The Work Programme has failed. We knew that, but Mark Hoban has admitted as much in advance of the performance data being released this coming Tuesday. He has given an interview to the Telegraph revealing that fewer than 5% of clients have found sustained work, and that the companies have to "get their act together". The best Hoban can say is, "I think we can see some positive signs." Doesn't sound good, does it? And the excuses are a bit lame. The economic backdrop is different now, so it's harder to get back into work. And "what work looks like is different as well". I assume that means that there's more part-time and temporary work. It's embarrassingly at odds with the spin put on the employment statistics. There's no apology to the unemployed, of course, those who are the real victims of the failure.
Will Mark Hoban be forced to front the excuses on Tuesday, or will Iain Duncan Smith step up to the plate? And will the media understand the implications and ask the right questions?
An interesting sidelight to the story is the way in which the writer of the article, Robert Winnett, twice refers to A4e's record.
It is a front,announce the bad news ahead of the "Results" one of the oldest tricks in the PR book, how about some honesty,we lost the plot and lined peoples pockets at the expense of the unemployed and the taxpayer! I have had many contacts with those employed in the W2W industry ..There main goal is to stay employed,which I understand,but at what cost?
ReplyDeleteFrom the Telegraph article linked to in the blog post:
ReplyDelete‘The work minister said that he was watching the companies “like a hawk”, adding: “We have learnt a lot from the mistakes made by the previous government.”’
Yesterday the Guardian reported that an impact analysis published this month by the DWP on the Future Jobs Fund, which was introduced by the last government in 2009 and scrapped by the ConDems, shows that the FJF produced a net gain for Britain:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/nov/23/back-to-work-scheme-gain
There's no apology to the unemployed, of course, those who are the real victims of the failure.
ReplyDeleteAbsolutely spot on historain, lets look at the 'one size fits all approach' isnt that what the WP is supposed to do. Lets look at all the people who have been taken off the sick and found fit for work, inclding people with mental health issues etc, how is the WP model supporting these people? It takes at least two years if not more to help people with such issues to come to terms with their own personal issues.How is the WP model expected to succeed when a) there ar thousands of people with these issues who need more long term support and B) quite simply a lack of jobs. There are companies(big companies)going into liquidation.. companies you would never think this would happen to, charities going down the pan as they are not making any money through the payment by results model. Roll back two years, charites were successful in supporting people with specialist needs and did a good job, yes the FJF was a successful initiative but it didnt last as the conservatives took away a good opportunity for long term unemployed people who proved they are hard workers and appreciated the opportunity they were given. The only issue was it lasted for just 6 months and should have lasted for at least year, therefore enhancing peoples opportunity of gaining further employment in the future - a years employment looks better than six moths on a CV. As for IDS he is a delusional man, who creates poison within the media-all benefit claimats are work shy, this is the impression he gives and the media feed on this and make the rest of the nation believe such rubbish.This Flagship program needs to be revisited and explore the current failures, work on those failures and lets remember 'one size does not certainly fit all'.
It's okay, just because the Work Programme has been a £5 billion disaster, everything will work out in the end because Ian Duncan-Smith is going to implement the Universal Credit on time and on budget.
Delete