When the long-term unemployed are drafted into work experience as part of the New Deal they receive their P45. Could anyone therefore clarify if those in unpaid work experience are officially classed as being no longer unemployed? If so isn't that a slight of hand by the New Labour government?
I was on a New Deal scheme from May to November 2005 and when I joined New Deal my JSA claim was closed, I received my P45 and was told that I was no longer classed as unemployed.
A couple of interesting facts however.
If a person joined New Deal before 2006 they received a training allowance plus a premium of just over ten pounds regardless of whether they were either on training or in a voluntary placement.
Nowadays they only receive the premium if they are in a placement.
Thankfully however, thanks to the training and placement experience I undertook whilst on New Deal I now have a full-time job thanks to up-to-date references and training, albeit away from my home area.
Therefore, in my opinion, New Deal is good for getting the correct training and up-to-date references to re-enter the employment market but its also a good way of getting people off the unemployment register which could explain why so many long-term unemployed people who supposedly get a job end up back on the register six months or so further along the line?
Thanks Geoffrey, So, it seems the Labour Party is using the New Deal to massage the true rate of unemployment. I should like to see the long-term unemployed given an opportunity to work and with full pay. This could be done by government. I'm not normally in favour of state infererence but in certain instances it can be beneficial. I remember Norman Tebbit proposing something similar several years ago, if I remember correctly he proposed paying the unemployed 100 pounds a week to undertake social projects.
The true rate of unemployment under New Labour is astronomical, they claim that more people are working yet unemployment keeps going up. The only explanation for such a scenario would be that foreign workers are entering the country to take advantage of the strong pound and are taking the jobs that our unemployed need. I really feel that the Conservative party needs to do more to expose Labour's distortion of unemployment figures and also set forward a package of costed initiatives for putting the long-term unemployed back into work.
The New Deal, like so many schemes before, are all part of the "MSC" (that's Massive Statistical Coverup!)
They have been used by successive governments (of both colours!) to fiddle the figures and make it look as if more people are getting off the dole (or whatever they're calling it at the moment) and back into work, than is actually the case.
Of course such schemes are also a source of cheap labour for businesses who don't even have to pay lip-service to the Minimum Wage and take on people under guise of "training" them, yet, after a few months of that, it's "Sorry mate, no job for you here, back on the dole whilst we get another cheap mug in to replace you..."
Graham, The future Conservative government needs to tackle long-term unemployment head on and create real jobs. I'd like to see a return to the 'Community Programme' of the 1980s that guarenteed 12 months full-time employment to the long-term unemployed. Such a 12 month period could combine working and training leading to a vocational qualification.
I certainly agree with you about the way that schemes like the New Deal have masked the true extent of unemployment.
New Labour's tax credit system is bizarre to say the least. A person might be claiming JSA, they then could find a part-time job and apply for tax credits and end up getting more benefit through the tax credits than they were getting through the JSA when unemployed. Gordon Brown's tax credits have created this half work/half benefits culture, which was designed as part of New Labour's anti-family agenda of coercing mothers away from their children and into part-time work.
Tax Credits and the New Deal must be scrapped by the future conservative government.
I'd like to see a return to the 'Community Programme' of the 1980s that guarenteed 12 months full-time employment to the long-term unemployed.
Unfortunately I experienced the Community Programme of the 1980s and it was just another excuse for cheap labour whilst shuffling people off and on to the dole registers.
Once your time was up, that was it, you were out and someone else was in. It made very little difference.
Graham , You make a very good point. Any future work programme for the long-term unemployed must be directed at fully paid work which also combines training with a recognized qualification at the end. The current New Deal is nothing more than a punitive dead-end with the unemployed serving time pointlessly in a charity shop. No actual training as New Labour had promised. If a future Conservative government can invest in actual work and training it will pay dividends in the long run.
The trouble is many of the unemployed on New Deals already have qualifications often a degree.
Most are unemployed because they are simply too good to employ and the victim of sexual discrimination against men in administration jobs (it works both ways).
Many are managers with a lot of experience.
Many are also not very good at doing stupid IQ and Personality tests. They don't know bizarre obscure words nobody uses in the real world anyway.
Many are just good at doing the jobs they are applying for.
However, in today's modern world even labourers have degrees. Therefore there are simply too many applicants for office jobs and people who are not "tough" enough for labouring jobs.
Interesting points chulcoop. Many of the humanitarian degrees issued are of little value in the labour market. By training for the unemployed I was thinking in terms of vocational qualifications, perhaps even something like learning how to drive, operating a lathe, woodcraft, hairdressing skills etc. Practical skills that could be learnt over a 12 month period and would give the unskilled jobless a fighting chance in the work market.
Firstly I agree that the new deal is a joke. I was out of work for well over 19 months and not claiming benefits. However, the job centre refused to help me get a job and told me that the new deal was out of the question.
Secondly, chulcoop when people talk about discrimination I believe that they forget that not discriminating against people is different from giving some a leg up. For example, whilst I recognise the good that the Disability Discrimination Act has done (Two members of my close family are disabled so I do recognise the larger range of opportunities for them now) it needs to be revised. Instead of creating a level playing field it has given the disabled a distinct advantage. On many application forms I have filled out it clearly states that if you are disabled and meet the minimum specs that you will be guaranteed an interview. This in my view is an unfair advantage and is infact discrimination toward everyone not covered by the DDA.
Good point on discrimination martinnelson. I've never understood how discriminating in favour of 2% is fairer than discriminating in favour of 98%. Although I support work opportunities for disabled people that feel they are able to work I'm totally against the New Labour culture of complusion. Just because a disabled woman might need the use of a zimmerframe to walk it doesn't mean she is a candidate for a position sitting all day at a checkout in Tescos. New Labour seem to think every disabled person can work and ought to work. All due to their egalitarian ideology no doubt.
Canvas, Ive already said that "I support work opportunities for disabled people that feel they are able to work" What Im against is the New Labour compulsion where they are trying to force disabled people into work. The same goes for seriously ill people Ive heard of a case where a man was dragged into his jobcentre for a job focused interview six weeks after having a massive heart attack. New Labour see statistics and not people.
Well, I think it's a complex situation. Next thing is you'll be shouting 'stop these people who abuse incapacity benefit!'. Who can fine tune the benefits system best? What does David Cameron suggest?
There are plenty of jobs that better qualified unemployed people can do. Unfortunately they are filled by people on fraudulent work permits. No proper checks are made to see if the claims by the employer that they tried to hire British people and failed are true.
There may be a shortage of willing unskilled people to fill unskilled roles, but there are a vast number of people desperate for skilled jobs that they are fully qualified to do.
This is a well documented fact, but neither the Labour, nor Conservative Parties will do anything about it.
The entire benefits system needs to be overhauled. Tax Credits have been a disaster and completely illogical. Gordon Brown has created the impression through tax credits that more people are working but in effect these jobs are no more than part-time jobs topped up with benefits or in other words half work/half tax credits. The entire disability regime needs to be abolished and replaced with one dependency benefit for the unemployed, disabled and those temporarily too sick to work. At the moment there are too many departments. The benefits system is one rare example where centralization would actually be advantageous.
On the subject of those who WANT to work, yes they should be entitled to work but it does seem to have gotten to the point where some can be considered for jobs that they are obviously not capable of doing. As I am willing to prove if necessary I am all in favour of the rights of the disabled, that said it seems to me that those who are close to disabled people and the disabled themselves are unable to see that they DO have limitaions. I do think that tony's example was not a fair one, but his point does stand up.
Canvas, may I just say that you would be surprised who can get benefits and who is rejected. A good example would be my nan who cannot walk without it hurting, she will probably want to work as long as she can but was turned down for DLA, however I know one person who was awarded DLA for a relatively minor problem, one that is no longer existant. Whilst trying to repair the benefit system is obviously necessary I do agree it is harder to do than to say.
DavidBodden, here is my take on the point you raise. Too many people are qualifing. At first glance this might not seem like a problem but imagine the Labour government said it wanted 50% of school leavers to go on to higher education. In my opinion the only way this could be achieved is to lower the quality of our qualifications and educational system. The only real way to solve the fact that so many qualified people want skilled work is to raise the level of education. We need only the best qualifing both academic and vocational courses.
I think it is essential that the long-term unemployed are offered a chance to study a trade/work skill over a 12 month period. As I wrote earlier, learning to drive, hairdressing, work in woodcraft etc. These are all skills that can be taught over 12 months or even less. Imagine if an unemployed person were taking driving lessons every day, they might well be qualified within a very short time. Then they would have a skill that would always open up work opportunities for them. We cannot allow people to rot on the dole.
“We cannot allow people to rot on the dole”. They can and they do. There is no real help to anyone who is desperate for work. The only ‘help’ that is available to anyone who is not functionally illiterate is to reduce their benefits to motivate them. Just how driving someone into deeper poverty makes them a more attractive candidate to an employer is lost on me.
What is ignored is that the ultimate decision on the employment status of someone is that of the employers. It is time to get tough on the employers not the unemployed.
A start could be made in allowing someone to challenge the issuance of work permits, even those that have already been issued. In my former field IT, almost all work permits are fraudulent. There are plenty of people who are keen and fully capable to fill the roles. In the unlikely event that they cannot get someone 100% then train people.
Interesting points DavidBodden. The future Conservative government must tackle long-term unemployment. This problem has blighted our nation for the last thirty years. I'm completely against all types of positive discrimination but how do webcameron supporters feel about the idea of giving the long-term unemployed first option on vacancies in the public sector if they are qualified for the job available?
I see no chance of there ever being a future Conservative government. At least not until they have policies of their own and have a history of actually opposing the Labour government.
There is no need for positive discrimination. What we need is an end of all discriminatory policies by employers. Not all the unemployed are without skills. However, if you haven’t been in employment in the last few days then they might as well not exist in the minds of employers. Simply currently being without work is often the reason why someone is not hired. Not being allowed the chance to earn money will inevitably lead to personal financial problems. It can also lead to both physical and mental health problems. All of these unavoidable consequences of not being allowed to work are used as reason to reject candidates. As I said before, get tough on the employers not the unemployed.
Personnel selection is, by definition, a discrimination process. Many of the selection criteria are just plain wrong. However, it is often abused. When employers decided that they want to use cheap work permit based labour, they apply criteria that ensure that nobody passes and advertise where they are less likely to find applicants in the first place. The home office has been complicit with this fraud. They never check that the claims that an employer cannot find people are valid.
What is most worrying is that despite massive amounts of evidence from a wide range of sources (including individuals, professional bodies, recruitment agencies, and trade unions), BOTH the Labour government AND the Conservative opposition refuse to look into it.
It is clear to me that in the unlikely event of the Conservatives forming a government then they will never do anything practical to get people back to work. Indeed, they will sell us out even more. It is economic madness, but when has that stopped politicians? One can only speculate on their motivation.
Now, here are another two problems that are commonly encountered by people.
1. The very tranditional 'Lack Of Experience'! So many people get turned down because of lack of experience. Yet if you are trying to get a foot in the door of any industry how can you first gain the experience necessary for the job? I know many people who have been told they don't have adequate experience for entry level jobs. Is it just me that find's this strange?
2. Something I have heard living in Merseyside and that is complete lunacy...overqualification. I have always asked how one could be overqualified for a job? I know that other people have experienced a similar thing. And with so many graduates unable to get jobs relavent to their degrees, surely this problem will only get worse????
I have always asked how one could be overqualified for a job?
Because the employer is worried that as soon as they've spent time training you in your new job and you've settled in, you're going to find something better and more suited to your qualifications and leave so they have to do it all again.
They're far rather employ someone with little or no prospects of advancement to a better career!
Which in itself is the problem. My view would be that employers who don't have advancement prospects within a company are going to have a high turnover in staff anyway. Long story short it is necessary as an employer to develop a strong training program that can promote from within. After all when looking a bigger companies taking on someone with potential is an investment in it's future.
Staff are not looked at as an investment, but as a cost that has to be minimised.
Staff mobility, or rather its absence, is one of the other advantages that employers see in using work permit labour. They are locked into their employer to large extent so can be abused in terms of the pay and conditions.
As for the lack of experience / overqualified issues, would you believe that you can be both? If you have plenty of skills, but have been out of work for a little while, you will be told that you have no recent commercial experience, but if you offer to take a lower role or pay you will be told that you are over qualified.
Why is the over-qualified excuse legal? Consider the other side. The conditions on getting Job Seekers Allowance say that you must accept any job even if it is below your skill level. We are repeatedly told to ‘lower your sights’. Boards like this are full of people saying ‘make the unemployed take any job’. Well, start by making discrimination against the ‘over-qualified’ illegal.
The New Deal has failed miserably because it didn't deliver on New Labour's promise of training. The Labour government seem to have confused 'Work Experience' with 'Training'.
The long-term unemployed need to be engaged in training. They need to learn new skills, work skills reflected in a recognized qualification. It would be more cost effective in the long run if the future Conservative government invests in training for the long-term unemployed. Once the jobless have a skill they will no longer be alienated from the work market. This question must be addressed.
SCRAP THE NEW DEAL AND ITS POINTLESS WORK EXPERIENCE PLACEMENTS
LET THE LONG-TERM UNEMPLOYED UNDERTAKE REAL VOCATIONAL TRAINING WHILE CLAIMING BENEFIT
DavidBodden, yes I would believe you can be both I've experienced it first hand. And I whilst I recognise that on the whole staff are not seen as investments there are many companies that do see employees as investments I can name three. McDonalds, Greene King, ASDA.
The Conservatives will never form a government again. However, just supposing they did, they would not do anything practical to help. It is a combination of lacking the wit, denial, and vested interests. The closest thing to ‘help’ would be to reduce or even abolish the minimum wage. They would claim it was ‘to bring the price of work back in line with the supply of workers’, or ‘to make the UK a less attractive place for foreign workers’. Even if there was a 90% cut, there would be some saying that paying someone £20 per week was too much.
What is needed is a complete change in attitude. It must be recognised that employers have been lying and cheating when they complain about the quality and availability of British workers, and their need to hire from abroad. Effort should be focused on getting the most able back to work as quickly as possible and not let the fester and their skills wither. All work permits applications must be published on a central website for at least a month so that all can apply. Existing permits must be subject to challenge at anytime by someone out of work. All skill requirements of the job must be justified. The employer must show that the applicant could never do the job no matter how much training they got before they can reject them. The annual fee for a permit must be twice the annual pay for the role in the open market.
There are hundreds of thousands of people who have suffered as a result of the corrupt policies of this government. Livelihoods have been destroyed, and some have died. We need to have our lives repaired and we need those guilty to be punished.
I would disagree. I think that it is too easy for employers to ignore the minimum wage and if it was enforced better then immigrant labour would not be so usefful. Also if anything the government have made a huge mistake in not raising the minimum wage in line with inflation. I strongly believe that this is the reason so many are being forced into debt and being unable to step onto the property ladder.
New Deal was an absolute waste of time to me. I went on dead end placements were I was just used for cheap labour.I'm suprised New Labour haven't started setting up work camps in the Welsh hills. Most 'training providers' are taking tax payers money to send people through the mill back into unemployment. It's rubbish that should be scraped!
Thanks for letting us know of your experiences Kevin. The New Deal is more about punishing the unemployed for being unemployed than it is about training. The government fail to create work, as promised, then they use the New Deal to punish the unemployed for making the government look bad.
The future Conservative government need to scrap the New Deal. The whole New Deal project stinks of New Labour from top to toe. I even read that most of the placements are given to businesses that donate to the Labour party. Talk about corrupt. Scrap the New Deal. Training for the unemployed not exploitation.
Can someone in the Conservative party with access to the relevant info please tell us how much the New Labour-New Deal has cost the taxpayer since 1997? I estimate it must be a very pricey sum, and for what?, unemployment is now higher than it was when Labour came to power. Lets have the facts on the New Deal. All we get is government propaganda telling us that more people are working but that clearly is a lie. I read that the New Deal has a 40% success rate, so lets turn that on its head, it really has a 60% faliure rate, any enterprise with such a poor record would be shut down in the real world, but New Labour are able to keep their New Deal gravy train afloat, at the taxpayers expense.
As soon as the Labour party had a sniff at the ‘donations to party funds’, aka bribes, that were on offer from employers to be lax on the abuse of new deal training places, and my hobby horse work permits, they went for it like a ferret up a drain pipe. In the highly unlikely event of there ever being a Conservative government they will take the money too.
If the Conservatives want to win the next election then “Proper plans for proper home and proper jobs for proper British people” would be a sure fire winner. Sod all this green stuff, most people think that it’s just a way of raising taxes and making life difficult for us anyway.
Cameron finally lost any chance of my vote when he congratulated B’Liar on his ten years. I think that this is the reason why there was a collapse in the lead in the option polls. I will never vote conservative again until there is a commitment to bring all the nuLieBore bastards to trial and, hopefully, execution.
