× Search rightsnet
Search options

Where

Benefit

Jurisdiction

Jurisdiction

From

to

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

voluntary appointments at JCP for support group ESA claimants

splurge
forum member

Welfare officer - Peabody, London

Send message

Total Posts: 101

Joined: 16 June 2010

I was concerned when a couple of my clients received letters from JCP inviting them to have a work focussed interview. Although the letters didn’t state that it was mandatory and there was no threat of sanction, my clients were obviously very worried as there wasn’t much detail to the letters, just a date and time.

It transpires that JCP are offering Support Group clients informal discussions about support in the wider community, possible work and training options and a chance to see whether they would like to join the work programme.

JCP manager told me that surveys tell them claimants in the support group feel parked and left out! In my experience, claimants have felt relieved and fear these sort of letters and what they mean.

I thought it might be useful for others to know about this trial.

Ben E Fitz
forum member

Welfare Benefits Caseworker, Manchester CAB Manchester

Send message

Total Posts: 162

Joined: 17 June 2010

Clients receiving these “invitations” should be advised that once they opt to take part in these activities they may become mandatory and the client subject to full conditionality and possible sanctions.

John Birks
forum member

Welfare Rights and Debt Advice - Stockport Council

Send message

Total Posts: 1064

Joined: 16 June 2010

I’d be interested in the mechanism for voluntary support to become mandatory…..

I’ve seen clients in the WP move from WRAC to SC. The WP lasts for two years and there is a compulsion on the WP provider to support the claimant.

Even when in prison. Then there’s a requirement on the WP provider to supply docs on an exit interview.

Despite all that if in the SG there is no Mandatory requirement to engage.

Daphne
Administrator

rightsnet writer / editor

Send message

Total Posts: 3537

Joined: 14 March 2014

Reg 3(3) of the ESA (WRA) regs 2011 says that a requirement to undertake WRA ceases to have effect if you become a member of the support group - so I don’t think it can be made mandatory.

Ben E Fitz
forum member

Welfare Benefits Caseworker, Manchester CAB Manchester

Send message

Total Posts: 162

Joined: 17 June 2010

Sorry if i’m incorrect, but my understanding was that once a claimant in the SG opts to take part in WRA, they become subject to conditionality and are treated in the same way as if they were in WRAG.

John Birks
forum member

Welfare Rights and Debt Advice - Stockport Council

Send message

Total Posts: 1064

Joined: 16 June 2010

The letters may seem like it’s mandatory but its not.

The WP providers get paid if they get claimants into work.

Therefore they can ask but con’t compel. If they didn’t ask they wouldn’t get very far.

Some providers are more reasonable than others - one recently insisting on ‘supporting’ a claimant in the SG by ‘...checking she was still taking her medication…’ Very ominous but they agreed to withdraw all contact until the final exit interview - which they are, but the client is not, obliged to carry out. 

This is all very confusing for claimants and advisers alike.

Advisers need to be clear on what the claimants obligations are for each group - JSA or ESA - WRAG/SG.

useful to have the following to hand if you need it.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/work-programme-dwp-provider-guidance

Mr Finch
forum member

Benefits adviser - Isle of Wight CAB

Send message

Total Posts: 509

Joined: 4 March 2011

It can’t become mandatory while the claimant remains in the support group. However, any participation might be used as evidence of the person’s capabilities at the next WCA.

John Birks
forum member

Welfare Rights and Debt Advice - Stockport Council

Send message

Total Posts: 1064

Joined: 16 June 2010

As will going to the shops.

Daphne
Administrator

rightsnet writer / editor

Send message

Total Posts: 3537

Joined: 14 March 2014

I think the point is that legislatively it can’t be made mandatory. However, in practice it is happening and needs to be challenged - noone in the support group should be sanctioned.

John Birks
forum member

Welfare Rights and Debt Advice - Stockport Council

Send message

Total Posts: 1064

Joined: 16 June 2010

No one can be - They may be threatened with it or feel they are threatened with it with confusion over either the language used or suggestions made.

A referral may even be made in error to sanction someone but a sanction wouldn’t be applied as you say.

If it’s happening in practice I’d like to see the evidence as that comes down to negligence and disregard for the law rather than mistake and error.

Sharon M
forum member

Derbyshire County Council

Send message

Total Posts: 68

Joined: 23 March 2011

John Birks - 23 January 2015 03:12 PM

No one can be - They may be threatened with it or feel they are threatened with it with confusion over either the language used or suggestions made.

A referral may even be made in error to sanction someone but a sanction wouldn’t be applied as you say.

If it’s happening in practice I’d like to see the evidence as that comes down to negligence and disregard for the law rather than mistake and error.


It’s been discussed in another thread here: http://www.rightsnet.org.uk/forums/viewthread/7598/ 

Our problem with it is that people we work with have moderate to severe mental health problems and they are being called in with little notice, little as 2 days, and on Saturdays. The claimants are scared their money will stop as they don’t understand the criteria for the Support Group/WCA/Sanctions and are believing it to be mandatory with a threat of sanctions if they don’t go. Without going into too much detail we’ve had some very serious incidents directly as a result of these letters or the repeated DWP phone calls if people don’t respond. Anyway, we’ve managed to stop them in our area, for now. A DWP associate of mine tells me these “invitations” are the invention Sandra Lambert, who you may remember was the DWP manager who introduced the Sheriff Stars for staff meeting benefit sanctions, allegedly. (See here: https://johnnyvoid.wordpress.com/2014/12/21/sandra-gives-the-game-away-jobcentres-given-sheriffs-stars-for-hitting-benefit-sanction-targets/ ).

John Birks
forum member

Welfare Rights and Debt Advice - Stockport Council

Send message

Total Posts: 1064

Joined: 16 June 2010

As I said

“They may be threatened with it or feel they are threatened with it with confusion over either the language used or suggestions made.

A referral may even be made in error to sanction someone but a sanction wouldn’t be applied as you say.”


All the more reason for advisers to be clear and not add to the fear and confusion.

Sharon M
forum member

Derbyshire County Council

Send message

Total Posts: 68

Joined: 23 March 2011

John Birks - 26 January 2015 08:50 AM

As I said

“They may be threatened with it or feel they are threatened with it with confusion over either the language used or suggestions made.

A referral may even be made in error to sanction someone but a sanction wouldn’t be applied as you say.”


All the more reason for advisers to be clear and not add to the fear and confusion.

I know what you’re saying, but I think the letters are purposely misleading at best and disingenuous. Many people do attend these meetings believing they had/ve no choice. I also think most advisors are clear, if the case reaches them. Unfortunately not all people seek advice, or with two days notice don’t have a chance. I think that’s what the concern is, not that sanctions could actually be imposed, but that the DWP are alluding that they could be.

DaphneH
forum member

Welfare Rights Adviser, Bristol City Council, Bristol

Send message

Total Posts: 49

Joined: 21 June 2010

Sharon - do you have any anonymised letters you could send me that I could send to operational stakeholders to raise it there - it may be if it is a regional invention then national DWP are not aware of it and will do something about it if we tell them - you can email them to me at .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).

If they are nationally produced letters and are intimidating then we should definitely be challenging it.

Sharon M
forum member

Derbyshire County Council

Send message

Total Posts: 68

Joined: 23 March 2011

DaphneH - 26 January 2015 09:48 AM

Sharon - do you have any anonymised letters you could send me that I could send to operational stakeholders to raise it there - it may be if it is a regional invention then national DWP are not aware of it and will do something about it if we tell them - you can email them to me at .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).

If they are nationally produced letters and are intimidating then we should definitely be challenging it.

I’ll email you, Daphne. I’ll be able to discuss our meeting at the local Job Centre with you as well.

Dan_Manville
forum member

Mental health & welfare rights service - Wolverhampton City Council

Send message

Total Posts: 2262

Joined: 15 October 2012

Any chance you could redact one of those letters and post it here.

There are very possibly issues arising under the EQA. It’s difficult to discuss individual cases as any settlements tend to carry gagging orders however I can say that private litigation is a very effective tool for changing policies such as this… Work Porgramme Providers in Wolvo are striving to keep their noses very clean since we started bringing Employment Tribunal claims against them. I don’t doubt that a successful claim against DWP would be persuasive in their efforts going forward to hassle Support Group members.

On a different note; looking at the provider guidance I don’t think Support Group claimants can be mandated to activity. I know that voluntary JSA participants can later be mandated as can ESA WRAG volunteers however I can’t see that it applies to volutary Support Group candidates.

edit; isn’t it funny how things drop into your lap? Admittedly there are administrative hurdles as my client has profound mental health problems and will need a litigation friend however it seems I may have a candidate for litigation…

[ Edited: 26 Jan 2015 at 11:05 am by Dan_Manville ]