Meanwhile, Mark Lovell has been using the Huffington Post to publicise his vision of young people getting themselves out of unemployment by starting their own enterprises. One would think that the Prince's Trust didn't exist.
Wednesday, 19 October 2011
"Lead Family Champion"
Something called the Family and Parenting Institute (a think tank) gives space for Emma Harrison to plug her Working Families Everywhere campaign. The familiar message has been refined somewhat. "The difference in the Working Families Everywhere approach is on setting a single goal, in this case employment for at least one family member, and dealing with the other needs on the path to, or subsequent to, that goal." There's a great deal about Emma's qualifications for the role, and then the final paragraph is a triumph of Emma-speak. But we learn that these "family champions" will all be volunteers. That was inevitable. But there's nothing in this piece about the ESF contracts for private companies to do this work for profit. How will the volunteers fit into this strange mix of local council employees and private companies?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I am not sure if I have mentioned this before and if I have, I apologise. The Government are doing nothing for older long term unemployed which hardly sets a good example to potential Employers.
ReplyDeleteAn aside. I have just read Justines blog (link on the right) I could hardly believe it. The Job Centre will not refer her to The Work Programme for at least nine months.. Why I wonder ..... ? Any ideas Historian/Whoever? Is it because they, the companies/organisations, have been flooded with participants It sounds it to me.
I haven't read all of that blog, but maybe it's a case of taking on those who have not yet been on the merry-go-round first.
ReplyDeleteWell I have been on New Deal and the like three times (with a few months in between) and was destined for The Work Programme until I pointed out the imminence of official retirement!
ReplyDeleteWell i have been told too many people are being referred and they cant cope with the amount of people being referred.
ReplyDeleteI was the last intake but one for the ND here and we were told by A4E themselves that it would be 9 months before we started WP if we hadn't found a job.
ReplyDeleteI had my letter from the Job Centre telling me I was going to have the WP interview a month after I finished ND. Since being back at A4E I have seen 3 other people who were also on the WP with me.
Perhaps it depends on where in the UK you are?
I have seen at least 8 people who was on the last FND with me. And 5 of those was on the one before that.
ReplyDeleteIt sounds then that the so called revolutionary Work Programme is already a disaster for the Government (a blessing for clients however!) as was predicted.
ReplyDeleteWhen I hear the word Revolutionary, I always think revolution it goes round and round in a circle, and nothing changes.
ReplyDeleteSome latest information. Apparently I am applying for TOO many jobs. I should be applying for one or two and spending all my time on those 2. I should be applying for paper applications and not just sending out cv's from legitimate companies. If i keep going on i will be sanctioned and maybe put on the community action scheme. All for applying for jobs.
ReplyDeleteThe subject of how much time one should spend on job-hunting gets ridiculous. Like many other people I was at one period having to apply for jobs because the job I had was coming to an end. I managed to search for jobs and apply for them in my lunch break. And I was successful.
ReplyDeleteHaving filled in two application forms, what are you then supposed to do?
And to add insult to injury, i was threatened with a sanction or community work programs. If i didnt stop applying for so many, i should be like a sharp shooter, rather than applying for anything i can do. I send about 3 to 6 emails cv's a week. i do some on line applications. I apply for too many, but a4e are contracted for you to do 3 job applications a week. So what are you to do.. The cynic in me says they are doing on purpose to kick people off..
ReplyDeleteCan you get that in writing? It may be that they don't want employers to be deluged with CVs from people who are not suitable for vacancies. But if you are going for jobs you're qualified for, it seems unlikely that they would try to stop you.
ReplyDeleteBut what has it to do with her, which jobs i am going for, so long as i feel as if i can get a job, and have the skill sets..
ReplyDeleteI will see if she will do it, but i doubt it as they dont want anything written down.
I must be doing it wrong otherwise i would have a job.. she actually said that to me. She stated that education more qualifications mean nothing, that i should be going for entry level admin jobs (which i do) which doesnt require experience.
(as an aside someone said theres a rumour going round that this blog and you are actually working for a4e. highparks hub page someone said it there) Will let you know what happens.. If its true it brings a whole new level to terror.
That rumour was put about because I wouldn't publish abuse. I can state categorically that I don't work for A4e. And anyone who has actually read this blog would not need to ask.
ReplyDeleteAs for the advice you're being given; there's a lot of conflicting advice out there, and in the end you have to learn from experience.
(i know that you arent part of that group, i wasnt sure you knew or not what was being said you are the sanity that exists for us with the experiences of a4e. and for that you have my deepest respect.)..
ReplyDeleteIf they [A4e] won't put anything in writing, start recording the conversations - Better still, record regardless.
ReplyDeleteYou can't record a conversation without the permission of the other person. Unless, of course, you're an undercover reporter.
ReplyDeleteSorry to go off topic. Just a quick heads up. The BBC is treting us to a double whammy tommorow.
ReplyDeleteOn BBC1, we have a Panorama program called: Britain On The Fiddle: An investigation into the world of benefits cheats, who effectively steal miilions of punds in taxpayer's money every year. Reporter Richard Bilton uses undercover cameras to expose people on benefits sailing yachts and driving expensive cars...
No doubt we all know which direction this prog will take. Sadly, such reports are used to beat jobseekers around the head with to make it look like its the norm.
Straight after this on BBC2 at 9pm we have the lovely John Humphrys looking at the future of The Welfare State. No doubt we'll heve the usual 'benefits are too generous' soothsayers.
With regards benefit cheats, this is something to bear in mind:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-15458400
No if, no buts?
Yes, I'd spotted the Humphrys programme http://goo.gl/l05bj
ReplyDeleteIt suggests that it will be reasonably balanced. The Panorama programme will probably NOT be balanced by a scrutiny of tax evasion.
I am a fan of Vince Cable and I accept that his non-payment of tax was a mistake!
'Britain: On the Fiddle'!!!
ReplyDeleteWhy not just go the whole hog and have a show called 'Saints and Scroungers'
oh wait...
I worry whether all these stories about the unemployed scroungers are making it harder for the true job seekers to get work. There are no headlines saying this person is a saint, its all about they are scroungers. I cannot watch these shows because i know being a jobseeker i will be called lazy.
ReplyDeleteFrom what is said here http://intensiveactivity.wordpress.com/2011/10/24/john-humphrys-to-tout-for-welfare-crackdown-on-bbc/#comments
ReplyDeletethe show doesn't sound balanced at all.
I don't feel remotely uncomfortable making the assumption this will be another bbc hatchet job, and I bet pounds to pennies Digby bloody Jones appears (if not here then in the other show).
I saw the same trailer and felt much the same, but we'll wait and see. The programme website talks about going back to "the original Beveridge vision of welfare". That was a model that still pertained in the 1960s; you paid National Insurance when you were working and got unemployment benefit when you weren't, but only as long as your contributions lasted. After that, you got means-tested benefits. Many people want to see this link restored.
ReplyDelete