"It's Great!"

A current client says of their work experience: 'It’s great, it’s enabling me to improve my skills and look at other avenues. It’s making me smile again.'

 That's what the Salvation Army Employment Plus website tells me. They claim the organisation:

Works to redress the negative effects of unemployment on people’s lives – their self-esteem, overall well-being, families and wider communities, to provide jobseekers with targeted professional support through:

 

• our nationwide network of community and social work centres
• our teams of specialist employment advisers
• and our partners in employment services

 These are not negative effects caused by unemployment but by capitalism: the lack of money in a society where money is everything and the social opprobrium brought about by not being what society wants you to be: an economic drone, instead of a rounded thoughtful caring individual. That's the first point to make; don't be telling me that unemployment is the diseases when it's merely an inevitable symptom of a much greater problem. As long as we keep the system as is, there will always be unemployment - and consequently there will always be people like the Salvation Army to capitalise upon it.

A nationwide network of community and social work centres? What the hell is this? There's no such thing. Certainly not for me - unless tatty old church halls decorated like something from the 1970's are what they mean. Hardly the brunt of a progressive movement toward helping people. I don't even think they have internet access!

Specialist employment advisers? Well for a start they are SA officers (they really do like to think of themselves as some kind of army!) and they expect me to be 100% comfortable being in their Christian environment. Good job I'm absolutely an atheist - oh wait. I don't see any evidence of specialism at all. Anyone could have done what P did: print out some leaflets and tell me how little they can help. I'm not sure what partners they refer to either, I'm not sure I'd want to find out.

To be honest they are using the same kind of pseudo religious work ethic nonsense as Duncan Schmidt; but then they are both followers of the same belief system. Welfare dependency - which they want to replace with what...income dependency presumably. Wage slavery. In work or not, you are still dependent on the money you receive, that isn't being challenged.

Looks like they are seeking people in my area: Job Life Coaches (WTF?). This isn't the most well paid job in existence however, and you have to be subservient to the organisation's 'christian ethos'. Of course they don't say that you must be a Christian, but then they can't can they! 

The Work Programme transforms the way in which long-term unemployed people receive help into employment. All job seekers who have been signing on for 12 months are referred for bespoke support in gaining sustainable employment. The Job Life Coach will encourage, motivate and inspire job seekers!

Yes, it's very transformative. It's magically transmuted the nation's finances into private wealth for those riding the unemployment gravy train. I can't say that P has encouraged, motivated or inspired me, especially given that he went out of his way to tell me how not-bespoke their service was. Again, I was flat out told that training, at the very least, is off the table entirely. 

Just goes to show how even the lord's soldiers can be 'economical' with the truth in order to deliver a service that, certainly in my experience, wasn't 'bespoke'. Here's the testimony of an employer (the only testimony) as to the effectiveness of employment plus:

Danielle Clark, Store Manager, British Heart Foundation, Putney.

“We started working with The Salvation Army around a year ago. During this time they have placed about 10 people with us on work placements, a couple of whom have gone forward for permanent positions.

Overall it’s been extremely successful and we’ve enjoyed working with them. For work as a Red Cap we require people with specific security certification and a strong outgoing personality. We’ve been impressed by the way The Salvation Army has understood what we are looking for and delivered the right people.”

Now it doesn't say whether those permanent positions are paid, but notice the lack of specificity - 'a couple of people' from 'about 10'. Is it me, or is this just really rather informal? Ok, fair enough I suppose, but that's not even a quarter of those placed (workfare?) as volunteers in a charity shop! Something that anyone could arrange for themselves anyway - and did the involvement of the SA displace anyone else hoping to volunteer? Did the forced labour they offered (I must assume this is workfare or synonymous with it) take priority? If this was good for the BHF, does that mean they are still involved in the iniquitous workfare programme? I hope not.

Again, from their site, the salvation army offers:

Offer a personalised service aimed at identifying and addressing any issues which may be making it hard for someone to find work and provide access to the right training and support to look for and gain the job that best suits your skills and personality.

Any issues? Well certainly not mental health issues as they, explicitly, don't have staff trained to deal with that. Had I been referred as an ESA claimant (not that it should make a difference, and they were made aware of my issues in the referral information they were sent but ignored) would it have been different. No, as point of fact, because I asked. Right training? Well that's bollocks as I've explained. The job that best suits your skills and personality: well this sounds great, but of course it can be taken to mean that, given the lack of training and opportunity to broaden your skills base or even experience base (unless shelf stacking and sorting clothes in the BHF is the way forward), this is a bit disingenuous. That's the dangerous part of all this. It's very easy to say we will help you find something to do without helping you move forward. I also don't like the personality part of that either. Sounds rather Orwellian. But even then, their service seems to amount to little more than jobsearching on rubbish facilities in an old church hall. They claim a list of specialist services, but it's the usual stuff with more claims about specialist help/training and the usual gamut of life or employability skills (these may be useful to some, which is fair enough, but this is used by providers across the board to disguise the fact that they offer very little else at all).

I have no idea what they mean by Employment Resource Centres either (this one in Hammersmith sounds about right), unless that's a euphemism for the kind of environment I've seen thus far. Perhaps they just expect you to pray to the almighty for a jobsearch.

Programmed - Parked?

I've been waiting all week for P to ring me. I was sure they'd be on my case as early as possible, and in a weird way, it might have been better had that been so. At least then I wouldn't have to wait, stressing out, as to what is supposed to be happening. It would also mean that I don't struggle to answer the JC adviser, when I sign on, when asked "how's it going on the WP?" which they ask every time now. 

So where does that leave me? Have I been parked? Will I get a call next week, next month, next year? Perhaps they've passed me back to the JC  for someone else to deal with; they clearly don't like having to deal with people that have the wit to ask questions about this awful nonsense. But in the end none of this really helps me, as if it was ever about that.

I've been filling in the forms that P printed out; the assessment forms. One of the first questions it asks is about my interest in self employment, further education, and/or training. Yet I've already been told that training, at least, is off the table. These are Jobfit forms, so it seems that the Salvation Army want to ignore the provision. Probably because they haven't the money to offer any kind of decent service; that's money they could be spending on transforming the environment into some horrible 1970's church hall and buying new old bibles.

Of course I'm not going to ring them myself. Not least of all because that's not my responsibility. But I'm annoyed that the signing process isn't as expedient as I would like. One of the few upsides I was hoping for, while on the WP, is that signing on is supposed to be more efficient. Unfortunately despite supposedly having a fixed time for my appointment (important given local transport times), they change it every time because the system is actually incapable of booking a set time beyond two weeks. I'm also supposed to see the same person (at least that's what my GP was told), this was the case until I was referred. Now i just see whomever is there and get asked the same question about how the programme is going. A waste of time really since the DWP can't do anything - and frankly I don't really want to get into it with them because it's probably going to cause more problems than it solves. So instead of being a quick in and out at the JC, it's still the usual bureaucracy, only without them doing any jobsearch (that's what the WP is for).

I wouldn't say I feel abandoned. I expected the WP to be a complete waste of time. But I just didn't think it would be so regressive: so lacking and just so backward. At least if you're in the right kind of environment - ie not a tatty musty old church hall - it would feel a bit more modern. But really it's just like a local rotary club meeting and completely unproductive.

Absolute Zero

Not our lovely Spring weather, although that isn't far off as I sit in a cold room typing this, but the implication of this, from our lord and master, Goonface Grayling. 

The implication of this would be that voluntary work experience is worth rolling out to everyone. But then wouldn't it cancel itself out? If everyone was made to work for 5 months unpaid, in order to get a 16% greater chance of finding work, surely the end result would be no one would get a benefit? These schemes do not create jobs, so where is the benefit? 

This is the case for any such statistic the DWP pulls out of its hat regarding workfare, or the Work Programme, or 'voluntary' work experience, and not just for the youth. If my chances of finding work are improved because my provider can 'magic up' a good cv then that implies that the WP can do this for everyone, which again cancels itself out. So either these sorts of statistics in fact relate to competition within the system (and the 'customer' has to hope he gets sent to the better provider - remember he has no say in the matter), or they are bullshit extrapolated desperately and spuriously to prove this scheme isn't a waste of time and taxes.

All the reports that get published that relate to the success of the WP always point to someone who found a job within a couple of months/few weeks, with the catalyst being their CV. "So and so helped me improve my cv," is what you will read. It's too simplistic to even count - and that's before considering that these might be jobs that the customer was always going to get regardless or that, statistically, there will always be some, few, that can benefit from this. The point of course is how few: it's clear that basing a policy on that few is disingenuous because it skews the perception to something that is clearly not reality. There aren't the jobs available, so if more people have their cv's polished or work for free in the dungeons of big business all that does is cancel itself out. In fact, simply giving the customer a job to apply for, without doing anything else (such as providing training, counselling, help of whatever kind...) is going to be the same: what if I was to ask my provider, upon receiving a mandatory application, "how many other people have you directed to apply for this job?"

The competition for jobs will remain, and it isn't as if these providers are even able (in some cases, in others they aren't willing) to invest in improving or diversifying skills and ability.

Dangerous Times

This is a great article, as is Izzy Koksal's blog, which I read yesterday. I think the key point made is quite simply the choice between paying for some slef help guru nonsense or paying for actual traiining:

"A4e and others seem to think it's worth spending money on this damaging nonsense but not on genuine skills training."

I've read a lot of the websites that are fighting this unholy mess and my concern all along has been that even if the claimant stands up for his rights and is correct, what's to stop the provider just making trouble for him? Quite simply nothing. I don't really have an answer for this: what else are people meant to do? But it seems that providers can just mark your card and you can get sanctioned simply for being a trouble maker by virtue of being seen not to play ball. What then? I hate to scaremonger.

What's needed is nationwide solidarity. We need the unions on side. We need as much of the media as we can muster on side. The actions against workfare are great and I fully support everything, but I fear it's not enough. This government seems to have the weight of popular (or populist) opinion on its side. So we need to mobilise en masse and fight hard; the sort of action that occurred with the pensions on 30th Nov last year. If we can't get this happening then the cause will be marginalised and people increasingly viewed as militant layabouts - just like the riots last year. This awful government is happy to sweep issues under the carpet and threaten people, including children, destroying their futures.

I would love to see a nationwide unemployment movement politically and socially progressive and motivated by equality and compassion. I wish I knew how to make that happen.

Txt Me

Can I take this opportunity to again slam the Work Programme as a money making scam for the few at the expense of the many unemployed?

Now Cleggy wants a scheme that sees the support for our growing unemployed youth to be whittled down to a text message.

I'm not a youth, but JC support is non existence, and if you re on the WP they withdraw completely - except to check your jobsearch (which the WP are meant to provide) and take a signature. I'm supposed to be seen by the same person each time, that's what the DWPs own psychologist agreed given my difficulties (issues, by the way, that the WP provider can't and seemingly won't address). But they are short staffed when I sign on because no one wants to work Fridays. This exacerbates their usual lack of coordination within a system that is byzantine, complicated and at times self defeating.

Recruitment agencies are getting swallowed up by the WP as the big names are jumping on board while the little ones are no hope anyway. It won't be long before the private sector replaces the JC+ entirely as I believe that to be the end game of the WP. It isn't just a 'hooray for work, arbeit macht frei' scheme, it's the privatisation of the benefits system. You will have to convince an untrained and unfunded and perhaps uncaring little man working for a subcontractor that's at the bottom of the food chain in order to get your payment. But of course he won't bear the responsibility for the sanction you may end up getting because those targets will be kept for the primes.

Chris Grayling is a sociopath. I wouldn't trust him to look after a ten pence piece never mind the welfare system and the well being of people on his failing schemes. IDS is a christian zealot who wouldn't know what it's like to work in a fraught economy putting in long hours for a pittance, or dealing with the insecurity of a zero hour contract. Both of these people are, objectively, completely unfit for their jobs and wouldn't have them were it not for the self interest of rural middle England and the fawning right wing media.

Signing Again

Yes, it's that time of the two weeks. Time to catch the happy bus to opportunity street, only to find that they are short staffed. If I were to give them the benefit of the doubt I would put it down to illness, so maybe it would be unfair to criticise them. However I know they are routinely short staffed on Fridays because no one wants to work on that day. Strange that the DWP's shift system should allow for such a possibility. Still it's not too long a wait till I get seen.

It is supposed to be a more expedient process once you are on the WP, but all that means is they don't go through the process of a job search. You still have to sit there and listen to all their waffle and of course the inevitable 'how's the WP going', which will probably last as long as it does. How is it going? Well that's a good question. Unfortunately the JC and the provider seem to each have a different view on how it should work. As a result the claimant is caught in that no man's land in between. That's what should be written on the epitaph to this ridiculous system, when we finally renounce scarcity and capitalism. Anyway signing goes ok. I have to wait for P to get in touch next week as was arranged (by P, of course) and the whole WP merry go round can begin anew. I can hardly wait.

Programmed - the Language of Bullshit

I've been looking over the assessment forms P gave me to fill in. They are, unquestionably, filled with the usual lazily worded profile creating questions. The purpose of which is to pigeon hole me. For example: "what job search activity have you done so far?"

No time frame presented. Do they mean since I last signed on? Since I first signed on? Do they want an accurate record of EVERYTHING i have ever done to find work? Good luck with that!
The first page refers to a self-assessment questionnaire. I have no such thing. These forms are not meant to be filled in by the customer, I'm only doing it because I'm awkward and kick up a stink. Most of this is information P would already have if he'd bothered to read the info that was referred. Of course in truth, he has this information (he must have, he has my phone number and rang me the day before). The questions want to match me up with services they doubtless provide: stuff like CV building, advice on the 'hidden job market' (that old myth), telephone techniques and all sorts of rubbish. Oddly one of the first questions asks whether or not I'd like training, self employment advice and even further education, or at least information thereon.

I've already been told that's off the table. What a joke.

Of course for these people this is their bread and butter. Going through these tedious motions might help some people - and that's entirely fine - but not for others. But that's supposed to be the point of this scheme: it's meant to be flexible and custom tailored to the needs of the individual.

It's just ironic that I have already been plainly told that isn't the case at all, and if they cannot begin to address or approach the health issues I do have then all that stuff isn't worth a damn.

Programmed - Action Plans

A few weeks ago I made a FOI request to ask if it was compulsory for claimants mandated to the WP to sign an action plan. The response I have received is as follows:

"Work Programme providers have the freedom to develop their own business models and processes to support and help participants find work. It is not however a mandatory condition of Jobseekers Allowance to sign an action plan, or a form confirming attendance to a Work Programme induction session or form confirming receipt of Work Programme induction session documents.

It is (among other things) a condition of Jobseekers Allowance that Work Programme participants make the most of the help made available by the provider, for example, by attending meetings or taking phone calls at the times agreed and completing activities agreed with the provider. Individuals who are mandated to undertake an activity by a Work Programme provider may incur a loss or reduction of benefit should they fail to comply without good reason. Participants are also required to attend their Jobcentre Plus office fortnightly to show they are available for and actively seeking work and therefore, still entitled to Jobseekers Allowance."

Now I don't know how the likes of my new chums at the Salvation Army will interpret this, which of course is half the battle. But it seems pretty clear. Claimants cannot be compelled to sign these things. But then the second paragraph says that if mandated a claimant that subsequently doesn't act will face a sanction.

I'm not sure I'm best placed to translate that more clearly; I'm not a lawyer.

Smoke and Mirrors

That's all the WP is. From the untruths uttered by professional sociopaths like Grayling to the cash strapped charities desperate for money, plaudits and validation. It is abundantly clear now that this scheme is not remotely fit for purpose, as if it was ever going to be.

There is clearly a culture of misinformation. I'm not sure I put that down to any clever conspiracy, i doubt the government are that clever. It's more a case of poor communication from day one. No one really understands what they are meant to do and when they aren't supported in delivering the kinds of vision that Grayling continues to espouse it starts to creak and groan.

The upshot of all this is that the claimant is constantly kept on the backfoot. I walked into the meeting not knowing what to expect, so I'm guarded (well, more than usual) from the start. Is that really the way to run things? Keeping people in the dark? Not telling them what's going to happen, what's on offer, what they can expect? No of course not, but it's just all spin. No one told me I was going to be interviewed by an incompetent organisation that ignored the data fed to them by their prime and the JC. Noone said to me I was going to be sat in a musty old church hall surrounded by what I would regard as inappropriate religious accoutrement's. I don't even recall seeing a single Internet connection, perhaps they all had wifi. But then there were only two pc's present: the laptops used by the staff.

Noone tells you that there isn't anything on offer. No training for instance. So how am I to move forward? We are living in a period of mass unemployment so you might reasonably argue that retraining people and offering them a broadening of their skills might be a good thing. That isn't the case. So how can this scheme possibly help? How are they going to find me a proper job if they wilfully keep me in the same circumstances I am now?

That's the bottom line: this programme is clearly not resourced or run to offer that kind of help. It will not and seemingly cannot target that which it needs to unless the individual is pretty much within the orbit of a job already. In which case the merest push will be seen to help him get the job, when that's not true at all. As a result the DWP can claim success for this scheme while shutting out all complaints. That's what is happening. I cannot see success for this scheme at all, even for the providers. It is simply a money making enterprise for the primes and quite probably a waste of time for the subcontractors. They aren't being supported and don't have the money to help with things like training, but they are the actual providers that people will see.

Programmed - Meet the New Boss...

So I'm back. From my first appointment on the two year sentence that nothing - including employment - will get me off of. What an utter waste of time.

First the surroundings: even though I knew it was the Sally Army (calling themselves Employment Plus instead of Salvation Army Employment Plus), I thought it might be in an office in a building that's part of what is a small church facility. Nope, there is no such thing. It's a small salvation army church with a small dining room/kitchenette at the back. I'm seen by the adviser, P, in the hall itself. He's set up a laptop with a printer attached as if it were a jumble sale. The whole place had that musty jumble sale/charity shop smell. We're sat between the rows of pews and the 'stage'; I've got a big old bible open on a shelf within arm's reach and on the other side of the stage is a lectern with a mic with the legend 'Jesus is Lord'! P is wearing salvation army uniform (that blue jumper they wear). No other markings, though at a later point he identifies himself, as the organisation had over the phone last week, as being a member of the Sally Army (as opposed to a group funded by them in the way they are subcontracting from Jobfit).

There is no one else present except for another adviser and I think he's with a client; they are in the dining area bit so I can't tell. I don't know whether or not other people will turn up, but as it transpires they don't. Consequently I made a fuss about privacy because even though I'm sure the Holy Ghost is discreet, we're in the middle of a bloody church and anyone could listen. These are all the facilities they have and the tone P uses in response sets the tone for the rest of the appointment: he constantly talks to me about how they do things with a bit of a smirk as if to suggest that it's perfectly obvious how things are done and that I should know this and that I don't means I'm a fool. It's quite defensive actually and I don't really care for it.

Quite honestly the appointment was a bit of a disaster in terms of what's supposed to have happened. But that, again, is in part down to the way things are done, according to P, as opposed to what I've been led to believe including what Jobfit have actually told me. As I said yesterday I spoke to Jobfit to find out whether they had forwarded the info that was included by the JC during the referral process. Jobfit assured me they had and I believe them (they verified said info and knew who I was because they had to verify that to). One thing I didn't mention yesterday was that the person I spoke to, again P, at Employment Plus (EP), wasn't someone that Jobfit had heard of! They mentioned a Samantha (no ladies present this morning just P and another fellow). What is going on?

Again, this morning, P is adamant - though he never explicitly says this - that he hasn't received the info. Instead he says that it doesn't matter because I have to explain all this stuff to him there and then. I think it matters because later on he questions whether Jobfit including writer as my short and long term career goal (it's in print on the action plan thing I was sent when the appointment was booked). He focuses instead on retail and customer service which, stupidly, I tell him I have done before (I couldn't really get out of that as it's part of the jobseeker's agreement info, along with the health overview, the DWP included with the referral paperwork already mentioned, writer was part of that). He completely ignores writer saying that what's on that action plan form, which I show him, is meaningless 'those are just goals, in the future' (duh!), so why is it on the form then if it has no bearing on the process at hand? He doesn't answer. So not only are the facilities inadequate for discussing personal issues (where necessary), but they are admant that they don't have the info passed on to Jobfit and that said info is irrelevant. Also they admit they can't help with mental health issues because it's totally not their remit. So the million dollar question is: what am I doing here, what is the point of this?

I could go on about the appointment ad nauseum, but I want to distill my experience and what it means more succinctly than usual. So here's the nub: even P admits, in fact we abandon the appointment (he starts to mellow out at this point, as do I because the whole thing is such a farce), that the Programme isn't what it's being sold as. At all. Now of course you'd have to be monumentally naive to believe the bollocks the Tories have been spouting. But the truth is, this is no different to the schemes of old, including the Working Links course I was on a couple of years ago. It's exactly the same: these people are there simply to facilitate a jobsearch. They are there to get you into any kind of work, along the lines of what's on your JSAg, as soon as possible. This talk of helping people realise long term goals and achieve a sustainable outcome is complete bollocks. Complete and utter bollocks. P is also adamant that this is the same for all the providers, across the board (including Jobfit's local rival, JHP, whom he tells me he has worked for before). It is essentially no different than the JC; no different than the Programme Centres of old. All it can do is offer a bit of jobsearch, some stamps and maybe the odd CV printout. Maybe - maybe - if you have particular needs that can tick a particular box (P tells me that literacy funding is currently en vogue) then it might be different, your mileage may vary.

In the end they can't really offer anything. We have a broo ha ha about writing, as I mentioned. He claims it's a long term goal (ie they completely ignore that as a job goal even though Jobfit and the DWP have recognised it) and that without proper training it can't even be considered. What training do I need? I'm not looking for any particular specialisation and I happen to be able to write (and at great length as these posts attest). I'm open to whatever opportunities the WP can offer in respect of writing - isn't that what it's for? Nope. Not at all. I ask what help he can provide for training and that's when I find out just how little these people can offer. No training. They have no budget for much of anything beyond refunding bus fares and printing CV's it seems (unless, as I say, it ticks a box, then they can 'draw down' funding streams). No mental health specialists/experts, no training, no facilities that aren't in a religious timewarp (it's like being sent to 1975 for some careers advice), not much of anything.

Again we get into the discussion of having a mental health advisor. As if these people are available on tap. Again the implication that, by not having such an adviser, I'm not to be considered ill. The fact that I'm on JSA further exacerbates this because the rules (apparently, at least according to P) say that people on the WP from JSA are ready to work, end of.

Quite honestly I'm exhausted at this point. P mellows out somewhat because I think even he can start to sense the dissonance of experience here. What I've been told and lead to believe is bollocks, even if you factor in a margin for bullshit when digesting Grayling's propaganda. Yet I'm still left wondering why Jobfit don't know who P is or why they have the information and yet both P and EP say otherwise. How can that information not matter? It answers the questions he's asking (even though, apparently, I still have to give those answers in person). I'm looking at my appointment letter: "we will carry out an in depth assessment of your barriers to work and individuals needs". There was nothing of the kind, just a short questionnaire covering basic skills (can you read, can you write, as well as what do you think comprises the skills required for retail and customer service - or whatever work EP think you should be looking for). The questionnaire does ask what health issues I have (as well as am I addicted to anything, do I have a criminal record, etc, the usual), but they can't do anything with those barriers. So why am I here?

I think at this point P realises there's something wrong. He relents and says that he's going to discuss things with his boss while I discuss things with my GP. He assures me I won't get sanctioned as I've signed the form to say I've turned up etc. I believe him (and in any case, he suggested curtailing the appointment and taking a different path so if they decide to play bollocks then so be it, I can't account for them being wankers if they so choose). He refunds my bus fare and offers me the chance to fill in the assessment forms at home, in my own time (i tell him I wont' be rushed and he accepts), to return at a later date. But even if I change my claim to ESA, which seems to be the most appropriate benefit for me (ATOS' bullshit and both the Psychologist my own GP's benign ignorance notwithstanding), I'm still obliged, like some kind of unemployment Johnny Blaze, to the Salvation Army Employment Plus and their outdated 1970's church hall facility. This is hardly the 21st century and it's hardly the progressive manifestation of modern thinking on welfare reform.

Frankly it's the same old same old.

Programmed - And We're Already Having Problems 2

A new post because otherwise it will take up 10 miles of screen space.

I've just had the Salvation Army ring me back. Oh where to begin. I think the guy is almost deliberately misunderstanding me. He seems to be saying that he's been told that I said this or that I wanted that (specifically a private room - no just appropriate discretion). What I asked him was 'what experience with mental health issues do you have'? Turns out, none. They are just, to use his words, job brokers. I explain to him that I made it clear that the issues I have were explicitly included in the referral. These are issues that my GP supports (somewhat) and that, with the help of the Psychologist (in her own wayward fashion), the JC accepts them. My JSAg is also tailored accordingly. It's far from perfect.

The upshot seems to be, ignoring his constant misrepresentation of what I have said, is that if you are referred as a JSA claimant you are regarded as hale and hearty with no problems. Consequently you have no leverage with regard to the mandatory stuff (uh oh, his words not mine). He also mentions group work (fuck THAT!) as well. So they have a whole programme of the usual tedious cake baking crap I have to look forward to. If you are an ESA claimant you have more leverage - although how that works I don't know since they are going to be the same organisation with the same lack of experience presumably. The difference, I think, is that the mandatory stuff then isn't.

On top of this he keeps telling me that I can't have a private room even though I didn't explicitly ask for one. My point was that discussing the personal issues requires due discretion. It doesn't sound as if they have this; it's a small office apparently and if there's group stuff going on it sounds like it's going to be very cosy right from the off! So in at the deep end I am thrown and without even them being forewarned (apparently - who knows what they've been told) that I have problems. So again the system fails: the granularity is so thick and the system so binary that it just isn't helping. I needed to be on ESA all along, ironically, for this to work. So I don't know how this is going to go down. He even claimed to have spoken to the JC who, apparently, said that they don't pass on such info as health issues upon referral. So where does that leave me? He said also that people with mental health issues 'normally' bring an advisor, a case worker or nurse of some kind. Well I don't have one and I can't imagine what my GP would make of this.

It sounds like I'm going to have no credibility tomorrow and that when I sit there and try and discuss these issues (which I'm happy to do with proper professional trained discreet staff who follow due processes of accountability and responsibility to such information and myself) that I'm going to be in a minority of one. He can't help me, he isn't remotely in a position to do so. I'm not even sure that, were I referred as an ESA claimant (and I presume it would be the same random referral process - there's no specialist ESA provision as far as I know), it would be any different. This will be interesting to say the least because I'm certainly not going to be thrown in at the deep end like this!

EDIT: I rang Jobfit directly. They have verified that they indeed received the info from the referral pertaining to my mental health issues. They also said this is information that should be available to Employment Plus. It's all there for them to look at. So either something went tits up in the transmission of info, Employment Plus don't regard that information as being an issue and so just aren't considering it at all, or they are lying outright when they say they don't have it.

Programmed - And We're Already Having Problems

I have just had my 'courtesy call' from Employment Plus (that is to say Salvation Army Employment Plus, only they left out the first two words, curiously). Ok, I knew this was coming. So I'm aware that I have my appointment tomorrow morning, in fact I can't stop thinking about it. Such is the joy the WP instills in me.

I ask if they refund bus fares. I'm assured they do, on presentation of a proper bus ticket. Ok, that's fair enough.

I ask about how trained they are in mental health. Well....they don't know I have any such issues. So that's something they get to discover during the assessment process, so I don't get an actual answer as to whether this person, a youngish sounding gentleman that doesn't proffer a name, has any experience in dealing with such issues/people/problems I might have.

But it gets better, it turns out that I've been double booked. So not only did Jobfit not pass on my the issues that I told the JC to let them know about when they referred me, but that when I asked Jobfit if the appointments were one to one they meant, no instead of yes. I asked this specifically. But instead they've booked me at the same time as someone else. So that would be two people having to discuss personal issues of whatever depth seriousness or nature with the adviser in stereo with no regard for privacy or discretion. How on earth did Jobfit, or even Salvation Army Employment Plus, think that was going to work?

I specifically asked Jobfit to clarify this: I rang them straight back to confirm this after the appointment was booked.

Of course this adviser isn't much help. Either I have to turn up tomorrow and unless this can be mitigated (I'm hanging on the telephone - he's decided to contact Jobfit to clear this up as we speak) be seen with a complete stranger simultaneously while discussing such personal issues as mental health (it's a little different than here as well, since this is anonymous and thus discreet - and I don't have to give out my address, NiNo, and phone number, etc), or I have to rebook the appointment. I can't cope with that. I agreed an appointment and that's what I have to work with. It might be different if it was somewhere more local, but it's not. Never mind pissing around with bus times.

They just assume you're ok with this. Which implies that whatever issues you might have (that of course they aren't told about prior, so as to perhaps prepare for whatever needs a customer might have) mean nothing. That's the problem. It's a complete mess before we've even started, and I don't even know when this guy will phone back or what he will do - assuming he doesn't presume a course of action all on his own (again implying that my issues mean nothing). I'm on tenterhooks as it is. I don't need this, but why am I surprised if the prime doesn't even communicate properly with it's subcontractor!