Forum Home → Discussion → Other benefit issues → Thread
“Work Programme has one fatal flaw - there isn’t any work”
Article in yesterday’s Observer -
Iain Duncan Smith’s Work Programme has one fatal flaw – there isn’t any work
I don’t agree that there is “no work”. There is less work. I did a search in Darlington and within 15 miles of Darlington there are over 250 full time vacancies being advertised. That doesn’t include all the other vacancies with other Employment advertisers on the internet. The issue is getting people trained to fill these vacancies. Also anyone who isn’t working should be doing voluntary work of some sort, to get experience and “work ready”.
Another issue is the cost of having a job, transport, child care etc-often people are worse off in work-which should never be the case.
I do not know Darlington all that well but 250 sounds rather a modest number to me.
Your comments raise many questions.
How many claimant vunemployed are within 15 miles of Darlington?
Is 250 a drop in the unemployed ocean?
Why do you think everyone can be a volunteer - who is going to fund the organisations that they can volunteer for?
I don’t agree that there is “no work”.
- if you had followed the link posted by ros you’d have seen that it is a headline. Journalistic licence to exaggerate, in other words. The subheading explains it more fully and accurately: “Iain Duncan Smith’s Work Programme has one fatal flaw – there isn’t any work - There is much to be said for Iain Duncan Smith’s proposals, but few new jobs are being created in the places where they are most needed”. do you think there are enough new jobs are being created in the places where they are most needed?
I don’t agree that there is “no work”.
- if you had followed the link posted by ros you’d have seen that it is a headline. Journalistic licence to exaggerate, in other words. The subheading explains it more fully and accurately: “Iain Duncan Smith’s Work Programme has one fatal flaw – there isn’t any work - There is much to be said for Iain Duncan Smith’s proposals, but few new jobs are being created in the places where they are most needed”. do you think there are enough new jobs are being created in the places where they are most needed?
You can try and create jobs where you think they are most needed but unless they are offering 20-30k few people on the dole nowadays are even interested-this is why we have a thriving migrant population who are “taking all our jobs” allegedly. There is alot of apathy in this country, everybody wants the glamourous lifestyle of the rich and famous on TV but most are not willing to work at school, train at college or do a decent days work to achieve it. When we had a flourishing manufacturing industry in north and elsewhere, the less well educated had well paid jobs for pretty long hours doing hard work, but even they shot themselves in the foot by being too greedy and striking once to often, thus the industry was shipped abroad and the jobs lost. Its a fine line to tread.
I dont have A levels but I have never been out of work for more than 2 months in 30 years because I am willing to do anything rather than sit at home on my hands waiting for the opportunties to come to me. The Welfare State is for those who really need it and I am committed to helping those who have done everything to help themselves or have suffered ill health, but the rest need to get some personal pride and just do any job they can get or create there own job.
I do not know Darlington all that well but 250 sounds rather a modest number to me.
Your comments raise many questions.
How many claimant vunemployed are within 15 miles of Darlington?
Is 250 a drop in the unemployed ocean?
Why do you think everyone can be a volunteer - who is going to fund the organisations that they can volunteer for?
If you are “unemployed” why cant you volunteer? I’m talking about helping out in old people’s homes, helping feed patients in hospital’s , cleaning litter from the streets.
I don’t intend to get into a political spat. It’s late on a Friday and, quite frankly, I just don’t have the energy, but hang on a mo’.
“You can try and create jobs where you think they are most needed but unless they are offering 20-30k few people on the dole nowadays are even interested…..”
You just can’t go round making sweeping statements like that without the evidence to support them. How many people in the dole queues of Britain have actually said this? This morning I saw a young woman of 19, still in care, in college and working at the weekend. She was really struggling financially, and in other ways, and she wanted to do better for herself and it was heartbreaking to see the hope slowly dying in her eyes. Yes, and well done the Coalition for scrapping EMA. Nick Clegg would you have the guts to come and tell her why?
“There is a lot of apathy in this country”
How much exactly? Have you measured it? There is undoubtedly some apathy in this country. How much? I don’t know. Does anyone? Where are the figures?
“Everybody wants the glamorous lifestyle of the rich and famous on TV but most are not willing to work at school, train at college or do a decent days work to achieve it.”
Again, a sweeping generalization supported by no evidence. Of course there are some deluded x factor wannabes with no discernible talent whatsoever and an even shakier grip on reality but I suspect that there are an awful lot more people who, in the vernacular, just want a fair day’s work for a fair day’s pay, to be able to pay their mortgages/rent and to just look after themselves and, if they have one, their families.
“The less well educated had well paid jobs for pretty long hours doing hard work, but even they shot themselves in the foot by being too greedy and striking once to often….”
What! All of them. I left school in 1975 so I remember the 1970’s vividly. Yes, I’ll concede that there were some ridiculous restrictive practices, those that caused demarcation disputes, or the practice of Buggins turn in British Rail (the practice where you were not promoted on merit but merely because it was your turn) which simply had to go. There was also a mentality amongst some shop stewards (some of whom I worked with) that they should force the employer over the barrel over the pettiest of matters and rush to strike if the employer declined to be so shafted. And, there were some unrealistic demands, such as in the early 1970’s the Miners’ demand for a £100 per week wage. A demand which led to a dispute that the Tories, Margaret Thatcher and Keith Joseph in particular, did not forget.
But there were far more smaller (often less well known), just, industrial actions, the more famous among them being the Grunwick dispute of 1976-78, a fight not for greed but for union recognition, fought largely by, funnily enough, not indigenous British men but East African Asian women. There was a lot of that in the 1970’s and a lot of important rights, many of which we take for granted today, were fought for and won. Struggles for union recognition, for equal pay for women, against discrimination practices. Struggles which led to, for example, the Equal Pay Act, the Sex Discrimination Act, the Race Relations Act, etc.
Most people all over the world are fundamentally decent and fair minded who simply want to live free from fear, free from want, free from sickness and free from oppression. If we forget this truth then the rich and powerful can manipulate us to their hearts content. They know this of course and so do their Rottweilers in the yellow press. That’s why they take the time and effort to systematically vilify minorities. We owe it to each other not to fall for the lies and the hype. The truth is out there.
Well said Paul. Good to avoid a spat as well. We’d only have John Birks following with his “nature not nurture” routine.
Rightsnet needs to get a ‘like’ button - well said Paul.
Well said Paul. Good to avoid a spat as well. We’d only have John Birks following with his “nature not nurture” routine.
Good job I follow my POETS philosophy on Friday so as to not offend.
I don’t intend to get into a political spat. It’s late on a Friday and, quite frankly, I just don’t have the energy, but hang on a mo’.
“You can try and create jobs where you think they are most needed but unless they are offering 20-30k few people on the dole nowadays are even interested…..”
You just can’t go round making sweeping statements like that without the evidence to support them. How many people in the dole queues of Britain have actually said this? This morning I saw a young woman of 19, still in care, in college and working at the weekend. She was really struggling financially, and in other ways, and she wanted to do better for herself and it was heartbreaking to see the hope slowly dying in her eyes. Yes, and well done the Coalition for scrapping EMA. Nick Clegg would you have the guts to come and tell her why?
“There is a lot of apathy in this country”
How much exactly? Have you measured it? There is undoubtedly some apathy in this country. How much? I don’t know. Does anyone? Where are the figures?
“Everybody wants the glamorous lifestyle of the rich and famous on TV but most are not willing to work at school, train at college or do a decent days work to achieve it.”
Again, a sweeping generalization supported by no evidence. Of course there are some deluded x factor wannabes with no discernible talent whatsoever and an even shakier grip on reality but I suspect that there are an awful lot more people who, in the vernacular, just want a fair day’s work for a fair day’s pay, to be able to pay their mortgages/rent and to just look after themselves and, if they have one, their families.
“The less well educated had well paid jobs for pretty long hours doing hard work, but even they shot themselves in the foot by being too greedy and striking once to often….”
What! All of them. I left school in 1975 so I remember the 1970’s vividly. Yes, I’ll concede that there were some ridiculous restrictive practices, those that caused demarcation disputes, or the practice of Buggins turn in British Rail (the practice where you were not promoted on merit but merely because it was your turn) which simply had to go. There was also a mentality amongst some shop stewards (some of whom I worked with) that they should force the employer over the barrel over the pettiest of matters and rush to strike if the employer declined to be so shafted. And, there were some unrealistic demands, such as in the early 1970’s the Miners’ demand for a £100 per week wage. A demand which led to a dispute that the Tories, Margaret Thatcher and Keith Joseph in particular, did not forget.
But there were far more smaller (often less well known), just, industrial actions, the more famous among them being the Grunwick dispute of 1976-78, a fight not for greed but for union recognition, fought largely by, funnily enough, not indigenous British men but East African Asian women. There was a lot of that in the 1970’s and a lot of important rights, many of which we take for granted today, were fought for and won. Struggles for union recognition, for equal pay for women, against discrimination practices. Struggles which led to, for example, the Equal Pay Act, the Sex Discrimination Act, the Race Relations Act, etc.
Most people all over the world are fundamentally decent and fair minded who simply want to live free from fear, free from want, free from sickness and free from oppression. If we forget this truth then the rich and powerful can manipulate us to their hearts content. They know this of course and so do their Rottweilers in the yellow press. That’s why they take the time and effort to systematically vilify minorities. We owe it to each other not to fall for the lies and the hype. The truth is out there.
No sure why for having a view point I have to produce proof?? I’m 46 years old and have been in many jobs and lived through many governments and recessions. I have had clients for over 24 years of benefit work expressing views that its “not worth them working” because they are better off on benefits (pride doesnt come into it). Also I can walk through our town and see jobs advertised in windows on a regular basis and there are still well over 250 jobs per day going on the JCP website for Darlington area. I remember in late 1983 (when jobs were advertised just on cards on a board) and finding 3 cards on the wall-thats a job shortage!! and guess what-I still got a job within 2 months and previous to that i’d done full time work (apprenticeship) for almost 2 years earning less than the weekly dole money and attending college. I dont agree with a the false reporting in newspapers and by the government putting pressure on the long term sick and disabled, but there are people on benefits long term who shouldnt be and we would all be very naive if we didnt acknowledge that fact.
Intolerance = little else to say, little else to add, little else to do and little else.
[ I can walk through our town and see jobs advertised in windows on a regular basis and there are still well over 250 jobs per day going on the JCP website for Darlington area. I remember in late 1983 (when jobs were advertised just on cards on a board) and finding 3 cards on the wall-thats a job shortage!! and guess what-I still got a job within 2 months and previous to that i’d done full time work (apprenticeship) for almost 2 years earning less than the weekly dole money and attending college. I dont agree with a the false reporting in newspapers and by the government putting pressure on the long term sick and disabled, but there are people on benefits long term who shouldnt be and we would all be very naive if we didnt acknowledge that fact.
A search on your council’s website resources shows that the standard unemployment rate in Darlington is currenlty 5.5% of the working age population which equates to 3,030 people. This means that there are 12 unemployed people chasing each of those 250 vacancies. And that’s before you add in all the students, underemployed and and those on IS also looking for work.
The UK has had very high structural long term unemployment since the 1980s. This has encouraged the growth of low paid, insecure/casual work, which does not make it easy for people to move off benefits, particularly if they also have to incur childcare, travel and housing costs all of which have increased at rates significantly above inflation. And if they do move off benefits, they are often still reliant on public subsidy in the shape of tax credits anyway if they are in low/modest paid work.
It is dangerously simplistic to deny this objective evidence by pointing to individual examples, of “workshy” people. You can no more use this as evidence anymore than one can prove that all people called Tiger are good golfers, all dogs poo in the street or all cyclists wear lycra.
John, sorry no offence intended. Humour in the technological age. A hit and miss affair. May have missed there. Good job for me it was Friday. We’ve disagreed across a couple of threads on politics but your posts are always interesting and nearly always make me smile.
dbcwru, whilst I disagree with you i think you’re brave for expressing views which you must know will not be popular on here. I felt your statements were sweeping in the same way as Paul did. But I think it’s evident from your posts that you don’t think all benefit claimants are good-for-nothings etc.
I suspect by the time we reach a certain age our opinions are set for life and it’s difficult to be persuaded otherwise. I agree with you that we should never discount what we see and hear with our own eyes and ears. I think there’s a tendency on the part of some left wing parties to expect their members to do just that. I don’t think Orwell ever visited Darlo but i read recently that when he got to Wigan Pier he was initially repelled by the very working class that he’d come to embrace. However, I admire Orwell precisely because he told it as it was rather than trying to be politically correct all the time.
I have my own theory that the closer you physically live to what you might, if you were being politically incorrect, call the under class, the more reactionary you become. So if you live in a run down area you regard certain people as “chavs” or “feral”. Live one mile away though and those same folk become “dysfunctional”. A further few miles out and they’re now “vulnerable”, till finally when you’re well away from them they are transformed into the “fragile”. I had a run in recently with some of these fragile fellas who wanted to kick my head in for me foolishly suggesting that they don’t play tug in my garden and jump “my” fence, at least not when they were clearly very drunk. For me, the great John Shuttleworth sums it up with a lyric: “Disaffected Youth/On my garage roof”.
Sorry that’s a digression but the point is that we shouldn’t attempt to hide the facts just because they’re unpleasant. No one is denying that there are feckless people about as well as those affected by the celebrity culture. However, what matters are the conclusions you draw from those facts.
Neil and Paul have offered alternative explanations for the unemployment using compelling evidence. But you’d doubtless say that these simply re-state the problem of people being able to rely on the welfare state as a substitute for not working. As you say in your first post “anyone who isn’t working should be doing voluntary work of some sort, to get experience and “work ready”.” Workfare in other words with childcare and other support thrown in.
Since this thread began, we now know that the government is planning to introduce a type of workfare. My objection to workfare is that it attempts to address one symptom of poverty, ie worklessness, not the cause. So even if everybody who was fit started to work for benefit rates of pay do you think that they’d all move on to better wages after a while, and become model citizens? I don’t think so. It’s far more likely that workfare jobs would simply mask a problem, just as transferring people from Unemployment Benefit to Invalidity did in the past, namely, a lack of jobs paying a living wage. That’s not just a problem for the people doing the workfare though. The excellent book “The Spirit Level” concludes that the more unequal a society is the worse off all its members are, not just the poor. So, I think it’s far better we start looking at ways of increasing equality than asking people to sweep the streets for £67.50 p/w.
There’s just a couple of other points. The skilled manual workers in the shipyards did strike over sometimes trivial matters, another uncomfortable fact. But they were, as I was reminded recently, allowed in their breaks to have snowball fights with the asbestos they worked with. So they were striking and dying.
Finally, despite you having done very well and shown resilience in your own employment history, it never ceases to amaze me why people don’t question just why it has to be like that. As if we’re a bunch of animals stuck in a pit and only the strongest will get out. What separates us from other animals is our ability to think and plan things differently.
[ Edited: 15 Nov 2011 at 03:40 am by Tom H ]Since this thread began, we now know that the government is planning to introduce a type of workfare. My objection to workfare is that it attempts to address one symptom of poverty, ie worklessness, not the cause.
There is an economic argument that workfare is creating additional wealth, whether that work is productive, social or environmental. If that is the case then, if those undertaking it share in that increase with society, there does seem to be a value in at least part-time activity.