Skip to main content

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.

Comments

  1. There are too many questions about that story. First where did they ask these people Is it in the south, south east, or North east. Different regions have different problems. And check the date.. "Researchers looked at what happened to young people who started a work experience placement between January and May 2011" 4 Months in the previous scheme period. Then you have to ask Is it a TRUE voluntary scheme rather than the Enforced voluntary people are forced on. AND.. its a 16% rise from what to what.. is it 16% of 3490, about 450 people.. which means about 3000 didnt.. (its early so maths is gone for the moment)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. WP provision isn't based on anything logical or sensible. It's like feeding lions by just randomly throwing slabs of meat around without thought for whether all the animals get a meal. There are two primes within spitting distance of each other here, but here isn't local to me and none of them offer provision beyond the town in question. People in nearby rural pklaces, like me, lose out, even though there are facilities. It's perfectly clear that, at all levels, this scheme wasn' thought out at all. It's just about making money. This scheme could have been dreamed up by the teams on the Apprentice as one of their hair brained tasks.

      Delete
  2. Is it just me or is there a whiff of desperation about the DWP article?
    Gissajob

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. a 16% improvement in the chances after 5 months of unpaid work is hardly something to boast.

      What i suspect they did was compare 500 people on this scheme and 500 people not and decided that because 80 more people got employed (and that's the best case scenario, it might mean simply no longer on the claimant count) from the former found work it must be a success. It proves nothing: this is the government's flagship scheme and it can't possibly work within the system as it stands, mever mind the current economic mess.

      Delete
  3. A whiff.. it smells like a 3 week old fish left out in the sun with a blue cheese sauce..

    ReplyDelete
  4. Thanks for these posts Ghost Whistler - I wish I was in a position to do anything about the issues you highlight.

    Things look like they have changed little in the world of dole. Back in the 90's I attended a Job Club, where (surprise surprise), all the people who would have got a job without a Job Club got one anyway, whilst the others who wouldn't have got one anyway (surprise surprise), didn't.

    Surely not (gasp) a hidden detention centre function going on there?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Perhaps, but I don't even think it's that considered. I think it's just about profit. That's it. They offer as little as possible, selling as much of the service as they can to whoever is beneath them on the food chain.

      I've been to one of thos job clubs, back in the day, and I remember having to discuss 'positive sounding words'. It was like sesame street.

      Thanks for the comments.

      Delete
  5. "It's not you that's been made redundant, it's the job that was made redundant!" - that was the buzz phrase from the guy running the Restart course I was made to go on. An early example of "positive" thinking for the poor.

    "At least it's got you out of bed in the morning . . . " was one of this guy's other pearls of wisdom.

    Yawn, The League of Gentlemen's Pauline and her pens thing is as appropriate a skit as ever.

    Tell you what (dunno if this is still the case), the law states (or stated then) that for the first few months the first entry of occupation on the Jobseeker's Agreement is entirely the claimant's own choice. There was something of a local competition back then to see how good a job title you could get on your Jobseeker's Agreement. The hands down winner in our town was "Prophet".

    Zeppelin Builder might be worth a try.

    It was also rumoured that someone Up North got on the Enterprise Allowance Scheme as a Court Jester.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There are plenty of court jesters already, most of them are running the DWP.

      Delete

Post a Comment

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…

I Hate James Bartholomew

Know the Tory mindset: according to these creatures welfare breeds dependency. Meanwhile they do not want to set a minimum wage, they do not want to create legislation to protect the un - and under - employed from the predations of the system they benefit from. That word is chosen deliberately, because they like benefits for themselves - the ability to sack whom they like, when they like and how they like. In this UKIP are the same. This is the febrile heart of the right wing.
Yesterday on 5 Live's laughable morning phone in - bigots drink for free - another right wing excuse for a human, James Bartholomew, revealed another aspect of their nasty prejudice and staggering ignorance. Not surprisingly this vile creature was once a banker. He writes (if one can call it that) for the Telegraph and though I don't know the content of his ballot paper, I dare say I can guess. He props up every tory myth about the unemployed and welfare with dull witted aplomb.
He believes people have …

Still Going

I started this blog thinking I could do something useful, provide some decent citizen journalism, or at the very least offer something credible for, at the risk of stroking my own ego, posterity. But in truth I have found it very difficult to keep up with my own standards. This is true of all the writing I engage in. It isn't that I don't enjoy it, or that I don't know how (YMMV), but that I just struggle to maintain the concentration. This is part of the problem, mental health-wise, that I have tried to address in recent years; all to no avail. Unfortunately it is simply perceived as an excuse by our society. In response to that, I offer none. I am what I am, and if that means I'm lazy then lazy I must be.

I was due to have a WCA on the 7th; instead I rang and said I couldn't go through with it and that they could pursue whatever consequences they saw fit. Curiously they offered me the opportunity to postpone the interview, which I did, though I'm not sure why…