Unemployed yoof to pick up litter in return for benefits...

Freakbro · 17 Feb 2015 at 13:11

Amp34 said:
I'm not talking about the other 10 hours, rather paying people minimum wage for their work (the 30 hours), rather than paying them a third of the minimum wage.

I know you were, but since they are under 22 they are not eligible for the minimum wage anyway, it would more be being classed as an apprentice wage which is £2.60 atm anyway iirc

SPG · 17 Feb 2015 at 13:12

Great i wonder how much the tax payer is going to get ripped off by Capita or G4 to sort out the people who are meant to be looking after the people to pick up the litter.

They will also need to be trained in how to pick up litter with a list of things they should not pick up as its not classed as litter due to industrial waste or dangerous.

I think its a good idea, they should also have to wear a boiler suit in a nice red colour to denote there lazy arsed attitude to life.

Shame it will never happen.

dazzerd · 17 Feb 2015 at 13:12

It's a joke if there is a market for these jobs (Tories do believe in the market don't they?) then the government should let the market create the jobs and pay whatever the market dictates.

This is nothing more than enforced labour and a way for government/councils to save money. Which council is going to pay for street cleaning when the government will force people to do it for free?

Wake up this is just another attack on the poor to deflect from the real social problems in our society; you know stuff like greed and inequality...

Efour · 17 Feb 2015 at 13:12

Tefal said:
why what are they doing for the other 138 hours of the week?

Work in poundland or asda for "free"

thep02 · 17 Feb 2015 at 13:13

I guess there are posters who are so bitter and angry about the failings in tbeir own lives they would take solace out of stopping the welfare state all together.

bitslice · 17 Feb 2015 at 13:13

Why not just execute people for dropping litter, then there would be nothing to pick up ?

We could start with the people who flick their cigarettes out of the car.

arknor · 17 Feb 2015 at 13:15

I'm curious as to which friend of the government gets awarded the "contract" and how much millions they make
It's unlikely to be taken on by the dwp

SPG · 17 Feb 2015 at 13:18

Infact, why dont we just go the entire way and bring back national service, but in a none miltaristic way (could always be open for those that wish to)

TommyV · 17 Feb 2015 at 13:19

We need to adopt the Australians no nonsense attitude with these type of matters.

G J · 17 Feb 2015 at 13:19

Does this also include people who get their wages topped up and people in reciept of other benefits? Scroungers...

Also please stop talking about apprenticeships like they actually amount to anything because its just another avenue for cheep labour and employer abuse.

misteranonimous · 17 Feb 2015 at 13:21

This article made my day.

These people need to learn that money doesn't fall out of the sky - you have to do something to earn it.

hyperseven · 17 Feb 2015 at 13:21

its not policy yet, and the tories have to win to make it so, so what is all the fuss about?

bitslice · 17 Feb 2015 at 13:22

TommyV said:
We need to adopt the Australians no nonsense attitude with these type of matters.

I think the King of Jordon is currently topping the list of people I'd rather run the country than Spineless Cameron.

OhEsEcks · 17 Feb 2015 at 13:22

misteranonimous said:
These people need to learn that money doesn't fall out of the sky - you have to do something to earn it.

It does if you hide your money away in swiss bank accounts.

Stretch · 17 Feb 2015 at 13:23

russell664 said:
I think it is not a bad idea myself, gives them something to do and will hopefully get them into the mindset for work more.

Or maybe, it will make them realise that the prospect of a job picking litter is worse than spending time inside for selling drugs.

arknor · 17 Feb 2015 at 13:23

G J said:
Does this also include people who get their wages topped up and people in reciept of other benefits? Scroungers...

Also please stop talking about apprenticeships like they actually amount to anything because its just another avenue for cheep labour and employer abuse.

benefits spending on these people is likely minuscule in the grand scheme of things.

benefits as a whole for non employed isn't even that great compared to pensions etc.

if they really need money clamp down on the tax dodgers? or is this to apease the rich hey look it's not only you we are going after because you avoid tax we punish the poor too!

Efour · 17 Feb 2015 at 13:25

Its a vote grabber.

If they wanted real money they would shore up the tax system and make it more watertight.

Amp34 · 17 Feb 2015 at 13:26

Freakbro said:
I know you were, but since they are under 22 they are not eligible for the minimum wage anyway, it would more be being classed as an apprentice wage which is £2.60 atm anyway iirc

Yes they are... Minimum wage is higher for those over certain age boundaries but there is still a minimum wage.

https://www.gov.uk/national-minimum-wage-rates

18-20 - £5.13

I'm not sure what the rules are regarding apprenticeships but my assumption is there needs to be one kind of qualification/training associated with the wage.

OhEsEcks · 17 Feb 2015 at 13:27

arknor said:
if they really need money clamp down on the tax dodgers? or is this to apease the rich hey look it's not only you we are going after because you avoid tax we punish the poor too!

It's only ever to appease the rich.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...e-rich-far-more-than-the-poorest-9898582.html

Demonise the poor and working class while providing great tax benefits to the rich and upper middle classes, and tell the rich and upper middle classes it's the poor and working class that are the problem.

Anyone who would vote conservative is either a ****ing moron, or one of the rich and upper middle classes who like tax breaks and kick backs and blaming the poor and working classes for the countries problems.

Stretch · 17 Feb 2015 at 13:28

arknor said:
benefits spending on these people is likely minuscule in the grand scheme of things.

benefits as a whole for non employed isn't even that great compared to pensions etc.

if they really need money clamp down on the tax dodgers? or is this to apease the rich hey look it's not only you we are going after because you avoid tax we punish the poor too!

I'm not a lefty, far from it. But I agree with this 100%.

Also, a continued attack on welfare, that includes everything but pensions, isn't rational.