Skip to content or view screen version

Working Links & Freedom

Hildy Johnston | 08.02.2008 14:36 | Repression | Sheffield | South Coast

This follows on from a previous article which was critical of Working Links connections to far-right Christian extremists. Following sanctions imposed on my JSA I have had a closer look at the relevant regulations and have found that the legislation appears to suggest that Mandatory Employment programmes are not quite so mandatory after all.

Working Links is just one example of the encroachment of the private sector into the public sector. The former model of allegedly apolitical civil servants acting independently of continuous party influences in the delivery of services, is being replaced by private organisations with strong ideological biases. Whilst outwardly appearing to be professional and objective, Working Links is increasingly influenced by ideologues from the religious right who have teamed up with crony capitalists CapGemini and Manpower to 'help' Jobseekers.

 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/regions/sheffield/2007/11/385420.html?c=on#c184110

My JSA has been suspended due to the terms of the Jobseekers Act 1995 sections 19 (1), 19 (2) and 19(5) following a dispute with Working Links. However, from what I can make out the decision makers have to take the following into account.

The Jobseekers Allowance Regulations 1996 include the definition of "good cause" for non-compliance with the direction of an employment officer. These include regulations 73 & 75. These regulations appear to challenge the presentation of attendance at Working Links and other such schemes for periods of up to 26 weeks as compulsory. Whilst decision makers may well suspend benefit payments for non-compliance it seems that each instance represents an abuse of their power.

73 (2) Without prejudice to any other circumstances in which a person may be regarded as having good cause for any act or omission for the purposes of section 19(5)(b), a person is to be regarded as having good cause for any act or omission for those purposes if, and to the extent that, the act or omission is attributable to any of the following circumstances—
(a) the claimant in question was suffering from some disease or bodily or mental disablement on account of which—
(i) he was not able to attend the relevant training scheme or employment programme in question;
(ii) his attendance would have put at risk his health; or
(iii) his attendance would have put at risk the health of other persons;
(b) the claimant's failure to participate in the training scheme or employment programme resulted from a religious or conscientious objection sincerely held;
(c) the time it took, or would normally have taken, for the claimant to travel from his home to the training scheme or employment programme and back to his home by a route and means appropriate to his circumstances and to the scheme or programme exceeded, or would normally have exceeded, one hour in either direction or, where no appropriate training scheme or employment programme is available within one hour of his home, such greater time as is necessary in the particular circumstances of the nearest appropriate scheme or programme;

Interpretation
75.—(1) For the purposes of section 19 and of this Part-
(a) "an employment programme" means a programme of advice, guidance or jobsearch assistance provided in pursuance of arrangements made by the Secretary of State under section 2 of the Employment and Training Act 1973[68], as amended by section 25 of the Employment Act 1988[69] and known as:—
(i) Jobplan workshop, being a programme of up to one week to provide advice and guidance on jobs, training and employment opportunity;
(ii) 1-2-1, being a programme of up to 6 interviews to give advice, support and encouragement and to identify matters that are preventing a return to work;
(iii) Workwise (in Scotland, Worklink), being a programme of up to 4 weeks of guidance and practical assistance in jobsearch; and
(iv) Restart course, being a programme of up to 2 weeks with emphasis on jobsearch.

 http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1995/ukpga_19950018_en_3





Hildy Johnston

Comments

Hide the following 2 comments

divide and rule

08.02.2008 15:50

The real state spongers ( OK besides greedy politicians and charidee execs ) are these fake training agencies and their collaborateur staff .i.e their purpose is to police us. I have been on fake training courses run by Manpower in the 1980'.s. They got their money supposedly to train us in various aspects of the bui;lding industry which they did not do. A4e make millions out of grants ( more then Jasper ) having started making their millions by exploiting unemployed Sheffield steel and textile workers. They mainly get peoples benefits stopped through having " the wrong attitude". There have been people who have nedee up on these courses who have been sacked from their jobs for not taking a wage cut ( usually while the bosses of these PFI/council partnerships get pay increases ) out of their meagre street cleaning jobs.Of course these jobs can be filled with ( also exploited ) cheap migrant labour who have no rights - like the US model where bosses and the state can hire then fire and deport as they feel like whilst undermining the local blue collar work force. Divide and rule. It has now starting to hit the middle class and by golly do they deserve what's coming to them. Did I get onto the subject of bailing out those greedy shareholders in schemes and businesses that go wrong? Railtrack, Metro, Northern Wreck - the list will be endless and the winners will be the corporations who will pick up the bargains. Groups like Siemens-Fujistu, McKinsey, Laing, Halliburton etc. How can they keep this going. By ROBBING AFRICA blind through the same divide and rule whether in Kenya, Sierra Leone or Nigera etc. ARMS FOR RESOURCES... alon with other countries oif the G8. The only way to stop this is to REALLY SQUARE UP TO THE SQUARE MILE and destroy the 4th estate propaganda machine.

capitalism must be destroyed


bastardisation of the poor

08.02.2008 18:24

A good article with some useful information.

You will generally find, that if you challenge at a tribunal, you win.

There is currently an unseemly macho bidding war between the two main parties to see who can kick the poor, the sick and the disadvantaged the hardest.

Jobseekers are being forced to go on scam training courses run by companies like Working Links, a4e, CDG, that do nothing for the unemployed, but line the pockets of the companies that run these fraudulent scams.

 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2007/11/386689.html?c=on
 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2007/12/388044.html?c=on
 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2007/12/388504.html?c=on
 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/01/390153.html?c=on
 http://www.schnews.org.uk/archive/news614.htm
 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/01/390290.html?c=on
 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/02/390471.html?c=on
 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/02/390638.html?c=on
 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/02/390901.html

At CDG the clients are starting to fight back, but what we need is these scam traiining couses to be shut down.

Maybe a day of action?

A few days ago we had a government minister say no work, no home. If you lack work you will be kicked out of your Council house.

 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/02/390820.html

What next, bring back the Work House.

Now that is an idea. More profits for private companies, and the labour will be free.

What next, a minister for bastardisation of the poor?

Keith