The Treatment of The Unemployed as Criminals is Criminal
Sir John Eardley-Wilmot, 1st Baronet | 13.09.2009 05:25 | Social Struggles | Workers' Movements
There is a spectre haunting Europe. It is the spectre of unemployment. In consequence of incompetence at the highest levels of Banking, there are millions without an employer. It is a terrifying prospect for both governments and businesses. Yet they have no fear. They have a plan: criminalise the Unemployed.
There is a spectre haunting Europe. It is the spectre of unemployment. In consequence of incompetence at the highest levels of Banking, there are millions without an employer. It is a terrifying prospect for both governments and businesses. Yet they have no fear. They have a plan: criminalise the unemployed.
Since the Thatcher Revolution, that overturned the last vestiges of labour market decency, there has been a creeping agenda of enslavement. The patterns of casualised labour, bogus training organisations and welfare to work programs are systematically overturning institutions of social justice. Such claims are met with ennui from the middle classes and terror from the working class. The spurious notion circulated over the last decade - that the UK is a classless society now - is the veneer of that ennui and terror.
Employers have no fear of a lack of employees because systemic changes have made the working class into the indebted class. Wider access to education is funded by transfer of debt to the individual with a promise of future earnings. The failure to take up such opportunities is met with a punitive response from Government agencies. This is merely one example of a pattern of Government misbehaviour made familiar since the 1980's.
DWP figures, from freedom of information requests, show that it is both regular and acceptable to treat the unemployed as criminals. The average monthly number of reports of fraud received by the Fraud Investigation Service over the 12 months from December 2007 to November 2008 was 70,143. Of those 70,143 there were 5,769 criminal convictions; 6,694 Administrative penalties, 12,304 cautions and 3,689 "Others". This leaves 46,877 cases, per month, of false or unsubstantiated allegation against ordinary people. Of 70,143 allegations only 5,769 criminal cases are prosecuted. That does not mean 5,769 cases succeed. The other 17,497 penalties are - almost literally - at the whim of the Department. Yes, there are structures to the non criminal penalties, but these are put in place to salve the indignation of the Department as bad loser and provide justification for the outrageous spending on vexatious litigation against innocent people.
It is an element of the systemic, progressive, criminalization of those not indentured to an employer. If such patterns of vexatious litigation were to appear against religious, ethnic or other minorities there would be rightful and persistent indignation. But the Unemployed do not have advocates in Government. The Unemployed do not have a "Work Foundation" to put forward their case. Trade Unions are for the Employed not the Unemployed - and have succumbed to accommodating Government rather than promoting the interests of people dependent on working for survival.
In a recession that has been created by the economic incompetence of a few bankers, there are literally millions of people who are now criminals. Millions are being systematically bullied, exploited by failed and nonexistent training schemes, given wrong, bad or harmful advice and treated as no better than criminal serfs. This is a punishment that is not deserved by the victims of the actual criminals.
Underlying all of this is the vicious potrayal of the Unemployed as criminal. Of the 8% of complaints that result in criminal prosecution by the DWP, none of the convictions are immune to appeal and successful appeals are not recorded. The underlying premise of DWP prosecution is driven by commercial and not criminal law: ensuring that those without an employer are potrayed as criminals - beyond a doubt - on the basis of the balance of probabilities. Those probabilities having been carefully selected and massaged by the Department on behalf of Employers.
There is an urgent an powerful need for welfare reform. This is not reform to make the system more amenable to employers. This is reform to support the rights of the Unemployed to Collectively Bargain. To take paid time off Unemployment to engage in Unemployed Union Activities. To negotiate fair and reasonable terms and conditions. To obtain appropriate training from the first day of Unemployment and all of the other "rights" that those with an Employer are said to enjoy. Any other reform simply reinforces the marginalisation and criminalisation of the Unemployed.
Welfare reform and the persistent lie that the Unemployed are workshy, scrounging scum are simply an extension of the workplace power of Employers. In analysis of "New Deal" programs, it comes to light that several employers use the System to obtain what amounts to enforced labour. In the lack of response to article there is the distinct presence of middle class ennui, guilt and pretence. While issues such as the rights of the Unemployed are not addressed, the pretence that "the Unemployed are not Me" persists. Because ordinary, decent people are not criminals like the Unemployed.
The rights and obligations of the Unemployed contain very little in the way of tangible rights. In return for remuneration far below the level of statutory minimum wage, there is an expectation of lickspittle subservience. The bulk of Unemployment is created by Business - not Government - Policies. It is not ministers who choose to lay off Private Sector workers: it is the same Directors and managers who created the economic situation that the world is in. The Unemployed are presented with the "duty" to be actively seeking work yet Businesses are not obliged to actively seek workers. It is this system of imbalances that lead to the Unemployed being unable to fulfil the role imagined for them by Governments.
It is that lack of balance that is creating a system human rights abuse that is as horrific as any historical slave trade. Exaggerations aside, there are millions of people whose lives are being shortened, made unbearable and taken out of their control because of Business Policy. In return, they are branded as criminals and offered Slavery.
Previous, related articles.
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/09/437764.html?c=on#c232149
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/11/413017.html
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/07/434659.html
https://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/07/435064.html
https://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/08/436367.html?c=on
Since the Thatcher Revolution, that overturned the last vestiges of labour market decency, there has been a creeping agenda of enslavement. The patterns of casualised labour, bogus training organisations and welfare to work programs are systematically overturning institutions of social justice. Such claims are met with ennui from the middle classes and terror from the working class. The spurious notion circulated over the last decade - that the UK is a classless society now - is the veneer of that ennui and terror.
Employers have no fear of a lack of employees because systemic changes have made the working class into the indebted class. Wider access to education is funded by transfer of debt to the individual with a promise of future earnings. The failure to take up such opportunities is met with a punitive response from Government agencies. This is merely one example of a pattern of Government misbehaviour made familiar since the 1980's.
DWP figures, from freedom of information requests, show that it is both regular and acceptable to treat the unemployed as criminals. The average monthly number of reports of fraud received by the Fraud Investigation Service over the 12 months from December 2007 to November 2008 was 70,143. Of those 70,143 there were 5,769 criminal convictions; 6,694 Administrative penalties, 12,304 cautions and 3,689 "Others". This leaves 46,877 cases, per month, of false or unsubstantiated allegation against ordinary people. Of 70,143 allegations only 5,769 criminal cases are prosecuted. That does not mean 5,769 cases succeed. The other 17,497 penalties are - almost literally - at the whim of the Department. Yes, there are structures to the non criminal penalties, but these are put in place to salve the indignation of the Department as bad loser and provide justification for the outrageous spending on vexatious litigation against innocent people.
It is an element of the systemic, progressive, criminalization of those not indentured to an employer. If such patterns of vexatious litigation were to appear against religious, ethnic or other minorities there would be rightful and persistent indignation. But the Unemployed do not have advocates in Government. The Unemployed do not have a "Work Foundation" to put forward their case. Trade Unions are for the Employed not the Unemployed - and have succumbed to accommodating Government rather than promoting the interests of people dependent on working for survival.
In a recession that has been created by the economic incompetence of a few bankers, there are literally millions of people who are now criminals. Millions are being systematically bullied, exploited by failed and nonexistent training schemes, given wrong, bad or harmful advice and treated as no better than criminal serfs. This is a punishment that is not deserved by the victims of the actual criminals.
Underlying all of this is the vicious potrayal of the Unemployed as criminal. Of the 8% of complaints that result in criminal prosecution by the DWP, none of the convictions are immune to appeal and successful appeals are not recorded. The underlying premise of DWP prosecution is driven by commercial and not criminal law: ensuring that those without an employer are potrayed as criminals - beyond a doubt - on the basis of the balance of probabilities. Those probabilities having been carefully selected and massaged by the Department on behalf of Employers.
There is an urgent an powerful need for welfare reform. This is not reform to make the system more amenable to employers. This is reform to support the rights of the Unemployed to Collectively Bargain. To take paid time off Unemployment to engage in Unemployed Union Activities. To negotiate fair and reasonable terms and conditions. To obtain appropriate training from the first day of Unemployment and all of the other "rights" that those with an Employer are said to enjoy. Any other reform simply reinforces the marginalisation and criminalisation of the Unemployed.
Welfare reform and the persistent lie that the Unemployed are workshy, scrounging scum are simply an extension of the workplace power of Employers. In analysis of "New Deal" programs, it comes to light that several employers use the System to obtain what amounts to enforced labour. In the lack of response to article there is the distinct presence of middle class ennui, guilt and pretence. While issues such as the rights of the Unemployed are not addressed, the pretence that "the Unemployed are not Me" persists. Because ordinary, decent people are not criminals like the Unemployed.
The rights and obligations of the Unemployed contain very little in the way of tangible rights. In return for remuneration far below the level of statutory minimum wage, there is an expectation of lickspittle subservience. The bulk of Unemployment is created by Business - not Government - Policies. It is not ministers who choose to lay off Private Sector workers: it is the same Directors and managers who created the economic situation that the world is in. The Unemployed are presented with the "duty" to be actively seeking work yet Businesses are not obliged to actively seek workers. It is this system of imbalances that lead to the Unemployed being unable to fulfil the role imagined for them by Governments.
It is that lack of balance that is creating a system human rights abuse that is as horrific as any historical slave trade. Exaggerations aside, there are millions of people whose lives are being shortened, made unbearable and taken out of their control because of Business Policy. In return, they are branded as criminals and offered Slavery.
Previous, related articles.
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/09/437764.html?c=on#c232149 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/11/413017.html http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/07/434659.html https://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/07/435064.html https://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/08/436367.html?c=on
Sir John Eardley-Wilmot, 1st Baronet
Comments
Hide the following 2 comments
again?
13.09.2009 19:17
Hmmm If it takes ten people to do a task then why employ 20. and if the thing they are building stops being of use then why employ enyone to build it?
I know its a silly question, but please try and answer it
anon through right
It is not a silly question - just inappropriate to the point
19.09.2009 13:13
If I go to a job, carry it out and leave then, at the end of that job I am obliged to find a new job. No ifs, no buts. I am obliged to seek work. To fail to do so is a criminalising act. The job I will find will not be the same job as before. As you point out, nobody should be employed on useless tasks. Yet employers have no such obligation and are not so criminalsied. Once an employer has built a bridge they are under no obligation to build another. The criminalisation creates a structural imbalance between the worker and the employer - where employers can pay less if they hire someone from benefits but are not obliged to sell bridges cheaper if they are not currently building one. The criminalisation of the unemployed is a bargaining chip in a labour market that is not free.
The structural imbalance between working and employing and their rights and obligations are the point. If you suppose that employment on useless tasks is undesirable then explain the purpose of the vast amount of public money being given to employers to retain workers doing such useless tasks. A policy instigated in the 1980's and unquestioned since. It encourgages Employers to retain "useless tasks" because they obtain a Corporate Welfare in the form of a tax advantage.
What happens during future work? Should Employers be allowed to advertise jobs that they know are so short term as to be economically meaningless to workers? This is not trivial - given the harsh economic choices you wish people to make, why should any worker tolerate being lied to by an employer with implications of future work? Or, nonexistent work? The Employer is not obliged to seek (or treat) future work in the same way as an Employee.
The notion that if a task is worthwhile an employer seeking employees then it is also worth the employer paying is also unaddressed by your question: why should ASDA obtain free labour in the marketplace when other employers have to pay. This is the claim made by people attending some New Deal Training courses.
Employers have, in the last three decades, created a form of collective bargaining that is unregulated, unremarked upon and undermines the economic wellbeing of the overwhelming majority of the population. Failure to balance up the "right to manage" with duties has never happened.
Sir John Eardley-Wilmot, 1st Baronet