Skip to main content

Nice Little Earner

Have a look at this post, on the consumer action group forum (which is a visual nightmare, sadly). Among the discussions is a thread about Ingeus (aka Working Links, though I have no idea why you'd change name...oh wait a minute everyone thinks WL suck). Here we have a client on the Work Programme that, having signed off, is being offered £75 by his provider....on the condition that said client coughs up the details the provider wants so they may secure a payment. This is information the client is under no obligation to provide.
Now you might think that the client should give that information: if they are being helped then why shouldn't the provider get paid. Well, my friend, you suppose an ideal world and I've read NOTHING that gives me confirmation regarding these pimps. As you can see, from the rest of the post they haven't been deserving of the client's trust, and this seems par for the course. There's also the ethical aspect as to whether such organisations should be allowed to manipulate clients in this fashion.
This is the future we can all look forward to, on the dole (which is where increasing numbers of us are going to end up thanks to the failing capitalist system and it's quasi religious tory pallbearers). Enjoy.


Popular posts from this blog

I Fucking Hate the Work Programme

That did not go well.
My legs were wobbly to begin with as I closed in on the church that passes for the office of the employment wing of the Salvation Army. My appointment was 3 to half past. I really did feel sick. Pretty early on, when he asked for the forms he gave me last time to fill in, I knew that what was arranged on the letter (a short interview with me bringing my CV and jobsearch) was actually going to be much longer. I also knew that, come half three when I had to leave to catch my bus back ten minutes later, I was going to have problems. 
Unfortunately, though more for me I fear, it never got that far; at 20 past he terminated the interview citing my apparent 'putting up barriers' as the reason not to continue. This was because I refused consent for him to keep my CV. I asked why he needed it and offered, three times, to show it to him (that's all), he said it was to apply for jobs on my behalf. The EEC's need this information.
What's an EEC? Employm…

Anybody Out There?

Just so I can be sure this is being read at all and decide whether it's worth continuing, please shout out in the comments. Even if you think I'm talking barmy bollocks, it'd be helpful to know if there are people reading this and not weird bots from phishing sites or Russian hackers or some weird sentient algorithm.

Apologies if you are none of those things, but I'm considering what to do with this blog.



Thursday today (unless time has confused me again!), the day between yesterday's appointment with The Psychologist, and signing on tomorrow. A brief oasis for me to discuss said appointment as it was a test for 'neurodiverse tendencies'. I think that's the best way of putting it; it's all a bit vague really. When I first saw The Psychologist I mentioned that I was in the process of trying to get a diagnosis for Aspergers to which she replied she could do a test that, while not an official diagnosis, could count towards one - or something. Something official anyway, though bizarrely after the test was completed (took a couple of hours) she said she wasn't trained for Aspergers specifically.

The test itself was a kind of Krypton Factor lite (sans exercise course): a mix of recall, pattern recognition, problem solving, and questionnaire. I was asked to arrange coloured blocks into a prescribed pattern, to spot what was missing from a series of pictures, to guess fr…