Tuesday, 7 October 2014

The future of work

If you didn't see the Panorama programme last night, you really should.  It's on iplayer.  It's called Workers on the Breadline and is a real eye-opener for those who think poor people are all idle and feckless.  It looked at working people whose incomes have to be topped up by tax credits.  (The presenter used the word hand-outs a lot, and I objected to that, but perhaps he was just reflecting the language of the right-wing press.)  There were couples where both partners worked (and had no more than three children) but even with WTC were living on the edge; and there was a single man, Jason, working in a zero hours job, earning around £10k a year and getting only £300 a year in WTC.  These were real people, struggling (and in Jason's case drowning) and knowing that it will only get worse.  It was pointed out that working overtime or extra hours isn't the answer because you lose most of your benefit, and for people with children the cost of childcare is impossible.  I haven't seen the BBC do anything this competent and important for years, so it's sad to learn that they're ditching all investigative reporting from Panorama.  There were no politicians waffling; the positions of the two main parties were set out succinctly.  And two authorities offered no solutions, admitting that Britain has become a low-skilled economy and wages are far too low.  While education and skills would seem to be important, one said, if you come out of university and the only work you can get is stacking shelves, that in itself isn't the answer.
There was a disturbing report from Liverpool on Saturday that half the jobs on Merseyside are now temporary agency jobs.  (See this Liverpool Echo piece.)  Agencies like Prime Time get hand-outs from the government to take people on under the Work Programme then pay them so little that, after travel costs, they can come away with £3.72 an hour.
This is a lunatic downward spiral.  Of the families featured on the Panorama programme, one husband and wife both work at Tesco.  But they can't afford to shop there.  All the big supermarkets are losing market share to the discounters.  And that's just one obvious result of how making people suffer frozen wages and benefit cuts impacts on the economy as a whole.  Those at the very top rake in a bigger and bigger share of the nation's money, but they don't spend it down at the supermarket.

What is the answer, then?  Raising the minimum wage is an obvious part of it, despite the protests of business that they can't afford it.  Genuine skills training has to be in there too.  Jason said in the programme that the only way he could see of getting a better job was to have a driving license, but he obviously couldn't afford driving lessons.  Why not set up a free driving school for people in his position?  And anyone who has spent years working in a particular industry and then loses his job should be re-trained.  Another component is to get rid of all the free labour, workfare schemes which allow companies to avoid actually hiring people.
The answer is not the Work Programme.  Both Labour and the Lib Dems have come round to the idea that local councils have to be in control of this.  They couldn't just end the contracts but they could negotiate changes which would give councils the power to commission programmes suited to the needs of their areas, and to use the money currently being wasted on the WP to fund the the schemes many councils are already operating in conjunction with skills training organisations.

The status quo is not an option for much longer.

24 comments:

  1. Sick of the Work Programme7 October 2014 at 14:24

    I've come across several fellow 'customers' at A4e who have told A4e that learning to drive would make a significant difference to their job prospects, but of course A4e will not fund the lessons. I agree that there needs to be funding available to enable people to retrain if they have had to leave the career for which they are already qualified. However, I am not sure that giving funding to local councils is the answer. Rather than local councils supporting people in gaining vocational qualifications in order to pursue a different line of work, wouldn't councils' 'support' be likely to consist of having people on benefits doing unpaid placements to compensate for the paid staff which councils have already laid off due to budget cuts? After all, some councils are already doing this via the Work Programme 'providers' and the Jobcentre.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No, councils wouldn't be able to do what you suggest. Going back before 2006 and the original New Deal, it was JCP which organised the programmes on a regional basis, using companies like A4e and any other organisations capable of delivering training. I assume that local councils would do the same.

      Delete
    2. In the Telegraph (Jan 22 2014) IDS stated that if paying for lessons and a drivers license would enhance somebody's chances of employment the JCP would gladly do it...Reality check! After having to write 3 proposals,1 which had 284 job opportunities that required a license they refuse to fund it,surprised? not really,after 4 years and dozens of requests to be re-trained it seems that unless one of the "Providers" can make money out of some silly mandated scheme,that is a waste of time and ends up with no worthwhile experience they are not interested.

      Delete
    3. Historian,I usually never disagree with you,but the phrasing in your reply astounds me! "using companies like A4e and any other organisations (capable of delivering training)" When did they actually start this? I am unaware of any actual training ever being delivered.

      Delete
    4. There certainly was actual training pre 2006. Those who were willing were put into work placements and studied for genuine qualifications. Courses varied, from 4 weeks to 52 weeks. Not everybody finished the course and not everybody got work at the end, but a large proportion did. And I know what I'm talking about because I worked in an FE college delivering New Deal at the time.

      Delete
    5. My apologies,I meant under the current WP.

      Delete
    6. I remember way back in 2001-2, under the old New Deal for Young People there was genuine training on offer. I gained the CLAIT and IBT2 qualifications in ICT under the FTET option. Compared to the current Work Programme the old New Deal was far less punitive and exploitative.

      Delete
  2. Thanks for the heads up Historian. Just finished watching. A few points then.

    Firstly, I'm sure some would point out the fact that a couple of families highlighted in this prog. had dogs. ''If they can't feed themselves, how can they afford a dog?'' Which would be a fair point except for the fact that for some a dog can be a cheap form of entertainment. Yes it needs looking after and there is a cost involved. But doing things such as walking a dog be cheaper (and healthier) than going to the pub or the cinema.

    Secondly, we see the couple working for Tesco and still having to claim £thousands in WTC. And even with this they are STILL earning less AS A COUPLE than the official average wage of about £24.5k. Surely this is the government subsidising poor wages from some of Britain’s most profitable companies? What incentive does this give to other companies to do the decent thing and pay their workers a liveable wage from the outset?

    Thirdly, is it not telling that the same Tesco couple cannot actually afford to shop in the very store they work in? We saw the husband popping into Iceland, a cheaper discount rival to Tesco. If Tesco is wondering why their sales have dipped, perhaps they should watch at this report and ponder why even some of their own workforce cannot afford their prices! As Henry Ford once remarked, ''If I do not pay my workers good wages, how on earth are they going to be able to afford the cars my plants produce?''. Tesco and others need to heed such words as they are as valid today as they were when Ford uttered them in the 1920's. Otherwise, we continue a downward spiral to the bottom of the barrel.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Almost every job where i live in merseyside, are temporary, or agency and if you have any gaps in your cv, you arent even considered, thousands of people on and off the jobs count every week.. where is the consistancy, when you dont know how long any job will last or if you will be replaced by a free worker..

    ReplyDelete
  4. I only wish to say very little, probably.

    In 2004 a lovely lady at my local JCP realized that I needed to learn how to work a computer, so she sent me to a local FE college for 13 weeks, to do an ECDL course under properly competent tuition. That course changed my life.

    Since then, the whole idea has become hideously corrupted. There have been allegations that some FE colleges were “on the fiddle” but this did not happen to me.

    Nowadays, I think the biggest problem lies in the political desire to divest “the state” of responsibility for anything that does not happen to amuse a Bulllingdon Boy.

    FWIW, I think the problem is worse than Historian says but I do not know how to resolve it.

    .

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You make my point. However, I can't see any way in which FE colleges could have been "on the fiddle" in the New Deal contracts. And given my job role, I should know!

      Delete
  5. A little off topic:

    I was informed today while signing on that I am being put on 4 weeks MWA with/through ATOS. What should I expect from this, aside from just spending 4 weeks doing what I assume will be unpaid work?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It depends where you are assigned,I had A4E,they were more interested in getting the induction over and the form signed so they could get paid,I refused to sign(you are not required) this annoyed them.

      The Charity,a small Welsh one,was actually brilliant and I still Volunteer there, I know a bit of a contradiction,but I was able to convince them to no longer take MWA.,they were unaware that A4E was paid over £600 to admin the placement and after the 20 minute induction they were worthless.

      The worst thing? trying to get advanced Travel pay,ask for it,under the contract you are entitled to request an advance if you are unable to pay(plus it winds them up) make sure upon initial contact that you request this,I know people still waiting to be reimbursed...and good luck!

      Delete
    2. Thanks, fubar.

      Hopefully my experience will be a good one. Sending someone on Mandatory Work Activity to a charity sounds a bit stupid, I just hope the government wises up one day and realises that (fat chance, though).

      Thanks again. ;)

      Delete
    3. Mine was at Leicester City Football Club. Four weeks of cleaning the seats and sweeping. I'm not sure why they get MWA people sent to them, since they obviously aren't a charity.

      They did atleast cut people some slack, by showing lenience and not always reporting things to the training provider, that might have gotten people sanctioned for several months, such as arriving slightly late, unless they really abused it.

      Delete
  6. Someone my mum knows their wife went for a job a proper paid job cleaning schools.. she didnt get it because she hadnt got cleaning experience in schools.. BUT they asked her would she consider “volunteering” to do that job in the school for free.. this is the way the world is going yes she was good enough to work for them for free.. doing the same job she would have been doing but when it came to being paid for it she wasnt good enough.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Forgive me, but I'm a bit sceptical about that story.

      Delete
    2. unfortunately it is true and its happened to other people as well..

      Delete
  7. Sick of the Work Programme11 October 2014 at 11:16

    historian- I am not sceptical about that story at all. In fact, a similar thing happened to me. The headteacher of a primary school phoned to tell me that I hadn't been shortlisted to attend interview for a teaching post because there was a 'very strong field' but she would be happy for me to come and volunteer at the school! I declined because it would have cost me quite a bit of money to travel there and back, as well as being a bit miffed that I was considered good enough to work for free rather than to be paid for my work. I also know of people who have gone for teaching assistant posts that this has happened to- some excuse will be made about the individual 'not having enough experience' compared to the 'successful' candidate, then the head will tell them that they 'would be willing for them to come along and volunteer!'

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It would be interesting to know whether these schools have anything in common. Local authority? Free schools? Academies?
      Years ago I went after a job in a secondary school, as librarian, only because it was advertised as full-time. I was called for interview but when I got there was told that they had reconsidered the job and it would be pay for term-time only. That meant the pay was so low that I couldn't take it. I'm reminded that I wouldn't be able to turn down such a job now.

      Delete
    2. Sick of the Work Programme11 October 2014 at 15:24

      The one I applied to was an LEA Church of England primary school. I'm not sure about the others. It does not surprise me that they only wanted to pay you during term-time, as headteachers use this wheeze to save money on salaries for just about every post in schools apart from teaching ones (although if they can get away with putting a cover supervisor in a class instead of a teacher and paying that person pro rata, then they will do that).

      Delete
  8. I don't know if you saw the story the other day, Historian, that tax receipts are down. The tax office reported that this was because of an increase in low-paid work and unpaid work (in the case of self-employment).

    An increase in non-taxable work will lead to further public sector cuts and eventually the state pension.

    It also contradicts the Tories argument that a decrease in the highest rate of tax (down 50% to 45%) would increase tax revenues.

    Liars.

    ReplyDelete
  9. If you want to improve work incentives and reduce bureaucracy then implement a BASIC INCOME and FLAT TAX. This could be very left or right wing, but the key is whatever you earn , you keep (100 - tax rate%) of your money. The basic income doesn't even have to be that large.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A flat tax is as regressive as you can get. A non-starter.

      Delete

Keep it clean, please. No abusive comments will be approved, so don't indulge in insults. If you wish to contact me, post a comment beginning with "not for publication".