Another piece of coalition common sense bites the dust

[CheeseRolls]

The unemployed should be made to work for their benefits - common sense right ?

PA report
University graduate Cait Reilly has won her Court of Appeal claim that requiring her to work for free at a Poundland discount store breached laws banning slavery and forced labour

Detail on the story Unpaid work schemes breach human rights, claim lawyers | Society | The Guardian

This is what happens when you try to govern by soundbites.

 

[Djmiles]

They're not working for free, they are claiming jobseekers. I don't see the problem here.

Pay them a fictional wage of £6 an hour, so if they are earning £70 a week they should be made to work 11-12 a week. Simple.

 

[bluenitsuj]

Unfortunately very little common sense is used these days regarding the government. If common sense was used we would:
Have a eu referendum now.
Stop child benefit.
Stop benefit for those that have no intention of working.
Pay for all elderly care so homes do not have to be sold.
Free prescriptions.
Ban no win no fee firms so we are not constantly being threatened with being sued.
Stop aid to all countries and get our own back on track.
Stop paying benefits to foreigners who come over and have no money or job lined up.
Get out of Afghanistan.
Sort out the human rights crap that allows criminals the right to a family life etc

Rant over. These are my honest opinions and I accept there are arguments for and against. I am just pissed off that all the governments ever do is talk the talk but do nothing to change things when they supposedly have the power.

 

[goldstone]

Unfortunately very little common sense is used these days regarding the government. If common sense was used we would:
Have a eu referendum now.
Stop child benefit.
Stop benefit for those that have no intention of working.
Pay for all elderly care so homes do not have to be sold.
Free prescriptions.
Ban no win no fee firms so we are not constantly being threatened with being sued.
Stop aid to all countries and get our own back on track.
Stop paying benefits to foreigners who come over and have no money or job lined up.
Get out of Afghanistan.
Sort out the human rights crap that allows criminals the right to a family life etc

Rant over. These are my honest opinions and I accept there are arguments for and against. I am just pissed off that all the governments ever do is talk the talk but do nothing to change things when they supposedly have the power.

.... spot on ... get this guy running the country.

 

[Tricky Dicky]

Unfortunately very little common sense is used these days regarding the government. If common sense was used we would:
Have a eu referendum now.
Stop child benefit.
Stop benefit for those that have no intention of working.
Pay for all elderly care so homes do not have to be sold.
Free prescriptions.
Ban no win no fee firms so we are not constantly being threatened with being sued.
Stop aid to all countries and get our own back on track.
Stop paying benefits to foreigners who come over and have no money or job lined up.
Get out of Afghanistan.
Sort out the human rights crap that allows criminals the right to a family life etc

Rant over. These are my honest opinions and I accept there are arguments for and against. I am just pissed off that all the governments ever do is talk the talk but do nothing to change things when they supposedly have the power.

That's politics of any colour. The country continues despite what the government of the day does, not because of it.

 

[beorhthelm]

Pay them a fictional wage of £6 an hour, so if they are earning £70 a week they should be made to work 11-12 a week. Simple.

i thought that was precisely the idea?

Forcing people to work for that kind of money is undoubtedly a breach of human rights in my mind. There are far better approaches that the government can take.

like? the status quo is to have job seekers sit on their arse between signing on. those that want to work get little real assistance and those that dont want to work dont.

 

[bluenitsuj]

.... spot on ... get this guy running the country.

Vote me in and I will provide free transport to the Amex from anywhere in Sussex. How does that sound?

 

[Triggaaar]

They're not working for free, they are claiming jobseekers. I don't see the problem here.

And they don't have to do it. Unbelievable.

 

[CheeseRolls]

They're not working for free, they are claiming jobseekers. I don't see the problem here.

Pay them a fictional wage of £6 an hour, so if they are earning £70 a week they should be made to work 11-12 a week. Simple.

So us taxpayers fork out so that a graduate can be trained in how to clean floors for a profitable retail organisation ?
Why don't Poundstretcher pay an unemployed person to do this manual job, rather than pretend it is a training opportunity, clearly it is not.

Who exactly is benefiting from this arrangement ?

 

[Goldstone Rapper]

They're not working for free, they are claiming jobseekers. I don't see the problem here.

Pay them a fictional wage of £6 an hour, so if they are earning £70 a week they should be made to work 11-12 a week. Simple.

Surely, if someone's been paying their taxes, they have already earned the money they are now getting back from the state?

What is being asked of them is the equivalent to taking out an insurance policy, and then when you are making a claim, having to work in order to be entitled to make a successful claim.

 

[Seagull73]

Why don't we just scrap unemployment benefit altogether, and say that if you want to be paid by the government, you have to do some form of work? Even if it is charity work for nothing, it stops those people that are hell-bent on claiming benefits for nothing. They also have to do this work to get the other benefits like housing etc.....

Or is that just too simplistic?

 

[TWOCHOICEStom]

Why don't we just scrap unemployment benefit altogether, and say that if you want to be paid by the government, you have to do some form of work? Even if it is charity work for nothing, it stops those people that are hell-bent on claiming benefits for nothing. They also have to do this work to get the other benefits like housing etc.....

Or is that just too simplistic?

Makes sense to me.

 

[somerset]

Why don't we just scrap unemployment benefit altogether, and say that if you want to be paid by the government, you have to do some form of work? Even if it is charity work for nothing, it stops those people that are hell-bent on claiming benefits for nothing. They also have to do this work to get the other benefits like housing etc.....

Or is that just too simplistic?

Civil liberties groups would have a fit mate,.... they took the government to court when vouchers were given out to asylum seekers to buy food etc. ... it was claimed that this stigmatised them, opening them up to embarrassment and ridicule........ priceless eh?

 

[LE19]

Why don't we just scrap unemployment benefit altogether, and say that if you want to be paid by the government, you have to do some form of work? Even if it is charity work for nothing, it stops those people that are hell-bent on claiming benefits for nothing. They also have to do this work to get the other benefits like housing etc.....

Or is that just too simplistic?

She was "working" - she had to leave her voluntary work at a local museum.

 

[spring hall convert]

Hold on a sec, if you guys think people should be forced to work for their JSA, that's your perogative. Personally I find it distasteful but each to their own.

But what you conveniently ignore is that Poundland made a pre tax profit in excess of £30m in the last finanicial year so why do they need people to work for them for free? Wouldn't it be better for it to either be a) charity/ community based (big society, remember that??) or b) to give them experience in a field that they actually wished to get into?

Also, why would Poundland even consider paying anything more than the derisory wages they currently offer when they know there is a sackful of "free" labour round the corner. That's really great for the working man isn't it....

When are we going to lean that this deserving/undeserving poor arguement does no working class person any favours. The only people really benefiting from this are Poundland shareholders.

 

[Seagull73]

Through no fault of their own, people NEED money. It's a necessity. If they aren't getting it through the government, they'd almost certainly resort to crime. The cost of accommodating a prisoner is FAR higher than having someone claiming the pittance that is job seekers allowance.

Why is it a big deal that people waste their lives doing nothing claiming £70 quid a week or whatever it is? It's their life, their loss. The government wastes MUCH more money on far less important things, perhaps these are the things the humble "taxpayer" should be worrying about rather than giving the poor a little bit of money to live on.

What job seekers really need is an incentive to work. Create more jobs and increase minimum wage is the solution.

On your first point, I'm not saying that can't have money, just earn it.

Second point, because it creates a downward spiral. If somebody has something to get up for in the morning, it will give them a sense of purpose. Anyway, you could turn that argument on it's head and say, well if it's only £70, why not make them earn it.

And on your final point, you have to be very careful with minimum wage because that could drive inflation, but more importantly, could drive firms to employ even less because they can't afford the staff.

All of which detracts from the point, which is - why shouldn't job-seekers be made to do some sort of work, voluntary or otherwise, to earn jobseekers allowance, housing benefit etc?? It may even be a cash-cow for the government, because if profit making firms like Iceland or Poundland want these people to do menial tasks, they have to pay the government for them....?

 

[Seagull73]

Hold on a sec, if you guys think people should be forced to work for their JSA, that's your perogative. Personally I find it distasteful but each to their own.

But what you conveniently ignore is that Poundland made a pre tax profit in excess of £30m in the last finanicial year so why do they need people to work for them for free? Wouldn't it be better for it to either be a) charity/ community based (big society, remember that??) or b) to give them experience in a field that they actually wished to get into?

Also, why would Poundland even consider paying anything more than the derisory wages they currently offer when they know there is a sackful of "free" labour round the corner. That's really great for the working man isn't it....

When are we going to lean that this deserving/undeserving poor arguement does no working class person any favours. The only people really benefiting from this are Poundland shareholders.

I completely agree that Poundland getting these people for free from DWP is utterly wrong, however, I'm not sure why you find individuals working to get JSA - and subsequently housing benefit etc - is distasteful?

 

[LE19]

Hold on a sec, if you guys think people should be forced to work for their JSA, that's your perogative. Personally I find it distasteful but each to their own.

But what you conveniently ignore is that Poundland made a pre tax profit in excess of £30m in the last finanicial year so why do they need people to work for them for free? Wouldn't it be better for it to either be a) charity/ community based (big society, remember that??) or b) to give them experience in a field that they actually wished to get into?

Also, why would Poundland even consider paying anything more than the derisory wages they currently offer when they know there is a sackful of "free" labour round the corner. That's really great for the working man isn't it....

When are we going to lean that this deserving/undeserving poor arguement does no working class person any favours. The only people really benefiting from this are Poundland shareholders.

Well said.

 

[spring hall convert]

Hold on a sec, if you guys think people should be forced to work for their JSA, that's your perogative. Personally I find it distasteful but each to their own.

But what you conveniently ignore is that Poundland made a pre tax profit in excess of £30m in the last finanicial year so why do they need people to work for them for free? Wouldn't it be better for it to either be a) charity/ community based (big society, remember that??) or b) to give them experience in a field that they actually wished to get into?

Also, why would Poundland even consider paying anything more than the derisory wages they currently offer when they know there is a sackful of "free" labour round the corner. That's really great for the working man isn't it....

When are we going to lean that this deserving/undeserving poor arguement does no working class person any favours. The only people really benefiting from this are Poundland shareholders.

And the funny thing is that the tax payer is getting f***ed either way, unless they are particuarly fond of stack 'em high discount retailing.

 

[drew]

The unemployed should be made to work for their benefits - common sense right ?

PA report
University graduate Cait Reilly has won her Court of Appeal claim that requiring her to work for free at a Poundland discount store breached laws banning slavery and forced labour

Detail on the story Unpaid work schemes breach human rights, claim lawyers | Society | The Guardian

This is what happens when you try to govern by soundbites.

Unfortunately very little common sense is used these days regarding the government. If common sense was used we would:
Have a eu referendum now.
Stop child benefit.
Stop benefit for those that have no intention of working.
Pay for all elderly care so homes do not have to be sold.
Free prescriptions.
Ban no win no fee firms so we are not constantly being threatened with being sued.
Stop aid to all countries and get our own back on track.
Stop paying benefits to foreigners who come over and have no money or job lined up.
Get out of Afghanistan.
Sort out the human rights crap that allows criminals the right to a family life etc

Rant over. These are my honest opinions and I accept there are arguments for and against. I am just pissed off that all the governments ever do is talk the talk but do nothing to change things when they supposedly have the power.

A bit of a mixed bag then. Stop child benefit, rather than just means test it but you want free prescriptions for all. Same with Care homes. I agree that you shouldn't have to sell your home but there should be some means testing rather than a universal benefit. Out of interest, how many times have you personally been sued by a no win no fee firm? I thought we are getting out of Afghanistan?

She was "working" - she had to leave her voluntary work at a local museum.

This. If any of the posters bothered to read up on the case rather than just reacting to 'soundbites' they would have known that she was doing voluntary work and therefore gaining experience in her chosen sector but was forced to give this up to work for Poundland. Whether that is the policy at fault of just some local jobsworth not seeing the wood for the trees, I don't know.