A couple of questions here, has anyone come across this before or does anyone have any answers?
The Courts are placing many people onto drug treatment and testing orders (DTTO'S)when they are convicted of a criminal offence and this means that they have to attend Probation for at least 20 hours per week. The hours are spread over 5 days (mon-fri)and the times are staggered and this goes on for at least 3 months. The probation staff tell their clients that they cannot work if it limits their availability to attend Probation when needed.

Ok, so some DTTO clients are in receipt of JSA, some of these are being told that they can't claim JSA as they don't meet the availability for work rules and they are not protected by reg 13 or any other reg as I can see.

I have looked at the IB/IS route but this is not applicable in most cases. At the moment some JSA staff are allowing a little discretion and others are turning a blind eye.

So my questions are:
1) Can the JSA advisors give discretion in this area? (I don't think so)
2) Has anyone come across this before? (if so how did you handle it and what was the outcome, or are cases pending)
3) Is an amendment needed to ensure clients who are on DTTO's still remain entitled to JSA?
4) Is this a human rights issue?

Unfortunately I don't have this years figures on how many clients are on DTTO's but last year 8519 people were given DTTO's by the courts,and it is expected that this years figures will rise, so I'd think there was a few of those in receipt of JSA.

My big worry here is that if discretion stops being applied then my clients may find themselves with no benefit entitlement and there may be a serious risk of the clients reoffending and being committed to custody.

CAO v David (reported in R(JSA) 3/01) is the closest I've come to finding the answer. Goodluck .

Not come across cases myself and not had time to look into it beyond p361 CPAG handbook which talks about restricting your availability if you have a 'physical or mental condition'. This doesn't appear to be defined so presumably could include drug addiction.

Cheers Andy,
your right it is an area that could be useful to a portion of clients on DTTO's, however many others have stopped using drugs and are just complying with the orders imposed on them ie. many of them do not have a mental or physical condition.

Hmmm, Im sure alcoholics anonymous would argue that you never stop being an addict you're just in recovery. I reckon its got legs. Best of luck.

Cheers again Andy, but alot of the clients on DTTO's up and down the country are classed as recreational users (not addicted). So I'm sure its got legs for some but not for all.

Does anyone know whether Simon Brown L.J.'s (obiter) comments in David, i.e. the lack of discretion afforded to decision makers in this area, have had any effect on government and are there any movements to amend the law in this area?

Or am I asking too much?

I don't know about adapting legislation but have you seen the DWP press release dated 19th May which announces the personalised Jobcentre Plus
Apparently a specific part of the 5 point plan is specialist programmes for people with specific problems, former drug addicts are mentioned

interesting...i'm wondering whether the probation service is exceeding its authority in some way - effectively (for its own admin reasons?)adding to the court order, a restriction on the right to work?

in any event there seems to be a lack of joined up thinking - the stability and discipline of work would be a positive step in achieving probation services objectives, i would have thought, and not something it should want to prevent. equally, depriving offenders of JSA on restricted availability grounds would work against its aims.

if its correct that probation service can do this, i agree, a need for an addition to the categories of IS claimants is indicated - unless the exercise of a discretion not provided for in the statutory provisions by jobcentre staff prevents the need arising...and that's another kettle of fish entirely...

jj

Ok how does this sound,
Employment advisers are allowed to send claimant's on courses or take steps that would improve their prospects of finding work.
Could an Employment adviser direct that a client complies with a DTTO, as the client is being given assistance that will inevitably improve the client's prospects of finding work, (could DTTO's be classed as training progammes etc)

I have also thought about whether the Courts/Probation Service are legally allowed to order someone from refraining from work and I am waiting on an answer to this,(is it a possible human rights issue?).