Does it pay to work? - Workfare

[Eric]

I'd tell 'em to shove it where the sun don't shine.

[kestrelx]

Originally Posted by Rob249

Ive recently been out of work for a few months now, and have been looking for any job.Anyway the jobcentre suggested a work placement for me, which i attended the interview today and he said i can start on monday.However its a months trial which means i do a months work for nothing, but still having to find my own travel, dinner expenses etc, and theres still no guarantee of a job at the end of it.I just feel like some employers can just try and exploit people to their own advantage which is not fair.I have no problem with work trials, its just i feel a month is to excessive working for nothing, if i factor in the hours i will be doing to what i get paid on jobseekers it works out at £2.29 an hour, what do you all think.

It's a con basically. How are you expected to pay your own travel? Also you eat more when working so you got to buy more food.

Aren't these workplacements just a fiddle to get free work out of people? The thing is they know they got you buy the short and curlies that's why they get away with it.

[Shurm]

Originally Posted by Rob249

So if i work my socks off show enthusiasm do the best i can, then after a month he says sorry no, then thats a month wasted, when i could have been looking for a paid job.I believe if you do a hard weeks graft you should be given at least something to show at least they appreciate your efforts you have put in and i'm sure many will agree.

I said 1 WEEK

[annesingleton]

I think that this situation is not good. Either you are fit to do a job or not, I can see perhaps that to give a week or two trial with expenses paid and benefits intact might be worthwhile, but this situation sounds like massaging the unemployment figures to the benefit of the Benefits Agency and the employer, with nothing to gain for the person desperate for a real job.

[flashy]

Originally Posted by Guinness

Not being flippant, and fair play to you for doing this, and this is an honest question, are you keeping someone else from getting that experience by continuing to work there, or do they have more than one training placement?

Nobody on these schemes should be out of pocket....local politicians claim expenses, MP's with their guaranteed golden pension schemes claim expenses....but poor Rob has to fork out for his own expenses from his £71 weekly pittance. Disgusting!

i know what you're saying Guinness, i work in a secondhand bookshop, i'm just in the background of it now, teaching and mentoring other trainees, i now have retail experience, cash handling, till work, coffee shop experience, mentoring and customer service experience, all thanx to what started off as 4 weeks unpaid work

[Rob249]

Originally Posted by kestrelx

It's a con basically. How are you expected to pay your own travel? Also you eat more when working so you got to buy more food.

Aren't these workplacements just a fiddle to get free work out of people? The thing is they know they got you buy the short and curlies that's why they get away with it.

As i said and my mum has said it does seem to me that the only reason the boss wants to employ me is because it will cut his costs in his insurance.Is that a good start to employing a new member of staff or just exploitation, make your minds up.

[Rob249]

Originally Posted by kestrelx

It's a con basically. How are you expected to pay your own travel? Also you eat more when working so you got to buy more food.

Aren't these workplacements just a fiddle to get free work out of people? The thing is they know they got you buy the short and curlies that's why they get away with it.

kestrel you are are spot on but theyre always going to get away with it.Id spend £15 on fuel a week and probably the same or more on food which would leave me with about 10 pounds spare a week.

[Guinness]

Originally Posted by flashy

i know what you're saying Guinness, i work in a secondhand bookshop, i'm just in the background of it now, teaching and mentoring other trainees, i now have retail experience, cash handling, till work, coffee shop experience, mentoring and customer service experience, all thanx to what started off as 4 weeks unpaid work

And I agree it has given you a sense of purpose, self esteem, a feeling of being back in the workforce etc..etc.. which is really great, and I genuinely applaud what you are doing... but ultimately the bookshop owner/charity directors are taking the sweat from your brow and turning it into hard cash for themselves.

This is typical of Camerons 'big society', the rich get richer on the backs of volunteers and the forced to work unemployed. They have no employer national insurance or tax to pay, no concerns over holiday pay, no concern over working time directives, no concerns about employment law..in fact they are laughing all the way to the bank, and those in work sneer at those who are out of work who refuse to take part in these schemes, and call them workshy layabouts.

Those that are 'genuinely' out of work have no real chance of getting a job, because all the jobs are filled with volunteers and forced to work unemployed.

You are currently doing something you obviously love (comes across in your post), however you also say you have no chance of being taken on full time....the vacancy is obviously there, but you have no chance because they can fill the position with a volunteer or another work experience forced to work unemployed person. This is what is inherently wrong with Camerons ideal!

[cashman]

Yeh got it spot on yon Guinness.

[Benipete]

Originally Posted by jaysay

To be honest Rob I'd tell um to stick it end of story, but of course if you refuse they stop your benefits, I'm in agreement in encouraging people back to work but this ain't it, by the way which firm is it?

I remember back in the 60's when I was an apprentice bricklayer,stonemason,drain layer flagger and kerber plasterer,slater and tiler and all round good egg and you where an apprentice wood butcher we all worked for virtually nothing.

Happy days!!

I started age 13 on a shilling an hour.

[entwisi]

I personally this this is a disgrace, if the job seekers people want you to do a months work then if they are happy for the employer to not put anything in the pot then your JavaScript allowance should at least be the minimum wage for the hours you work. To me it like the government is actually breaking its own rules by making you work for less than min wage.

I'd like to hear Graham Jones view on this.

[lancsdave]

Turn to drink or drugs. That way they can't be bothered with you and you get extra benefits

[Less]

Originally Posted by lancsdave

Turn to drink or drugs. That way they can't be bothered with you and you get extra benefits

That's because he would no longer be classed as unemployed.

I know what he's going through, they give no real encouragement, just want a long list of jobs applied for, it doesn't matter what jobs, if you applied for a job as a heart surgeon it wouldn't matter that you aren't qualified or that you have no hope in hell of getting it you have to apply for something. You can't turn up and say, 'I've been searching Every day all the jobs I've found I've already applied for', you must find something to put down and they will do anything including misinformation on the Govt jobs website to get you off their books.


Here's a question, I believe the minimum legal hourly rate is £6.19p how can the Govt site legally advertise jobs for less money than that?
(I know that under 21 can be employed for less but these jobs make no mention of a trainee rate, just advertise the job like it's for older people).

[lancsdave]

Originally Posted by Less

That's because he would no longer be classed as unemployed.

I know what he's going through, they give no real encouragement, just want a long list of jobs applied for, it doesn't matter what jobs, if you applied for a job as a heart surgeon it wouldn't matter that you aren't qualified or that you have no hope in hell of getting it you have to apply for something. You can't turn up and say, 'I've been searching Every day all the jobs I've found I've already applied for', you must find something to put down and they will do anything including misinformation on the Govt jobs website to get you off their books.


Here's a question, I believe the minimum legal hourly rate is £6.19p how can the Govt site legally advertise jobs for less money than that?
(I know that under 21 can be employed for less but these jobs make no mention of a trainee rate, just advertise the job like it's for older people).

Thats why I started this business, I went there twice and vowed not to go again if I could help. Better off working for nowt here than dealing with the jobcentre staff

[Guinness]

Originally Posted by entwisi

I personally this this is a disgrace, if the job seekers people want you to do a months work then if they are happy for the employer to not put anything in the pot then your JavaScript allowance should at least be the minimum wage for the hours you work. To me it like the government is actually breaking its own rules by making you work for less than min wage.

I'd like to hear Graham Jones view on this.

In February 2011, our Graham advertised for a parliamentary intern on an unspecified contract length to be paid lunch and travel expenses.

His argument for doing this...

Graham Jones MP: Parliamentary Interns. Right wing bloggers

The comments from Guido Fawkes and Ian Silvera blow his full page argument out of the water in a couple of brief paragraphs, but I guess his blog gives you some idea of his personal view on this kind of thing

Tory, Labour, LibDem...when it comes to jumping on the media led populist bandwagon that the unemployed are a workshy drain, they fall over themselves to condemn and get airtime....when it comes to dipping their hands in their own pocket to help...you won't see them for dust