Moving customers onto the Work Programme
Should some people be enabled or required to move more quickly than others to the Work Programme? Which groups should move onto the Work Programme most quickly? Which groups should move more slowly?
Are there some groups of people who would benefit from accelerated access to the Work Programme – such as ex-offenders, or people with a history of unemployment?
Will anyone benefit from having their access to the Work Programme delayed?
This discussion is now closed. Thank you to all of you who contributed.
I think trying to set targets and groups of people to certain criteria is filled with problems. There are some really obvious people who should have their program delayed – people recieveing certain kinds of treatment like chemotherapy or dyalysis or awaiting operations. People recieveing inpatient treatment – or intensive outpatient treatment especially those with mental ill health.
What about other people reliant on carers, how much conditionality can yu impose on someone who must rely on another to help them wash and dress – my own interviews were very worrysome, if they were early, what if my P.A. was late or we had a problem?
Perhaps if the NHS worked properly there would not be so many sick people on benefits whilst awaiting treatment. There is so much time wasted due to bad organisation where you wait weeks or months for an appointment, then weeks for tests and scans etc, then wait weeks for a follow up appointment to discuss test results, then wait weeks for treatment, surgery or whatever. In the meantime you are “on the sick”.
Call me cynical but is it not cheaper for the DWP to pay jobseekers allowance rather than incapacity benefit? Could this be the reason they want us all to become jobseekers even when there is not a snowball’s chance of us finding a job? What employer is going to take on someone with an unpredictable debilitating illness who at best could work 8 hours a week. Find me a job where I can work from home, as and when able, sometimes not at all for several weeks, that pays at least minimum wage and I will gladly do it.
When a friend who is on JSA searched for all ‘jobs’ available in the Hampshire area, half of those listed were miles outside the area and there were several that are actual ‘phishing’ scams trying to get you to apply for an ‘administrator’ to manage payments from a foreign company. What they wanted was you to use your bank account to receive money stolen from other accounts. I recognised the way the ‘vacancy’ was described, having read about other similar scams online.
It’s disgraceful that this kind of thing can get on an official Government website while local authorities are not even required to advertise their vacancies and can go straight to a private agency even for temps.
My friend has also seen ads for adult entertainment companies, scam survey and envelope filling ‘jobs’ and others. It seems that no-one ever checks.
If you are looking on the Jobcentre system, be aware that what you might find may be anything but a genuine local job and could actually be illegal!
While I was waiting for my ESA tribunal last year and early this year, even though I was severely depressed, I was forced to go to ‘work preparation’ on threat of losing what little benefit I was receiving.
The advisors were useless, they couldn’t even operate their own computer system and it was all a waste of time anyway and just a job creation exercise for the advisors. Even if I had been well enough to participate fully, I can’t see that I would have derived any benefit whatever.
My previous experience in IT was so far over their heads, they didn’t understand the terminology used in vacancies I might have applied for and their system did not have job descriptions for what I would have looked for. I took them some job descriptions for positions I might have applied for if well (few and far between because of IT outsourcing to the third world). They had problems understanding why I would need re-training having been out of IT for several years while sick. Software development and the programming languages and technologies used have moved on.
Basically if all you can do is make plastic widgets, or work on a checkout in Tesco they might be able to find you a job. Anything more qualified or technical than that, forget it.
We are concerned that there may be a gap for those people with autism who are not eligible for Work Choice but who need long term support to go (back) into employment. We would strongly welcome further details of how employment support will work for those at a significant distance from the workplace, who may need support for one, two or more years before they are fully prepared to be able to take on employment as a result of their disability, especially given discussions about potentially limiting the amount of time people may claim ESA. Support must be provided early for those people with autism who will need intensive, long-term support to find work. The Work Programme and Work Choice must be sufficiently flexible to allow long-term support to be provided as early as possible.
I am finding all this increasingly insane. Everyone wants to put the cart before the horse. Before talking about giving support, long or short term to disabled people, shouldn’t everyone be asking themselves at DWP and the Government how WE are going to find and obtain jobs in the first place. Disabled People are not the only people in the country living on benefits. There ar e more non disabled people looking for a job AND CANNOT FIND ONE
Fred is right there are a limited number of positions available in this country; as far as all of the statistics that are published by the government are concerned there are more people unemployed than there are positions available. Companies are more likely to give non disabled people any positions available than disabled people. Whilst the theory of providing help for people with disability back to work is sound the reality is there are not enough jobs available to go around the healthy population let alone positions for the 2 million disabled population, and whether the government legislate against discrimination or not there will be discrimination. Disabled people due to the nature of their disability will always require additional time off work for appointments, adaptations to the work place or additional time off work due to their disability. Where will the positions magically appear from? The majority of disabled people are and can be useful members of the community and unlike the portrayal by the media want to earn a living. The people who do abuse the system don’t want to work and will never work no matter what help they are given. The government needs to concentrate their efforts on finding employment for able bodied people rather than penalising and discriminating against the disabled.
Agree with both posters, Unfortunately there are no jobs available, although we keep hearing that there are over 400,000 jobs available, where ?. why are unable to give the locations. Having had a disability for over 54 years and working for 43 of those years, having to do the rubbish jobs on rubbish wages, why, because the people at the DWP have no idea what each and everyone’s disability is or how it affects them. This is also something employers fail to do. But they seem able to offer all disabled a low low wage when you are lucky to find a job with an employer, willing to take you on, oh you do not get paid if your ill, My local paper had a whole 10 jobs listed last week, yep 10, mostly in the care sector, 3 others, you had to have the experience, ermm, how do people get the experience when there is no provision to train them. The idea of this government is to put all on a ESA benefit irrespective if you have a long term disability, why?.. because of spending cuts, if you take away 20% of people working in the public sector you increase the people looking for work substantially, they deem by decreasing benefits it will soon go unnoticed by the media and such like, cheaper too. I know lets cut the help they need, what a Victorian idea is that. Better we open the mines up, get the kids back up the chimneys, how about we all go into service, I expect they would give you job training in how to “doff your cap” to hell with those with a disability… shame on all those who have to claim…. a cyanide pill on your next prescription perhaps……how stupid people are particularly those who make up these stupid rulings, bet they do not have to suffer…. NO the do notMy dad never left me money nor did he own a wallpaper business….
I read today in the daily mail that they are thinking of putting a 6 month to a year time limit on benifits for the sick and disabled. This is inhumane and disgusting,especially after the condems said they would still look after the most needy!! I have M.E and mental health problems,and have been this way for more than a decade…..what do we do when the time limit runs out…jump off a cliff?
I totally agree with you there are a lot of able bodied people who could work and are not and these are the ones that the government need to concentrate on.
Employers are more likely then ever due to the down turn to employ able bodied people. Disabled people are more then likely be slower, need to take time off for physio/appointments medical treatment & hours need to be flexiable, employers are running a business they do not want staff that cannot work the hours or pace that they need.
There is also the question of how safe is it to employ someone who is on a lot of medication and suffers with memory laspes/brain fog, fits, inapppropate behaviour would you want someone working with these problems, which is why alot of disabled cannot get jobs.
Perhaps we should look at the amount of benefits paid to EU workers etc, families who dispite who are on benefits have more children who they cannot support, young persons who do not want to work instead of picking on the disabled & sick……………
Any support the New Work Programme aims to offer unemployed people would be well advised to build on the evidence, knowledge and expertise that DWP has funded over the past few years – with some extremely encouraging results.
The economic challenges ahead will impact on employment opportunities and those most affected are predicted to be those hardest to help. The current decommissioning and reprovision in the Welfare Reform plans makes the assumption that the voluntary and private sector will provide the answers. Given the well publicised difficulties experienced by Provider Led Pathways to Work programmes – this may prove a high risk strategy.
I don’t know why this is, but the Government and DWP are all under the assumption that there are enough jobs for everyone, if this was the case there would be fewer on benefits then there are now. This Government is attacking everyone, even those who are severely disabled and haven’t a hope in hell chance of getting a job. What about people who attend Day Centres, are they going to have their benefits stopped and told to get a job? Disabled people dis not make the ‘black hole’, the Banks did that. And as for disability, the Labour Government created more disability by going to WAR. And now even those are under attack and told to get a job. The Government and DWP have got it all wrong….yet again.
I believe no-one with a history of violence or long term unemployment should be radicalized into work. Years of unemployment play havoc with the personality, and Work Programs are proven to be utterly useless. Unemployment in itself is an illness and the prospect of being forced to work and take orders when you have grown up in deep dysfunction and quite possibly have a personality disorder will be disastrous for an individual. The stick is not an incentive, stopping benefits is neither an incentive. People FEAR work because they have been born into abject poverty without structure or understanding of authority. You cannot break this cycle of fear by forcing people to do something they would prefer to die for before doing it.
The alternative is to look at school leavers and the next generation, because this generation is sadly lost. Some people will obviously want the opportunity to work, but when people have been imprisoned within a life long mindset your radical reforms will lead to deeper depressions, crime, more alcohol and drug abuse, and suicides.
You should not expect Disabled people to work, unless that person knows they are capable of work. Disability changes by the minute, so it is virtually impossible to ask a disabled person to be in the workplace on a schedule. There are many types of disability, and many disabled people will want to work, at least part time, but the majority of disabled people are unable to work, and should not be pigeon holed into a criteria. This will only add to more suffering, stress, and hardship.
Disabled people were “fairly” happy with how the system already worked, so there is no need to change it, except for saving money, changing sickness goal posts, and forcing people who are unable to do impossible tasks.
You may say I have the wrong attitude, and it is people like myself who obviously need to be reconditioned, but I am ASSURING you, you would be very very wrong.
Leave the ill and disabled to live with some dignity and peace, if they feel like working, you will be sure to hear from them. Since your New government has came into power we have been living in terror. Stop bullying us into earlier graves.
I am classed as severely disabled, I can’t walk, csn’t use my left have/arm at all, and I have a bad speech impediment. I am a wheelchair user. I have applied for jobs in my life, but at 58, and with my disability I have not a hope in hell chance of getting a job. Why? because of attitude of employers towards disabled people. Ask the Government to give us jobs and see what they say, Better still, why don’t disabled people become MP’s? And while we are on that subject, how many disabled people have this Government got? HARDLY ANY.
Chronically ill people may never return to the workplace for the simple reason they are unable to consistantly sustain any level of activity.
Some may manage two hours a week, some four.
But many have no hours a week when they feel well enough to do sustained activity.
The benefits sytem at present doesn’t give chronically ill people the opportunity to do less than 16 hours a week. Why is this? What is the rationale behind the magic 16 hours?
If I had 16 hours a week that I felt capable of ANY activity I would be eternally grateful, and would actually like to spend some of my “well” hours in doing something productive, and get paid for it.
I can but dream…
Instead I sit in trepidation of being called in for a Work Capability Assessment that will deny me the right to be what I actually am, which is a chronically ill person who has an incurable condition.
I desperately want to work, but I NEED to be cured first.
There are no “reasonable adjustments” that will make me well enough to be productive, no amount of legislation will give me energy, strength and stamina, and no amount of threats or sanctions or government targets will “persuade” me to be something I am not, which is pain free and healthy enough to work.
I suggest that targeting 16-25 year olds who are still fit and healthy should be the priority.
Then targeting the remainder of the population who are capable of work.
Retraining, genuine individual one-on-one help, and on going support are essential, but I have mis-givings regarding “providers”.
Employers need to see that disabled people can, and do, work. Employers need help to understand Access to Work, grants and legislation.
Government needs to differentiate between those who cant work, those who are being descriminated against, and those who just dont have the skills or the motivation to work.
“I suggest that targeting 16-25 year olds who are still fit and healthy should be the priority.
Then targeting the remainder of the population who are capable of work.”
I agree that this must be a priority. We cannot as a nation afford to have another ‘lost generation’ with some who have never worked and who have not had an upbringing that instills in them a ‘work ethic’.
However, as others have said, at present there is a shortage of ‘Jobs’ so why spend resources on people who are unlikely to find work. But then there is the massive dilemma that the government faces, and in which it must pacify voters – why should we be paying benefits to an individual who can work but chooses not to. Do you say “there are only 0.5 million jobs, so let’s spend as little as possible on the ‘easiest’ 0.5 million people and ‘stuff’ the rest”? Do they say “there are only 0.5 million jobs, but let’s spend as much as we need to in order to get every one of the 3 million unemployed in an equal position to be able to compete for them”?
Then add in to the mix – as a society, are we prepared to accept living on benefits as a viable ‘career choice’ for some, or do we wish to prevent that. Finally, there is the simple ‘human’ factor of accepting the point at which an individual has genuine health issues (and to determine that opens another ‘can of worms’) such that making the choice not to work and be supported by the state is respected, whilst doing everything possible to support those who in spite of significant health issues want to work.
Not easy is it!
I have been severely disabled since birth. I can no longer walk, I can’t use my left hand/arm at all, I limited movement in my Right hand. AND I have a bad speech impediment. My parents always brought me up to look upon myself as ‘normal’, but normal in the sense as I am as equal as the next person, and in a perfect world this is the way it should be. Sadly, we do not live in a perfect world. I know a few disabled people who left school and went to college only to come out of college and spend the rest of their lives going to a Day Centre. They have had to live on benefits…not by choice, but because they could not get employment from leaving college. This country is totally one side and never attempts to get things right…which is why it is in the mess it is in now. I am not going to say there arean’t disabled people who could find a job, of course there is, but there are more non disabled people who can find work but do not want too. It is these people who the Government should be coming down on. Never the less, there is still the fact that there is far too many people in there country from other countries, some, shouldn’t even be here. Maybe this Government should say any immigrant who comes here cannot claim benefit for the first 5 years. If they don’t have a job to come to then they are not allowed in. If after 5 years they lose their job, they are only allowed to claim benefit for 1 year, if after they still have no work then they must return to their country. The Government are right, the benefit system is wrong…but they are not attacking the people they should be attacking, they would rather attack disabled people that this Government thinks can’t fight back. Tory’s are only intersted in their own, they are don’t care about middle class or working class people. As for Clegg, he has killed the Lib-Dems, no one will never trust them again.
I was 100% with you until you started getting all ‘party political’. This whole thing goes beyond ‘party politics’and arguements over which party is right.
I am not sure if I understand what you mean. This is Not about which Party is right or wrong. However, clearly the lastest Government is attacking Disabled People in the most unacceptable manner. It is doing so to claw back the debt caused not by disabled people or Joe Blogs in the street, it was caused by the Banks who seem to be getting away with it stock free. Even though I am not middle clase I have always voted Lib/Lib-Dems, but I will never vote for them again. Whether you like it or not, the Tory and Lib Dems are two faced. None of these cuts were ever mentions by both Party’s before the Election, but I must say Brown did warn us all this would happen if the Tory’s got in. I was no friend of Brown, He was the worse PM we have ever had…which was why Labour lost, but what he said about the Tory’s came true. Not even Maggie ever attacked the disabled in the way Cameron and Co is doing right now. When you conside Cameron had a severely disabled son, he of all people should understand what disabled people go through, He should be doing all he can to protact the Disabled not distroy them. Disabled People are killing themselves because of what Cameron and Co are doing, do you feel this is RIGHT? You have Cameron moaning about the high demand there is on the benefit state yet a large amount of these people are from other countries who come here for an easy ride. Nothing is being done about this issue, it is all being placed on Disabled People. If you read my comments to others above you will see I have said this whole thing is like putting the cart before the horse. You can’t walk into a shop and buy a job. First you have to find one you can do, then you have to apply for it, and at the going rate today there are about 100 non disabled to every 1 disabled applying for the same job. So, who do you think is going to get the job? Even if that Disabled Person can do the job they still might not be able to get to or get in the workplace due to Access. So no, this is NOT about which Party is RIGHT, It’s about what’s RIGHT for DISABLED PEOPLE!
I agree with you Fred that the government should concentrate on the immigrants who are coming into this country and claiming benefits and sending benefits abroad to so called (no proof) children by restricting benefit claims on how long they have paid into the system. But it is easier to pick on there own people then to take on the EU and the courts.
You would think they would look after us first would’nt you, I dont think so?
“Do you say “there are only 0.5 million jobs, so let’s spend as little as possible on the ‘easiest’ 0.5 million people and ‘stuff’ the rest”? ”
Yes, if it kick starts the economy.
” “there are only 0.5 million jobs, but let’s spend as much as we need to in order to get every one of the 3 million unemployed in an equal position to be able to compete for them”?”
Equal?
I will never be in an equal position as I have no physical strength, no stamina, and chronic pain.
I do have a university education. So to have equality all must have what I have.
Or perhaps lower us to the lowest common denominator?
The very best service provider can’t level that playing field.
The concept of equality of employment being made a reality by service providers is bizarre.
Of course we are not happy to accept that people live on benefits by choice, but we should be happy to expect that there will never be 100% employment, and there will always be a percentage of the population who cannot work, though not through choice.
And those people need financial support.
“whilst doing everything possible to support those who in spite of significant health issues want to work.”
People with significant health issues actually want to be WELL first, then return to work.
People with genuine health issues dont make the choice not to work, they cannot work, and that is the the problem.
You state that you would want the state to accept that a sick person choses not to work and should be respected.
1) No-one respects our right to be recognised as ill.
2) Ill people dont chose not to work, they cant.
3) The state has stated that people will not be supported financially if they chose not to work, even if they are ill.
Can you stop labouring under the false statements of the media and government that people are not ill, that all they need is to get back to work?
How would you feel if govenment and the media decided to turn on service providers and say that they shouldn’t get paid because actually they provided no services, they were fraudulent, they were capable of much more, and that they are failures because although there were no job vacancies there were still people not in employment?
It wouldn’t be too hard to mock up a test that ensures you appear to have failed, or give a list of statistics to prove you have failed.
And then how would you feel?
Lets not waste more money on more witch hunts and bully boy tactics.
Lets get…[truncated by the system]
Well done CR you have summarised the problem in one statement, People with disability have good days and bad days, and for most disabled people committing to either 2 hours a week or 40 hours a week is a virtual impossibility that is a part of the disability. Therefore forcing the disabled to give sustained effort for a period of time could in a lot of cases make them worse than they are now.
The fact that the government has decided to bully disabled people into work that they may not be able to sustain even short term shows that the government has little or no concern for the welfare of the disabled of this country, they are in fact acting in a way that constitutes bullying and discrimination against the disabled.
The need is to help those who have disability but the reality is that companies in the private sector cannot facilitate the disabled person’s needs and will therefore in virtually every situation give an available position to an able bodied person over a disabled person.
The Work Programme needs to recognise the different skills of people who are unemployed. The current programmes dfo not recognise either the skills or the capabilities of people who have been working for many years in skilled and professional tasks and who face unemployment due to redundancy. Transferrable skills training and support should be part of the Work Programme, for blue and white collar workers.
No-one should be forced to work for their benefit. If there is a job of work, as task, to be done, as there clearly would be in such instances, then that work or task should be offered to the person as a paying, full time, contractual job. That gives the person a sense of value and avoids the use of the welfare roll as a captive, low wage workforce.
The Work Programme needs to take into account the living costs of people, including those who are already at the time they become unemployed committed to buying their homes. Full allowance needs to be made to help people maintain their mortgage payments as part of this programme. A stable home, owned by the occupiers, which is what the government’s support for owner occupation has promoted both now and in the past (e.g. Right to Buy), will add to the aspiration to work and will help encourage people to work when there is work available. The Work Programme needs to recognise and support that aspiration.
Labour’s iniquitous decision to stop supporting people with mortgage payments after they have claimed JSA for two years needs to be repealed. It is unfair to pay landlord mortgages via housing benefit interminably but not the mortgages of owner occupier claimants who in the vast majority of cases are hardworking people who have fallen on hard times. Such people are not claiming benefit – and help with their housing costs – as part of a ‘life style’ choice. If, in spite of their best endeavours, they have not found work after two years (and this will be the case in many northern and midland areas and for many over 50 years of age)then it is simply not right to take away from them their homes.Especially as that would not happen if they had not made the effort and sacrficies to buy and were renting.
Under normal circumstances, no-one should be referred to a Work Programme provider until they have spent at least six months (perhaps longer) looking for a job. This minimises the Work Programme cost incurred for people who would have found work by themselves anyway. The only exception should be for people who are considered hard to place – for example, ex-prisoners or people who happen to have disabilities.
If someone is considered hard to place, the Work Programme provider should not be permitted to apply undue pressure on them or drop them from the programme. The problem in many such cases is not with the would-be worker, but with the lack of interest or understanding from employers.
If a would-be worker is getting interviews, but simply hasn’t been lucky enough to secure a job offer, they should have the option of agreeing with their Job Centre advisor that they will continue as they are, in preference to being distracted by a referral to a Work Programme.
Let’s not put people into boxes. It may be convenient for bureaucrats but it’s unworkable. We need to properly reconsider the benefit system. It’s hard to break away once you are in the system. Punishment follows any entrepreneur – earn money outside the system and you are penalised.
We need to encourage new businesses – and they can come from the unemployed. The Work Programme needs people who really understand what it is like to be unemployed.
The first people to be moved onto the work programme must be those who are (or could be, with little re-training) ready & able to work. This includes many parents of young children, who could take at least part-time work (full-time school is over 30 hours/ week) – there would also then be demand for extra childcare during school holidays, creating more possible jobs (with suitable training).
Most people who get JSA may be able to prepare for work with help from DWP and other providers (including, as said above, offenders who will often need guidance and encouragement).
Disabled people should be interviewed and offered help if they want to find work AND it is feasible – people with variable conditions or who are only able to work a few hours a week are not an attractive prospect to most employers and in a time when many people are unemployed, it cannot be right to put pressure on people who often already have difficulty getting into suitable employment. There is also the problem that if someone finds work for 8-10 hours a week (which is the most they can cope with), they are expected to either increase working hours or stop work in a few months. This is crazy, there are people who will never be able to work full-time, but would benefit greatly from maintaining a few hours work (social contact, pride in doing something useful, personal dignity could all be increased working just one half-day a week.). The idea of all-or nothing working isn’t OK for everybody, and the govt’s assurances about protecting “the most disabled” are not at all helpful to anyone who doesn’t need 24-hour care but cannot do regular work.
People on ESA should only participate on a volunteer basis.
Furthermore the so called “medical test” which determines whether they receive ESA should be carried out by real medical professionals rather than say a midwife with just a few days “disability training”. Also their diagnosis, hospital test results and their specialised hospital consultant’s opinions SHOULD be taken into account. At the moment it is not, yet you would think that they know more about the patient or disabled person than can be learned in a 30 minute tick box session which will impact on the rest of that person’s life.
I have to agree which if we are to have a medical it should be by a medical professional, you would not go to a nurse for a operation would you? If you are being accessed by a nurse then the medical test is not really a medical is it? A medical can only be gone by a doctor or consultant so this is a discrimination in its self.
My partner has just been through the mill and back and is disabled (through no fault of his own) and he had private medical care through work and has lots of letters from consultants, doctors and his company doctor if this is not enough then I dont know what is? They know him more then a nurse at a medical centre.
Single parents of school-age children, who want to, and who enjoy looking after those children properly, should be offered the opportunity to not only do a Work Programme part-time, but also to be employed part-time (while still gaining financially at least 25 per cent more than they would by just claiming benefits). This way society gets it’s children properly looked-after and the parents of those children get pride and dignity in work, becoming an example to their children.
People freshly out of prison should be given as much help as possible as quickly as possible to find their feet again as working members of society, with the pride and dignity this brings.
Young people who have recently left education should be offered a specialised Work Programme to help them into employment as quickly as possible. This should focus on long-term career goals, with proper, professional career guidance, literacy and numeracy retraining if necessary, and the opportunity and financial support to gain further qualifications whilst working.
People who have been unemployed for a long time, who are not ill and who are not disabled need fast help and should be prioritised for a Work Programme, which should at least offer some profession career guidance as well.
Chronically ill people, who have a history of hospital confinement, whose illness is less often than not in remission, should only be asked to volunteer for a Work Programme.
People who are disabled and who have faced frequent barriers to employment because of their disability should similarly only be required to volunteer.
Acceleration should be based on those furthest from the job market or who face additional barriers to obtaining work. Such as the disabled, those on health related benefits, those in the ESA Support group expressing a desire to return or attempt to find work, those out of work for over a year etc..
The young should be able to access the support early especially where a lack of education attainment may be a barrier to the workplace. This would also ensure that culturally as they are engaged early in worl activity a work ethic can be developed.
Assessment should be able to identify the levels of support required and time of intervention or access. Those from educated middle classes may well be able to be more self sufficent in finding a job and thus Support would not necessarily be a requirement and would only want to be accessed where all there personal endeavours met a “brick wall”.
The ambition for support to work programmes long term should be to allow the earliest access to all to expedite re-engagement with the work market. Subject to sufficient and adequate employment oppourtunities existing.
I am a severely disabled man of 58. I have Cerebral Palsy. My disability: I can’t walk, can’t stand unaided, can’t use my left hand/arm at all…..plus, I have a speech impediment which means people cannot understand me very well. Tell me John, are you saying I am fit to work? If you are, then you find me a 20k job that I can do, and I will happily do it. Otherwise, when you talk of the ‘disabled’ choose your words carefully and make sure you know what you are talking about. Before severely disabled people have any chance of getting work attitudes of employers must change towards disabled people, that is why so few are in work. Its not because they don’t want to be, its because we are forced not to be by employers who refuse to employ us.
I agree with you entirely, Fred. I cannot find an employer who will take me as I am, with a chronic and totally unpredictable illness, which also means that sometimes I can’t talk at all or my mouth is so ulcerated and my tongue so swollen it is impossible to understand me. Other mentionable symptoms include being covered in enormous red spots. I also can’t help other things with are too embarrassing to discuss. I have also been sneered-at, laughed-at and treated like I’ve got the plague, which has somewhat crushed my confidence in the idea of office work. I just can’t see how a Work Programme can really help many sick or disabled people.
i agree with kate and fred being penalised for being severely disabled by governments is totally unjust even those at jobcentre plus are expressing alarm at number of disabled who quite simply cannot work are “failing their medicals when medical professionals are adamant they are not fit to work.
This exercise is a ploy to save money at the expense of vulnerable disabled (easy targets) shame on you DWP
I agree with you as a 56 year old woman who cannot walk and needs an assistant to get on and off the toilet, not only does the attitude of employers have to change along with the facilities they provide for the disabled but also the attitude of the ‘man/woman in the street’ who fail to understand the scope of the term ‘disabled’
All lone parents should move to work group in line with other maternity/paternity leave legislation.
Will somebody please explain why it is apparently okay to care for other people’s children (Childminder, Nursery Nurse, etc), but somehow a sin to take care of your own (lone parent)?
In my view, raising the next generation is probably the most responsible job there is; if a mother or father chooses to undertake that job, rather than contracting it out to some third party, I think they should be supported in that choice.