(No Ratings Yet)
Loading ...So Welfare Reforms plans are out and so is Flexible New Deal… they plan to make us work for below that National Minimum Wage; but surely aren’t we getting worked up about nothing?
This is coming from someone who lives in a pilot zone for Flexible New Deal and strongly opposes the plans…
It needs to be stopped, agreed, but aren’t we forgetting about something?
New Deal
VSO - stands for Voluntary Sector Option (sometimes referred to as simply VS)
This involved 24 hours per week cheap labour exploitation by businesses who weren’t interested in training the ’slaves’ without a job at the end - and – charity shops with an agreement with the New Deal Provider just to stick people in there. Rarely, are people able to choose a placement they want and actually get it.
If you got £50 per week and did 24 hours of work – you are working for £2.08 per hour – if you are lucky enough to secure a proper job at NMW you would think you had won the jackpot! Then there is the emergency taxation soaking up your hard earnt cash. (Not to mention a further 6 hours a week is spent doing job search)
Charity shops sign agreements with the New Deal provider claiming you are doing shop work (you said you want to do retail right? what difference does a charity shop make?) either written as “shop work”, “general retail”, “retail duties” or “shop duties” etc. which all looks good for the auditors.
You however don’t make it to the shop floor you sort out clothes from bags which could contain needles and the clothes are typically unwashed and including underwear or if you are lucky instead you get to iron the clothes with steam and do the labelling. Yeah pretty dull. This typically is working with those ordered by the courts to do Community Service. No, they are not CRB checked and even if they were they would fail it. Or you can work lumping furniture and electrical appliances around without manual handling training.
Sorry for those who are confused. VSO is the name, there is absolutely nothing voluntary about it. it is compulsory. Thats why people can’t get out of it so easily.
ETF - stands for Environmental Task Force (aka Community Service by Unemployed People)
A lot of concern has been raised about Flexible New Deal meaning unemployed people have to do Community Service similar to sentences handed out by the courts.
This actually has already been happening, on New Deal – it is called ETF!
A google search for this returns this result with a distorted explanation and some geeky guy pictured.
Following on from Gateway to Work, the Environment Task Force offers additional help to those clients aged 18-24 who were unable to secure employment during the Gateway to Work programme. ETF is a 13 week programme and the aim is to assist unemployed people back into employment.
The design of the programme is extremely flexible, allowing for a variety of training options with the emphasis on recognising the aspirations of the customer and developing a training plan that is most suitable for them.
Elements of the programme can include training in motivation, confidence, communication, interview techniques, help with compiling a CV, completing application forms and writing letters of application as well as the opportunity of work experience in practical elements including joinery, engineering and environmental improvements.
Ironically, it makes no mention about the actual work you would have to do.
Flexible New Deal
So not much different at all. Saying this it will be for longer, a rumour of no training allowance at all and people who done VSO are more likely to do ETF like activities. Comments welcome!
following on from the link above,given the nature of the law breaking on these new deal programs’ with bullying/
personal abuse.
i would advise anyone who has experienced this too.
take a note of what was said/by whom the time and date of the abuse,this is used as evidence at any future tribunal.
i was told to always appeal by the citizens advice bureau they went on “they (dwp) are not keen on appeals’) was stated by them also “always appeal” as well,given the nature of the allegations. human rights abuses’/breach of the law and the scheming bullying tactics used by its contractors this isn’t surprising that they are not keen.
and are highly likely to back down when confronted before it gets to that stage.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Very good advice thanks Ken. The problem is however it isn’t always easy to create notes of the time and the person etc. Always depend on the nature of the situation.
As a Jobseeker I have rang up the BDC phone number (the 0845 long-wait one) and sometimes people are very clear on the phone while other times they mumble their name. I never bother to ask them to repeat their name as apart from logging their name (which even though DWP record your call the staff get funny about you taking any notes as feeling their privacy has been invaded) they will get funny about it and the phone call wont go well. I say “never” but on one occassion I did this and it resulted in a very rude phone operator followed by having the phone hang up on me (well they did, the call didn’t terminate).
The abuse is harder to log. If someone comes up to you and says something like “you idiot” it would be easy to log down. When it comes to verbal and physical abuse you can’t think straight (I know from experience and yes with New Deal) and couldn’t really estimate a proper time. If you get worked up about it (which is common and understandable) then it would be hard to quote someone saying something in the right order.
The biggest problem is the case of 3 Vs 1.
The New Deal Provider gets a say (a partner of JCP)
The Manager of the centre gets a say (yes an employee of the above however it is taken from a so-called neutral point of management and not frontline staff – even if they share the same workplace)
The Jobcentre (NDPA, BDC/Decision Maker and/or Managers)
Vs
You. (None of the statements you make are to be treated as fact because you are the defendant. They make the case, you are solely trying to defend yourself (even if you aim to win) not make claims. If you had the opportunity to do the case, but with the DWP as a defendant you stand more chance of winning. The 1 Vs 3 bias would still apply (similar to the 3 Vs 1) however they would be defending your claims (or trying to) which would be seen as factual unless proven not true by the defence.)
The statements made are written by the Jobcentre (not a neutral party). Everything you say is alleged and they twist what you say. Everything the New Deal provider and Jobcentre state is deemed to be fact. You get a small box to fill in for an appeal where the JCP and NDP don’t have such restrictions. The NDPA and Managers can make “independent” statements as they are not directly geographically involved with the NDP – even though they have strong communication links in place – and they will back the NDP even if they weren’t there and have no evidence to state it is beyond doubt. Decision Maker also makes a statement (the decision).
What I would add is if an employee of a New Deal provider (or Flexible New Deal as it will now be) assaults you, make a threat towards you of assault or death, or harasses you or bullies you to the extent you feel you could be assaulted – in the first instance get involved with the police. Then make complaints to Jobcentre Plus and the New Deal Provider otherwise your statements will be allegations and as being unemployed… would be considered lies. Don’t expect the police to do much with the situation but at least you have the Police supporting you so instead of 3 Vs 1 it will be 3 Vs 2. I would also advise if possible to get witnesses (if applicable) to be able to make a supporting statement. The police would usually take them.
As for bullying and harassment – sadly not crimes as such. private businesses are not bound to human rights and related legislation (i.e. UNDHR, ECHR and Human Rights Act 1998) and law only applies to H&S in the workplace.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I had an employment advisor at cupar jobcentre who was a bully and very cheeky
he had the audacity to suggest i work in a PERFUME SHOP YES A PERFUME SHOP IN GLENROTHES i told him that i wasnt that way inclined(gay which is what he was implying) and also pointed out that i had only ever seen young girls working in that shop and one time i walked past there was a young bloke talking to the girl assistant who i persume was his girlfriend as he kissed her before leaving the shop i also pointed out to him that if he had passed that remark in a glasgow jobcentre he would most likely be lying on the floor with his teeth smashed in when he asked if i was threatening him i said no merely pointing out that that type of remark wouldnt wear well in a glasgow jobcentre
another time when waiting to see my idiot nda he passed comment about someone who was late for interview with the remark that persons who are late for interviews dont want to work turned out the person had been left sitting downstairs and noone had bothered phoning this idiot ea to say their next appointment was downstairs
as for voluntary work i only do this if it is compulsory i was told new deal was voluntary but had to do it or face benefit sanctions how can something voluntary be compulsory its either one or the other
also idiot nda insisted i approach prospective employers and mention the employer subsidy when i did neither wanted to know one of them killed the conversation completely as soon as i mentioned new deal subsidy
i told idiot nda i had done as requested and he was welcome to phone the employers to check which he declined to do no sirprise there then and also told him that i would not be mentioning new deal subsiudy to any employer at interview and was also taking new deal off my cv he didnt seem phased by this and said to go ahead and do this
strange that i got interviews when i sent a cv without new deal being on it but if i sent cv with new deal listed i got a rejection letter and no interview says a lot for new deal does it not?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0