4) Guardian Newspaper Discussion RE: Jobcentre Targets

Guardian - Labour Demands action over jobcentre targets

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/mar/22/labour-demands-action-jobcentre-targets#comment-22183029

23 Mar 2013

ObiDanKinobi:-

Social cleansing is happening. Its time to speak-up/stand-up. People are dying out there. But because it's "legal" it's o.k.

Having recently had my benefits casually "disallowed" on the premises that i was not actively seeking work, when i was, i will speak my case later on... I am thoroughly dubious about the legality of what's happening.....

In society if you are guilty of a crime you are innocent until proven guilty.

Why does the benefits system operate in reverse of this natural system of law and order? I.e your benefits are stopped and then you have to appeal. That is similar to saying "you are guilty and must prove your innocence". Surely this is a contravention of the entire legal system? Also those who have been found "innocent" i.e appealed and had it overturned, have been unduly punished and persecuted when they've done no wrong. This is wrong.

It's also going to be a disaster for society, with increasing crime rates as a result. Not only that but if you take away the ability to fundamentally survive for people in society, you are justifying crime, and destroying the integrity of the entire legal system.

Why should someone who has been abandoned by society, feel any sort of responsibility to adhere to societies laws/order? This is madness. Just because its "legal" does not make it right! Look at the law lord scandal, they were paid to pass laws through, is that right? Vested interest laws need to be repealed post-haste!

As i say my case is i got disallowed for "apparently not seeking employment".

I did what was required of me as set out by the jobseekers agreement, looking for work, and even managing to find a couple of jobs to apply to. I have a clean conscience, i didn't make the jobs up, or even make up the times i searched for work, i was completely honest.

I was then told by some smug looking woman, that there was a query about my claim, because she had managed to find one job for "receptionist" that i had overlooked. So it would be sent to a decision makers.

I tried arguing my cause at this point, but it was completely pointless. Utilising common-sense does not appear to be far up the list of some civil-servants priorities.

So basically i have been sanctioned/disallowed because i didn't apply to a receptionist job. 1 job that was found. Now this would be all well and good if i had any actual prior experience of receptionist work.

None of the 3 areas of "so-called expertise" for me are to do with receptionist work, I've never worked as a "receptionist" before and my propensity to try to be honest with people at all times, would probably mean i would make an extremely crap receptionist.

Suffice to say i will be fighting this like f*ck, because it is completely wrong, I'm fully aware I'm not the only one this is happening to, and I'm not saying I'm above others in anyway because i truly don't believe that. But if someone is completely honest about looking for wok, adheres to their responsibilities with regard to looking for work, and details it accurately in their job-seekers log, and is still having bullshit sanctions brought against them, because of one job they failed to apply for, even though they have absolutely 0 experience in that area. You know there is something severely wrong with this system. I.e if you play completely by the rules and your getting penalised for it, something is majorly fucked up.

In response to xbay81

@xbay81 - I'm sorry to hear that dude/dudette...

I know exactly what you mean,and the first thing you can and should do is hold your head up high, if you've done what was required of you and have a clean conscience, then you have nothing to feel bad about, down or ashamed of. Being unemployed doesn't make you any less of a human-being. Regardless of how people treat you, do not forget this. I know what you mean about not having the energy to fight such things, it can sometimes feel like trying to have a conversation with a brick-wall. Such is the onset of fascism.

You are not in the wrong to question things, or to ask why people are sanctioning you e.t.c. Many people would be fearful that they are going to have benefits taken away e.t.c if they question, this is used to control people. It is fascism.

In fact i say if things are going the way they are, we should be an absolute thorn in the side of those who are doing such things, we should make them sweat and argue our points, as best we can.
Granted this could put some of us into severe dire straits. If you can stand-up, you should. If you can stand-up for some-one else you should. Do what you can, with the means available to you.

I know its immensely frustrating to be fobbed off, and pissed about, more so when you haven't done anything wrong, but there's always light at the end of the tunnel man. Don't give up, ever.

23 Mar 2013 10:56
In response to Perditax

@Perditax - I'm sorry to hear that about your son.... I went in for a hardship interview on friday. Basically i was told to bring some forms that i needed to fill out with me, so i did that. Upon arriving i was given another form...to do with claiming jobseekers, and told to fill this out, upon looking through the form i realised it was actually a renewal claim for jobseekers, which i found odd, so whilst at the appointment, i asked "why am i filling this renewal form out?"

I hadn't yet heard anything about my claim to say whether or not my benefit had been sanctioned/disallowed/stopped e.t.c, i was just told it had gone to a "decision makers".

At which point i was told yeah it seems to of been disallowed, nice to just get given a renewal form, and not even get an official notice of benefits being "disallowed".

I think next time i go in i shall take the advice of one of the other posters on here, and ask for a written signed official statement for the reason the benefits have been stopped.

At this point i was asked to, go over to another table, and write upon a piece of paper or two, the reasons why i disagreed, and why i felt my claim should be reconsidered.

I then asked if what i had written could be used in further/future hearings e.t.c. I was not given a direct/clear answer to this question.

So rather than just "go over to the desk" and fill the form out, as was suggested, i said that i would instead take some time to consider a response, if it was indeed likely to be used as part of any hearing, (which i will be attending should the reconsider option, not be successful). Again i was not given a clear response.

The way i have started to treat the jobcentre and advice others to do so, is similar to being in a court-room. Be mindful of everything you say.

@ObiDanKinobi - The regulating of agencies is key to this entire situation, it ties corporations to nations, forcing them to be responsible for their employees, and the nations within which they operate in. This would generate a more stable work base being that corps are required to hire workers directly, affording the workers more rights, and reducing corporate "mobility". At the moment if you look at the available jobs, you will see about 80-90% are now via agencies. This is not only a stealth job-tax, but also a stealth "rights" tax.
Sort out the issues of tax-avoidance and reassert some rights for the people of this country, and then perhaps the poor won't go short.

*Edited spelling errors* 8/10/2015