× Search rightsnet
Search options

Where

Benefit

Jurisdiction

Jurisdiction

From

to

Forum Home  →  Discussion  →  Work capability issues and ESA  →  Thread

The hounding of mental health ESA claimants - Guardian today

Andrew Dutton
forum member

Welfare rights service - Derbyshire County Council

Send message

Total Posts: 1955

Joined: 12 October 2012

“I just met a jobcentre manager. It had to be in secret, in a Midlands hotel, several train stops away from where she works. She told me how the sick are treated and what harsh targets she is under to push them off benefits. A high proportion on employment and support allowance have mental illnesses or learning difficulties. The department denies there are targets, but she showed me a printed sheet of what are called “spinning plates”, red for missed, green for hit. They just missed their 50.5% target for “off flows”, getting people off ESA. They have been told to “disrupt and upset” them – in other words, bullying. That’s officially described, in Orwellian fashion, as “offering further support”. As all ESA claimants approach the target deadline of 65 weeks on benefits – advisers are told to report them all to the fraud department for maximum pressure. In this manager’s area 16% are “sanctioned” or cut off benefits.

Of course it’s not written down anywhere, but it’s in the development plans of individual advisers or “work coaches”. Managers repeatedly question them on why more people haven’t been sanctioned. Letters are sent to the vulnerable who don’t legally have to come in, but in such ambiguous wording that they look like an order to attend. Tricks are played: those ending their contributory entitlement to a year on ESA need to fill in a form for income-based ESA. But jobcentres are forbidden to stock those forms. These ill people’s benefits are suddenly stopped without explanation: if they call, they’re told to collect a form from the jobcentre, which doesn’t stock them either. If someone calls to query an appointment they are told they will be sanctioned if they don’t turn up, whatever. She said: “The DWP’s hope is they won’t pursue the claim.”

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jul/08/mentally-ill-need-help-not-bullying-by-the-state

Geri-G
forum member

Welfare reform team - North Ayrshire Council

Send message

Total Posts: 91

Joined: 4 June 2013

I am shocked but not surprised in the slightest. I have a family member with a severe mental health problem, and September is going to be fun when I guide them through the ESA nightmare when sick pay finishes.

I intend to attend the assessments and complete all the forms-should be fun!

Ben E Fitz
forum member

Welfare Benefits Caseworker, Manchester CAB Manchester

Send message

Total Posts: 162

Joined: 17 June 2010

Surely these directives and non-targets etc have a source. What is needed is for that source to be identified, named and shamed and if necessary, prosecuted with the full force of law.

Dan_Manville
forum member

Mental health & welfare rights service - Wolverhampton City Council

Send message

Total Posts: 2262

Joined: 15 October 2012

Ben E Fitz - 09 July 2014 02:07 PM

Surely these directives and non-targets etc have a source. What is needed is for that source to be identified, named and shamed and if necessary, prosecuted with the full force of law.

The thing is finding that source; all the “you haven’t sanctioned enough people” will be on individual appraisals which are immune from FOI/DPA requests; it will be hidden from public view.

What’s needed is someone to blow the whistle, like Dr Gregg Wood did with ATOS.

Ben E Fitz
forum member

Welfare Benefits Caseworker, Manchester CAB Manchester

Send message

Total Posts: 162

Joined: 17 June 2010

Absolutely! Just hope somebody has the courage.

Judy Scott
forum member

Judy Scott Consultancy

Send message

Total Posts: 53

Joined: 18 June 2010

A friend with mental health problems who is in receipt of ESA Support Group was called in for a Work Focused Interview in February and it took three calls with my advice to get the Jobcentre to change tack and say it was for ‘information only’ and not mandatory.

Now she is called in for a Customer Compliance Interview. I looked this up. See attached guidance. This may be the practice that the Jobcentre Manager who spoke with Polly Toynbee described. It says ‘Conduct a robust and challenging interview with the claimant’ Well if the last episode is anything to go by my friend will be likely to have a relapse as a result. She is scrupulously careful about checking and following benefit rules and recently started Permitted Work having followed all procedures exactly.

DWP do not seem to appreciate that they are making people more ill and more incapable with these practices.

The impact of the sanctions is likely to be increasing the numbers of claimants who now declare mental health problems such as severe anxiety.

File Attachments

Dan_Manville
forum member

Mental health & welfare rights service - Wolverhampton City Council

Send message

Total Posts: 2262

Joined: 15 October 2012

Judy Scott - 15 July 2014 12:07 PM

Now she is called in for a Customer Compliance Interview.

The impact of the sanctions is likely to be increasing the numbers of claimants who now declare mental health problems such as severe anxiety.

They’ve put her in the Support Group then hit her with a compliance interview? a phone call for advice regarding potential indirect discrimination might be in order

Judy Scott
forum member

Judy Scott Consultancy

Send message

Total Posts: 53

Joined: 18 June 2010

Could you say a bit more please - point me to a source or a case?
Thanks

Dan_Manville
forum member

Mental health & welfare rights service - Wolverhampton City Council

Send message

Total Posts: 2262

Joined: 15 October 2012

Hi Judy

If they’re applying a procedure, criterion or practice without proper consideration of your friend’s mental health; such as pursuing compliance proceedings without full back room appraisal of her circumstances beforehand, then it may constitue a breach of the Equality Act by way of indirect discrimination.

There’s not much caselaw yet as it’s relatively new law, but if DWP were going down the compliance route with one of my punters (and if DWP didn’t already know how litigious I am which saves a lot of work for me to be honest) I would be lawyering up toot suite and letting the compliance officer involved know that’s what I am doing. It will at least ensure kid gloves rather than the “robust and challenging” approach.

I’ve personal, as well as professional, experience of how their compliance officers approach things and with that in mind I would not pull my punches where I can sense heavy handed practice.

Judy Scott
forum member

Judy Scott Consultancy

Send message

Total Posts: 53

Joined: 18 June 2010

thanks for this - wish you were local to lawyer up - will investigate Equality Act

Paul_Treloar_CPAG
forum member

Advice and Rights Team, Child Poverty Action Group

Send message

Total Posts: 550

Joined: 30 June 2014

Judy Scott - 15 July 2014 12:07 PM

A friend with mental health problems who is in receipt of ESA Support Group was called in for a Work Focused Interview in February and it took three calls with my advice to get the Jobcentre to change tack and say it was for ‘information only’ and not mandatory.

Now she is called in for a Customer Compliance Interview. I looked this up. See attached guidance. This may be the practice that the Jobcentre Manager who spoke with Polly Toynbee described. It says ‘Conduct a robust and challenging interview with the claimant’ Well if the last episode is anything to go by my friend will be likely to have a relapse as a result. She is scrupulously careful about checking and following benefit rules and recently started Permitted Work having followed all procedures exactly.

DWP do not seem to appreciate that they are making people more ill and more incapable with these practices.

The impact of the sanctions is likely to be increasing the numbers of claimants who now declare mental health problems such as severe anxiety.

It’s appalling to see them using this kind of language in their own guidance - “someone who has experience of dealing with mentally disordered or mentally handicapped people… - when almost everyone recognises that “mental handicap” carries such negative connotations for people affected.

neilbateman
forum member

Welfare Rights Author, Trainer & Consultant

Send message

Total Posts: 443

Joined: 16 June 2010

S 13 (7) Welfare Reform Act 2007 defines work related activity as: “activity which makes it more likely that the person will obtain or remain in work or be able to do so”.

A lot of what passes for work related activity - “robust interviews”, telephone interviews for people who are too ill make it into the office, “light touch interventions” will not improve people’s chances of finding a job.

Therefore such activity fails the test under s 13 (7). 

Any qualified careers guidance adviser will tell you that helping people find work requires courtesy, patience, empowerment, confidence building and support.  A lot of so called WRA just isn’t like this.

I have used this as an argument to challenge awards of ESA with WRAC to people who JCP or Work Programme providers accept are not fit enough to fully engage in WRA.

I also think it might be a useful argument to use in equalities/discrimination challenges to excessive/counter-productive WRA as have been described in these posts.  Conceivably, it might also open up grounds for ultra-vires or even misfeasance challenges.

Dan_Manville
forum member

Mental health & welfare rights service - Wolverhampton City Council

Send message

Total Posts: 2262

Joined: 15 October 2012

neilbateman - 16 July 2014 10:08 AM

S 13 (7) Welfare Reform Act 2007 defines work related activity as: “activity which makes it more likely that the person will obtain or remain in work or be able to do so”.

A lot of what passes for work related activity - “robust interviews”, telephone interviews for people who are too ill make it into the office, “light touch interventions” will not improve people’s chances of finding a job.

Therefore such activity fails the test under s 13 (7). 

Any qualified careers guidance adviser will tell you that helping people find work requires courtesy, patience, empowerment, confidence building and support.  A lot of so called WRA just isn’t like this.

I have used this as an argument to challenge awards of ESA with WRAC to people who JCP or Work Programme providers accept are not fit enough to fully engage in WRA.

I also think it might be a useful argument to use in equalities/discrimination challenges to excessive/counter-productive WRA as have been described in these posts.  Conceivably, it might also open up grounds for ultra-vires or even misfeasance challenges.

Exactly this point is being considered in respect of the operation of reg 35 in CE3453/2013