Poundland Girl Wins Forced Labour Ruling

[arknor]

What work could they really do that won't cost someone a job?
You may say litter picking in the street , helping old ladies cross the road.
But then setting up a system for this will cost more than it's worth and then you have to employ other people to make sure they are actually working..
The only jobs that won't cost a job and doesn't require external monitoring would be packing peoples bags in supermarkets.

Any thing else will just give free labour to companies and boost their profits whilst forcing someone else onto JSA

It has to be jobs that don't currently exist that won't be abused to boost a companies profits.

The only thing is manufacturing something we don't now and exporting it or sticking everyone who claims JSA on treadmills and feeding powrer to the national grid to reduce the cost of energy and peoples bills

 

[GAC]

so your telling me people learning how to garden, build fences, walls and help expand cycleways or walking routes arnt learning new skills ?

retail in general is stagnant and in some instances in decline, sticking someone in tesco's stacking shelves for 8 weeks and being treated like a dogs body is good experience !?

as for costing money, at least its being spent on something to help improve the country and who knows enhance tourism in some places, which would hopefully bring in money to the country rather than save cash for supermarkets and other retailers who arnt exactly suffering at the mo.

 

[spankingtexan]

I do, because in a long run, even looking at the example of the two people in media spotlight, there is a precedence proving it works. The idea is to break the cycle for long term unemployed. Preferably in such a way as to go and find even a minimum wage job instead of relying on benefits. I can't think of a better place to make someone think "there must be better alternative out there" than position in Poundland. And on that level I would support it even if it was cleaning public parks of dog's excrements in orange jumpsuits.

Oh right, so forcing people to work for no pay simply because they have been unfortunate in their job search is ok is it?
Do you understand most people on JSA are actively seeking employment, even long term unemployed or are we going to put them in the same basket as the minority who cheat the system?
Forcing people to work for no pay must not be allowed to continue unless they have been convicted of a criminal offence and sentenced to community service.

Your suggestion you would support a person who is out of work to degrading public humiliation by doning on a bright orange jump suit is sick, it is this kind of attitude that is causing anger in our society and then wonder why people protest. It's been called a short sharp shock by the DWP, evidence the schemes are a punishment rather than a real attempt at helping people find a job.
These schemes do nothing more than take real paid jobs away, it is costing the tax payer more than it would if nothing at all was done.

As for charity organisations, I do not have a problem with those who wish to volunteer their services for no pay but to force people into working for free whether charity or not is just wrong.
You will get those who abuse the system sure but these really are a very small minority as are those in work who have their little perks or those MP's who abuse their expenses.
Why should someone fallen on hard times who has as Gac says paid years into the pot be forced into free labour wearing bright orange jumpsuits?

Yes I will fight these vile schemes and those vile people who support them, remember you just might need to fall back on the state for help yourself one day, i'm sure your attitude would then be a different one.

 

[v0n]

so your telling me people learning how to garden, build fences, walls and help expand cycleways or walking routes arnt learning new skills ?

I think the main difference between two sides of this discussion is that some of you think this scheme is populated by some sort of almost Doctors Without Borders dropouts who have long term difficulty finding jobs to match their skillset and are brutally torn away from their charitable tasks to perform menial services for high street capitalistic exploiter whereas the other side see them simply as the cast of "Shameless" raptured from beer gardens at the back of their council property to make them busy and mix them with other working people in hope they would wake up to the realities of life in society.

In any case, in order to organise work scheme in such a way as to perform tasks for councils and community, government would have to spend a lot of money to create proper structure. Chain of people to find tasks worth doing, train the forces, supervise them, health and safety inspectors, attendance database inputters, multilevel management for escalation procedures, additional supervisors on call in case people turned up drunk or became uncooperative/aggressive, etc etc. Time. Money. Vetting. More time. More money. Private companies and existing charities already have all of the above in place. I can see why the scheme would go that route instead.

Oh right, so forcing people to work for no pay simply because they have been unfortunate in their job search is ok is it?

I'm sorry mate, but five years unemployed is hardly "unfortunate in their job search". I'd say after initial 12 months one should automatically wake up to the fact that "job searched" to match the skill is just not going to happen. Otherwise, the scheme will do so? And we already covered the "no pay" issue. It's paid. It's been paid forward across many years of watching Jeremy Kyle and dong the "unfortunate in search" routine in some cases.

 

[spankingtexan]

And those who have been unable to get employment after 12 months despite trying to get work need to be punished like a criminal on community service? Sorry mate don't think so.

 

[v0n]

And those who have been unable to get employment after 12 months despite trying to get work need to be punished like a criminal on community service? Sorry mate don't think so.

But they are not punished like a criminal, are they? They don't work in orange jump suits and they are not supervised by men who hold keys to their freedom. Regardless of how much you exaggerate for dramatic effect. As far as I know currently all that is expected of these people is to go and work for up to four weeks in a high street shop. I personally do not agree with range of businesses selected for this purpose, I'd rather if it was more "communal" - more to the benefit of the society, but as I wrote, I understand why it has to be that way.
Reading your rants one could get an impression this was some sort of scheme forcing kids to dig coal from dusk to dawn. The only people who can describe this as "vile schemes and vile people who support them" are usually the ones "not bothered to read the rest".

 

[Tefal]

so your telling me people learning how to garden, build fences, walls and help expand cycleways or walking routes arnt learning new skills ?

ah i'm sorry i didn't realize you where going to have them compete with private companies and put paid people out of work....

that's kinda the exact same problem everyone is saying exists at the moment with them costing retail jobs.

maybe charity shops would be better?

also i think the highways lot might go on strike if you get this lot doing road works.

retail in general is stagnant and in some instances in decline, sticking someone in tesco's stacking shelves for 8 weeks and being treated like a dogs body is good experience !?

they're unskilled, unemployed and have no references and havn't gotten a job in six months, yep the reference that they can be a dogsbody will be useful.

might interest you to know that the supermarkets mates work in they now pretty much only employe people who they've had o na placement, if they're not incompetent at end of the placement they get hired, but trying to walk in off the street wqith a cv in your hand generally gets you told to sod off.

 

[Tefal]

And those who have been unable to get employment after 12 months despite trying to get work need to be punished like a criminal on community service? Sorry mate don't think so.

well not really, it's just saying "right you couldn't find a job so we're going to choose one for you, otherwise we stop giving you the free money you've been living off".

 

[Biohazard]

It's not a proper job though, they aren't earning a proper wage. If there is a job to do, it should provide at least minimum wage earnings. The staff retention rates of this scheme are shocking.

 

[Woden]

well not really, it's just saying "right you couldn't find a job so we're going to choose one for you, otherwise we stop giving you the free money you've been living off".

Well not really, it's just saying "right you couldn't find a job so we're going to choose one for you. Where you will work for just £2.03 an hour with a very low chance of employment at the end of it anyway."

 

[Biohazard]

I prefer the Spanish system, they all go off in vans and do stuff for the community.

I could handle that in place of private shareholder profit.

 

[spankingtexan]

Tesco Called on Government To Scrap Benefit Sanctions As Profits Dipped

Posted on March 29, 2013 by johnny void | 65 Comments


Tesco claim to have called on the DWP to scrap benefit sanctions in a response to a letter asking them about their use of forced, unpaid workers.

In a humiliating snub to Iain Duncan Smith, the company set up their own workfare scheme outside of the Jobcentre system last year. Tesco say that this scheme is entirely voluntary but add in the letter: “I appreciate your concerns and can advise that Tesco have suggested to the Department of Work and Pensions that, to avoid any misunderstanding about the voluntary nature of the scheme, the risk of losing benefits that currently exists should be removed.”

Now unless Tesco are fibbing, if their scheme is outside of the various DWP workfare schemes, then it should be entirely voluntary. The statement suggests that in order to avoid confusion Tesco would like to see all benefit sanctions removed. Tesco want free workers without the bad PR, and have no doubt calculated that with youth unemployment soaring, they can easily manipulate young people into working for free. The company have even stated that “going forward” young people “accepted for work experience with Tesco” will have the option of being paid minimum wage and those that complete a placement successfully will be given a real job.

Yet just 300 of those who worked unpaid at Tesco have been employed, despite around 1,400 people having ‘donated’ their time to support the company. What Tesco really seem to be saying is that occasionally we might employ someone without making them work unpaid first. How ****ing big of them.

These is another reason why Tesco might oppose benefit sanctions however. Whilst Tesco are far from the cheapest shop, they are often the biggest in areas where there are high numbers of benefit claimants. A significant chunk of the UK’s social security budget ends up in the pockets of Tesco shareholders – along with small local businesses and the utilities companies – something George Osborne seems to have forgotten.

Every family queuing at a foodbank is a family that didn’t shop in Tesco that week. The latest available figures suggest 680,000 benefit sanctions were handed out in the first 10 months of 2012. During the same period Tesco’s profits fell for the fist time in 20 years.

The bedroom tax, council tax benefit changes, housing benefit cuts and the raft of other vicious measures set to impoverish the already impoverished are also all about to begin. These changes are big enough, and will affect enough people, that Tesco, along with ASDA, Poundland, Lidl, Aldi and other discount retailers are waking up to the fact that if their core customers have less money, then so will they.

Tesco have already taken steps to mitigate this problem. Shortly before Christmas last year Tesco teamed up with the The Trussell Trust “to launch the biggest ever nationwide food collection for people in crisis.”

Customers in Tescos around the UK were invited to donate an item of shopping bought at the supermarket to their local Trussell Trust foodbank. The company set up collection points in many of their stores to make this easier. Claimants shouldn’t be fooled by this apparently charitable gesture. Tesco make no real secret of the fact they are a bunch of *****. They are simply attempting to ensure that if people are getting their food from foodbanks, then that food was bought in Tesco first.

Join South London Solidarity Federation and others to protest against workfare outside Peckham Poundland tomorrow: https://www.facebook.com/events/631652860184840/

http://johnnyvoid.wordpress.com/

 

[Sudden]

Tesco want free workers without the bad PR, and have no doubt calculated that with youth unemployment soaring, they can easily manipulate young people into working for free.

Why is this manipulation? As far as i'm aware, increasing unemployment is a fact and it is also a fact that lot of companies want experience.

I would be quite happy working for free if it meant that I didn't have a huge empty spot on my CV.

Before my current role, I was an intern at the same company. Internship was coming to an end and they couldn't extend it due to internal policies. I offered to continue working as an intern for free, but this was not possible due to the various regulations etc.

If a company is offering free experience, why is it manipulation? There may not be enough to do for them to hire someone, but enough to do to get someone in to do a little something.

 

[spankingtexan]

Why is this manipulation? As far as i'm aware, increasing unemployment is a fact and it is also a fact that lot of companies want experience.

I would be quite happy working for free if it meant that I didn't have a huge empty spot on my CV.

Before my current role, I was an intern at the same company. Internship was coming to an end and they couldn't extend it due to internal policies. I offered to continue working as an intern for free, but this was not possible due to the various regulations etc.

If a company is offering free experience, why is it manipulation? There may not be enough to do for them to hire someone, but enough to do to get someone in to do a little something.

So what is wrong for a company to pay the worker while giving training? Look, people want to be PAID for working, I just don't get why some have a problem with that. A FAIR DAYS PAY FOR A FAIR DAYS WORK!

 

[Tefal]

Well not really, it's just saying "right you couldn't find a job so we're going to choose one for you. Where you will work for just £2.03 an hour with a very low chance of employment at the end of it anyway."

yep "because we've already been paying you for the last 6/12 months"...

and is that 2 pound an hour including the ni, council tax, housing, free glasses/eye checks, free meals and all the other things or just the basic jsa?

caus if it's only the jsa that's a little bit misrepresentative.

 

[spankingtexan]

yep "because we've already been paying you for the last 6/12 months"...

and is that 2 pound an hour including the ni, council tax, housing, free glasses/eye checks, free meals and all the other things or just the basic jsa?

caus if it's only the jsa that's a little bit misrepresentative.

JSA (Job seekers allowance) money to help the unemployed while seeking work, not for working. Not claiming in work benefit, HB, C.TAX benefit, working tax credits. Most people have paid into the system for years. Do you have a problem with people who want to be paid a living wage for working? People just want to be paid for work, what's the problem?

 

[Rroff]

In both cases, this was not "unpaid" work. They were to work for the benefit they were receiving. To "pay it back" to the taxpayer, if you will. In both cases the alternative open to both of them, was to just go to paid work anywhere else, if they didn't want to go and clean or work in Poundland.

For every roughly 3 or so people I know who are just claiming benefits long term with no interest of actually finding work I know someone else who is genuinely in that position not through choice and despite having made significant effort to find work. For some people it very genuinely isn't as simple as going and finding paid work elsewhere even if there are plenty of people who do make no effort to find work.

 

[edscdk]

Oh right, so forcing people to work for no pay simply because they have been unfortunate in their job search is ok is it?.

if they are not paid how to they live, who pays their rent and for food? they get paid if they dont work either which is not fair on the tax payers...

im for x years of benefits with no work (say 4) then work in the community - if you refuse yuo can leave the country or have your benefits stopped

 

[Woden]

yep "because we've already been paying you for the last 6/12 months"...

and is that 2 pound an hour including the ni, council tax, housing, free glasses/eye checks, free meals and all the other things or just the basic jsa?

caus if it's only the jsa that's a little bit misrepresentative.

It's not misrepresentetive at all. Those on minimum/low wage get those as well.
It really is simple. Do work, get paid a fair wage. That is the whole point of working is it not?

 

[spankingtexan]

if they are not paid how to they live, who pays their rent and for food? they get paid if they dont work either which is not fair on the tax payers...

They are given an allowance because they have become unemployed, a saftey net for all, I'll repeat what others have stated, most JSA claiments have paid in the pot for years and have unfortunately found themselves out of work through no fault of their own.
What do you suggest people who find themselves suddenly out of work do?

You may have to rely on this help yourself one day.