Date: 2010-11-08 11:08 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] gonzo21.livejournal.com
Ha, yeah, I was just reading about how this 4 weeks labour thing was all Labours idea anyway, and basically what the system already was.

The media presented this one *very* strangely.

Date: 2010-11-08 11:49 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] iainjcoleman.livejournal.com
It suits the Tories to make a big noise about getting tough on workshy scroungers, despite this being a minor change to the existing system.

It suits Labour to whip themselves up into a froth of synthetic outrage, despite these being Labour proposals in the first place.

It suits the Lib Dems to keep their heads down on this one.

So all three parties are doing what is best for them politically, and the media is meekly playing along as usual.

Date: 2010-11-08 12:19 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] marrog.livejournal.com
...and the media is meekly playing along as usual.

That's an... interesting perception of the media's 'usual' behaviour...

Date: 2010-11-08 02:18 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] gonzo21.livejournal.com
I was really lead astray by the news media on this one, they totally failed to present the facts of the story. Thank the gods for the internet.

Date: 2010-11-08 01:23 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] cairmen.livejournal.com
The FT article linked from LC is worth a read (arguably "more worth a read"):

http://blogs.ft.com/westminster/2010/11/the-questions-for-ids-in-his-plan-to-give-hard-labour-to-workless/

Key interesting points:

- This is essentially intended to be a punishment measure for those who JSA advisors consider are "not working at trying to find a job". (Basically, if your JSA advisor doesn't think you're trying hard enough, you get sent on community service).

- There are a number of unanswered questions. The question of exploitation is the big one. There's also no answer as to how often people who aren't in work can be forced to do these jobs.

Date: 2010-11-08 03:27 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] marrog.livejournal.com
I'm interested to know how it will impact struggling artistes - people who are on benefits and using the time while they job hunt to attempt to make a freelance career for themselves being shafted by JSA Advisors who don't like scummy artists and decide that that constitutes 'not trying'. Is this sort of career choice protected anywhere?

Date: 2010-11-08 04:08 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] cairmen.livejournal.com
I'm thinking it'll teach them the valuable career skills of persuasion, charm, and total lack of shame...

(I don't think there's any protection for that at all, unless you were to somehow frame it as starting a business).

Date: 2010-11-08 04:55 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] missedith01.livejournal.com
I agree with Liberal Conspiracy's point 1 especially. And I'd also like to make the point that a person who works should normally be paid for that work. To force people to work for no return is immoral.

Date: 2010-11-08 08:48 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] princealbert.livejournal.com
I'm not unamused that Labour originally came up with the plan to make unemployed people work for their benefits.

Oh c'mon Andy did you sleep through Blunkett?
Thankfully twice before Blunkett went completly apeshit on us he got sacked for fuckin around.

Date: 2010-11-09 11:40 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] missedith01.livejournal.com
What is it about Work and Pensions that it always gets these people? James Purnell anyone? Norman Fowler? Peter Lilley and his blodoy list.

March 2026

S M T W T F S
1 2 3 4 56 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031    

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Mar. 14th, 2026 10:37 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios