A4e was at all the party conferences this year, as usual. They don't record what interest they drummed up amongst the Lib Dems or Labour, but describe on their website the "event" they hosted in Manchester for the Tories. They've had to amend the story in the last couple of days - it was "former minister" Mark Hoban who led the praise for 6 A4e "customers" (I do hate that word) who have found jobs through the WP. Apparently 40 people turned up. Now, as I've always said, I'm happy for anybody who gets work, with or without the help of A4e. But it seems slightly over-optimistic for A4e to be lobbying just at the point when they've lost market share for getting poor results.
There was a little-noticed piece on the BBC website yesterday about the poor quality of prison education. Ofsted has been very critical about current standards, and it's pointed out that prison education and training is outsourced to private companies. No companies are named, but A4e has several contracts.
BBC Radio 4's "The Report" programme last night looked at the state of Universal Credit. There was nothing which hadn't already been in the press, but the programme pulled it all together to show how the project went off the rails. Around £200m has been completely wasted, there are no effective financial controls, and there is no chance that it will come in "on time and on budget", as IDS insists it will. UC is being rolled out to 6 more jobcentres, but it's still limited to new claims by single people with no dependants, on JSA only and with no complications. It was pointed out that you can't do a change of circumstances, or even sign off, online. You have to phone an 0845 number, at your own expense. The whole thing is supposed to be completed by 2017, but as the reporter said, whether IDS would still be in post by then is doubtful.
That dismal excuse for a newspaper, the Express, gleefully reported a survey which purports to show that a majority of people think that benefits claimants "should find a job or work harder". Surprisingly, a lot of the comments under the article are not supportive of the Express's stance. For the actual figures, read a better article on a website here. But all such polls are suspect. We don't know the sample size, but we do know that sampling methods tend to exclude the poorest people, and that would certainly skew the results here. Of course, the government is jubilant, and Labour is flummoxed about how to respond.
The problems mentioned about the lack of proper training and qualifications being offered while in Prison seems very similar to what A4E and the other Providers offer on the WP....a few very basic and cheaply run workshop type schemes,which are only there to justify collecting the fees and meeting(sic) the terms of these very vague contracts.
ReplyDeleteNow we see the porn-baron owner of the Daily Express following other lazy channels with the oh-so imaginatively titled 'On Benefits and Proud', airing on Channel 5 next Monday at 21.00. Needless to say I won't be bothering to watch such lazy programming that no doubt seeks to highlight those on benefits in a mostly one dimensional and cartoon like fashion.
ReplyDeleteThis is a description courtesy of the Radio Times:
'Documentary examining the lifestyles of some of those living on benefits who are not currently seeking employment, including a Gloucestershire mother-of-11 who receives benefits equivalent to three times the typical UK family income. Also featured are a Liverpool couple who have not worked for six years, and two single mums in Camden whose rents are more than £1,200 a month each and are paid by the state.'
Blatant propaganda of course. No doubt will go down well with Cameron, Osborne, Smith, McVey, Freud and all those who really think that the majority of those out of work are living a life of luxury.
I almost rejected your comment so as to avoid publicising the programme. But does anyone actually watch Channel 5?
DeleteSorry about the highlighting of the program Historian, However, many other sites are picking this up as well and giving CH5 a well deserved roasting.
DeleteAs for Ch5's audience? Well, as we know from the Daily Mail and the Sun, one headline can become well publicised even to non readers. I guess this is the shock effect they're trying to achieve. Trouble is it is being countered already.
Re opinon polls I'm always reminded of the bit in 'Yes, Prime Minister' where Humprey explains to Bernard how you can determine a persons answer by the way you phrase the question: Here's the link:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0ZZJXw4MTA
Just what i was going to say, Anonymous12 October 2013 09:41 I watch this part whenever someone goes on about polls
DeleteSome interesting statistics about the Work Programme failing to help older claimants.
ReplyDeleteFrom 1st July 2012 to 30th June 2013 20,820 males aged 59 and over were referred to the Work Programme on a mandatory basis. During this period only 980 of these people found employment lasting 6 months or over.
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/249727/foi-2013-4518.pdf
"only 980 of these people found employment lasting 6 months or over"
DeleteI'm surprised it was that many!
That was my comment. I'm 58 and will be leaving the Work Programme in November.
DeleteHas anyone attended this activity? ''The Future on Benefits - A4E Countdown Routeway''
My intention is to disrupt this activity with lots of facts and statistics about the Work Programme and how it has failed me. It would be useful to know in advance what exactly is covered during this particular meeting.
I don't think that going in with an intention to disrupt is a good idea. Go in armed with your facts, by all means, and challenge anything you know to be false. But don't go looking for trouble; you'll be the only one who suffers.
DeleteI take your point. Perhaps ''disrupt'' was the wrong choice of word.
DeleteMy main aim is to prevent a whitewash of the appalling way I have been treated whilst on the Work Programme.
I was ''shelved'' and ignored for 3 months, 3 failed attempts to impose sanctions due to admin errors, appointments cancelled without informing me, refused access to a health advisor, etc, etc.
It's important to me that these facts are recorded.
My adviser keeps gloating about how many people they've got into work in the last few months and if the WP works for them, it'll work for me. Also, they like to say things like "what you put in, youll get out" and that really annoys me beyond belief. It's as if these people think I've spent the last 8 and a half years doing nowt, when in fact, I've been attending pointless course after pointless course in the pursuit of employment.
DeleteSince you didn't hear from them for 3 months, are we supposed to assume you've been lounging around like a king while on benefits?! I think not!! I'm sure you've been running around doing your best to find suitable employment. I finish the WP at the end of the year and it's a time I look forward to with great antisapation.
Countdown Routeway - revists your jobsearch, interview skills, cv etc. We were sent off on the tramp to look for work. I met with 20 employers on a local trading estate. Only one had a job and that was for a part-time cleaner. One young girl told me and mate to get lost!
DeleteIn a nutshell it looks at why YOU have not found work, it does NOT look at the external factors.
Of course the young woman could have put it differently, but it does not surprise me if employers are getting irritated with people contacting them speculatively to find out if they have any jobs. Although sending off 'specs' and even visiting employers in person is a standard part of what the Work Programme and Jobcentre expect 'customers' to do, I have long believed that it could in fact make it less likely that someone will be offered a job, as employers could feel hassled.
DeleteRe ''A4E Countdown Routeway''
DeleteI've just checked the last Work Programme statistics published by the DWP. In my area, (Lancashire) A4E had 21,990 referrals and in my category, (JSA Ex Incapacity Benefit) only 30 people had successful job outcomes.
This will be a useful statistic to quote when I attend the Routeway meeting.
Is it me? has anybody noticed that the Press/politicians bombarded the public with stories at the same time that the WP results were released? A4E's website has been silent(lesson learned after Emma?) . the JCP seems clueless about which policy they will follow for people returning from the WP and seem intent on issuing as many sanctions as possible and hope that people just accept them,after a recent run in with JCP about Job searching and although they would not admit that it is a flawed system,the main intent allowing them access appears to be able to track that you log in daily,yet they do not have IAD's available to use,their advice was to ask the WP Provider to allow you access to their facilities,I was under the impression that if you are mandated to do a task by either the WP/DWP that they had to provide you with the tools and pay for the travel,have I missed something here?
ReplyDeleteIn the ''Provider Minimum Service Delivery'' document published by the DWP, updated 7th Oct 2013 it states:
Delete''All customers will have access to online learning and job search tools for 6 months following their
exit from the Work Programme''
It looks like the DWP have realised that Jobcentres do not have the facilities to cater for those exiting the Work Programme. So, if the Work Programme has failed you the answer seems to be use the same facilities and fail again!
I wonder if the providers will receive a re-referral fee for the use of their PC's.
The BBC report on the poor Ofsted results for Wormwood Scrubs doesn't give specific details but (as a tutor employed at another London prison) the poor results will be a result of a number of factors. In the London B cats there are a large number of men on remand and a few sentenced men so any education provision working by results has to try and get results quickly because learners are not there long - this is called 'churn' and is a long standing problem (the average stay is apparently 7 weeks) . The contract for offender learning has become stricter than it once was in terms of how a provider can earn payment by results so the pressure is on to generate income by putting men through a lot of short modules, so that income is maximized. This is always justified by A4e managers in terms of earning money to pay for teaching staff and never in terms of profits for A4e's shareholders.
ReplyDeleteAs a teacher it is clear that the quality of the teaching and learning under such a system of provision rapidly deteriorates into a model of stacking tins of beans on a supermarket shelf.
As the number of prison officers are reduced as a cost cutting measure and as prisons move to what they term 'new ways of working' i.e. ways of working that require fewer officers, education provision is likely to be impacted adversely.
On the evidence of the location where I work A4e cannot generate anything like the income it anticipated from the London prisons under the current funding arrangements (OLASS 4) and will probably end up abandoning the work in London.