
Liquidus Zeromus
Against: It's not fair, and it's far from just lazy people who have to make use of it. I think it should be replaced by a standard benefit for all unemployed people which doesn't force them to get a job really, and doesn't restrict people's freedom to earn money -people should not be penalised for earning a small wage alongside benefits. There are ways of making welfare work better, that's for sure. And being forced to get a job is quite demoralising, people should be allowed to take their time.
There was a system a few years back that mean if you worked part time they would allow you to keep the first £5 but after that kept it in a fund for a maximum of like 6 months or maybe a year not sure, but only to the maximum of £1000 that they paid you when you found a job, good if you worked for a few hours over a few months and it mounted up otherwise it was bad because you couldnt keep your money.
Do not replace Jobseekers Allowance with Hard labour. The purpose of Jobseekers Allowance is to provide people with a reasonable income while they look for a job. Jobseekers Allowance is not, as many people assume, an easy way for lazy people to earn money without working. Not everyone exploits the system, and not every person on Jobseekers is lazy and un-motivated. It's excellent that there is a system put in place in this country that supports those unfortunate enough to have lost their jobs, especially in this current economic crisis.
Replacing Jobseekers with paid hard-labour would be an even greater burden on the tax-payer. What is this gargantuan work-force supposed to do? build roads, housing, plant trees? Think of the enourmous amount of money that would be required to insure this workforce, and provide them with the appropriate training needed to carry out whatever tasks they may be asked to perform.
I know it's only a debate topic, but the whole idea of replacing reeks of Middle-Class predjudice. I doubt that it has been thought through.
Replacing Jobseekers with paid hard-labour would be an even greater burden on the tax-payer. What is this gargantuan work-force supposed to do? build roads, housing, plant trees? Think of the enourmous amount of money that would be required to insure this workforce, and provide them with the appropriate training needed to carry out whatever tasks they may be asked to perform.
I know it's only a debate topic, but the whole idea of replacing reeks of Middle-Class predjudice. I doubt that it has been thought through.
The positives I would suggest is that it would provide people who have been out of work with a current reference - i.e. if they do a good job with whatever place you put them then they can be recommended for a job that they really want. This would be beneficial to people who have been long-term unemployed but still capable of doing a good job. Speaking from personal experience, I think it might also give the long term unemployed more self worth (although, obviously, only if the work placements were handled sensitively). My boyfriend was unemployed for several months and became quite down as a result of it - I think that having something to do would have been of great benefit (pardon the pun).
I don't think that the point that it would put DWP workers out of work is relevent at all, as more workers would presumably be needed to organise and follow up such a scheme, which would be beneficial in itself.
The negatives are that, while there are some lovely job centre workers, there are also some bad apples, who might treat the process of putting people into work insensitively, making people who are genuinely looking for work feel even worse about the process. As someone else has suggested, it would also mean less time available for the job seekers to actually look for jobs. I would be more inclined to suggest one or two days of volunteer work a week, leaving time for job hunting but providing the benefits I suggested before.
I don't think that the point that it would put DWP workers out of work is relevent at all, as more workers would presumably be needed to organise and follow up such a scheme, which would be beneficial in itself.
The negatives are that, while there are some lovely job centre workers, there are also some bad apples, who might treat the process of putting people into work insensitively, making people who are genuinely looking for work feel even worse about the process. As someone else has suggested, it would also mean less time available for the job seekers to actually look for jobs. I would be more inclined to suggest one or two days of volunteer work a week, leaving time for job hunting but providing the benefits I suggested before.
Ryouga
There was a system a few years back that mean if you worked part time they would allow you to keep the first £5 but after that kept it in a fund for a maximum of like 6 months or maybe a year not sure, but only to the maximum of £1000 that they paid you when you found a job, good if you worked for a few hours over a few months and it mounted up otherwise it was bad because you couldnt keep your money.
That definitely sounds reasonable.
Would encourage people to find work, gives them skills such as team work, work experiance and muscle building.
Ryouga
Shame they got rid of it.
No ****. Useless
Lust of a Gardener
Replacing Jobseekers with paid hard-labour would be an even greater burden on the tax-payer. What is this gargantuan work-force supposed to do? build roads, housing, plant trees? Think of the enourmous amount of money that would be required to insure this workforce,
Replacing Jobseekers with paid hard-labour would be an even greater burden on the tax-payer. What is this gargantuan work-force supposed to do? build roads, housing, plant trees? Think of the enourmous amount of money that would be required to insure this workforce,
I imagine they would be paid the same amount as the total of all their benefits, or a similar amount, so in that respect it's not a much greater cost.
and provide them with the appropriate training needed to carry out whatever tasks they may be asked to perform.
The government already runs free training programs for those seeking work, this would just mean that the skills learned are put to good use.
I know it's only a debate topic, but the whole idea of replacing reeks of Middle-Class predjudice. I doubt that it has been thought through.
I don't believe that i have a middle class prejudice towards this. I'm in support of something like community work for the unemployed as I've seen how low people (eg. my ex partner, my brothers, myself) can get when they find themselves unable to get work. I think doing something positive would be good for self esteem and also improve people's chances of getting a new job with the added references.
though, in all fairness, I have little to no idea how realistic it would be.
Tuppenny
I don't think that the point that it would put DWP workers out of work is relevent at all, as more workers would presumably be needed to organise and follow up such a scheme, which would be beneficial in itself.
Except the civil service has a strange way of dealing with extra work...not hiring enough people to deal with it! Even with the 4 other people hired the same time as me, we're still overwhelmed by the amount of people signing on. Instead of hiring more people we've been left to struggle for months.
I would put money on this being the case if a hard labour scheme was introduced. The minimum possible number of people would be kept on while the rest would be left to join the unemployed.
That of course is on top of the MASSIVE cost of such a scheme. Governments aren't always the best at introducing massive new projects on budget.
T kay
It shouldn't be entirely scrapped but merely tougher to be eligible for and tougher to stay on. There's too many people who don't make an effort to get a job and just milk the state.
Actually there are quite a few methods of getting people off JSA if they don't make an effort. The issue right now is that there aren't enough staff and there isn't enough time to deal with those people effectively.
death.drop
I imagine they would be paid the same amount as the total of all their benefits, or a similar amount, so in that respect it's not a much greater cost.
The government already runs free training programs for those seeking work, this would just mean that the skills learned are put to good use.
I don't believe that i have a middle class prejudice towards this. I'm in support of something like community work for the unemployed as I've seen how low people (eg. my ex partner, my brothers, myself) can get when they find themselves unable to get work. I think doing something positive would be good for self esteem and also improve people's chances of getting a new job with the added references.
though, in all fairness, I have little to no idea how realistic it would be.
The government already runs free training programs for those seeking work, this would just mean that the skills learned are put to good use.
I don't believe that i have a middle class prejudice towards this. I'm in support of something like community work for the unemployed as I've seen how low people (eg. my ex partner, my brothers, myself) can get when they find themselves unable to get work. I think doing something positive would be good for self esteem and also improve people's chances of getting a new job with the added references.
though, in all fairness, I have little to no idea how realistic it would be.
I would rather do a good job on a work placement than a crap job and paid so I can see something in what you say.
death.drop
I assume that you don't have a great knowledge of how the Jobseekers allowance scheme works. I was unfortuante enough to be on Jobseekers for two weeks, before I got more hours at work. I certainly didn't get an enormous amount of money from the scheme; £40 a week was all I got. Compare this to the enormous amount of money the Government would have to pay to provide each person on benefits with the minimum wage, suitable training, appropriate clothing and equipment, and Goverment pensions (If applicable). What exactly would the Government plan to do with such a large and expensive workforce. Honestly, it would be cheaper to pay them the average Jobseekers income.
It's not the one's on JSA that are scroungers it's the hundreds of thousands of people on incapacity benefit when they are perfectly capable of getting a job. However, anyone taking out unemployment related benefits from the sate should do something in return.
if there is work available for benefit recipiants to do, why not just advertise the job?
Lust of a Gardener
I assume that you don't have a great knowledge of how the Jobseekers allowance scheme works. I was unfortuante enough to be on Jobseekers for two weeks, before I got more hours at work.
I assume that you don't have a great knowledge of how the Jobseekers allowance scheme works. I was unfortuante enough to be on Jobseekers for two weeks, before I got more hours at work.
actually, my partner was on JSA for about 6 months and I had control of the finances so I have a fairly good knowledge of how it works.
I certainly didn't get an enormous amount of money from the scheme; £40 a week was all I got. Compare this to the enormous amount of money the Government would have to pay to provide each person on benefits with the minimum wage, suitable training, appropriate clothing and equipment, and Goverment pensions (If applicable). What exactly would the Government plan to do with such a large and expensive workforce. Honestly, it would be cheaper to pay them the average Jobseekers income.
People on the dole get housing benefit and don't have to pay council tax. when you consider that it's roughly the same as working for minimum wage and having to pay both of those out of your wages.
I assumed that it would work in the way that their benefits are the same, yet they work for them until they can find a 'real' job.
As I said before, the government already provide free training for those who have been on JSA a certain amount of time so there's no added expense there.
clothing is a small cost and equipment doesn't have to be bought often.
Also, I do believe that this kind of scheme would mean less people taking advantage of the fact that if they choose to not work the government gives them this option, so they would save money in that area.
~emy~
What if they can't find any 'paid hard labour' (i.e. a job)? Is that not the whole point of jobseekers allowance- for people not in work? If they were already working then they wouldn’t need jobseekers allowance.
However, I do find that the whole system is flawed. I think a lot more needs to be done in order to get people into work. Just something simple like getting people into work experience would be a great thing. A lot of the 'training' the jobcentre provides is just a waste of money.
People go on the dole thinking that they'll find a job but then get comfortable with the free money coming in and all the free time to just laze around. That needs to stop. It's too easy for people to be on the dole for years and not even bother to look for a job
However, I do find that the whole system is flawed. I think a lot more needs to be done in order to get people into work. Just something simple like getting people into work experience would be a great thing. A lot of the 'training' the jobcentre provides is just a waste of money.
People go on the dole thinking that they'll find a job but then get comfortable with the free money coming in and all the free time to just laze around. That needs to stop. It's too easy for people to be on the dole for years and not even bother to look for a job
I dont think its easy to live on £50 a week! Like someone said before - thats a maximum of a day and a half work.
The majority of the money wasted in the benefits system is because of privatisation of services which the job centre should be handling. anybody heard of a4e? Their owner has made millions and millions of pounds of the unemployed. They are under investigation for fraudand david blunket gets a wage packet from them.
There is your problem
There is your problem
Can someone explain to me how the JSA works, like is their a period of time where you're on JSA long enough that they just take you off it?
Latest
Trending
Last reply 3 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 3 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 3 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 3 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 3 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 3 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
