"I don't believe it"

There are two big stories to look at today.  First let's look at:

SANCTIONS FIGURES
The latest sanctions figures have, at last, been published.  Between October 2012 and June 2013 they show a rise of 6% on the same period a year before, to 580,000.  Think about that - more than half a million.  The BBC website explains the new rules, and says that 53% of the decisions were at the lowest level, up to 13 weeks, for such failures as not attending an appointment.  Then it says that about 1 in 5 were for failing to keep an appointment with an adviser.  Esther McVey is trotted out to speak for the DWP, saying that sanctions were only used against those who were "wilfully rejecting support for no good reason".
In another piece the BBC's Sean Clare looks at "Life when the Jobcentre says you broke the rules".  It brings out some of the absurdities and injustices of the system, with several horror stories.  The CAB is quoted as saying that they've seen a 64% rise in people coming to them because of sanctions.  The PCS union, whose members have to administer the regime, says, "There's no question that there is an overarching pressure to enforce the sanctions regime as strictly as possible."  The DWP, of course "flatly denies" this.  But the article has stories which cannot be brushed aside in this way.

"UP TO THE JOB?"
BBC Radio 4 did a "File on 4" programme yesterday on the Work Programme, which gives me my title for this post.  It seems that Esther McVey has rapidly absorbed her boss's approach to uncomfortable facts; three times her response was to say that she didn't believe it.
The programme started in Eastbourne, where unemployment is a lot lower than the national average, but the local MP Stephen Lloyd (a Lib Dem) is angry at the number of people who have done their 2-year stint on the WP and been failed by it.  One 47-year-old man said that there was no respect and he was treated like a child.  A woman said she'd seen her advisor only once a month.
The WP providers there are Avanta and G4S.  One older woman who had a good experience (and found a job) through a sub-contractor of G4S was interviewed.  But the programme then turned to Richard Johnson, formerly of Ingeus (didn't he work for Serco too?).  He said that the quality of the contract was deteriorating because case-loads were now up to 240 per adviser.  McVey said she didn't believe it.  The official figure is 80 - 140.  And, she said, people can make a complaint.
The point which emerged was that of the just under 2.5 million who are unemployed, 900,000 have been out of work for a year or more and these, along with those with medical problems, are not being helped.  A consultant, a chap called Grimes, said that the sanctions against the worst-performing providers (the 5% "market shift") are inadequate.  The DWP should remove their contracts altogether, but the providers know that this is not going to happen.
The attachment fees are due to end in April 2014.  Johnson spoke about the discounts of 30% or more offered by some of the providers when they bid.  These are back-loaded to years 4 and 5 (i.e. at this point the providers will get 30% less for outcomes) on the assumption by the providers that the government would never let this happen.  The contracts, he said, are not viable at this price.  Deloitte's, who partnered with Ingeus, are now trying to sell their shares, and Johnson thinks it's because they understand the implications of the discounts.  "I don't believe that", said McVey.  She thinks Deloitte's want out because they are doing very well.
Turning to those on ESA, the programme highlighted a man who had been sent to Triage Central.  In 7 visits he saw an advisor only once and got no help at all.  He said that the emphasis was on what he was doing wrong.  Disability Rights UK said that the Work Programme isn't working for disabled people, and a 90% failure rate is not acceptable.  Once again, McVey said, "I don't believe it."
More or less the last word came from Grimes, who said that the long-term unemployed were at the back of the queue and moving backwards.

Lots to comment on, I think.

Universal Jobmatch mandatory from Monday 4 March

Thanks to the poster who pointed us to this on the PCS union site.  From next Monday, 4 March, it will be compulsory to sign up to Universal Jobmatch.  The DWP is supposed to be announcing it today.  You should note the following:

• It is supposed to be at the discretion of the adviser rather than a blanket approach.  But you can be punished if you "unreasonably refuse", so assume that every claimant will be forced to sign up.
• Because of EU laws on cookies, you cannot be forced to sign up on your own home computer - so don't.  Use the computers in the Jobcentre, the WP provider office or a public access place such as a library.  The PCS says that fixes are being worked out to enable cookies to be removed from home computers, and when that's done they will make it compulsory to register there (assuming you have a computer at home).
• It is still the case that you don't have to give your adviser access to your account.  Don't tick the box.  You are allowed to provide alternative proof of sign-up and jobsearch, such as screenprints.

If you are going to be affected by this, I recommend printing off the PCS page.

Join the union

Trade union membership has always been low among the employees of outsourcing companies.  Workers tend to be on short-term contracts and often don't see the point of paying subs out of their meagre wages.  So it's interesting to see that the PCS, the Public and Commercial Services union, is actively recruiting among A4e staff - see their website.
Sceptics may say that the union is simply trying to recover the membership numbers which have been steadily eroded by the selling off of public services.  But they are clear about the problems in A4e.  "We know there are issues in A4e - issues such as long hours, unachievable targets, low pay, and high turnover – but we can only change when we work together."  They say, "We are currently talking to A4e senior management at a national level about what PCS can do for staff in A4e, and have asked them for time to speak to staff."  Will A4e resist, as they resisted the right of clients to be represented in Edinburgh? 

Select Committee Enquiry - a summary of submissions

We reported a while ago the submission that A4e made to the Work & Pensions Select Committee's enquiry into the "management and administration of contracted employment programmes". There are now links to all the submissions on the House of Commons website; and they are helpfully summarised on the Indus Delta site. There are some very interesting points from providers, representative bodies and the DWP. The Public and Commercial Services Union make powerful points which are treated rather patronisingly in this summary, and it's worth reading their submission in full. The union's stance is summed up in "PCS believes that it is wrong to allow private sector contractors to profit from the unemployed." But they are a lone voice in this welter of opinions.