Discussion archive

Top Other benefit issues topic #4432

Subject: "Serious concerns over Reed Advice" First topic | Last topic
Sam Warburton
                              

Welfare Rights Worker, Broadway (London)
Member since
13th Jul 2004

Serious concerns over Reed Advice
Fri 28-May-10 10:43 AM

I wanted to raise concerns over advice given to one of my clients at her ESA work focused interview.

She suffers from Paranoid Schizophrenia and despite being on a high does anti-psychotic medication she continues to experience auditory and visual hallucinations aswell as side effects from her medication and is a very vulnerable adult. She has been attending work focussed interviews while on ESA and has recently with the help of Jobcentre plus found a part-time job under the permitted work rules. However she was advised by Reed not to declare her mental health problems to her employer, she also found out that her work colleughs who also started with her through Job Cntre plus have been given the same advice.

I am concerned about my client for two reasons, firstly she needs alot of support while in employment due to the nature of her health problems and requires an understanding employer, she recently became unwell at work linked to her health problems and was not allowed to go home. I feel she is being exploited in order for someone to meet their targets of getting people into work. Secondly there could be a legal issue here as I believe but Im not clear on this that you may have to declare health problems to your employer.

What do people think I should do with this information?

  

Top      

Replies to this topic
RE: Serious concerns over Reed Advice, nevip, 28th May 2010, #1
RE: Serious concerns over Reed Advice, steve_h, 28th May 2010, #2
      RE: Serious concerns over Reed Advice, jj, 28th May 2010, #3
           RE: Serious concerns over Reed Advice, ariadne2, 28th May 2010, #4
                RE: Serious concerns over Reed Advice, Neil Bateman, 28th May 2010, #5
                     RE: Serious concerns over Reed Advice, John Birks, 02nd Jun 2010, #6
                          RE: Serious concerns over Reed Advice, jj, 02nd Jun 2010, #7

nevip
                              

welfare rights adviser, sefton metropolitan borough council, liverpool.
Member since
22nd Jan 2004

RE: Serious concerns over Reed Advice
Fri 28-May-10 10:55 AM

Just a brief reply for now but it should be brought to the attention of the local jobcentre manager, the DWP policy unit and her MP.

  

Top      

steve_h
                              

Welfare Rights Caseworker, Advocacy in Wirral, Birkenhead, Wirral
Member since
06th Mar 2006

RE: Serious concerns over Reed Advice
Fri 28-May-10 01:10 PM

Why was she attending WFI's?

Surely she should be in the support group under reg 35?

  

Top      

jj
                              

welfare rights adviser, saltley & nechells law centre birmingham
Member since
21st Jan 2004

RE: Serious concerns over Reed Advice
Fri 28-May-10 04:08 PM

a valid question, but the reality is that there's always a danger, unless it is carefully managed, that errors will be made and people sent down the wrong track.

ultimately, the Secretary of State is accountable for the impact of welfare reform measures, and the Department has taken on another level of risk, in its responsibility for interventions in the lives of people who are vulnerable by virtue of serious health conditions and disabilities.

the advice by government contractors (to be dishonest to employers) is wrong in every respect and cannot be countenanced by the DWP - i totally agree with Paul's recommended course of action. i also think you need to discuss further with your client her concerns, and yours, and obtain her consent.

your client is not going to receive the support and understanding she needs at work, if her employer is unaware of her problems. as a disabled person, she has legal rights and protections in the workplace, which can be compromised if she has withheld information about her disability. unfair treatment at work risks worsening her condition, and there may be risks to others, depending on her job and how she is affected, which her employer needs to be aware of.

there have been a few cases where fraud/deception issues have been raised in relation to withholding relevant information or providing false information on job applications, although i wouldn't expect this to be likely in this type of case, but the important thing is that the very important support element, which your client needs, is being totally trashed by the contractor. i trust your instincts that ticking outcome boxes is trumping every other consideration - there is too much of this - but contractors' profit interests cannot be allowed to override health, safety and wellbeing of members of the public.





  

Top      

ariadne2
                              

Welfare lawyer and social policy collator, Basingstoke CAB
Member since
13th Mar 2007

RE: Serious concerns over Reed Advice
Fri 28-May-10 05:46 PM

It would be really interesting to know if the contact with Reed gives them bigger payments for finding work for harder-to-help claimants. Some DWP contracts may do this in order to avoid contractors making easy money for "parking and creaming" - concentrating on the easy to help who were probably going to get a job quick whatever, while leaving the hard to help on the back burner.
This sort of incentivisation just could account for what has happened.

  

Top      

Neil Bateman
                              

Welfare rights consultant, www.neilbateman.co.uk
Member since
24th Jan 2004

RE: Serious concerns over Reed Advice
Fri 28-May-10 06:00 PM

Fri 28-May-10 06:00 PM by Neil Bateman

About 4 or 5 years ago I asked a senior manager of one of JCP's welfare to work contractors what advice their staff would give to a claimant if they did a better-off calculation for a claimant and found that they would be worse off in paid work (eg because of caring, travel or housing costs). Answer: "We wouldn't tell them".

The enquiry arose because they asked me to do some training about better-off in work assessments.

Needless to say, on the basis of my negative response to the answer, I didn't get the work and would have refused it if it had been offered.

  

Top      

John Birks
                              

Welfare Rights Officer, Stockport Advice
Member since
02nd Jun 2004

RE: Serious concerns over Reed Advice
Wed 02-Jun-10 09:30 AM

Sadly you can see how the DWP think with regard to fibbing on job applications.

http://www.publicservice.co.uk/news_story.asp?id=8154

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1260901/Woman-lied-CV-A-Levels-bag-NHS-job-jailed.html

  

Top      

jj
                              

welfare rights adviser, saltley & nechells law centre birmingham
Member since
21st Jan 2004

RE: Serious concerns over Reed Advice
Wed 02-Jun-10 10:57 AM

prosecutions under the fraud act 2006. i'n sure i'm being a bit thick here, but does anyone know why exactly it's the DWP prosecuting these cases?

anywaaays, it's good to see the light dawning at last on daily mail readers, dawg bless'em.

  

Top      

Top Other benefit issues topic #4432First topic | Last topic