The Independent has picked it up as "Chris Grayling hails employment programme". It says that the figures show that "around one in four of those who joined the Work Programme a year ago had stayed off benefits for at least three successive months. The signs were that the figure could have risen to 30%, which means the multi-billion pound scheme was 'on track' to deliver the help ministers had hoped for."
Look at the figures for yourself. We're told that "Of those who left benefits most quickly - in the first 10 weeks - 7 out of 10 were still off benefits 13 weeks later." No surprise there. They were the ones who would have got work anyway.
It's being spun as 25% getting long-term work. It doesn't mean that. Of the 26,800 sample size, people will have signed off for a variety of reasons, including death, emigration and marriage.
There is no breakdown by region or by provider. And how does this square with the leaked A4e performance figures which showed little more than a tenth of these figures?
PS: In answer to some of the comments below, I've been given the following information:
- The Office for National Statistics say that 46% moved into jobs of more than 16 hours a week. That suggests that there's rather more sharing of information going on than some people would like.
- The DWP says "categorically" that the numbers signing off do NOT include those who were sanctioned.
Interesting.
“A break in claim is when there is evidence that a WP participant has left benefit for at least one day” This is on the last page. How do they determine what left benefit is.. Interesting to check
ReplyDeleteYes, does it include people who were "sanctioned"?
DeleteLook on the bright side! According to the Independent, Grayling says that he is "comfortable" with the Work Programme scheme. Since Grayling is nice & comfy the Work Programme providers can forget about trying to get him to give them any more money, it seems to me.
ReplyDeleteApparently only 14% of WP participants from the June 2011 intake have signed off Benefits for not less than 26 weeks. There were 26,800 people originally. 14% of 26,800 is less than 4,000 people, isn't it? If my (admittedly hopeless) maths is roughly correct, doesn't this 4,000-ish correspond with A4E's own figures, more or less?
So you get sanctioned, then you become one of the "succeses" in that interim study?.. Or have I gone insane.. I wonder how many of those who were off benefits were sanctioned for 13 weeks.
ReplyDeleteOne in four.. means 3 in four didn't.. that's success? so only 6,700 got off benefits for longer than 13 weeks.
But if you remember the prior stories, 4,020 people from a4e got a job, 3,000 got sanctioned.. If you add those together you get an approximate figure of 7,020. I am wondering if that isn't scalable up.
Curious.
I have a long term health condition that has plagued me for many years.
ReplyDeleteI have worked through employment agencies for most of my life, because as the severity of my condition fluctuates it allowed me a certain degree of flexibility.
I've been unable to find employment for over a year. My health has not been the reason I have just noticed the number of jobs open to people like me in clerical work has collapsed.
I have been referred to Mandatory Work Activity. There was no point. I spent three months working in a charity shop: I had to leave because of my health.
I signed of Jobseekers Allowance shortly after I started the "placement." I am still working in the charity shop I have been sent to, and will until the designated four weeks runs out. So why did I sign off?
I am frightened I will be unwell and make a mistake at the shop, or my feet will hurt more than usual and I will walk in five minutes late and then be "sanctioned" for three months. I've done the maths - the certainty of four weeks without an income or the risk of three months.
I have a a kitchen stuffed with tins of baked beans, corned beef pasta ect and a couple of hundred pounds to carry me over.
I cannot speak for other people but I have signed off unemployment benefit because I am afraid of being punished for some kind of minor mistake, possibly related to my health problems.
Unless I happen to find a job in the next few weeks I will be sucked into the Work Programme in a couple of months. If I had family to turn to for support, I sign off unemployment benefit.
The governments figures do not prove anything to me, only that many people are desperate. Many people are afraid.
In the charity shop I work alongside people who are being forced to work as part of their Community Punishment Orders. On Friday a probation officer visited the shop to check those sent there were actually attending - I went to the toilet, closed the door and almost cried. I am a 52 year old man and have never committed a crime in my life. I am being punished for being ill, I am being punished for being poor.
I urge you to see your doctor. You do not have to be in this position, and if you're not able to do the placement because of your health your doctor will be able to say so. If s/he won't, demand a second opinion. Go to your local CAB and get advice there. Go to your MP's surgery. Make a fuss. I know it's hard, especially if you're in a state of depression. But get angry. By all means send me your email address (I won't publish it) and I'll try to help.
DeleteNo one should be in that position. talk to those who sent you. take doctors advice like historian said. why should you have to live like that. If you told them of the health problems they have to do something
DeleteI have a a kitchen stuffed with tins of baked beans, corned beef pasta ect and a couple of hundred pounds to carry me over.
DeleteMe to.
My contributions Esa will end in Feb 2013
I'm an ex remploy worker with Cerebral Palsy and diabetes aged 53.
I haven't the energy to fight the benefit system. I'm not brave like Karen Sherlock but I bet the results will be the same.
Best Wishes
Matthew Fell, the CBI’s director for competitive markets, said: “The Work Programme seems to have made a promising start, with nearly half of participants coming off benefits at some point since joining
DeleteThe CBI should be taken to the european courts of human rights,because it is an apolgist for it's members woeful record in employing disabled people.
Matthew Fell's upbeat comment do not suprise me.
46% moved into jobs of more than 16 hours per week. So 54% of the successes didn't get jobs of more than 16 hours and are therefore very likey to be still drawing benefits of some kind.
ReplyDeleteSo (roughly) we have around 25% of people geting work and only 46% of those getting anywhere near full time work. I make this around an 11.5% "success" rate.
G.
Can you please post under a pseudonym. It's easy, painless and doesn't disclose anything about you. It just makes it a lot easier to hold a conversation.
DeleteIn the drop down menu Historian do you have the option of deleting "Anonymous: That will help if you can.
DeleteI am not sure it is easy!
DeleteI can't seem to get the hang of it!
G.
In the drop-down menu (I can't delete anything) you have Name/URL. I think if you use that you can then put a name in. Or perhaps some of the regulars with pseudonyms can explain it.
DeleteTesting Testing!
DeleteCongratulations!
Delete'11.5% "success" rate'
DeleteI agree that's probably close to the real in-work figure!
But I think that by signed-off-benefits they mean just off JSA. Some will be on 'training allowance' instead. Many or even most will still be getting HB,CT,WTC, due to the quality and pay of the jobs.
The more you look into, it the worse it gets - if that's possible.
Well that's odd Historian. In Justine's drop down menu she hasn't either "Anonymous" or "Name/Url" which suggested to me you can delete or keep these options ..... Maybe ask her or the isp in charge?
DeleteNope, I can't delete anything. This is a Blogger blog and I'm stuck with what they give me. It seems to work fine.
DeleteMany figures are of people being sanctioned.
ReplyDeleteNo, they are not. As I said above, the DWP has stated that the figures don't include those sanctioned.
DeleteOn the posting problems. I can't seem to get firefox to post/work here at all, so swapped to Opera, - mostly just for this site.
ReplyDeleteFF and Opera seem to work fine together.
http://www.opera.com/browser/
I use Firefox and Chrome and both work fine.
Delete