A Universal Christmas Jobmatch

It’s Christmas Morning, 9am, what better time than this to check what’s on Universal Jobmatch.

Yes, I suppose this is a bit sad, but Christmas doesn’t mean much to me so I won’t be doing anything different today other than eat a roast dinner (something I do too little off all year round). I thought it might be amusing to run a wee experiment into the veracity of this god-awful site on the most unlikely day to apply for jobs. I shall log on early and check back during the day to see how much stuff gets uploaded (or appears to) and what the quality of these jobs seems to be. I read someone got sanctioned for not applying for jobs on Christmas so I thought, what better day to test the site.

Unfortunately we’re off to a rather depressing start as there seem to be 12 pages of jobs within 10 miles of me (if you set it any further it will be unmanageable) and dated (i.e. uploaded) today. By way of comparison yesterday was 3 pages at this time and the average seems to be about 5.

From the first page alone, most of the jobs come from ‘Company Confidential’ while the rest are ‘CV Library (Jobs Warehouse Only)’. Both of these I suspect are automated mail spam nonsense, though I have no idea for sure. I don’t know who owns or runs (or automates) these sources at all, that’s the problem – you are never given any information at all. Not even an employer name.

It’s only on page 4 that I find a different source: ‘Thistle rec’ (I think it’s meant to be a recruitment agency). That’s a name I don’t recognise. There are two jobs listed one is for a Deputy Manager. The advert is another appalling cut and paste job, evident by the faulty layout (no space after the full stops, which doesn’t make reading it easy). I Google a portion of the text and the job is actually in Scotland. That’s a lot more than 10 miles away. This is nothing new for Universal Jobmatch; good to see the site isn’t taking a break from being crap.

Another two vacancies from ‘CIT’ (I’ve no idea) are listed, including one for a ‘customer collections advisor – housing’ which is local, but closed on the 19^th. Why is it being listed today then, of all days? The advert links to another recruitment agency site ‘ukstaffsearch’, but if that’s the quality of their adverts what’s the point, and who are ‘CIT’?

One of the most annoying features of UJM is in how it continually seems to shuffle the adverts. When I click to load the next page of vacancies instead of actually doing that, a simple enough task, it seems to instead shuffle what’s already been seen and mix it with what you haven’t seen, like a broken ipod. Now I’m getting adverts on the page that I’ve already seen – that I’ve just looked at! How on earth is someone meant to navigate this nonsense? Given how generic most of these ads (e.g. ‘customer service operator’) are you have to assume they are different vacancies and so you waste your time clicking to find out it isn’t.

At this point a thirteenth page has been added to the total page count. It’s not even half past nine. I need breakfast. I am aware this may screw up this experiment as when I return to the site later I fully expect another bazillion pages to have been added and the whole thing to be shuffled the next time I click. It is two steps back for every step forward.

I return, having broken my fast and had a walk in the cold (at least it’s not raining). Now there are a total of 15 pages. Again it’s mostly ‘Company Confidential’. I’ve no idea why they would be confidential given that if you work for them surely you would have to know who’s paying your wages. Why does the DWP allow these employers (or more likely the agents brokering these supposed vacancies) to hide?

Most of the jobs do seem to be actually quite skilled or specific, for example there is an advert for a locum GP (the link is yet another agency website called ‘jobsball’ – maybe that’s an agency specifically for trained doctors). Again the UJM blurb is another cut and paste job. That makes me suspect it wasn’t submitted by the employer or even Jobsball. This means there must be people in the DWP trawling these sites and sticking stuff on – perhaps Santa Duncan Smith has a bunch of workfare elves slaving away over Christmas.

There are actually quite a few GP/locum jobs. Other adverts are for engineers and managers and nurses (there are lots of nursing homes round here). Surfing the site is becoming increasingly difficult due to the ‘shuffle’ problem above; I’ve now seen the ‘CIT’ jobs for a third time in as many pages. I’m about halfway through at this point. I’m already tired. Get a life.

About 8 pages in and there’s another source, something called ‘Adzuna’. But click the link and all Adzuna seems to do is redirect to another source, the agency hosting the link. However as we have seen before on UJM this source might not even be the first or original host for the link. It really is a hall of mirrors.

Another break while I explain all the vegetables I hate (HATE!) to my mother. I don’t like sprouts, or parsnips. Sprouts are evil little things and parsnips have fooled me into thinking they were yummy roast potatoes once too often. “Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice…you can’t get fooled again (thanks George).”

Needless to say a lot of these jobs are a mixture of vague ‘customer service’ positions (anything from call centre, sales, to retail, to just about anything), ‘trainee’ positions that are usually apprenticeships and low paid, or the eponymous catalogue distribution. It seems to be either badly advertised, poorly explained cut and paste jobs, and the high end stuff (such as the aforementioned locum position). There is no middle ground; no regular vacancies advertised sensibly. You must buy into the spiel (if you can read the ad); submit your personal details to websites you would never otherwise trust. Such as this, for example. It hardly looks like something reputable and I’ve seen worse. That position is also aimed at people aged 16-19; perhaps obvious when you think about it but since the UJM ad doesn’t mention this it’s possible anyone could be compelled to apply which would be stupid.

I have no idea who ‘company confidential’ are, or who hides behind that title or why they are allowed to. I don’t know what CV Library (Jobs Warehouse) means. Googling helps not one bit; there are so many recruitment websites, agencies and online pages, likely encompassing a wide range of quality and reliability, that it becomes an endless fractal. You click one link it takes you to another, and another and another. You search the web to find a source and it’s the same.

According to an FOI request ‘company confidential’ is to protect vulnerable groups. It allows them to advertise without giving details out, an example being someone looking to recruit home help without giving out who they are. I can understand that, but does that really apply to most of what is listed as ‘company confidential’? Surely it would be obvious from the nature of the vacancy or even the title. As such claimants cannot exempt themselves on the basis they don’t know to whom they are sending their details. For example, one advert says “Dream Medical are seeking a Consultant in Clinical Oncology for a client of ours in Bristol.”

That came from a Jobsball link as well. Thus, Jobsball are acting on behalf of ‘Dream Medical’ acting on behalf of a client unnamed. But that client is most likely to be a hospital of some kind, why the secrecy? I can’t imagine a vulnerable individual will be able to hire (or afford to hire) a cancer consultant!

I have a feeling I could be at this all day and I’m done. It’s Christmas Day, though obviously not somewhere in the DWP. It’s two o'clock, I’m hungry (cook woman, cook!), and I’ve looked at 15 pages of adverts all supposedly posted or uploaded on December 25^th 2013. Make of that what you will, happy Christmas!

Larry and Tarquin

This is the tale of two boys. We will call them Tarquin and Larry.

Tarquin and Larry never used to be friends; their families came from either side of the tracks, so to speak. But over the years they managed to find common ground. As the world got smaller they both began to recognise similar interests in acquiring as much pocket money as possible. It was a case of mutual self interest, rather than anything deeper or nobler. Over the years they became greedy.

Then, in 2008, they got caught stealing from a sweet shop. Both boys were culpable but Tarquin was lucky in that he was stood behind Larry when the shopkeeper came into the front of the shop from his office out back. Consequently he was able to pocket his candy without being noticed. At the same time as the shopkeeper saw what Larry was holding, catching him red handed, Tarquin stepped back and flung out his arm, finger pointing straight toward his friend: “it was him, sir!”

Larry, chastised and burning, confessed and set about paying back the shopkeeper. Unfortunately for Larry there had been a crime wave throughout town. All the other sweet shops, candy stores, and confectioners were being robbed as well. Larry felt so ashamed that he went to as many of them as he could; explaining himself he offered to help them. Again he was betrayed by his former friend; with the help of his wealthy and influential family Tarquin had blamed the robberies on Larry (even though Larry couldn’t be everywhere at once) and his family.

Sadly for Larry, his family had so admired Tarquin that even they began to question Larry. How could they ever trust him again? His friends turned away and people, upon meeting him, assumed the worst. If he’d done it once, they thought, surely he’d do it again.

But the biggest tragedy of all is that Larry now believes he was right to do what he did and that Tarquin’s way of living is an ideal worth striving for.

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to everyone kind enough to read and comment on my blog!

Dated

The day before an acquaintance I hadn’t seen for a while was telling me that his tribunal was successful. He has been placed into the support group for two years, which is a great result. I told him I was waiting to hear and that I could hear today, tomorrow the next few months. Turns out it was tomorrow; the next day I got my tribunal date through. I’m to be seen at the local magistrates court (apparently in one of the rooms within as the regular venue in Briustol is chock a block) on the 30^th. To say that I am apprehensive is to put it midlly.

A few weeks before I made a last ditch attempt to persuade my GP to write a letter supporting the problems I have. All he needed to do was write confirming what I’d told the CAB in respect of the WCA descriptors. This is the only language the system, and thus the appeal, will understand. He said that he would, after, again, another episde of me having to explain to him how it all works. What I got back was not what I consider to be particularly helopful. He has taken it upon himself to briefly say that I have some problems, mildly confirming some of what the CAB wanted, but also to go off and express his own feelings about the whole thing. Unfortunately and quite surprisingly the CAB passed this on to the tribunal (as they do for all supporting evidence). They say they can try and counter the negative stuff that’s on the letter (such as the GP saying he thinks I can work!) by referring to the positive stuff. Either way it won’t matter; what’s done is done.

In short, I don’t think I have a cat in hell’s chance of winning, but you never know. I’m not looiking to get into the support group. All I can do, assuming I don’t completely lose my shit on the day and have a massive anxiety attack (or have to share a waiting room with people waiting to be seen my magistrates for stealing cars or dealing crack or something), is point to the evidence that’s there. I think, from what I have presented even if tangentially, that I do have problems and they do affect me. The real question is whether these problems are recognised by the ESA system and to what degree. This has been the problem all along: am I ESA or JSA? I think I’m somewhere in between, but to the ‘anti-scrounger’ elite that, I fear, is just an excuse.

Curiously my friend managed to pass without the CAB’s help (his problems are not the same as mine, though they are also ‘mentally based’). He’s in the support group, but only temporarily. This further proves how the system is flawed. The argument has been that the WRAG is for people who ‘can work at some point in the future’, according to the doctors, while the Support group is for those that can’t due to incurable and chronic conditions. If someone is put into the Support group on a time limited basis, such as my friend, then how is that different to the WRAG? I will try and argue that ESA is there to support people – even if they ‘can work’ (though I’m not confident about this as I suspect it will seem highly precocious).

Time will tell. I can’t say I’m keen to sign on again.

The World According To Amazon

Amazon online; it all seemed so great.

A few years ago I wanted to use my Amazon account to try and make a living. I’d seen a few people in the unemployment support industry including the Shaw Trust, and a group called First Step (they are all called ‘step’ or something ‘step’). Nothing came of it other than vague promises of moral support, but no actual help getting anything off the ground (i.e. money, since stock doesn’t come free – unlike said moral support).

Perhaps that’s just as well as recent journalistic incursions into the secret world of Amazon’s elves paints a very grim picture. I still have my Amazon account and I had used it quite recently to sell a DVD. Unfortunately it’s the only game in town; like the big supermarket chains it has been allowed – even financially assisted – to creep into and take over our lives. In fact one o the reasons I liked using them was because I didn’t have to take my credit card details to other internet sites and increase the risk of fraud (though I have no idea how secure Amazon accounts are).

Now I wonder if it’s really worth supporting this company – even through third party sellers such as I had hoped to become. For instance, I can buy a second hand novel for pennies and postage. Amazon’s cut is around 20% so they aren’t making much from such sales at all, though they still make something. More importantly those are not orders that have to be picked by people run ragged in their appalling workhouses.

It shouldn’t be such a conundrum: anyone with any morality should realise, myself included, that this organisation is yet another corporate exploiter. They are clearly and obviously abusing staff. But convenience is such an aphrodisiac – where else can I legally acquire MP3 albums, even though Amazon charges a fortune for such things? How else can I offload books games and DVD’s I no longer want? I suppose that’s what charity shops are for.

I have wondered why charity shops don’t adopt a more business like regime, and actually buy stuff. Rather than rely on donations, they could pay a nominal fee – it doesn’t have to be much at all. That way they can attach a few stipulations, insisting, for example, sellers at least wash the clothes they intend to offload. This would also prevent people just dumping bin bags full of stuff (of any quality) outside the shop for the staff to pick up and sort through the next day. Given the perks and the profit margins charity shops enjoy I don’t see this as a problem.

But back to Amazon; we now have a society that is so compliant to the pseudo-Christian work ethic that anyone who shows even momentary reluctance to slave themselves into blistery skinned oblivion is permanently marked as indolent. Even if your reluctance is founded on genuine concerns of being able to cope with the insanity of the workload you’re told that other people manage – and patently they do so the question then becomes: why can’t you? The lad on the recent Panorama documentary walked 11 miles around the warehouse – and that was just one day’s night shift! It’s the mob mentality, the herd: don’t think you’re unique or special, if other people can slog their guts out then you can cope too, even if you actually can’t.

This is the race to the bottom. Amazon pays the minimum wage (a bit more for night shift work, graciously). In other words they are a company that doesn’t value workers and begrudgingly gives them a wage – as little as they are legally allowed to pay. This increasingly is the norm; those defending this system, like the CBI, will ask “why should we pay more than we have to?” just as their accountants do when avoiding tax. Something else Amazon excels at.

In fact I would suggest that Amazon is more focussed on minimising its responsibility to society than paying its staff a wage many I’m sure would feel more represents the dismal unremitting nature of the job. Meanwhile Amazon has benefited tremendously from society: enjoying tax breaks and massive state investment to ‘encourage’ them to come to places like south Wales where it has a cowed and responsive labour market, due to years of deprivation. This is capitalism in action: benefits for the rich and the powerful, insecurity and a dog eat dog world for the rest. Amazon’s corporate masters can command the taxes paid by society through the state, but contributes as little as possible.

This is all defended by the Tories who think that, just because they are an employer, everything they do is acceptable. Once the government thinks that, the media thinks that (or perhaps it’s vice versa), and once the media and the government are on the same page public thinking is shaped. Consequently people are given no choice but to apply to Amazon if they come to town. No one will examine the ethics of the company and because others are desperate enough to accept the terms of conditions of their modern slavery (and who knows, some might enjoy it) the rest will have to like it or lump it, even though some will simply not be able to cope. The price of capitalism is your body and soul and what do you have to show for it? How likely is it that any one Amazon workhouse employee will ever get a seat at the top table?