No I don't, hence why I never said that, I said that getting paid a lower wage to do a job that your not really suitable for but will give you good experience that will help you find a job in the future was fine.
Poundland Girl Wins Forced Labour Ruling
- Thread starter CosmicClown
- Start date
No I don't, hence why I never said that, I said that getting paid a lower wage to do a job that your not really suitable for but will give you good experience that will help you find a job in the future was fine.
Yes, but I would also be doing everything I could to get a job...
That doesnt seem to be the case in the examples in the court case.
Certainly true around here and I shudder to think what my options would be if I was made redundant again - McDonalds here for instance has dozens and dozens of people on basically "zero hour" contracts and lucky to get 5 hours of work a week. With the best will in the world I'd almost certainly be out of work for quite awhile depending pretty much on fate for both an opening to come up and being ahead of the ever increasing number of people applying to get a job.
Deleted member 66701
Deleted member 66701
Yes it does.
however, a minority of benefit claimants are willing to add a negative value to the disadvantages of being employed - reduced free time, commuting, being "bossed" about, being a "cog in the wheel" etc.
For those, sacrificing £10/£20 per week difference from a min wage job is worth it to not have to put up with those negatives. Monetarily they'll be worse off on benefits but without the disadvantages of being employed - and tbh I can see where they are coming from.
What needs to happen is that min wage employment needs to significantly exceed the monetary value of benefits OR the disadvantages of min wage employment reduced - i.e. subsidised child care, subsidised travel. more meaningful and worthwhile work for those on min wage. Better traing in min wage jobs. better career progression etc.
Only by elevating min wage jobs in prestige and satisfaction will you break the cycle of benefit dependancy. Enlarging the gap between min wage jobs and benefits by depressing or removing benefits is not the answer.
Associate
- Joined
- 17 Oct 2010
- Posts
- 1,073
In this girls case and people in a similar position the scheme seems to be poorly targeted what is the point of her getting poundland experience with no intention of working there one minute longer than she has to at the expense of placing someone who would be better suited and a possible long term employee at poundland or would love to gain experience or a job in that sector.
The job centre seems to take a very short term view, just get anyone, no matter how unsuitabe into any job, no thought of getting the right people into the right jobs and starting them off on long term careers.
The job centre seems to take a very short term view, just get anyone, no matter how unsuitabe into any job, no thought of getting the right people into the right jobs and starting them off on long term careers.
Deleted member 66701
Deleted member 66701
Way to miss the point.
Doing voluntary work whilst looking for a job is a perfectly valid way to improve your employabilty and maintain a "work ethic".
Forcing someone to give up voluntary work in order to send them to work at Poundland for 30hrs a week is ludicrous.
I thought you had to be looking for a job to be able to claim JSA? No doubt there are some who will abuse that but let's not assume that everyone on JSA is a benefit scrounger.
Deleted member 66701
Deleted member 66701
This is what happens when you implement private sector target driven work practices in a public sector organisation.
The public sector isn't there to "provide value" - it should be there to "help people".
No, it doesnt. there are numerous situations where total withdrawl rates go over 100% in the current benefits system due to varying entitlements etc.
www.jrf.org.uk/publications/poverty-trade-work-incentives-and-income-redistribution-britain
The whole system needs a fundamental, ground up reform. Thats why I support exactly that, via a negative income tax/guaranteed income model that ensures everyone stands to benefit equally from benefits and employment.
No there isn't. That's essentially all you do as a replenisher; pull stock from the warehouse, put it on the shelf. Anything to do with systems or stock control is handled by someone who knows what they're doing.
Retail experience counts for essentially nothing anyway, unless you only want a career in retail.
You have to go through the motions of getting a job. however, people should not be able to restrict their searches to what they decide they want to do, which appears to be the situation with both of these example cases.
To be clear, I don't actually like the current conditional benefits model, but while we have a system that allows people out of work to have an equivilent (or in some cases better) lifestyle than their employability could achieve, conditionality and sanctioining become a requirement due to the poor design of the sustem
Deleted member 66701
Deleted member 66701
No it doesn't - that report is 7 years old.
Significant increases in the personal tax allowance, increases to min wage rates, erosion of some benefits and the housing benefit subsidy cap now means that it's no longer possible to earn more on benefits than it is to be in employment.
I'd remind you what it is I do for a living and the industry sector I'm employed in but this is the internet and I could say I'm a Physics Professor for all anyone knows. Lets just say DWP and Hewlett-Packard and leave it at that.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 20 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 3,814
- Location
- Cambridge/Chicago
proves that poundland are evil.
Deleted member 66701
Deleted member 66701
Apart from when the Job Center tells your teenage daughter to apply for a job as a "masseuse"
Deleted member 66701
Deleted member 66701
If I were the boss of Poundland I'd offer her a job on min wage, with just enough hours to stop JSA being able to be claimed
If she refused she'd lose JSA
Last edited by a moderator:
Why? Because she didn't want to work for £2 an hour in Poundland where she'll learn nothing new and means that she can't do voluntary work she enjoys doing that will improve her employability while looking for a job?
I know that universal credit goes some way to addressing the issues, although it doesnt address the impact of tax credits in raising some families income beyond that of working families earning more, but I am willing to take your word for it to a point that things are improving.
We are still nowhere near a fair system though, even when universal credit comes in, especially after changes such as child benefit entitlements.
This 100%.
I fail to see why people don't understand how stupid it is to pay JOB SEEKERS allowance to people WORKING.
JSA is for people who are looking for a job, not people working 30+ hour weeks stacking stock in pound-land.
That's ignoring the utter contempt to our capitalist rules of fair competition - by giving some private corporations a supply of cheap labour not available to all.
Training I can understand unpaid (which resulted in recognised qualifications), or even at a push community service (assisting the elderly or doing something they can at least feel good about).
It was a stupid idea & badly implemented from the get go.
Good post, it's also a method which maintains a safety net & ensures that the few exceptions don't end up on the street, call me a "wishy washy lefty" but I'd prefer to keep the number of homeless people in the UK at a minimum & reduce child poverty - slashing our benefits system to achieve the above will do just that.
Besides, benefit slashing is a form of collective punishment (make a child live in poverty because they had the misfortune to have had Wayne & Waynetta slob as parents)
Last edited:
but in practice you're doing a mundane job that a monkey could perform and taking away a private sector job that someone should be employed minimum wage to do. The only ones who benefit are government statistics and private enterprises getting cheap labour.