"she then decided to claim unemployment benefit for a number of weeks, after X amount of time the government said, Miss Reilly we have a placement for you, and so sent her to pound land. stacking shelves, customer service. not unpaid, because the conditions you accept at the point of claiming unemployment benefit is after X amount of time you'll be sent on a work place program. - so she wasnt working for nothing, she was working to meet her client agreement. and to continue to receive unemployment benefit."
Again no offence but you are wrong. I happen to be on JSA my self and it does not say anywhere in the agreement you are expected to work full time for no money. Hence why she took the government to court. The High Court would not be in her favor if what they were doing is legal.
Also you are expected to look for jobs, and write them down in a book and go to A4E. You are not told when you sign on you have to work full time in a shop without receiving any wages.
She didn't decide to claim benefits, she had left university and had to because she didn't have a job. But more important is the fact she already had voluntary work in the musium which would of helped her get a job in her chosen career. And they took her off it.Which is inane.
I'm sorry but working in a shop stacking shelves and not getting £6 an hour for your graft is working for nothing. You have to ask yourself a simple question, would you work in a job if you wasn't getting paid a wage?Again The High Court have said the government is breaking the law and what there doing is illegal. So I don't see how anyone can argue with The High Court.
"is it really to much to ask for people to work for their benefit. or do people expect to just sit idle and get benefit for nothing."
No one is saying they should sit around and do nothing. 99/99 per cent don't. they look for work. But there's a recession and it's very difficult to get jobs.
There are many people that are redundant as well. And No they shouldn't be expected to work for there money, we don't want to live in America.
They should be expected to look for work and the government should provide work experience with extra money like they used to years ago on MBW.
They used to pay people £15 extra for work placements. I'm all for work experience if it is suited you and will help you get a job, but there's no point in putting someone in a placement that is unsuitable. Kind of reminds of the inbetweeners episode where they put will and the lanky guy in the wrong placements and there terrible. they need to put doleys in work experience that is suitable to them and pay them for there time there. that way it would be a great idea and help people into work.
"anyway the program worked because Miss Reilly is now employed, not as a geologist, but in retail/customer services in a supermarket. so proof if proof were needed. lets remember who was backing Miss Reilly. the Unions. the same unions who support and back the labour party. and now the picture becomes clear"
I can't see what unions or Labour have to do with this TBH. The poundland "Job" didn't help her and is nothing to do with her working in a supermarket, she's getting paid now, she wasn't before.
"as for the geologists who have taken offense to the reference made who cares".
I'm pretty certain that they do and there quite right. Ian Duncan Smith doesn't understand Joe Bloggs. I doubt he has ever worked stacking shelves or being on benefits. The only time he was on benefits was for a t.v. show which he quit. because he couldn't live on the money that was provided to
the Court actually agreed with the governments program, but not the frame work, as such once the new regulations have been approved the exact same program will continue.
as part of your job seeking allowance agreement you accept the terms. were it clearly states - if you refuse to go on a work placement or refuse a training offer. you will lose your benefit entitlement. the program kicks in if you have been claiming unemployment benefit for six months.
at no point did this lady work for nothing, she was working for her benefit. - in order to keep receiving the benefit - going on the job placement was part of the deal in order for her to meet her JSA agreement.
It is my belief if people want work they will work in any job. trouble is some people think certain jobs are beneath them. and this is were the problem starts, people need to see the bigger picture and plan ahead. most people are not even worth the minimum wage but expect to be paid £10 plus an hour. and turn their noses up. when we have 650,000 migrants coming over to do menial jobs - jobs which the natives refuse to do then something has gone horribly wrong. and it goes back to what i've just said.
We need a wholesale change of the benefit system. in order to receive Jobseeking allowance it should be the norm that you have to take a placement of work or training. in order to receive benefit it should not be the case you sign on benefit and then are left idle. doing nothing but, signing on, on a Thursday, getting you benefit on the Tuesday, and filling in a job log with fictitious entries. you know am closer to the truth. if anyone reaches the 6 months unemployed then something is wrong, one) they are not willing to adapt and change, IE career direction or two) refuse to learn a new skill.
adapt or be left on the sidelines, moaning about how unfair the government is, at least the government is trying, unlike labour, as was said on question time they, labour just wrote the cheque and walked away, at least the Tory government are asking questions. because for far to long people have taken the mickey. like i've said if your out of work for longer than 6 months then look in the mirror and ask the question why. anyone out of work longer than 5 years needs throwing off benefits altogether.