I'm obliged to an anonymous comment which gives a link to an interview in a phone-in programme on Radio Merseyside. It can be found 2.06.50 in. A caller said that he is on the Work Programme with A4e and was supposed to be doing jobsearch today with them. But he got a phone call from his son's school to say that the 10-year-old was ill, feverish. As he collected his sick child from school he got a phone call from A4e to say that he would be sanctioned. The interviewer established that this meant he would lose his JSA but he didn't know whether it would be for weeks or months. The woman from A4e, said the client, was almost sympathetic, but said she had no choice. This accords with the provider guidance issued by the DWP which says that a "sanction doubt" must be raised whenever someone fails to comply, e.g. misses an appointment, and cannot be rescinded if the explanation is accepted. The interviewer, Roger Phillips, said that it was the responsibility of the DWP and the minister, and they would be following it up. I hope we get to hear the response.
Earlier I had heard a short report on the BBC news by Mark Easton on the implications of Universal Credit. He spoke to a man in Glasgow who had been sanctioned (and is therefore destitute) because he failed to do jobsearch by computer; he can't use a computer. Easton pointed out that under UC all clients will have to use a computer. He put the problem to Iain Duncan Smith, who said that 90% of people can now use a computer. A worker in the constituency (I didn't catch from what organisation) said that two thirds of the people there can't, and anyway using one in a public place like a library was not acceptable for such private business. Cut back to IDS who said that they will discuss it with councils and if necessary "make adjustments".
you are quite welcome my friend. :]
ReplyDeleteCan some ask IDS exactly what planet is he on when he says 90% of people can use computers ? The number of folks that I have seen directed to do jobsearch in A4e who can bearly get their head around basic things like switching on computers, logins , email , registration on universal big brother job search ,word processing let alone search techniques and basic personal information security when operating on public terminals. Some folks don't want to have anything to do with computer as may be their previous occupation did not require that skill set. It is very arrogant of IDS to expect people to aquire sufficient skills just to apply for Jobseeker's Allowance in the first place.
ReplyDeleteI am afraid the story above is typical. The system is set up to be a sanction production line. It's true that, provided they choose to abide strictly to the rules, advisors have little or no discretion in raising sanction doubts. They then wash their bloodstained hands saying *it's not me that sanctions you - it's the DWP". I believe this is known as the Nuremburg defence used by Nazis at the war crime trials ("I was only following orders").
ReplyDeleteThe sanctions machine then gets into top gear with specialist HO staff completing the WP08 (Please withdraw all income from this person) form and sending them off in batches to the JCP Decision Makers.
Now unless you are determined, articulate and confident it is difficult to resist the well oiled sanction machine. Even if you are determined, articulate and confident it is very time and effort consuming. The providers want their customers to "engage" and co-operate yet in so many cases (maybe even all cases) the first contact is full of threats and in many cases (including mine) the first contact is an attempt to sanction for what amounts to their administrative shortcomings (in my case successfully resisted). It was at that point that the provider's actions confirmed my enmity and stiffened my resistance. The WP will never work for a number of reasons one of which is that they are seen (and see themselves) as sanction production lines.
Rant over.
Ever since A4E incited the JCP impose a JSA sanction on me, I have been complaining about the appallingly crude, clumsy provisions used in Chapter 6 of the DWP's Provider Guidance documentation..
ReplyDeletehttp://www.dwp.gov.uk/supplying-dwp/what-we-buy/welfare-to-work-services/provider-guidance/work-programme-provider.shtml
A4E interpret the provisions of Chapter 6 in the most literal, crude possible terms, I discovered.
Chapter 6 instructs the WP provider to complete and submit Form WP08 to the JCP’s DMA team:
http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/wp-pg-form-wp-08.xls
Form WP08 is itself a disastrously sloppy, inadequate document and Kirsty McHugh of the ERSA is simply being disingenuous with her own claim that the sanctions process has “nothing to do” with the WP providers. It has everything to do with the WP providers, as anyone with half a brain-cell can deduce with zero difficulty.
The upshot was that the JCP imposed a JSA sanction on me. I served Notice of Appeal both on the JCP and on A4E. In it, I reserved the right to call my A4E “adviser” as a witness to the relevant facts in my forthcoming Appeal against the sanction. I also explained, at length, exactly why the decision to sanction me had been disproportionately harsh as well as grossly unfair.
It is NONSENSE to stop somebody’s money on the basis of nothing but a few entirely *subjective,* untested impressions formed by a couple of clerks who are not even lawyers in real life. This sort of nonsense merely encourages “kangaroo justice” – a concept that is not recognized or entertained by the Supreme Court of Judicature of England & Wales.
I did not argue about the lawfulness of the sanction because I lodged my Notice of Appeal the week before the recent decision of the Court of Appeal.
In my own case, it transpired that I did enough in my Notice of Appeal. The JCP’s Labour Market Decision Maker reversed the sanction imposed on me and refunded the £142 of JSA that had been withheld from me due to nothing but unacceptably careless, ignorant errors of judgement and execution by A4E’s own staff and then by the JCP’s staff as well.
I think everyone threatened with a sanction should follow your example and lodge a Notice of Appeal. In that Notice follow your example of reserving the right to call the A4E adviser and the A4e employee who completed the WP08 as witnesses.
DeleteIt will surely make someone think twice if A4e have to keep sending their people to appear at tribunals, especially when the WP08 signatory is probably in Sheffield and the tribunal could be anywhere from Penzance to Dundee!
Let's make sure that imposing a sanction costs them more than it costs the victim.
I am in living fear of being sanctioned, alone no help at 54 with a 12 yr old, v difficult and quite honestly no one especially the Tory boys gives a ...., they want us all on our knees, defenseless or gone to a job- which I hope I get myself, or wherever. If I do get sanctioned by unhelpful, derogatory a4e I will be straight on the BBC local radio, and lodge the Notice as well. We are now in a Totalitarian regime, we have to fight against it or become slaves.
DeleteEvil is a strong word. but this system comes pretty close to it.
ReplyDeleteI have no idea if IDS's 90% figure is accurate (it seems pretty reasonable) but in all likelihood the 10% who have limited ability to use computers (plus the cohort with limited or no access to PCs and / or the internet) are likely to fall into the categories of people previously identified by SSAC as being disproportionately likely to face sanctions in any case - older claimants, the sick, and "vulnerable claimants [who] do not set out to be non-compliant but ... often lead chaotic life-styles, have poor
ReplyDeleteorganisational skills and frequently forget the conditions they are supposed to
fulfil" .
Combine this with the way that MWA seems to be excessively targeted at ethic minority claimants (again from SSAC, who also commented that MWA looks in some senses more like a punishment than an opportunity) and it's clear that claimants who regularly face discrimination and / or are unusually complex or vulnerable for some reason are likely to fall foul of the stricter sanctions regime, more demanding Claimant Commitment an debt risks posed by the end of Hardship Payments.
Given all that, it seems pretty blase to be so relaxed about 10% of the population (which is, after all, c.6m people) facing potentially serious difficulty in jumping through the required hoops.
I visited my (Lib-Dem) local authority’s HQ in Eastleigh a few weeks ago. There were about a dozen public-access computer terminals close to the main Reception area. They looked miles better than similar terminals in my local public library (which is run by Hampshire County Council.) In my small, local library, half a dozen computer terminals are jammed close to each other in one corner. There is no privacy and no adequate desk space between the HCC-managed terminals. At EBC’s HQ, each of the terminals occupies an individual cubicle, which is adequate to ensure privacy, and there is also adequate desk-space in each of the cubicles.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I have heard that there is still a problem with EBC’s idea. The problem seems to lie in the Local Support Services Framework, on which IDS’s theory with Universal Credit depends:
http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/uc-local-service-support-framework.pdf
Who is going to show members of the public how to work the public access computer terminals in EBC’s HQ? Also, why should these members of the public allow a stranger to have access to any of their personal information?
I gather that there is a separate, "computer-problem," as well. I know next to nothing about IT, so please forgive the inadequacy of my description of this bit! Seemingly, the theory of the UC system depends on the Govt having trusted “Partners” via the Local Support Services Framework. These Partners will be able to assist members of the public via some sort of special, electronic person-recognition feature. The idea is that the UC system will need to be hack-proof and this special recognition thing is expected to cost around £25 million of the £2.2 billion that has been earmarked for UC. For whatever reason, the special electronic recognition-feature has not been developed fully (if at all) and anyway there is no provision that requires either the local authority or the member of the public to get involved with any of this, I gather.
UC will clearly cost a fortune to implement, the system is nowhere near ready for any “live testing” of it, then there are legal and social problems involving privacy plus there are also the practical problems that will occur if the relevant member of the public cannot work a computer adequately (if at all.)
... your concerns are shared by the jobcentre plus staff!
Deletehttp://www.pcs.org.uk/en/department_for_work_and_pensions_group/dwp-news.cfm/id/C6B54F6F-6875-405D-8A9FC800362CA2D9
I have to say, I always preferred being interviewed at the Jobcentre. The worst of staff there are like angels compared to a4e. I know some staff at jobcentre are unhappy with this situation.
DeleteEveryone is trying deny the Jobcentre has sanction targets. One thing for sure is that A4e certainly do.
ReplyDeleteAt my last JCP appointment both computers were out of order,only 1 phone line was working(0845 is expensive) and available by appointment only...what is the catch? you can only book time on the phone by calling the JCP.
ReplyDeleteThe Adviser asked for my contact details,which I provided a C\O address,this is no longer good enough,I was informed that I also need a phone and an E-mail as they can no longer rely on the post. And who pays for this? You are required to have access to these bare minimums or it might be determined that you are not willing to actively search for employment! Can I have this in writing as it sounds like you are mandating me to secure a Phone and internet access...NO You should travel daily to your local Library.And who pays the £4.80 travel? That is what JSA is for "The clue is in the title-Jobseekers" What do you think we give you that money for?....
So, out of approx £70/week £25 should go immediately on travel? Leaving in my case.....
Delete£20/week for rent (it's gone up massively, even with HB)
£5/week on electricty
£5/week for the gas central heating
I believe that leaves me with £15/week over.
For food, the PAYG for my mobile and clothes and shoes etc. I don't have a working TV, and neither do I smoke or drink.
Cant you get a travel aid pass - get the form at you Job centre so it's half fare, I do.
Delete@mkmky " "The clue is in the title-Jobseekers" What do you think we give you that money for?...."
ReplyDeleteAnswer: It is not a gift. It is an entitlement.
gissa,quite a few months ago,after signing on,I was leaving the JCP when I was approached by a member of staff and asked to accompany her to a conference room,as we entered a well dressed man produced a Warrant card and advised me that I was under caution (freaked me out) long story short the DWP,JCP or HMRC had obtained my Tax records from 3-4 years ago and I was suspect of fraud.I had to produce records to prove I no longer had the dosh. Good news was they (HMRC) owed me a decent refund.So not all bad news..lol
DeleteHere is a link to an article from the New York Times, dated April 7th 2012.
ReplyDeleteIt explores the history and the current impact of Social Security reforms in the United States.
As much of the current governments cuts package is modelled on the "Wisconsin Model," regular readers of this blog might be interested.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/08/us/welfare-limits-left-poor-adrift-as-recession-hit.html?pagewanted=1&_r=2
Yes, in US now they are having food coupons cut all over.
DeleteIn the case of the Roger Phillips interview, something similar happened to me. I missed my appoiintmetn with my WP provider. I was contacted by the DWP and asked for an explanation (a form was sent requesting a written explanation). I explained the circumstances around missing my appointment and they allowed it.I wasnt sanctioned.
ReplyDeleteI had a job over Christmas and when it finished I went back to sign on just before New Year. The advisor at JCP arranged an interview for me at JCP however at the JCP interview I was told I was supposed to be going back A4E. In between my application interview and the second interview A4E had arraged an interview and then tried to sanction me for not attending. The worst part was that I never found out they had tried to sanction me until I received a letter about 3 weeks after the 'appointment' (of which I knew nothing about) to say that I wasn't going to be sanctioned!
ReplyDeleteA4e have standard letters for everything.
DeleteApart from a standard apology.
I would suggest something along the lines of:
"We are sorry that we tried to deny you your income thus attempting to reduce you to penury and possible homelessness. We understand that contesting the sanction doubt we maliciously/mistakenly raised has caused you considerable effort, time and worry, for which we offer our sincere apology.
This will not happen again until the next time we are incompetent. Looking forward to dealing with you again soon."
ok seems as if every one is in the know ?
ReplyDeleteI have been threatened with a sanction for an appointment with a4e which I have been sanctioned before and penniless for 4 weeks due to it but complained and ended up with a refund only due to proving had no contact about appointment through my phone bill but this time they are doing it for a appointment that was before my first signing date after reclaiming due to being laid off again from job should they be able to do such a thing ? as I know I am not the brightest person in the world but could any one on here answer please as got a feeling it will be a lot longer than 4 weeks and that was a struggle
Did you get notification of the appointment? That's the important thing, I think. You were with A4e and got a job which proved to be short-lived. You are automatically back on the Work Programme.
Deleteno letter or txt but cant prove about not receiving letter but also it wouldn't of been mandatory at that due date due to how would they of known I wasn't still in work at that time as after the 2 weeks I had to get by for another three weeks before signing back on due to ticking box to say I was going last longer than five weeks in the job I got which I did believe at the time
ReplyDeletecheers historian
I'm afraid I don't understand what you're saying.
DeleteI've also just been sanctioned for failing to start a MWA placement due a my sick daughter.
ReplyDeleteOn the Monday that I was due to start (only had one weeks notice with a letter stating place & date, no interview or anything prior) my daughter was ill, she had been ill since the Friday & I had advised the JCP of this should she still be ill come Monday & she was. I phoned the number on the A4E letter at 9am on the Monday to tell them that my daughter was ill, being a lone parent with no family support, I had nobody to look after her. The A4E 'advisor' said for me not to worry & she'd arrange with my JSA advisor an alternative start date. I even received a letter from her stating that I was no longer required to attend the MWA as of 'the start date'! The letter dated the day after the start day.
Needless to say, I've been sanctioned. Apparently an ill child is not a 'good enough reason'!
To make matters worse I have been called in for an interview with the A4E advisor for that alternative start date, no date yet but considered placement is 30 miles away. So if they give me a start date whilst on the sanction I will then have to do a daily 60 mile journey, 300 miles a week (1200 miles for the 4 weeks period) with no 'money' coming in.
i lost my job september last year as a bus driver,it was due to an car insurance error i was entirly responsible for,i have a six month driving ban leaving me without a job im used to and skilled at.since october i have been claiming jsa,looking for jobs and doing the best i can in a semi rural area with little prospects,i live at home with my parents still(im 30)who do thier best to help and support me.however in february i recived a letter from jsp,telling me i had to attend an advisor interview.when i turned up,it was not my usual advisor but a new fella who id not seen before.he said,i dont know why,but you have to go on a mandatory work programme,saying little about it other than its mandatory.i had no idea what it involved to be frank as i never heard of it since starting my claim,so i signed the agreement and went home to check up the ins and outs of it.after 5 minuts of reading i was livid what i was entering into,working for benefits basically,even though id only been a claiment for 12 weeks.in april i recived a letter from the placement group on a friday,telling me to attend on monday.i had no money to eat and told i must work no less than 35 hours per week for 4 weeks.i rang them and explained im looking for real work and wont be attending.i told my advisor who said its mandatory and ot good enough excuse.last week i got a call from dwp who asked why i did not attend,i told them it would hamper my prospects of finding a real paid job,and he said it was not good enough and your likely to be sanctioned.last friday i recived the sanction notice 12 weeks no jsa.i am basically destitute,i have gone from 300 pounds a week in a good job,to nothing in 8 months,not a sausage.there are no jobs to get,ad now i must wait until i get my licence back and pray i find another employer,the jsa-dwp are utter scum who will effectivly let you die of starvation.on top of this i still have to keep my jsp fortnightly commitments.i dont think there is anything i can contest about,unless im wrong.any responses welcome. john
ReplyDeletei was on job seekers allowance for 2 years and then i managed to get a job and i was so happy but on my third day (when i first met the boss)he didnt seem to like me much for some strange reason because i was really nice to him but he kept shouting at me for being too slow and asking too many questions such as where does something get stored (even though its only my third day)and then he shouted at me because my mopping skils wasnt up to there standards even though the floors was very clean and he didnt give me a break in an 8 hour shift and then he said if the next day i wasnt faster then he would sack me on the spot and i could tell it wasnt a threat so he was trying to bully me out of the job so i quit 1 reason was because its bullying 2nd reason was because if i get sacked after 3rd day then it could be hard to get another job in future as it doesnt look good so i went to sign back on and they refused to let me and sanctioned me for 3 months because apparently it isnt a good enough reason so doing this job has made me loose out on more money than i would have earned and wasnt worth it and then the job centre said i can apply for a hardship thing which is like 40% less money than job seekers and will take probably like a month or 2 to process so now im living off about £20 until i get paid, its a good job i live with my mother but if i didnt i would have probably been made homeless
ReplyDeleteI was sanctioned for not following a job they recommended, It was for a carer, the job said you need a NVQ 2, I don't, It said you need your own car, I don't, It said you needed business insurance, I couldn't afford that even if i had a car, lost 2 weeks money.
ReplyDeleteThis doesn't make sense. There was nothing to stop you applying for it, knowing you wouldn't have got it if what you say is true. That would have avoided punishment. Stupid, perhaps, but it's what people have always had to do.
DeleteMakes no sense at all, wouldn't it had better spending my time applying for jobs i can do, not cannot do, Maybe you shouldn't think to hard and just go along with any rubbish they hand to you!
DeleteMy 20 yr old son lives with me and his brother. He has learning difficulties (reading, writing, literacy and numeracy) which is why he can't find a job to match his skills. He pays me keep from his JSA which is a huge help as I only work 20hrs a week, single parent and support his brother who is a full time student. Last week we found out my son has been sanctioned and haven't been told how long for. He hadn't been searching correctly on the job search website, I think he hadn't clicked the drop down box saying why the job isn't suitable. However he has kept up all the many appointmnents with jobcentre, going to his food hygeine course and his CSCS course. It was just one slip up with mouse!! There are no jobs for someone who is illiterate, even the cleaning jobs required previous experience. I'm 50 yrs old, I'm dealing with my own issues (I have severe PTSD) and now worrying about over draft charges. He hasn't got the skills to appeal. Any help and advice would be much appreciated....I'm feeling so hopeless and helpless.
ReplyDeleteIt's a horrible situation, and I don't know whether anyone here can help. Your son will have the paperwork to enable him to appeal, and he could go the CAB for help with that. There should be an advocacy service in your area for people with learning difficulties - the CAB could point you to that. Try involving your local paper and your MP.
Deleteit is disgusting that his advisor sanctioned him for this reason. He is best to appeal the decision and change advisors. This is not a good reason to sanction someone. Has your son given DWP access to view his account activity? he may have been coerced into doing this. He could withdraw the right for them to access it under data protection legislation. Proof that he has applied to jobs can be taken in written form using job center ref numbers. screen prints etc. This should not qualify even as a lower level sanction, as the advisor may not have clearly communicated what he/she expected of him, and the reason itself is absolutely trivial.
Deletefill in a GL24 form from the DWP website or ask for appeal form at JCP office, you could get the JSA money backdated if successful.