Benefit busters Shaw Trust C4 9.00pm

Post by Niteawk
What a fucking carry on eh. They admitted to ignoring peoples illness!
Now you see the point of the sham medical, they are forcing people with
serious injury and mental health problems to apply for work.
There is no way those people are going to get work. One of them could
not fill in an application form, another lad, semi literate at best was
expected to apply for office work. And an old boy 57 years old, ex
painter and decorator, who was barely able to walk after a dodgy foot
operation. What can he do? These people were manual workers, there is no
way in hell they are going to get work in admin type jobs. They havent
got the minerals.
I see the adviser for ST saying the council employs people with
disabilities, I suppose they do to be seen as politically correct, they
will also have one gay, one lesbian, one religious nut etc. Thats fine
for the council who we pay for out of taxes, but no employer, who is in
business and has to make profit, is going to hire people like that.
Now that I see there is a major problem with people who have
disabilities, why doesnt the JC's employ them? I have not seen any
people with disabilities working in my local JC. Kick the idle able
bodied fuckers out and let the disabled run our JC's.

I'm very disappointed at what Shaw Trust has let happen to themselves in
order to get funding. At one time they only saw people who voluntarily
chose to see them. As a result they had a high success rate in getting
people into work or training. Now they've become part of "the system"
and are one of the Government's "partners". Sleeping with the enemy it
used to be called. They are hardly impartial any more.

On a related note, it looks like A4e have thrown a hissy fit over their
portrayal in the episode shown last week. The first episode was on the
on demand service for Channel 4 (a bit like the BBC's iPlayer) for one
week and the programme was repeated on C4 a few days later. The second
programme, shown last week, was on the 4OD service for 24 hours then
pulled as was the repeat showing of the programme, C4 stating they
didn't have the rights any longer to show the programme. Word is Emma
Harrison in her magnificent mansion asked for the programme to be pulled
after her less than glorious appearance at the end...

Did anyone know that David Blunkett, he of ministerial, guide dog and
mistress-dumping-him fame, is paid £30,000 a year by A4e as a
parliamentary adviser?

m***@hotmail.com

2009-09-04 18:32:37 UTC

I'm very disappointed at what Shaw Trust has let happen to themselves in
order to get funding. At one time they only saw people who voluntarily
chose to see them. As a result they had a high success rate in getting
people into work or training. Now they've become part of "the system"
and are one of the Government's "partners". Sleeping with the enemy it
used to be called. They are hardly impartial any more.
On a related note, it looks like A4e have thrown a hissy fit over their
portrayal in the episode shown last week. The first episode was on the
on demand service for Channel 4 (a bit like the BBC's iPlayer) for one
week and the programme was repeated on C4 a few days later. The second
programme, shown last week, was on the 4OD service for 24 hours then
pulled as was the repeat showing of the programme, C4 stating they
didn't have the rights any longer to show the programme. Word is Emma
Harrison in her magnificent mansion asked for the programme to be pulled
after her less than glorious appearance at the end...
Did anyone know that David Blunkett, he of ministerial, guide dog and
mistress-dumping-him fame, is paid £30,000 a year by A4e as a
parliamentary adviser?- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

Groups can either be part of the system or on the outside watching in
while someone else is part of the system, someone that perhaps screws
things up and doesn't subsidise the government.
Its only a minority of charities that rely on government contracts for
a good chunk of their income. Mainly social care but dealing with
helping people back to work or to a point where they can consider work
is a growing area.
Depending on the contract, depending on the whim of government about
whether something should be voluntary, imposed or mandatory,
determines the resources including the people being helped.
Not suprisingly its easier to help someone who wants help than someone
there just to satisfy a tick box.

You could leave A4e to do it all if you wanted, but for helping
disabled I'd prefer the expertise of the Shaw Trust myself.

Martin <><

Robbie

2009-09-04 19:07:33 UTC

I'm very disappointed at what Shaw Trust has let happen to themselves in
order to get funding. At one time they only saw people who voluntarily
chose to see them. As a result they had a high success rate in getting
people into work or training. Now they've become part of "the system"
and are one of the Government's "partners". Sleeping with the enemy it
used to be called. They are hardly impartial any more.
On a related note, it looks like A4e have thrown a hissy fit over their
portrayal in the episode shown last week. The first episode was on the
on demand service for Channel 4 (a bit like the BBC's iPlayer) for one
week and the programme was repeated on C4 a few days later. The second
programme, shown last week, was on the 4OD service for 24 hours then
pulled as was the repeat showing of the programme, C4 stating they
didn't have the rights any longer to show the programme. Word is Emma
Harrison in her magnificent mansion asked for the programme to be pulled
after her less than glorious appearance at the end...
Did anyone know that David Blunkett, he of ministerial, guide dog and
mistress-dumping-him fame, is paid £30,000 a year by A4e as a
parliamentary adviser?- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

Groups can either be part of the system or on the outside watching in
while someone else is part of the system, someone that perhaps screws
things up and doesn't subsidise the government.
Its only a minority of charities that rely on government contracts for
a good chunk of their income. Mainly social care but dealing with
helping people back to work or to a point where they can consider work
is a growing area.
Depending on the contract, depending on the whim of government about
whether something should be voluntary, imposed or mandatory,
determines the resources including the people being helped.
Not suprisingly its easier to help someone who wants help than someone
there just to satisfy a tick box.
You could leave A4e to do it all if you wanted, but for helping
disabled I'd prefer the expertise of the Shaw Trust myself.
Martin <><

So would I - but I'd want Shaw Trust to do it on their own terms and not
on payment by results, which just encourages a conveyor belt approach to
helping the disabled. It doesn't help the organisation tailor make help
to the individual which is what they used to (be able to) do.

Like yourself, in the past I've been helped by Shaw Trust and found them
to be very helpful to the point they helped me back into work after a
period of having health problems. That was a few years ago, and since
then I've always recommended them to other people but this now puts a
whole new complexion on things...

Niteawk

2009-09-04 20:36:32 UTC

I'm very disappointed at what Shaw Trust has let happen to themselves in
order to get funding. At one time they only saw people who voluntarily
chose to see them. As a result they had a high success rate in getting
people into work or training. Now they've become part of "the system"
and are one of the Government's "partners". Sleeping with the enemy it
used to be called. They are hardly impartial any more.
On a related note, it looks like A4e have thrown a hissy fit over their
portrayal in the episode shown last week. The first episode was on the
on demand service for Channel 4 (a bit like the BBC's iPlayer) for one
week and the programme was repeated on C4 a few days later. The second
programme, shown last week, was on the 4OD service for 24 hours then
pulled as was the repeat showing of the programme, C4 stating they
didn't have the rights any longer to show the programme. Word is Emma
Harrison in her magnificent mansion asked for the programme to be pulled
after her less than glorious appearance at the end...
Did anyone know that David Blunkett, he of ministerial, guide dog and
mistress-dumping-him fame, is paid £30,000 a year by A4e as a
parliamentary adviser?- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

snip,
You could leave A4e to do it all if you wanted, but for helping
disabled I'd prefer the expertise of the Shaw Trust myself.

Martin <><

More shite, the people I saw on that program were not fit to work. Unless
you can find them a job that involves no work, then forget about it. Move
on, there are plenty of healthy people who need jobs, leave the sick alone.
Fucking maniacs.

m***@hotmail.com

2009-09-05 07:54:17 UTC

I'm very disappointed at what Shaw Trust has let happen to themselves in
order to get funding. At one time they only saw people who voluntarily
chose to see them. As a result they had a high success rate in getting
people into work or training. Now they've become part of "the system"
and are one of the Government's "partners". Sleeping with the enemy it
used to be called. They are hardly impartial any more.
On a related note, it looks like A4e have thrown a hissy fit over their
portrayal in the episode shown last week. The first episode was on the
on demand service for Channel 4 (a bit like the BBC's iPlayer) for one
week and the programme was repeated on C4 a few days later. The second
programme, shown last week, was on the 4OD service for 24 hours then
pulled as was the repeat showing of the programme, C4 stating they
didn't have the rights any longer to show the programme. Word is Emma
Harrison in her magnificent mansion asked for the programme to be pulled
after her less than glorious appearance at the end...
Did anyone know that David Blunkett, he of ministerial, guide dog and
mistress-dumping-him fame, is paid £30,000 a year by A4e as a
parliamentary adviser?- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

snip,
You could leave A4e to do it all if you wanted, but for helping
disabled I'd prefer the expertise of the Shaw Trust myself.
Martin <><
More shite, the people I saw on that program were not fit to work. Unless
you can find them a job that involves no work, then forget about it. Move
on, there are plenty of healthy people who need jobs, leave the sick alone.
Fucking maniacs.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

Oh, so you used your medical qualifications and examined them
yourself?
Get real - you cannot possibly know if they were fit to work.

Just because someone is sick or disabled doesn't mean they get chucked
on the scrap heap, never to work again.
I've met plenty of sick and disabled people who work. You cannot say
someone is fit to work or not, the best person to know will be
themselves.
And employers these days are able to make reasonable adjustments in
the workplace.

Martin <><

Niteawk

2009-09-04 20:37:51 UTC

Post by Niteawk
What a fucking carry on eh. They admitted to ignoring peoples illness!
Now you see the point of the sham medical, they are forcing people with
serious injury and mental health problems to apply for work.
There is no way those people are going to get work. One of them could not
fill in an application form, another lad, semi literate at best was
expected to apply for office work. And an old boy 57 years old, ex
painter and decorator, who was barely able to walk after a dodgy foot
operation. What can he do? These people were manual workers, there is no
way in hell they are going to get work in admin type jobs. They havent
got the minerals.
I see the adviser for ST saying the council employs people with
disabilities, I suppose they do to be seen as politically correct, they
will also have one gay, one lesbian, one religious nut etc. Thats fine
for the council who we pay for out of taxes, but no employer, who is in
business and has to make profit, is going to hire people like that.
Now that I see there is a major problem with people who have
disabilities, why doesnt the JC's employ them? I have not seen any people
with disabilities working in my local JC. Kick the idle able bodied
fuckers out and let the disabled run our JC's.

They probably saw Emma's mansion and decided that was the way to go.

Post by Robbie
On a related note, it looks like A4e have thrown a hissy fit over their
portrayal in the episode shown last week. The first episode was on the on
demand service for Channel 4 (a bit like the BBC's iPlayer) for one week
and the programme was repeated on C4 a few days later. The second
programme, shown last week, was on the 4OD service for 24 hours then
pulled as was the repeat showing of the programme, C4 stating they didn't
have the rights any longer to show the programme. Word is Emma Harrison in
her magnificent mansion asked for the programme to be pulled after her
less than glorious appearance at the end...

The powers that be do not want the public to know that they are wasting
billions of tax payers cash on mindless crap. Most ordinary people think
that there is training available for the unemployed, imagine what they would
think if no training was being done, which there isnt, certainly not by A4e.
Making the likes of Emma Harrison into a billionaire for doing fuck all. I
dont think the tax payer would be to happy about that. The government could
come under fire again, only this time they would have to explain why they
are wasting billions on nothing, and why some of them are being paid by Emma
Harrison, which is another way of helping themselves to yet more taxpayers
money.

Post by Robbie
Did anyone know that David Blunkett, he of ministerial, guide dog and
mistress-dumping-him fame, is paid £30,000 a year by A4e as a
parliamentary adviser?#

Yes, and did you also know that he was instrumental in giving A4e many of
the contracts they now have. Bent as fuck the lot of them.

Robbie

2009-09-04 20:58:28 UTC

Post by Niteawk
What a fucking carry on eh. They admitted to ignoring peoples
illness! Now you see the point of the sham medical, they are forcing
people with serious injury and mental health problems to apply for work.
There is no way those people are going to get work. One of them could
not fill in an application form, another lad, semi literate at best
was expected to apply for office work. And an old boy 57 years old,
ex painter and decorator, who was barely able to walk after a dodgy
foot operation. What can he do? These people were manual workers,
there is no way in hell they are going to get work in admin type
jobs. They havent got the minerals.
I see the adviser for ST saying the council employs people with
disabilities, I suppose they do to be seen as politically correct,
they will also have one gay, one lesbian, one religious nut etc.
Thats fine for the council who we pay for out of taxes, but no
employer, who is in business and has to make profit, is going to hire
people like that.
Now that I see there is a major problem with people who have
disabilities, why doesnt the JC's employ them? I have not seen any
people with disabilities working in my local JC. Kick the idle able
bodied fuckers out and let the disabled run our JC's.

They probably saw Emma's mansion and decided that was the way to go.

Post by Robbie
On a related note, it looks like A4e have thrown a hissy fit over
their portrayal in the episode shown last week. The first episode was
on the on demand service for Channel 4 (a bit like the BBC's iPlayer)
for one week and the programme was repeated on C4 a few days later.
The second programme, shown last week, was on the 4OD service for 24
hours then pulled as was the repeat showing of the programme, C4
stating they didn't have the rights any longer to show the programme.
Word is Emma Harrison in her magnificent mansion asked for the
programme to be pulled after her less than glorious appearance at the
end...

The powers that be do not want the public to know that they are wasting
billions of tax payers cash on mindless crap. Most ordinary people think
that there is training available for the unemployed, imagine what they
would think if no training was being done, which there isnt, certainly
not by A4e. Making the likes of Emma Harrison into a billionaire for
doing fuck all. I dont think the tax payer would be to happy about that.
The government could come under fire again, only this time they would
have to explain why they are wasting billions on nothing, and why some
of them are being paid by Emma Harrison, which is another way of helping
themselves to yet more taxpayers money.

Post by Robbie
Did anyone know that David Blunkett, he of ministerial, guide dog and
mistress-dumping-him fame, is paid £30,000 a year by A4e as a
parliamentary adviser?#

Yes, and did you also know that he was instrumental in giving A4e many
of the contracts they now have. Bent as fuck the lot of them.

That's an unprovable aspersion you are casting there young Mr Niteawk...
like Emma, he's a fine upstanding citizen of Sheffield! I wonder how
many nights he's spent at her mansion - it looks like Blunkett decorated
it...

Niteawk

2009-09-04 22:02:54 UTC

Post by Niteawk
What a fucking carry on eh. They admitted to ignoring peoples illness!
Now you see the point of the sham medical, they are forcing people with
serious injury and mental health problems to apply for work.
There is no way those people are going to get work. One of them could
not fill in an application form, another lad, semi literate at best was
expected to apply for office work. And an old boy 57 years old, ex
painter and decorator, who was barely able to walk after a dodgy foot
operation. What can he do? These people were manual workers, there is
no way in hell they are going to get work in admin type jobs. They
havent got the minerals.
I see the adviser for ST saying the council employs people with
disabilities, I suppose they do to be seen as politically correct, they
will also have one gay, one lesbian, one religious nut etc. Thats fine
for the council who we pay for out of taxes, but no employer, who is in
business and has to make profit, is going to hire people like that.
Now that I see there is a major problem with people who have
disabilities, why doesnt the JC's employ them? I have not seen any
people with disabilities working in my local JC. Kick the idle able
bodied fuckers out and let the disabled run our JC's.

They probably saw Emma's mansion and decided that was the way to go.

Post by Robbie
On a related note, it looks like A4e have thrown a hissy fit over their
portrayal in the episode shown last week. The first episode was on the
on demand service for Channel 4 (a bit like the BBC's iPlayer) for one
week and the programme was repeated on C4 a few days later. The second
programme, shown last week, was on the 4OD service for 24 hours then
pulled as was the repeat showing of the programme, C4 stating they
didn't have the rights any longer to show the programme. Word is Emma
Harrison in her magnificent mansion asked for the programme to be pulled
after her less than glorious appearance at the end...

The powers that be do not want the public to know that they are wasting
billions of tax payers cash on mindless crap. Most ordinary people think
that there is training available for the unemployed, imagine what they
would think if no training was being done, which there isnt, certainly
not by A4e. Making the likes of Emma Harrison into a billionaire for
doing fuck all. I dont think the tax payer would be to happy about that.
The government could come under fire again, only this time they would
have to explain why they are wasting billions on nothing, and why some of
them are being paid by Emma Harrison, which is another way of helping
themselves to yet more taxpayers money.

Post by Robbie
Did anyone know that David Blunkett, he of ministerial, guide dog and
mistress-dumping-him fame, is paid £30,000 a year by A4e as a
parliamentary adviser?#

Yes, and did you also know that he was instrumental in giving A4e many of
the contracts they now have. Bent as fuck the lot of them.

That's an unprovable aspersion you are casting there young Mr Niteawk...
like Emma, he's a fine upstanding citizen of Sheffield! I wonder how many
nights he's spent at her mansion - it looks like Blunkett decorated it...

Hardly unprovable, unbelievable maybe, fucking astounding even. Why the
media has not picked up on it, I will never know. He was one of many
involved with the tendering process for government contracts. It is mear
coincidence that he got a job as consultant to A4e when he didnt even know
the job existed.

Maybe we should believe that Blunkett did not have any work to do as a
minister, so he decided to get himself a job which just happened to be with
a company he awarded contracts to.

I cant think of a good excuse, maybe you have to have your hands in the
public purse for a very long time to come up with the best excuses, "we are
endeavouring to help the most disadvantaged in society", "we are lifting
people out of poverty", "the figures never lie", "the initial feedback is
good". "It has nothing to do with me, I do not work with that woman" "I have
never laid eyes on her before". "Just because my dog knows where she lives,
proves nothing".

m***@hotmail.com

2009-09-04 18:25:00 UTC

Post by Niteawk
What a fucking carry on eh. They admitted to ignoring peoples illness! Now
you see the point of the sham medical, they are forcing people with serious
injury and mental health problems to apply for work.
There is no way those people are going to get work. One of them could not
fill in an application form, another lad, semi literate at best was expected
to apply for office work. And an old boy 57 years old, ex painter and
decorator, who was barely able to walk after a dodgy foot operation. What
can he do? These people were manual workers, there is no way in hell they
are going to get work in admin type jobs. They havent got the minerals.
I see the adviser for ST saying the council employs people with
disabilities, I suppose they do to be seen as politically correct, they will
also have one gay, one lesbian, one religious nut etc. Thats fine for the
council who we pay for out of taxes, but no employer, who is in business and
has to make profit, is going to hire people like that.
Now that I see there is a major problem with people who have disabilities,
why doesnt the JC's employ them? I have not seen any people with
disabilities working in my local JC. Kick the idle able bodied fuckers out
and let the disabled run our JC's.

So you expect manual workers to be unable to do admin jobs? Sheesh,
you really want people thrown on the scrapheap don't you?

And a council employing people with disabilities? Oh, just like every
other employer can then. Employers tend to take more of a risk with
someone who is disabled but its not usually a massive risk.
Its harder for someone with a disability to get a job, not impossible
though.

You know, I think you'd be perfect working in a JC. After all, by your
own account you have mental health issues.
It would suit you - and starting pay is above minimum wage.

Martin <><

Niteawk

2009-09-06 13:31:15 UTC

Post by Niteawk
What a fucking carry on eh. They admitted to ignoring peoples illness! Now
you see the point of the sham medical, they are forcing people with serious
injury and mental health problems to apply for work.
There is no way those people are going to get work. One of them could not
fill in an application form, another lad, semi literate at best was expected
to apply for office work. And an old boy 57 years old, ex painter and
decorator, who was barely able to walk after a dodgy foot operation. What
can he do? These people were manual workers, there is no way in hell they
are going to get work in admin type jobs. They havent got the minerals.
I see the adviser for ST saying the council employs people with
disabilities, I suppose they do to be seen as politically correct, they will
also have one gay, one lesbian, one religious nut etc. Thats fine for the
council who we pay for out of taxes, but no employer, who is in business and
has to make profit, is going to hire people like that.
Now that I see there is a major problem with people who have
disabilities,
why doesnt the JC's employ them? I have not seen any people with
disabilities working in my local JC. Kick the idle able bodied fuckers out
and let the disabled run our JC's.

So you expect manual workers to be unable to do admin jobs? Sheesh,
you really want people thrown on the scrapheap don't you?
And a council employing people with disabilities? Oh, just like every
other employer can then. Employers tend to take more of a risk with
someone who is disabled but its not usually a massive risk.
Its harder for someone with a disability to get a job, not impossible
though.
You know, I think you'd be perfect working in a JC. After all, by your
own account you have mental health issues.
It would suit you - and starting pay is above minimum wage.

You and the idiots like you at Shaw Trust are the ones with mental issues if
you think semi literate manual labourers are suitable to do admin office
work. To suggest they can have academic skills or gain these skills, is like
saying they are suitable to become doctors, surgeons, accountants or
solicitors, which is ridiculous. Manual labour types have not got the
educational background needed for that type of work.

Even the JC finds it unacceptaple for manual labours to apply for admin
office work. When I done that to meet my quota of applications as per my
JSAg, they were adamant that no unskilled labourer can do office type work.
This is what led to me being sanctioned 3 times.

So the JC also thinks it is impossible for manual workers to get admin
office work. They classed it as being the same as not applying for jobs. And
that was without being on the sick. TBH I knew I wasnt going to get those
jobs either, but I had to apply for 2 jobs per week, any 2 jobs. AFAIWC I
met my target to get JSA.

I have already tried and tested the ridiculous notion that manual labourers
can get office work, for the last 10 years.

If I must face another mindless course, where they tell me I can do anything
or be anything I want. I am going to go the whole hog and see if they will
support me in becoming a brain surgeon ;)

Mike

2009-09-06 16:06:14 UTC

Post by Niteawk
What a fucking carry on eh. They admitted to ignoring peoples illness! Now
you see the point of the sham medical, they are forcing people with serious
injury and mental health problems to apply for work.
There is no way those people are going to get work. One of them could not
fill in an application form, another lad, semi literate at best was expected
to apply for office work. And an old boy 57 years old, ex painter and
decorator, who was barely able to walk after a dodgy foot operation. What
can he do? These people were manual workers, there is no way in hell they
are going to get work in admin type jobs. They havent got the minerals.
I see the adviser for ST saying the council employs people with
disabilities, I suppose they do to be seen as politically correct, they will
also have one gay, one lesbian, one religious nut etc. Thats fine for the
council who we pay for out of taxes, but no employer, who is in business and
has to make profit, is going to hire people like that.
Now that I see there is a major problem with people who have
disabilities,
why doesnt the JC's employ them? I have not seen any people with
disabilities working in my local JC. Kick the idle able bodied fuckers out
and let the disabled run our JC's.

So you expect manual workers to be unable to do admin jobs? Sheesh,
you really want people thrown on the scrapheap don't you?
And a council employing people with disabilities? Oh, just like every
other employer can then. Employers tend to take more of a risk with
someone who is disabled but its not usually a massive risk.
Its harder for someone with a disability to get a job, not impossible
though.
You know, I think you'd be perfect working in a JC. After all, by your
own account you have mental health issues.
It would suit you - and starting pay is above minimum wage.

I dare say most manual workers would resent being considered semi
literate. Sure I daresay some are and they were attracted to a job that
required a low level of literacy but I know lot's of manual labourers
who are very literate.

Most 'admin work' needs a few mediocre GCSE/O marks, even when
qualifications are asked for. Many do not even ask for qualifications
as someone getting a GCSE ten years ago does not demonstrate an aptitude
for call centre or other admin work.

Most large employers (inc the DWP) use testing and even roleplay for
low end admin jobs recruitment.

Mike

Niteawk

2009-09-06 17:39:59 UTC

Post by Mike

Post by Niteawk
What a fucking carry on eh. They admitted to ignoring peoples illness! Now
you see the point of the sham medical, they are forcing people with serious
injury and mental health problems to apply for work.
There is no way those people are going to get work. One of them could not
fill in an application form, another lad, semi literate at best was expected
to apply for office work. And an old boy 57 years old, ex painter and
decorator, who was barely able to walk after a dodgy foot operation. What
can he do? These people were manual workers, there is no way in hell they
are going to get work in admin type jobs. They havent got the minerals.
I see the adviser for ST saying the council employs people with
disabilities, I suppose they do to be seen as politically correct, they will
also have one gay, one lesbian, one religious nut etc. Thats fine for the
council who we pay for out of taxes, but no employer, who is in business and
has to make profit, is going to hire people like that.
Now that I see there is a major problem with people who have disabilities,
why doesnt the JC's employ them? I have not seen any people with
disabilities working in my local JC. Kick the idle able bodied fuckers out
and let the disabled run our JC's.

So you expect manual workers to be unable to do admin jobs? Sheesh,
you really want people thrown on the scrapheap don't you?
And a council employing people with disabilities? Oh, just like every
other employer can then. Employers tend to take more of a risk with
someone who is disabled but its not usually a massive risk.
Its harder for someone with a disability to get a job, not impossible
though.
You know, I think you'd be perfect working in a JC. After all, by your
own account you have mental health issues.
It would suit you - and starting pay is above minimum wage.

I dare say most manual workers would resent being considered semi
literate.

But the fact is they are semi literate, and freely admitted to that on
Benefit Busters, the only resentment shown was against being asked to apply
for jobs they did not have the skills to do. Jobs they know for a fact that
they cant get. As the young lad with the bad back stated, "how can I go to
college to learn when I couldnt do it at school" He was not capable of
learning because he failed at school. If you expect people like him to
learn, he has to start from scratch, and sit the exams. Then he can think
about going to college.

Sure I daresay some are and they were attracted to a job that

Post by Mike
required a low level of literacy but I know lot's of manual labourers who
are very literate.

Here we go again with the I know lots of people who can do everything. I
know lots of people who get paid for doing fuck all. These are not the same
people being forced off sickness with metal rods proping their spines up.
Semi literate warehouse labourers.

Post by Mike
Most 'admin work' needs a few mediocre GCSE/O marks, even when
qualifications are asked for. Many do not even ask for qualifications as
someone getting a GCSE ten years ago does not demonstrate an aptitude for
call centre or other admin work.

Yes, I am sure if you peddle this BS for long enough you will start to
believe it yourself. In laymans terms it is called moving the goal posts,
the purpose of which is to kick seriously ill people off the sick. All of a
sudden qualifications or skills do not matter. Try telling that to
employers. Make it illegal to refuse jobs on that basis. Then I might
believe you myself. The Shaw Trust has done a complete U turn compared to
the other course providers inc the JC/ND because their goal is get people
off the sick, not into work as the program suggested. That is how they are
making money, they wouldnt make any money at all if the had to get people
into paying jobs they cant do.

Post by Mike
Most large employers (inc the DWP) use testing and even roleplay for low
end admin jobs recruitment.

That is the government for you, no connection with the real world of
employment. They can and do fanny about all the time, they are not paying
for it. Real employers do not have a bottomless pit of taxpayers money at
their disposal, they have to work for a living, they cant afford to take on
mentally ill cripples not capable of walking properly or lifting.

The only good thing I can see coming out of this is, none of the twits at
the JC can ever question my choice of jobs again, and if I want to apply for
skilled jobs, even though I have no skills, they cant really argue with
that. But knowing them they will still force their bent jobseekers agreement
on me. If I dont sign it, benefit stops. What a great system.

Mike

2009-09-06 19:26:13 UTC

Post by Niteawk
What a fucking carry on eh. They admitted to ignoring peoples illness! Now
you see the point of the sham medical, they are forcing people with serious
injury and mental health problems to apply for work.
There is no way those people are going to get work. One of them could not
fill in an application form, another lad, semi literate at best was expected
to apply for office work. And an old boy 57 years old, ex painter and
decorator, who was barely able to walk after a dodgy foot
operation. What
can he do? These people were manual workers, there is no way in hell they
are going to get work in admin type jobs. They havent got the minerals.
I see the adviser for ST saying the council employs people with
disabilities, I suppose they do to be seen as politically correct, they will
also have one gay, one lesbian, one religious nut etc. Thats fine for the
council who we pay for out of taxes, but no employer, who is in business and
has to make profit, is going to hire people like that.
Now that I see there is a major problem with people who have disabilities,
why doesnt the JC's employ them? I have not seen any people with
disabilities working in my local JC. Kick the idle able bodied fuckers out
and let the disabled run our JC's.

So you expect manual workers to be unable to do admin jobs? Sheesh,
you really want people thrown on the scrapheap don't you?
And a council employing people with disabilities? Oh, just like every
other employer can then. Employers tend to take more of a risk with
someone who is disabled but its not usually a massive risk.
Its harder for someone with a disability to get a job, not impossible
though.
You know, I think you'd be perfect working in a JC. After all, by your
own account you have mental health issues.
It would suit you - and starting pay is above minimum wage.

I dare say most manual workers would resent being considered semi
literate.

But the fact is they are semi literate, and freely admitted to that on
Benefit Busters, the only resentment shown was against being asked to
apply for jobs they did not have the skills to do. Jobs they know for a
fact that they cant get. As the young lad with the bad back stated, "how
can I go to college to learn when I couldnt do it at school" He was not
capable of learning because he failed at school. If you expect people
like him to learn, he has to start from scratch, and sit the exams. Then
he can think about going to college.
Sure I daresay some are and they were attracted to a job that

Post by Mike
required a low level of literacy but I know lot's of manual labourers
who are very literate.

Here we go again with the I know lots of people who can do everything. I
know lots of people who get paid for doing fuck all. These are not the
same people being forced off sickness with metal rods proping their
spines up. Semi literate warehouse labourers.

In my office we have a wheelchair user and half a dozen people using
canes and crutches to walk. There are then various other less visible
ailments such as severe to mild respiratory illnesses, high blood
pressure, low blood pressure, at least one person with IBS and who knows
how many bad backs. Various stress related illnesses, some caused
working for the DWP but many caused by outside factors. All manage to
work, maybe some employers would not accommodate the reasonable
adjustments the DWP make in some cases but the majority would be or
their employer would be staring down the wrong end of an expensive DDA
emp trib they would be sure to lose.

I'm not saying everyone on IB/ESA could work even if they wanted to, but
I bet lots could.

Maybe their body is no longer upto manual labour but does that mean the
taxpayer should fund a life of leisure for the next 30 or 40 years when
they could do less physically demanding work? Enhancing their literacy
would not only widen the jobs they could go for but it would be life
enhancing, being able to read the paper, a magazine or even an
instruction manual.

Post by Mike
Most 'admin work' needs a few mediocre GCSE/O marks, even when
qualifications are asked for. Many do not even ask for qualifications
as someone getting a GCSE ten years ago does not demonstrate an
aptitude for call centre or other admin work.

Yes, I am sure if you peddle this BS for long enough you will start to
believe it yourself. In laymans terms it is called moving the goal
posts, the purpose of which is to kick seriously ill people off the
sick. All of a sudden qualifications or skills do not matter. Try
telling that to employers. Make it illegal to refuse jobs on that basis.
Then I might believe you myself. The Shaw Trust has done a complete U
turn compared to the other course providers inc the JC/ND because their
goal is get people off the sick, not into work as the program suggested.
That is how they are making money, they wouldnt make any money at all if
the had to get people into paying jobs they cant do.

Just because you have disabilities it doesn't mean you can't work.
Governments over the last few years have put discrimination legislation
into place requiring employers to make reasonable adjustments to allow
people with disabilities (most of which many people would not consider
disabilities) to work. Believe or not most people protected by the DDA
want to work.

Unfortunately for you (or is it) being lazy and shiftless is not covered
by the DDA.

Post by Mike
Most large employers (inc the DWP) use testing and even roleplay for
low end admin jobs recruitment.

Actually the concept of testing and even role play in recruitment was
lifted from private companies. TBH we do get staff more able and better
prepared for the job that awaits them than we used to relying on
qualifications alone.

Would you rather judge a builder by his work or by his NVQ he got from
college last year?

Post by Niteawk
The only good thing I can see coming out of this is, none of the twits
at the JC can ever question my choice of jobs again, and if I want to
apply for skilled jobs, even though I have no skills, they cant really
argue with that. But knowing them they will still force their bent
jobseekers agreement on me. If I dont sign it, benefit stops. What a
great system.

Niteawk, I pity any employer who took you on, from day one they would be
looking to get rid of you with as little fuss as possible.

For the sake of the UK economy it's better for you to stay on ESA or
JSA, however the least you could do is jump through the effing hoops
when told and STFU. I guarantee you have far fewer hoops to jump
through than most people have to at work.

Mike

m***@hotmail.com

2009-09-06 21:42:05 UTC

On 6 Sep, 20:26, Mike <***@googlemail.com>
wrote:
<snipped>

Post by Mike
Niteawk, I pity any employer who took you on, from day one they would be
looking to get rid of you with as little fuss as possible.
For the sake of the UK economy it's better for you to stay on ESA or
JSA, however the least you could do is jump through the effing hoops
when told and STFU. I guarantee you have far fewer hoops to jump
through than most people have to at work.
Mike- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

Niteawk

2009-09-07 13:57:34 UTC

<***@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:3c378328-e673-4a3d-bbf3-***@l13g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
On 6 Sep, 20:26, Mike <***@googlemail.com>
wrote:
<snipped>

Yes, he seems to put more effort into not working than most put into
working.
While he may choose to remain on unemployment or sickness benefits,
with whatever hoops he has to jump through to remain on those
benefits, he can't make that choice for others.

Government spends billions of pounds each year on adult education,
many millions is spent advertising it, but he won't use it because its
not compulsory. If it was complulsory he'd only complain about it and
try his best to avoid doing it.
The world operates as it is, not as he would want it and he can't cope
with that. I pity him.

Martin <><

We know you live in your own little world where everything is the exact
opposite. The imaginary billions. I say imaginary because it would make
headline news if the government spent billions on adult education.

I was listening to a consumer program about 2 weeks ago, where adults could
not get on courses because the government wants colleges to train up more
young people. So the oldies were naturally upset by this, considered it to
be age discrimination. Any course of value to getting work, like plumbing,
was always fully booked by youngsters. Even though older people attended the
vetting process, they were not selected to go on the course, only the
youngest were being selected. It was after the threat of a law suit for age
discrimination, and I dare say the unwanted publicity on radio, the college
agreed to give a place to an older student (47 years old) on the next course
they run.

I tried for 6 years to get on a plumbing course in my area. They do not
advertise them well in advance any more because to many people apply, so
they advertise for about 2 weeks, even with that short exposure they still
get innundated. No compulsory or mandatory shite needed here.

Plenty of basket weaving, beauty and knitting courses though, no shortage of
crap like that. They will take anyone they can get. A bit like A4e and Shaw
Trust in that respect.

m***@hotmail.com

2009-09-07 14:26:09 UTC

On 7 Sep, 14:57, "Niteawk" <***@btinternet.com> wrote:
<snipped>

Post by Niteawk
We know you live in your own little world where everything is the exact
opposite. The imaginary billions. I say imaginary because it would make
headline news if the government spent billions on adult education.
I was listening to a consumer program about 2 weeks ago, where adults could
not get on courses because the government wants colleges to train up more
young people. So the oldies were naturally upset by this, considered it to
be age discrimination. Any course of value to getting work, like plumbing,
was always fully booked by youngsters. Even though older people attended the
vetting process, they were not selected to go on the course, only the
youngest were being selected. It was after the threat of a law suit for age
discrimination, and I dare say the unwanted publicity on radio, the college
agreed to give a place to an older student (47 years old) on the next course
they run.
I tried for 6 years to get on a plumbing course in my area. They do not
advertise them well in advance any more because to many people apply, so
they advertise for about 2 weeks, even with that short exposure they still
get innundated. No compulsory or mandatory shite needed here.
Plenty of basket weaving, beauty and knitting courses though, no shortage of
crap like that. They will take anyone they can get. A bit like A4e and Shaw
Trust in that respect.

Look at an organisation called the Learning and Skills Council - you
often see their logo on college and training provider materials.
Budget is above £10 billion.
Thats one body, there are others.

Government spending billions on adult education isn't news, its simply
what has been going on for DECADES!
Funny how you hear about young people being given priority on courses.
Could this be in response to so many older people being given priority
on degree courses this year perhaps? Last I heard, mature students had
applied to university in record numbers.
And I didn't even have to show my A levels to get in.

Not sure how you consider only some courses of value to getting work.
I'd have said offhand that a degree in social work, an MPharm for
pharmacy or some of the teaching qualifications were of use too - but
done through university, not college level.
I honestly can't believe you've had trouble getting on a plumbing
course. I'd have thought it was too much like work for you.
Sure you applied? Sure you didn't just wait to be offered the course?
As I said, I pity you.

Martin <><

Niteawk

2009-09-07 14:37:35 UTC

<***@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:1a12d512-2a67-4c31-8e0b-***@c37g2000yqi.googlegroups.com...
On 7 Sep, 14:57, "Niteawk" <***@btinternet.com> wrote:
<snipped>

m***@hotmail.com

2009-09-07 15:13:36 UTC

Post by m***@hotmail.com
<snipped>

Niteawk

2009-09-07 19:11:05 UTC

Post by m***@hotmail.com
<snipped>

Post by Niteawk
We know you live in your own little world where everything is the exact
opposite. The imaginary billions. I say imaginary because it would make
headline news if the government spent billions on adult education.
I was listening to a consumer program about 2 weeks ago, where adults could
not get on courses because the government wants colleges to train up more
young people. So the oldies were naturally upset by this, considered it to
be age discrimination. Any course of value to getting work, like plumbing,
was always fully booked by youngsters. Even though older people attended the
vetting process, they were not selected to go on the course, only the
youngest were being selected. It was after the threat of a law suit for age
discrimination, and I dare say the unwanted publicity on radio, the college
agreed to give a place to an older student (47 years old) on the next course
they run.
I tried for 6 years to get on a plumbing course in my area. They do not
advertise them well in advance any more because to many people apply, so
they advertise for about 2 weeks, even with that short exposure they still
get innundated. No compulsory or mandatory shite needed here.
Plenty of basket weaving, beauty and knitting courses though, no
shortage
of
crap like that. They will take anyone they can get. A bit like A4e and Shaw
Trust in that respect.

You really don't have a university, college or adult training centre
anywhere in your area?
Thats really sad. Move out of that area then.

Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills is another body
providing funds for adult education.

Martin <><
All we have is airy fairy stuff, no good for manual worker peasant types.
Actually I recall some dealings with the LSC from way back. I asked them for
help towards course fees, they said they only provide funding if I was to
run a course of some sort, and the criteria to meet this was crazy. So they
may have x amount of money to give away, but in reality not many people meet
the requirements to get this funding. The money might be there to fund
courses, but not much if any of it is used on college courses, which is why
they charge fees.

m***@hotmail.com

2009-09-07 21:14:43 UTC

Post by m***@hotmail.com
<snipped>

Post by Niteawk
We know you live in your own little world where everything is the exact
opposite. The imaginary billions. I say imaginary because it would make
headline news if the government spent billions on adult education.
I was listening to a consumer program about 2 weeks ago, where adults could
not get on courses because the government wants colleges to train up more
young people. So the oldies were naturally upset by this, considered it to
be age discrimination. Any course of value to getting work, like plumbing,
was always fully booked by youngsters. Even though older people attended the
vetting process, they were not selected to go on the course, only the
youngest were being selected. It was after the threat of a law suit for age
discrimination, and I dare say the unwanted publicity on radio, the college
agreed to give a place to an older student (47 years old) on the next course
they run.
I tried for 6 years to get on a plumbing course in my area. They do not
advertise them well in advance any more because to many people apply, so
they advertise for about 2 weeks, even with that short exposure they still
get innundated. No compulsory or mandatory shite needed here.
Plenty of basket weaving, beauty and knitting courses though, no
shortage
of
crap like that. They will take anyone they can get. A bit like A4e and Shaw
Trust in that respect.

You really don't have a university, college or adult training centre
anywhere in your area?
Thats really sad. Move out of that area then.
Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills is another body
providing funds for adult education.
Martin <><
All we have is airy fairy stuff, no good for manual worker peasant types.
Actually I recall some dealings with the LSC from way back. I asked them for
help towards course fees, they said they only provide funding if I was to
run a course of some sort, and the criteria to meet this was crazy. So they
may have x amount of money to give away, but in reality not many people meet
the requirements to get this funding. The money might be there to fund
courses, but not much if any of it is used on college courses, which is why
they charge fees.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

Ah yes, the sheer surplus of manual worker jobs this country has.
Doesn't stop a manual worker increasing their skills.

And LOL - you asked the LSC for funding direct? You complete idiot,
thats for the course provider to ask as you found out. The course
provider arranges the course to be free with the relevant paperwork.
Many charities, companies and educational establishments meet the
requirements to run a course using LSC funding. Not exactly hard for
organisations. I've been on several courses paid for by them over the
years.
Didn't help me get into university as I applied without listing my
achievements but look good on a CV and worth studying in themselves
anyway.

Martin <><

Niteawk

2009-09-07 13:05:14 UTC

Post by Niteawk
What a fucking carry on eh. They admitted to ignoring peoples illness! Now
you see the point of the sham medical, they are forcing people with serious
injury and mental health problems to apply for work.
There is no way those people are going to get work. One of them could not
fill in an application form, another lad, semi literate at best was expected
to apply for office work. And an old boy 57 years old, ex painter and
decorator, who was barely able to walk after a dodgy foot operation. What
can he do? These people were manual workers, there is no way in hell they
are going to get work in admin type jobs. They havent got the minerals.
I see the adviser for ST saying the council employs people with
disabilities, I suppose they do to be seen as politically correct, they will
also have one gay, one lesbian, one religious nut etc. Thats fine for the
council who we pay for out of taxes, but no employer, who is in business and
has to make profit, is going to hire people like that.
Now that I see there is a major problem with people who have disabilities,
why doesnt the JC's employ them? I have not seen any people with
disabilities working in my local JC. Kick the idle able bodied fuckers out
and let the disabled run our JC's.

So you expect manual workers to be unable to do admin jobs? Sheesh,
you really want people thrown on the scrapheap don't you?
And a council employing people with disabilities? Oh, just like every
other employer can then. Employers tend to take more of a risk with
someone who is disabled but its not usually a massive risk.
Its harder for someone with a disability to get a job, not impossible
though.
You know, I think you'd be perfect working in a JC. After all, by your
own account you have mental health issues.
It would suit you - and starting pay is above minimum wage.

I dare say most manual workers would resent being considered semi
literate.

But the fact is they are semi literate, and freely admitted to that on
Benefit Busters, the only resentment shown was against being asked to
apply for jobs they did not have the skills to do. Jobs they know for a
fact that they cant get. As the young lad with the bad back stated, "how
can I go to college to learn when I couldnt do it at school" He was not
capable of learning because he failed at school. If you expect people
like him to learn, he has to start from scratch, and sit the exams. Then
he can think about going to college.
Sure I daresay some are and they were attracted to a job that

Post by Mike
required a low level of literacy but I know lot's of manual labourers
who are very literate.

Here we go again with the I know lots of people who can do everything. I
know lots of people who get paid for doing fuck all. These are not the
same people being forced off sickness with metal rods proping their
spines up. Semi literate warehouse labourers.

In my office we have a wheelchair user and half a dozen people using canes
and crutches to walk. There are then various other less visible ailments
such as severe to mild respiratory illnesses, high blood pressure, low
blood pressure, at least one person with IBS and who knows how many bad
backs. Various stress related illnesses, some caused working for the DWP
but many caused by outside factors. All manage to work, maybe some
employers would not accommodate the reasonable adjustments the DWP make in
some cases but the majority would be or their employer would be staring
down the wrong end of an expensive DDA emp trib they would be sure to
lose.
I'm not saying everyone on IB/ESA could work even if they wanted to, but I
bet lots could.
Maybe their body is no longer upto manual labour but does that mean the
taxpayer should fund a life of leisure for the next 30 or 40 years when
they could do less physically demanding work? Enhancing their literacy
would not only widen the jobs they could go for but it would be life
enhancing, being able to read the paper, a magazine or even an instruction
manual.

Post by Mike
Most 'admin work' needs a few mediocre GCSE/O marks, even when
qualifications are asked for. Many do not even ask for qualifications
as someone getting a GCSE ten years ago does not demonstrate an aptitude
for call centre or other admin work.

Yes, I am sure if you peddle this BS for long enough you will start to
believe it yourself. In laymans terms it is called moving the goal posts,
the purpose of which is to kick seriously ill people off the sick. All of
a sudden qualifications or skills do not matter. Try telling that to
employers. Make it illegal to refuse jobs on that basis. Then I might
believe you myself. The Shaw Trust has done a complete U turn compared to
the other course providers inc the JC/ND because their goal is get people
off the sick, not into work as the program suggested. That is how they
are making money, they wouldnt make any money at all if the had to get
people into paying jobs they cant do.

Just because you have disabilities it doesn't mean you can't work.
Governments over the last few years have put discrimination legislation
into place requiring employers to make reasonable adjustments to allow
people with disabilities (most of which many people would not consider
disabilities) to work. Believe or not most people protected by the DDA
want to work.
Unfortunately for you (or is it) being lazy and shiftless is not covered
by the DDA.

Post by Mike
Most large employers (inc the DWP) use testing and even roleplay for low
end admin jobs recruitment.

Actually the concept of testing and even role play in recruitment was
lifted from private companies. TBH we do get staff more able and better
prepared for the job that awaits them than we used to relying on
qualifications alone.
Would you rather judge a builder by his work or by his NVQ he got from
college last year?

Post by Niteawk
The only good thing I can see coming out of this is, none of the twits at
the JC can ever question my choice of jobs again, and if I want to apply
for skilled jobs, even though I have no skills, they cant really argue
with that. But knowing them they will still force their bent jobseekers
agreement on me. If I dont sign it, benefit stops. What a great system.

Niteawk, I pity any employer who took you on, from day one they would be
looking to get rid of you with as little fuss as possible.

I do as well, all the profit they make from free labour, it must be a real
burden for them. They do not have any jobs to offer, but plenty of work to
keep people on placements busy.

For the sake of the UK economy it's better for you to stay on ESA or JSA,
however the least you could do is jump through the effing hoops when told
and STFU. I guarantee you have far fewer hoops to jump through than most
people have to at work.

I think you mean for the sake of the UK slave trade and poverty wage payers.
The least I can do is tell them to fuck off, with their £10 a week better
off. The "better off in work calculation" that ignores travelling costs
which is at least £20 per week on public transport. Am I the only one who
sees the lunacy behind this!

m***@hotmail.com

2009-09-07 14:13:57 UTC

Post by Niteawk
What a fucking carry on eh. They admitted to ignoring peoples illness! Now
you see the point of the sham medical, they are forcing people with serious
injury and mental health problems to apply for work.
There is no way those people are going to get work. One of them could not
fill in an application form, another lad, semi literate at best was expected
to apply for office work. And an old boy 57 years old, ex painter and
decorator, who was barely able to walk after a dodgy foot operation. What
can he do? These people were manual workers, there is no way in hell they
are going to get work in admin type jobs. They havent got the minerals.
I see the adviser for ST saying the council employs people with
disabilities, I suppose they do to be seen as politically correct, they will
also have one gay, one lesbian, one religious nut etc. Thats fine for the
council who we pay for out of taxes, but no employer, who is in business and
has to make profit, is going to hire people like that.
Now that I see there is a major problem with people who have disabilities,
why doesnt the JC's employ them? I have not seen any people with
disabilities working in my local JC. Kick the idle able bodied fuckers out
and let the disabled run our JC's.

So you expect manual workers to be unable to do admin jobs? Sheesh,
you really want people thrown on the scrapheap don't you?
And a council employing people with disabilities? Oh, just like every
other employer can then. Employers tend to take more of a risk with
someone who is disabled but its not usually a massive risk.
Its harder for someone with a disability to get a job, not impossible
though.
You know, I think you'd be perfect working in a JC. After all, by your
own account you have mental health issues.
It would suit you - and starting pay is above minimum wage.

I dare say most manual workers would resent being considered semi
literate.

But the fact is they are semi literate, and freely admitted to that on
Benefit Busters, the only resentment shown was against being asked to
apply for jobs they did not have the skills to do. Jobs they know for a
fact that they cant get. As the young lad with the bad back stated, "how
can I go to college to learn when I couldnt do it at school" He was not
capable of learning because he failed at school. If you expect people
like him to learn, he has to start from scratch, and sit the exams. Then
he can think about going to college.
Sure I daresay some are and they were attracted to a job that

Post by Mike
required a low level of literacy but I know lot's of manual labourers
who are very literate.

Here we go again with the I know lots of people who can do everything. I
know lots of people who get paid for doing fuck all. These are not the
same people being forced off sickness with metal rods proping their
spines up. Semi literate warehouse labourers.

In my office we have a wheelchair user and half a dozen people using canes
and crutches to walk. There are then various other less visible ailments
such as severe to mild respiratory illnesses, high blood pressure, low
blood pressure, at least one person with IBS and who knows how many bad
backs. Various stress related illnesses, some caused working for the DWP
but many caused by outside factors. All manage to work, maybe some
employers would not accommodate the reasonable adjustments the DWP make in
some cases but the majority would be or their employer would be staring
down the wrong end of an expensive DDA emp trib they would be sure to
lose.
I'm not saying everyone on IB/ESA could work even if they wanted to, but I
bet lots could.
Maybe their body is no longer upto manual labour but does that mean the
taxpayer should fund a life of leisure for the next 30 or 40 years when
they could do less physically demanding work? Enhancing their literacy
would not only widen the jobs they could go for but it would be life
enhancing, being able to read the paper, a magazine or even an instruction
manual.

Post by Mike
Most 'admin work' needs a few mediocre GCSE/O marks, even when
qualifications are asked for. Many do not even ask for qualifications
as someone getting a GCSE ten years ago does not demonstrate an aptitude
for call centre or other admin work.

Yes, I am sure if you peddle this BS for long enough you will start to
believe it yourself. In laymans terms it is called moving the goal posts,
the purpose of which is to kick seriously ill people off the sick. All of
a sudden qualifications or skills do not matter. Try telling that to
employers. Make it illegal to refuse jobs on that basis. Then I might
believe you myself. The Shaw Trust has done a complete U turn compared to
the other course providers inc the JC/ND because their goal is get people
off the sick, not into work as the program suggested. That is how they
are making money, they wouldnt make any money at all if the had to get
people into paying jobs they cant do.

Just because you have disabilities it doesn't mean you can't work.
Governments over the last few years have put discrimination legislation
into place requiring employers to make reasonable adjustments to allow
people with disabilities (most of which many people would not consider
disabilities) to work. Believe or not most people protected by the DDA
want to work.
Unfortunately for you (or is it) being lazy and shiftless is not covered
by the DDA.

Post by Mike
Most large employers (inc the DWP) use testing and even roleplay for low
end admin jobs recruitment.

Actually the concept of testing and even role play in recruitment was
lifted from private companies. TBH we do get staff more able and better
prepared for the job that awaits them than we used to relying on
qualifications alone.
Would you rather judge a builder by his work or by his NVQ he got from
college last year?

Post by Niteawk
The only good thing I can see coming out of this is, none of the twits at
the JC can ever question my choice of jobs again, and if I want to apply
for skilled jobs, even though I have no skills, they cant really argue
with that. But knowing them they will still force their bent jobseekers
agreement on me. If I dont sign it, benefit stops. What a great system.

Niteawk, I pity any employer who took you on, from day one they would be
looking to get rid of you with as little fuss as possible.

I do as well, all the profit they make from free labour, it must be a real
burden for them. They do not have any jobs to offer, but plenty of work to
keep people on placements busy.

LOL.
Slave trade? Poverty wage payers?
But you haven't shown you have the skills to be worth more than the
lowest pay.

And yet other people manage to live on wages.

Many areas have public transport travel cards. Depending on the hours
and travel distance, can be fairly cheap. Such things as riding a bike
are even cheaper. Or there's always getting a lift in with a work
colleague.
And yes, you are probably the only one to see the lunacy behind this.
Others merely get on with working.

Martin <><

Niteawk

2009-09-07 14:36:18 UTC

Post by Niteawk
What a fucking carry on eh. They admitted to ignoring peoples illness! Now
you see the point of the sham medical, they are forcing people with serious
injury and mental health problems to apply for work.
There is no way those people are going to get work. One of them
could
not
fill in an application form, another lad, semi literate at best was expected
to apply for office work. And an old boy 57 years old, ex painter and
decorator, who was barely able to walk after a dodgy foot
operation.
What
can he do? These people were manual workers, there is no way in
hell
they
are going to get work in admin type jobs. They havent got the minerals.
I see the adviser for ST saying the council employs people with
disabilities, I suppose they do to be seen as politically correct, they will
also have one gay, one lesbian, one religious nut etc. Thats fine
for
the
council who we pay for out of taxes, but no employer, who is in business and
has to make profit, is going to hire people like that.
Now that I see there is a major problem with people who have disabilities,
why doesnt the JC's employ them? I have not seen any people with
disabilities working in my local JC. Kick the idle able bodied fuckers out
and let the disabled run our JC's.

So you expect manual workers to be unable to do admin jobs? Sheesh,
you really want people thrown on the scrapheap don't you?
And a council employing people with disabilities? Oh, just like every
other employer can then. Employers tend to take more of a risk with
someone who is disabled but its not usually a massive risk.
Its harder for someone with a disability to get a job, not impossible
though.
You know, I think you'd be perfect working in a JC. After all, by your
own account you have mental health issues.
It would suit you - and starting pay is above minimum wage.

I dare say most manual workers would resent being considered semi
literate.

But the fact is they are semi literate, and freely admitted to that on
Benefit Busters, the only resentment shown was against being asked to
apply for jobs they did not have the skills to do. Jobs they know for a
fact that they cant get. As the young lad with the bad back stated, "how
can I go to college to learn when I couldnt do it at school" He was not
capable of learning because he failed at school. If you expect people
like him to learn, he has to start from scratch, and sit the exams. Then
he can think about going to college.
Sure I daresay some are and they were attracted to a job that

Post by Mike
required a low level of literacy but I know lot's of manual labourers
who are very literate.

Here we go again with the I know lots of people who can do everything. I
know lots of people who get paid for doing fuck all. These are not the
same people being forced off sickness with metal rods proping their
spines up. Semi literate warehouse labourers.

In my office we have a wheelchair user and half a dozen people using canes
and crutches to walk. There are then various other less visible ailments
such as severe to mild respiratory illnesses, high blood pressure, low
blood pressure, at least one person with IBS and who knows how many bad
backs. Various stress related illnesses, some caused working for the DWP
but many caused by outside factors. All manage to work, maybe some
employers would not accommodate the reasonable adjustments the DWP make in
some cases but the majority would be or their employer would be staring
down the wrong end of an expensive DDA emp trib they would be sure to
lose.
I'm not saying everyone on IB/ESA could work even if they wanted to, but I
bet lots could.
Maybe their body is no longer upto manual labour but does that mean the
taxpayer should fund a life of leisure for the next 30 or 40 years when
they could do less physically demanding work? Enhancing their literacy
would not only widen the jobs they could go for but it would be life
enhancing, being able to read the paper, a magazine or even an instruction
manual.

Post by Mike
Most 'admin work' needs a few mediocre GCSE/O marks, even when
qualifications are asked for. Many do not even ask for qualifications
as someone getting a GCSE ten years ago does not demonstrate an aptitude
for call centre or other admin work.

Yes, I am sure if you peddle this BS for long enough you will start to
believe it yourself. In laymans terms it is called moving the goal posts,
the purpose of which is to kick seriously ill people off the sick. All of
a sudden qualifications or skills do not matter. Try telling that to
employers. Make it illegal to refuse jobs on that basis. Then I might
believe you myself. The Shaw Trust has done a complete U turn compared to
the other course providers inc the JC/ND because their goal is get people
off the sick, not into work as the program suggested. That is how they
are making money, they wouldnt make any money at all if the had to get
people into paying jobs they cant do.

Just because you have disabilities it doesn't mean you can't work.
Governments over the last few years have put discrimination legislation
into place requiring employers to make reasonable adjustments to allow
people with disabilities (most of which many people would not consider
disabilities) to work. Believe or not most people protected by the DDA
want to work.
Unfortunately for you (or is it) being lazy and shiftless is not covered
by the DDA.

Post by Mike
Most large employers (inc the DWP) use testing and even roleplay for low
end admin jobs recruitment.

Actually the concept of testing and even role play in recruitment was
lifted from private companies. TBH we do get staff more able and better
prepared for the job that awaits them than we used to relying on
qualifications alone.
Would you rather judge a builder by his work or by his NVQ he got from
college last year?

Post by Niteawk
The only good thing I can see coming out of this is, none of the twits at
the JC can ever question my choice of jobs again, and if I want to apply
for skilled jobs, even though I have no skills, they cant really argue
with that. But knowing them they will still force their bent jobseekers
agreement on me. If I dont sign it, benefit stops. What a great system.

Niteawk, I pity any employer who took you on, from day one they would be
looking to get rid of you with as little fuss as possible.

I do as well, all the profit they make from free labour, it must be a real
burden for them. They do not have any jobs to offer, but plenty of work to
keep people on placements busy.

LOL.
Slave trade? Poverty wage payers?
But you haven't shown you have the skills to be worth more than the
lowest pay.
You may laugh and joke about it, but you are right. Why should poor people
have any sort of life, just because they are not skilled. Treat them like
shit, that will teach them for being born. Still it shows the mentality of
those well off in society when they see fit to treat people with such
contempt. Right back at you is what I say.

m***@hotmail.com

2009-09-07 15:02:53 UTC

On 7 Sep, 15:36, "Niteawk" <***@btinternet.com> wrote:
<snipped>

Post by m***@hotmail.com
LOL.
Slave trade? Poverty wage payers?
But you haven't shown you have the skills to be worth more than the
lowest pay.
You may laugh and joke about it, but you are right. Why should poor people
have any sort of life, just because they are not skilled. Treat them like
shit, that will teach them for being born. Still it shows the mentality of
those well off in society when they see fit to treat people with such
contempt. Right back at you is what I say.

Niteawk

2009-09-07 19:10:54 UTC

<***@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:0b08f7e9-22c9-4c18-880f-***@g31g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
On 7 Sep, 15:36, "Niteawk" <***@btinternet.com> wrote:
<snipped>

The minimum wage is the bottom rung of a ladder, not a place to stay
for the next 50 years.
Poor people can learn things, they can get promoted, they can go for a
different job if not earning enough on current one. The single major
disadvantage of a minimum wage is that it lumps many lower wages
together.
Nothing to stop people learning skills. With annual budgets well in
excess of £15 billion, advertising campaigns, leaflets, prospectuses
etc there isn't much more that can be done to advertise whats
available. It all boils down to the individual choosing to do
something.
Its easy to choose to learn something. Its just even easier to choose
not to learn something.

You've been unemployed about 9 years? Thats enough time part time to
take a degree and a masters, or full time get a PhD. So what did you
do with your time?

Martin <><
You have only got to look at what the likes of A4e is offering to see how
comitted the government is in improving poor peoples lives. That is the only
level of so called education they can expect, and because it is crap, it has
to be forced on them. So please do not talk to me about what is on offer and
what people can get. Try to see what is in front of your eyes and
acknowledge it. You must attend their courses or they will stop your
benefit. No fancy jobs with promotional prospects for us, we get placements
and forced to work for no pay. No fancy education either, write your one
page crap CV and be done with it. That is how people like me are treated in
todays society, so excuse me if I choose to opt out of this madness, before
I end up killing someone.

m***@hotmail.com

2009-09-07 21:07:35 UTC

Post by m***@hotmail.com
<snipped>

The minimum wage is the bottom rung of a ladder, not a place to stay
for the next 50 years.
Poor people can learn things, they can get promoted, they can go for a
different job if not earning enough on current one. The single major
disadvantage of a minimum wage is that it lumps many lower wages
together.
Nothing to stop people learning skills. With annual budgets well in
excess of £15 billion, advertising campaigns, leaflets, prospectuses
etc there isn't much more that can be done to advertise whats
available. It all boils down to the individual choosing to do
something.
Its easy to choose to learn something. Its just even easier to choose
not to learn something.
You've been unemployed about 9 years? Thats enough time part time to
take a degree and a masters, or full time get a PhD. So what did you
do with your time?
Martin <><
You have only got to look at what the likes of A4e is offering to see how
comitted the government is in improving poor peoples lives. That is the only
level of so called education they can expect, and because it is crap, it has
to be forced on them. So please do not talk to me about what is on offer and
what people can get. Try to see what is in front of your eyes and
acknowledge it. You must attend their courses or they will stop your
benefit. No fancy jobs with promotional prospects for us, we get placements
and forced to work for no pay. No fancy education either, write your one
page crap CV and be done with it. That is how people like me are treated in
todays society, so excuse me if I choose to opt out of this madness, before
I end up killing someone.

Yes, you have only to look at the non-A4e stuff on offer for people to
see the committment. Hundreds of billions of pounds over decades but
people aren't forced to take advantage of whats on offer.
Are you seriously suggesting that people can only go on mandatory
training courses only and not choose to study themselves? Because my
experiences are opposite to that.
The education they can expect is the same education as I can expect.
As much as wanted, up to the level they want, subject to funding for
post-degree education (there is some funding available).

By your requirements, people can only take whats forced on them. By
what the government spend billions of pounds on each year, by the
experiences of my family and friends, education is offered for the
taking.
I've done academic subjects at night school, I've done distance
learning, I've done 'practical' subjects that have helped me maintain
my house and save money by doing work myself, I've done evening
language lessons (great fun) and open university courses where they
gave me £250 free as a grant each year and the courses were free due
to income. Could have stayed with the OU and had a degree in 6 years
for free!
And after all that, I start a degree next week full time. Education
offered for the taking.

You choose not to take advantage of that, its up to you. But other
people can and do take advantage of the educational opportunities on
offer.
Hell, come to think of it there was quite a bit in the press late last
month about A level students and the shortage of university places.
You may not have noticed it but university in this country isn't
forced on anyone.

Your choice, take advantage of whats on offer or not. Knowing you,
won't take advantage until such time as its forced on you......

Oh, and if you haven't yet got a degree, can get one where you get
given more than £7,300 a year tax free and whatever you choose to earn
in a part time job on top of that. And no council tax payable.
Current student loan interest rate is 0%.

Martin <><

Niteawk

2009-09-08 12:25:08 UTC

Post by m***@hotmail.com
<snipped>

The minimum wage is the bottom rung of a ladder, not a place to stay
for the next 50 years.
Poor people can learn things, they can get promoted, they can go for a
different job if not earning enough on current one. The single major
disadvantage of a minimum wage is that it lumps many lower wages
together.
Nothing to stop people learning skills. With annual budgets well in
excess of £15 billion, advertising campaigns, leaflets, prospectuses
etc there isn't much more that can be done to advertise whats
available. It all boils down to the individual choosing to do
something.
Its easy to choose to learn something. Its just even easier to choose
not to learn something.
You've been unemployed about 9 years? Thats enough time part time to
take a degree and a masters, or full time get a PhD. So what did you
do with your time?
Martin <><
You have only got to look at what the likes of A4e is offering to see how
comitted the government is in improving poor peoples lives. That is the only
level of so called education they can expect, and because it is crap, it has
to be forced on them. So please do not talk to me about what is on offer and
what people can get. Try to see what is in front of your eyes and
acknowledge it. You must attend their courses or they will stop your
benefit. No fancy jobs with promotional prospects for us, we get placements
and forced to work for no pay. No fancy education either, write your one
page crap CV and be done with it. That is how people like me are treated in
todays society, so excuse me if I choose to opt out of this madness, before
I end up killing someone.

m***@hotmail.com

2009-09-08 12:53:53 UTC

On 8 Sep, 13:25, "Niteawk" <***@btinternet.com> wrote:
<snipped>

Post by Niteawk
You seem to forget I have 10 years of experience dealing with the system.
There is nothing on offer to the unemployed except mandatory BS courses. And
I have already explained to you about college courses in my area, if there
is a course worth doing, it is impossible to get on. They have not run any
worthwhile courses for very long time now. It is all business type courses.
No good to manual worker types like me.
The bottom line is they do not want the unemployed to learn, all they want
them to do is apply for temp, warehouse and retail jobs, nothing else.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

You only choose to see the mandatory courses. Many hundreds of non-
mandatory courses you can do without affecting your benefit.
And college courses in your area are so popular? Maybe other people
want to increase skills? Surely they aren't required to go on those
courses, instead choosing to do them?
I'm suprised too - most college courses are advertised weeks in
advance and people just go down on the registration day to sign up.
Trying to sign up the day the course starts could be tricky, but with
all your spare time I'm sure you are going on the morning of
registration day. :)

Hard to believe they don't run worthwhile courses. Especially this
year where many areas are doing more academic courses than vocational
or hobby courses. Nothing to stop hobby courses becoming a little
earner either.

The bottom line is that billions is spent on allowing the unemployed
(or employed with spare time) to learn. But is down to choice again -
you choose to study something or not. You aren't being forced into it.
And to think, the increase in mature students going to university this
year is apparently because redundant workers (hence unemployed) are
going for degrees and to escape the recession for 3 years.
The government want people to learn. They just won't force you, you
have to do it yourself.

Martin <><

Niteawk

2009-09-08 21:18:33 UTC

Post by m***@hotmail.com
<snipped>

You only choose to see the mandatory courses. Many hundreds of non-
mandatory courses you can do without affecting your benefit.
And college courses in your area are so popular? Maybe other people
want to increase skills? Surely they aren't required to go on those
courses, instead choosing to do them?
I'm suprised too - most college courses are advertised weeks in
advance and people just go down on the registration day to sign up.
Trying to sign up the day the course starts could be tricky, but with
all your spare time I'm sure you are going on the morning of
registration day. :)
Hard to believe they don't run worthwhile courses. Especially this
year where many areas are doing more academic courses than vocational
or hobby courses. Nothing to stop hobby courses becoming a little
earner either.
The bottom line is that billions is spent on allowing the unemployed
(or employed with spare time) to learn. But is down to choice again -
you choose to study something or not. You aren't being forced into it.
And to think, the increase in mature students going to university this
year is apparently because redundant workers (hence unemployed) are
going for degrees and to escape the recession for 3 years.
The government want people to learn. They just won't force you, you
have to do it yourself.
Martin <><

Ok lets put it another way, they may be spending billions but it is not
getting or did not get to people like me who needed it. After 10 years of
trying I have given up. I am going to stay on the dole until retirement age,
not that I set out to do this, this is how it has ended up. Thanks to the
crap courses I was forced to attend, I have lost all interest in doing
anything any more. They fucked me about when I wanted to learn a trade so I
could earn a decent living, they wanted me to apply for was low paid
warehouse work that was no good to me, and that is all they still want me to
do. They have not budged 1 inch in the last 10 years, it is the same old
crap all the time. It is this unwillingness to try something different just
for once that pisses me off the most. The bottom line here is, nobody is
going to force me into a low paid warehouse job.

Anyway they should not have allowed me to be out of work for this long, and
tried something different akin to the old system. After I was 2 or 3 years
on the dole, they should have shoved their hitlerite rules up their fat
fucking arses and listened to me. After all I am the one who is out of work.
Before any of this shit came in I was hardly ever out of work. Crazy as it
sounds, all they had to do was let me get on with it. But nooooo, you cant
do dat. you do wat we tell yuh innit ;)

m***@hotmail.com

2009-09-08 22:08:39 UTC

Post by m***@hotmail.com
<snipped>

You only choose to see the mandatory courses. Many hundreds of non-
mandatory courses you can do without affecting your benefit.
And college courses in your area are so popular? Maybe other people
want to increase skills? Surely they aren't required to go on those
courses, instead choosing to do them?
I'm suprised too - most college courses are advertised weeks in
advance and people just go down on the registration day to sign up.
Trying to sign up the day the course starts could be tricky, but with
all your spare time I'm sure you are going on the morning of
registration day. :)
Hard to believe they don't run worthwhile courses. Especially this
year where many areas are doing more academic courses than vocational
or hobby courses. Nothing to stop hobby courses becoming a little
earner either.
The bottom line is that billions is spent on allowing the unemployed
(or employed with spare time) to learn. But is down to choice again -
you choose to study something or not. You aren't being forced into it.
And to think, the increase in mature students going to university this
year is apparently because redundant workers (hence unemployed) are
going for degrees and to escape the recession for 3 years.
The government want people to learn. They just won't force you, you
have to do it yourself.
Martin <><

Ok lets put it another way, they may be spending billions but it is not
getting or did not get to people like me who needed it. After 10 years of
trying I have given up. I am going to stay on the dole until retirement age,
not that I set out to do this, this is how it has ended up. Thanks to the
crap courses I was forced to attend, I have lost all interest in doing
anything any more. They fucked me about when I wanted to learn a trade so I
could earn a decent living, they wanted me to apply for was low paid
warehouse work that was no good to me, and that is all they still want me to
do. They have not budged 1 inch in the last 10 years, it is the same old
crap all the time. It is this unwillingness to try something different just
for once that pisses me off the most. The bottom line here is, nobody is
going to force me into a low paid warehouse job.
Anyway they should not have allowed me to be out of work for this long, and
tried something different akin to the old system. After I was 2 or 3 years
on the dole, they should have shoved their hitlerite rules up their fat
fucking arses and listened to me. After all I am the one who is out of work.
Before any of this shit came in I was hardly ever out of work. Crazy as it
sounds, all they had to do was let me get on with it. But nooooo, you cant
do dat. you do wat we tell yuh innit ;)- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

ROTFLOL!!!!

Its not getting to you because you aren't using it. Whats to stop you
doing an open university course? Whats to stop you doing an NVQ at
college? Whats to stop you doing other courses on offer, during the
day or evening?
The answer is you. Its your choice. Your choice to do, or not to do.

Ok, so you are going to stay on the dole until retirement. Nice goal -
hopefully not your only goal in life. That means you get to jump
through all the hoops the JC want to put you through until then. Have
fun with that.
I admire your determination to reach your goal even if I think your
goal is daft.

Glad to see they haven't budged an inch in 10 years, consistancy is
good in a government department.
True, no-one is going to force you into a low paid warehouse job. Just
as no-one is going to force the JC to pay you full benefits every
week. No-one is forced and everyone is therefore happy eh?

Not sure how THEY should not have allowed you to be out of work this
long. They don't get to apply for jobs, you do. The question is, why
have you allowed yourself to be out of work this long?
As for the old system, that was the old system - not been around in
years. Things change, not always for the better but change always
happens.

And why should they have shoved their rules anywhere and listened to
you? Takes government or commissioners to change rules or
interpretations of rules, and I don't recall listening to the client
was ever part of benefit law.
Yes, you are the one out of work. Other people manage to find work,
why not you? Just unlucky all these years? Or setting the standard way
too high?

And letting you get on with it? Exactly what have you been doing for
the past 10 years when not on mandatory courses or signing on?
You claim benefit and agree to the benefit conditions. You may not
like the conditions but you won't get the benefit unless you do agree
to keep to them. Whats so different about you that you've had 10 years
of it?

Tell you what, come and live up in the Black Country. We have the
highest unemployment rate in the UK apparently but come up here and
see about finding a course you can do, or loads of job adverts. And
can travel quite a distance on a bus pass or a £3.30 daysaver pretty
much across the county. Or if you haven't got a degree, I hear
Wolverhampton still has a place or two left.

Martin <><

Niteawk

2009-09-09 00:10:47 UTC

Post by m***@hotmail.com
<snipped>

Post by Niteawk
You seem to forget I have 10 years of experience dealing with the system.
There is nothing on offer to the unemployed except mandatory BS
courses.
And
I have already explained to you about college courses in my area, if there
is a course worth doing, it is impossible to get on. They have not run any
worthwhile courses for very long time now. It is all business type courses.
No good to manual worker types like me.
The bottom line is they do not want the unemployed to learn, all they want
them to do is apply for temp, warehouse and retail jobs, nothing else.-
Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

You only choose to see the mandatory courses. Many hundreds of non-
mandatory courses you can do without affecting your benefit.
And college courses in your area are so popular? Maybe other people
want to increase skills? Surely they aren't required to go on those
courses, instead choosing to do them?
I'm suprised too - most college courses are advertised weeks in
advance and people just go down on the registration day to sign up.
Trying to sign up the day the course starts could be tricky, but with
all your spare time I'm sure you are going on the morning of
registration day. :)
Hard to believe they don't run worthwhile courses. Especially this
year where many areas are doing more academic courses than vocational
or hobby courses. Nothing to stop hobby courses becoming a little
earner either.
The bottom line is that billions is spent on allowing the unemployed
(or employed with spare time) to learn. But is down to choice again -
you choose to study something or not. You aren't being forced into it.
And to think, the increase in mature students going to university this
year is apparently because redundant workers (hence unemployed) are
going for degrees and to escape the recession for 3 years.
The government want people to learn. They just won't force you, you
have to do it yourself.
Martin <><

Ok lets put it another way, they may be spending billions but it is not
getting or did not get to people like me who needed it. After 10 years of
trying I have given up. I am going to stay on the dole until retirement age,
not that I set out to do this, this is how it has ended up. Thanks to the
crap courses I was forced to attend, I have lost all interest in doing
anything any more. They fucked me about when I wanted to learn a trade so I
could earn a decent living, they wanted me to apply for was low paid
warehouse work that was no good to me, and that is all they still want me to
do. They have not budged 1 inch in the last 10 years, it is the same old
crap all the time. It is this unwillingness to try something different just
for once that pisses me off the most. The bottom line here is, nobody is
going to force me into a low paid warehouse job.
Anyway they should not have allowed me to be out of work for this long, and
tried something different akin to the old system. After I was 2 or 3 years
on the dole, they should have shoved their hitlerite rules up their fat
fucking arses and listened to me. After all I am the one who is out of work.
Before any of this shit came in I was hardly ever out of work. Crazy as it
sounds, all they had to do was let me get on with it. But nooooo, you cant
do dat. you do wat we tell yuh innit ;)- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

m***@hotmail.com

2009-09-09 01:24:54 UTC

On 9 Sep, 01:10, "Niteawk" <***@btinternet.com> wrote:
<snipped>

Post by Niteawk
When I saw photos of prisoners being tortured in Guantanamo Bay, I started
having flashbacks from when I was on A4e, only on A4e they use more severe
torture techniques, the staring at the same newspaper for weeks on end is
probably the worst. I thought it would be a lot easier if they got me to lie
bollock naked on a pile of other naked people as a team building exercise.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

You compare Guantanamo Bay tortures to what happened on your A4e
course? You are one sick individual.
Perhaps you'd care to find out the differences firsthand someday?

Martin <><

Niteawk

2009-09-09 11:00:27 UTC

Post by m***@hotmail.com
<snipped>

Post by Niteawk
When I saw photos of prisoners being tortured in Guantanamo Bay, I started
having flashbacks from when I was on A4e, only on A4e they use more severe
torture techniques, the staring at the same newspaper for weeks on end is
probably the worst. I thought it would be a lot easier if they got me to lie
bollock naked on a pile of other naked people as a team building
exercise.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

You compare Guantanamo Bay tortures to what happened on your A4e
course? You are one sick individual.
Perhaps you'd care to find out the differences firsthand someday?
Martin <><

They are one and the same IMO, they both make people do mindless and silly
tasks which is a form of mental torture. Both of them threaten you with
some form of punishment to make you comply. Both of them hold people against
their will. I really cant see what the difference is.

Finn

2010-05-24 14:17:35 UTC

Hey, Niteawk,
don't know if you get this seeing as the string is 6 months old but I'd
appreciate being able to go over this with you. I'm a just finished trainee
teacher, having worked all my life abroad, and I was more than shocked at my
placement which was with a provider about which you speak. I know this has
been going on a long time, I can honestly say teaching there was good but
had nothing to do with finding work. Your post buddy Martin talks about
education, which is fine, but people go to these places to find work and it
is true that benefits are etcetc when you go.
Maybe talking about it might get some ideas, even if it is for me to take a
totally different line. ie eg force people to pay for volunteers under the
Citizens Charter or whatever else bs backup the state makes for itself.
Types like Emma Harrison should be forced to test the nature of the product
that makes them rich I agree, the ND thing is stupid. The money should be
spent on creating JOBS not training for unemployment.
Martin is right in that in some areas of the country there is access to
education but you are right in that it is forced and irrelevant if you
simply want to work. I also agree with you, sadly, about Shaw Trust. It is
fine to have high ideals, so prove it, is what I would say and they can't.
The will has gone to create work, perhaps it is down to IT and computers,
culture is deluded and reverts to tyranny - if so, then I am sure some idiot
with fingers on cash can see a better use of IT. Instead of education I see
the point to be to create a new kind of 'WORK' and force people to pay for
it, not force people to do work which is old and abusive. The 'great
generation' can now shop and be served by the 'worst' generation - this
country simply has a disability of consciousness. That is something that can
change but not by following an old route. I utterly empathise with your
views and would like to throw the whole system out. I think the local
councils should be obliged to employ every person in their books, and that
would include richer councils with people who don't have to work. They can
volunteer to do up the poorer areas. Why shouldnt it work both ways?

url:http://myreader.co.uk/msg/13973385.aspx

m***@hotmail.com

2009-09-06 17:15:46 UTC

Post by Niteawk
What a fucking carry on eh. They admitted to ignoring peoples illness! Now
you see the point of the sham medical, they are forcing people with serious
injury and mental health problems to apply for work.
There is no way those people are going to get work. One of them could not
fill in an application form, another lad, semi literate at best was expected
to apply for office work. And an old boy 57 years old, ex painter and
decorator, who was barely able to walk after a dodgy foot operation. What
can he do? These people were manual workers, there is no way in hell they
are going to get work in admin type jobs. They havent got the minerals.
I see the adviser for ST saying the council employs people with
disabilities, I suppose they do to be seen as politically correct, they will
also have one gay, one lesbian, one religious nut etc. Thats fine for the
council who we pay for out of taxes, but no employer, who is in business and
has to make profit, is going to hire people like that.
Now that I see there is a major problem with people who have disabilities,
why doesnt the JC's employ them? I have not seen any people with
disabilities working in my local JC. Kick the idle able bodied fuckers out
and let the disabled run our JC's.

So you expect manual workers to be unable to do admin jobs? Sheesh,
you really want people thrown on the scrapheap don't you?
And a council employing people with disabilities? Oh, just like every
other employer can then. Employers tend to take more of a risk with
someone who is disabled but its not usually a massive risk.
Its harder for someone with a disability to get a job, not impossible
though.
You know, I think you'd be perfect working in a JC. After all, by your
own account you have mental health issues.
It would suit you - and starting pay is above minimum wage.

You and the idiots like you at Shaw Trust are the ones with mental issues if
you think semi literate manual labourers are suitable to do admin office
work. To suggest they can have academic skills or gain these skills, is like
saying they are suitable to become doctors, surgeons, accountants or
solicitors, which is ridiculous. Manual labour types have not got the
educational background needed for that type of work.
Even the JC finds it unacceptaple for manual labours to apply for admin
office work. When I done that to meet my quota of applications as per my
JSAg, they were adamant that no unskilled labourer can do office type work.
This is what led to me being sanctioned 3 times.
So the JC also thinks it is impossible for manual workers to get admin
office work. They classed it as being the same as not applying for jobs. And
that was without being on the sick. TBH I knew I wasnt going to get those
jobs either, but I had to apply for 2 jobs per week, any 2 jobs. AFAIWC I
met my target to get JSA.
I have already tried and tested the ridiculous notion that manual labourers
can get office work, for the last 10 years.
If I must face another mindless course, where they tell me I can do anything
or be anything I want. I am going to go the whole hog and see if they will
support me in becoming a brain surgeon ;)- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

You may be incapable of adding skills or using skills learnt long ago.
Doesn't mean everyone else is like you.

Sure, someone who has spent years as a manual labourer may not want a
sit down office job. Doesn't mean they don't have skills, training,
education or ability to do the work.
Doesn't mean they can't get qualifications and experience in a
different field. Jobs change, jobs go, we aren't in a time now where
you leave school at 15 and walk into a job you keep unchanged for 50
years. The odds are many of us will have several different jobs in our
working lives.

Martin <><

Niteawk

2009-09-06 18:03:12 UTC

Post by Niteawk
What a fucking carry on eh. They admitted to ignoring peoples illness! Now
you see the point of the sham medical, they are forcing people with serious
injury and mental health problems to apply for work.
There is no way those people are going to get work. One of them could not
fill in an application form, another lad, semi literate at best was expected
to apply for office work. And an old boy 57 years old, ex painter and
decorator, who was barely able to walk after a dodgy foot operation. What
can he do? These people were manual workers, there is no way in hell they
are going to get work in admin type jobs. They havent got the minerals.
I see the adviser for ST saying the council employs people with
disabilities, I suppose they do to be seen as politically correct,
they
will
also have one gay, one lesbian, one religious nut etc. Thats fine for the
council who we pay for out of taxes, but no employer, who is in
business
and
has to make profit, is going to hire people like that.
Now that I see there is a major problem with people who have disabilities,
why doesnt the JC's employ them? I have not seen any people with
disabilities working in my local JC. Kick the idle able bodied fuckers out
and let the disabled run our JC's.

So you expect manual workers to be unable to do admin jobs? Sheesh,
you really want people thrown on the scrapheap don't you?
And a council employing people with disabilities? Oh, just like every
other employer can then. Employers tend to take more of a risk with
someone who is disabled but its not usually a massive risk.
Its harder for someone with a disability to get a job, not impossible
though.
You know, I think you'd be perfect working in a JC. After all, by your
own account you have mental health issues.
It would suit you - and starting pay is above minimum wage.

You and the idiots like you at Shaw Trust are the ones with mental issues if
you think semi literate manual labourers are suitable to do admin office
work. To suggest they can have academic skills or gain these skills, is like
saying they are suitable to become doctors, surgeons, accountants or
solicitors, which is ridiculous. Manual labour types have not got the
educational background needed for that type of work.
Even the JC finds it unacceptaple for manual labours to apply for admin
office work. When I done that to meet my quota of applications as per my
JSAg, they were adamant that no unskilled labourer can do office type work.
This is what led to me being sanctioned 3 times.
So the JC also thinks it is impossible for manual workers to get admin
office work. They classed it as being the same as not applying for jobs. And
that was without being on the sick. TBH I knew I wasnt going to get those
jobs either, but I had to apply for 2 jobs per week, any 2 jobs. AFAIWC I
met my target to get JSA.
I have already tried and tested the ridiculous notion that manual labourers
can get office work, for the last 10 years.
If I must face another mindless course, where they tell me I can do anything
or be anything I want. I am going to go the whole hog and see if they will
support me in becoming a brain surgeon ;)- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

You may be incapable of adding skills or using skills learnt long ago.
Doesn't mean everyone else is like you.
Sure, someone who has spent years as a manual labourer may not want a
sit down office job. Doesn't mean they don't have skills, training,
education or ability to do the work.
Doesn't mean they can't get qualifications and experience in a
different field. Jobs change, jobs go, we aren't in a time now where
you leave school at 15 and walk into a job you keep unchanged for 50
years. The odds are many of us will have several different jobs in our
working lives.

Like I said at the start, these courses are not about helping the sick. They
are being run to kick people off the sick. They do not care if they find
work, they do not even care that they can work. They are only interested in
getting them off the sick, finding them a job has nothing to do with it. It
is a scam plain and simple.

m***@hotmail.com

2009-09-06 18:46:27 UTC