There is plenty of comment on the news that the government plans to expand the Mandatory Work Activity scheme. If you haven't read any of it, try the Guardian. Essentially, the plan was was for 10,000 starts in the first year, but more than 49,000 have been referred in the first 10 months. Only 16,790 have actually started MWA. And 46% either signed off or didn't turn up. (I don't know how they work that out - I make that 34% no-show.) It's such a success that they are going to spend £5m on increasing the numbers by 9,000. And the penalty for failing to comply could be loss of benefits for 3 years.
For the right wing press, of course, this means that nearly half of long-term unemployed people are in some way fraudulent. But does it? Certainly there are some who are working in the black economy, cash in hand, and will sign off. Some others are claiming whilst being kept by someone else, and would rather sign off than go on the scheme. But nobody knows how many there are in these categories. Some have been trying to play the system by signing off for a week or two then signing on again, assuming that the clock is wound back to the start - but it isn't. Others will simply have decided that they don't wish to comply with MWA. But what they will then live on, who knows? There is no evidence of increased numbers getting jobs because of MWA.
MWA was the contract which A4e lost in one region, you remember, because their processes were too "risky". But another £5m is to be put into the scheme. Presumably if enough people sign off, that's a bargain. But one question which is never addressed is, where is all this "work activity" coming from? Which employers are benefiting from this? There are now nearly 17,000 people out there working for up to 30 hours a week, doing what?
The MWA contract in the same area that has the MP Chris Grayling..
ReplyDeleteThis is YET another way for Grayling to say the Unemployed are breaking the Law. Its blaming people who have so little voice, who are blamed for everything wrong. If employers wont hire the unemployed and rely on forced volunteers, then blame the employers.. Where I live there is ZERO growth for everyone hired there is someone fired
If Excel is right (ie if I've worked Excel correctly, which is probably unlikely) this new MWA scheme is going to cost Grayling over £500 of taxpayers' money for each of the 9,000 additional people whom Grayling plans to refer to the expanded MWA scheme?
ReplyDeleteThe CESI and the DWP both say that their own research shows that the MWA does not do enough (if anything much at all) to improve the job prospects for the people who have been forced to attend MWA placements so far.
If so then what is the point of wasting so much more public money on something that appears not to work?
Because they cant afford to let it fail.. Too many people have put their reputations on the line, grayling, Duncan Smith, Devereux, The PM, everyone who has pushed this will help. They have so much to lose. It isn't about reality its about blame the unemployed, It's an ideological plan Nothing to do with reality
DeleteAs a over 25 JSA claimant I can state that there is nothing on offer ,if I have been misled please show me the way,I am not taking the p£ss.
DeleteI have read the guardian, when will this government get this whole mess sorted? Never! What is the point of ploughing more money in to this MWA System, like throwing good after bad. I feel that they want the unemployed to feel like scum. While ever companies know they can hire free labour, they will be clapping their hands.If this free labour wasn't available then there would more REAL paid jobs up for grabs.
ReplyDeleteNot trying to rock the boat,but i recently had re-sign my contract with both the JCP and the WP if I fail to live up to this agreement I will be sanctioned.My question is if they fail to fufill there part what will they face?
ReplyDeleteAnd yes I am being funny,this whole Work Programme is like watching a train wreck in slow motion,no accountability, no facts and in the end there will be nobody that takes account for their actions.
ReplyDeleteDo the companies who take on MWA employees for the 4 weeks pay the providers any sort of 'agency fees'?
ReplyDeleteThe reason I ask is that I arranged my own unpaid 30hr a week placement with an employer who is providing real and valuable skills training, yet my work programme provider has refused to offer financial assistance to travel to the workplace and complete an 8-week pre-employment training placement which will lead to an already offered position of employment pending completion of the placement.
I've been told by the WP provider I'm referred to that the employer is exploiting me, despite working alongside three other members of staff who have just been offered permanent contracts after completing their 8-week placements.
The WP providers don't engage in anything that may be of benefit to their clients without being able to earn a profit from it themselves.
I don't quite understand what you're saying. You're doing a placement now, but it's not arranged through the provider? Are they letting you complete the training but not paying you travel expenses? Providers do have their own lists of placement providers, though they are not bound by them, and if there are financial deals being done, there shouldn't be.
DeleteIf you send me a comment with your email address (not for publication, of course) maybe I can advise you.
Other factors worth mentioning about MWA and Work Programme work experience placements are health and safety induction and Employers' Liability Insurance.
ReplyDeleteTheir is a legal requirement for private sector organisations, including charities, to insure that anyone undertaking a work experience placement is covered by their Employers Liability Insurance. This is to ensure that you are insured in the event you have an accident and sustain an injury or contract a disease whilst on placement.
The Health & Safety Executive (HSE)say that you would PROBABLY be covered by the Employers' Liability Insurance for short periods work experience placements. But it is up to you to ask the provider to confirm this. The provider should have already carried out an health and safety audit of the organisation, which includes clarifying if the jobseeker is insured.
And if the organisation offering the placement is taking a succession of jobseekers on short term work experience then it is likely they will have to buy additional liability insurance.
So before accepting any work experience placement, regardless of whether it is on MWA or the Work Programme, you are entitled to ask your provider about whether you will be insured. No insurance - no placement.
You are entirely right. I was tending to assume that an employer offering such training would have the necessary insurance and H&S paperwork. In the past providers were always willing to go out and do sign-ups if the client found their own placement. perhaps now they've decided they just don't have the time.
DeleteSent a letter recorded delivery to A4E to confirm whether Employers Liability Insurance would cover me during mandatory work activity placement. No reply. (Personal advisor at Job Centre scoffed at me for questioning A4E's integrity!!, so A4E must have informed her about my insurance letter.) I failed to turn up for the MWA placement and haven't been sanctioned yet. This was my fourth referral, but in none of these referrals was an MWA 05 issued by the Job Centre. Presuming that the MWA 05 letter hasn't been issued to anybody at my Job Centre, then would those people who have completed MWA be entitled to sue the DWP for not paying minimum wage (illegal mandation)?
DeleteAlso interesting to see that Archbishop Rowan Williams's 'aspirationl waffle' comments on the BBC news website yesterday are not in the headlines today.
Quote: Historian: "I don't quite understand what you're saying. You're doing a placement now, but it's not arranged through the provider? Are they letting you complete the training but not paying you travel expenses?"
ReplyDeleteThat's exactly right. Organised between myself & the employer, with the provider letting me complete the training, but not providing travel expenses, which have upto now been met by taking a loan.
And to boot, as I have declined to sign the consent documents, I have been both offered a cash-bonus in return for confirming employment details with the provider once I sign-off to start work, and when I refused the money offer, was threatened with sanctions on future NI contributions.
Okay. If you are guaranteed the job on completion I would carry on, even it means using a loan. If it's not guaranteed, it's more difficult. If you were on this training before you started with the WP provider, then I don't blame you for not wanting them to get an outcome payment - but you might consider that worth it if the bonus paid off your loan. As for the "sanctions on future NI contributions", I don't see how that can be done. You are getting your NI paid now because you are signing on. When you start work you sign off and pay your own NI, along with your employer. The WP provider isn't in the picture, unless I'm missing something.
DeleteHow do i go about getting A4E to delete my personal information from there database because they are refusing to do it for me?
ReplyDeleteI am back into full time work, used A4E once for an induction now there pestering me with phone calls demanding me to visit there office so i can sign off with them! I know they need my signature so they can claim there money and when i spoke of this the "advisor" just laughed down the phone then i requested for my details too be removed from there database, he replied that my details would be kept on file for two years because 'it's up to the government' i then demanded for my details to be removed as they are my details and i don't want them being leaked as this shoddy company have previous, he just continued to give me the same rubbish about the government. In the end i found myself getting angry so i just hung up.
Any help on this matter would be greatly appreciated.
They can't / won't delete you from their system because you are part of the Work Programme for two years, like it or not (and understandably most don't like it). They can't force you to sign anything, but I don't think their outcome payment depends on your signature. JCP can give them corroboration of your job. If you were to lose it, you would be back with A4e.
DeleteI suggest you contact your MP and ask for guidance. There are lots of people in the same position.
All you can do, apart from what Historian has advised, is to refuse sign any documents A4e send you - and not give them any details about your new employer.
DeleteAnd if you did not sign the info consent form at A4e induction you will have the satisfaction of knowing you made it that bit harder for A4e to make any money from you!
I have said.. I do not want a4e to contact me ever again. If they continue I will take legal advice about harassment. Talk to your MP, talk to CAB about this organisation constantly badgering you. This would not be allowed by any other company, why should a4e be allowed to do that.
ReplyDeleteIts simple. you get a job sign off dont tell the jobcenter weho your employer is, you dont have to. how can A4E trhen claim anything for you getting a job? for others apply for jobs outside the work programme do not let your "work coach" know you have applied for them. apply for work programme jobs just to satisfy your work coach ie crap jobs, if sent for interveiw on the craapy jobs fluff the interveiw. only be serious about the jobs you have applied for OUTSIDE OF THE WORK PROGRAMME. everyone do this and no outcomes for providers. simple as.
DeleteNo it isn't "simple as". The provider's claim isn't dependent on your information. They can get it from JCP. And to say that you should avoid applying for or getting particular jobs just to spite the provider is silly.
DeleteA4E operate in israel. no mention of that on this site historian? why? A4E partners with BAE no mention of this on this site historian? why?
DeleteTry putting "Israel" into the search box, top left, and you'll find plenty of posts on the subject. You obviously haven't looked very hard. As for BAE - I have asked you many times what you mean by "partners" but have had no response. So no more insulting comments, please.
DeleteUnder the Protection from Harassment Act 1997:
ReplyDelete"A person must not pursue a course of conduct
"(a) which amounts to harassment of another, and
"(b) which he knows or ought to know amounts to harassment of the other." Harassment also occurs when, on the grounds of race, disability, sex, sexual orientation, belief or religion, an employer - or their agent such as another employee or a manager - engages in unwanted conduct which has the purpose or effect of violating an individual's dignity or creating an interrogating, degrading, hostile offensive or humiliating environment for the employee in question. This is wide spectrum, and covers all types of harassment.
In addition, while the conduct must be unwanted by the recipient, it does not necessarily have to be that the harasser has a motive or an intention to harass. So it is still harassment even if the harasser does not know there is harm caused by their actions.
I created my own business back in March, a4e continue to bombard me with phone calls and letters stating they will stop the benefits I'm not claiming if I don't attend appointments.
ReplyDeleteI have requested several times that they remove me from their database however they have told me they will not remove me unless I tell them my employer (who is myself).
I have told them it is none of their business as they are a private company and are acting illegally by holding and disseminating false information about me when they know their information not to be correct.
It is clear to me that this is a harassment tactic to enable the to be paid for employing me.
How do I launch a private prosecution against the managers involved?
The original post was more than two years ago, so not many people will see this.
DeleteYou would have to go to a solicitor. That costs. And a private prosecution would cost a great deal. You could try the Information Commissioner if the issue is that A4e are holding false data. Whatever you do could result in A4e learning about your self-employment.