Not much evidence is it. I have been told off a few doctors, that the pitfalls of not passing people as unfit, deter them from deciding to deny people their benefit or sick note. Doctors are easy meat. When was the last time you heard of anyone being denied their sicknote?
Do they? Have you cites for this? Why didn't you answer, instead of doing the very thing you have accused Kev of in the past? ie: excusing police attrocities by comparing them to doctors.
What a load of rubbish, I would have said, a few months ago. Smug in my employed world. Now I have introduced my daughter to the real world via the job centre (wot a joke) I know there are hundreds of jobs out there, with millions of applicants and they are agency jobs (the vast majority) Every single one of the scores I tried was agency. You have to spend minutes putting in your details including how many hours you are willing to work, in which area, which types of job, how many miles away etc. What a total waste of time, to get a phone number for an agency. If the waste of space employees in these unemployment centres were honest, they would print a list of agencies and pin it to the wall, then pin a card for every job on the board, like they used to do.
Yes, it can be. Many people who are neither very intelligent nor very well educated - poor literacy and numeracy - and have no particular talent for anything. In the old days they got jobs doing manual labour of various kinds. Now those jobs are not available. If you don't believe me, go and look for one. Report back here.
Not everybody is dynamic, confident and resourceful, you know. That doesn't make them scroungers.
She had two years' experience, some useful skills and - above all - she already had a job. It's relatively easy to find a new job if you already have one, especially if you have a confident personality (as hers evidently is!). It's much more difficult to get a job if you are unemployed, with little work experience and perhaps not very bright or articulate. Especially if you are competing with a million Poles (which she isn't). I should be interested to hear about her experience of finding work just after she left school.
snip
I didn't mean to imply that you had been undeservedly lucky. I don't doubt you've worked hard for what you've got. But you have been lucky in the sense that you had the opportunity and ability to take that career path and it turned out to be a well paid and secure one. Millions of others never have that chance, either through no fault of their own or through faults or mistakes that they may regret but cannot undo. Don't be so quick to write them off as lazy.
He can claim the moon is green but he would have to produce evidence. He never did. This is old news and discredited
No they aren't. He lied. The initial check is made by the patient's own GP the same as for anyone going sick. Long term IB has to be checked by a DWP doctor. You want everybody going sick and claiming state sick pay to be examined by a DWP doctor from day one?
That's correct. There are many people with a medical condition that mitigates against *any* type of work but does not stop them from being able to undertake *some* type of work.
So ask the employers why they will not employ someone with a medical condition who would like to work.
Another statement dragged out of thin air with no proof
Most people can hit a keyboard. Are you going to find 3 million jobs for keyboard bashers?
The disability discrimination act came into place the previous year. It repealed the disabled persons employment act 1944 requiring any company employing more than 12 employees to hire a proportion of registered disabled. The requirement to register as disabled with the DHSS was abolished. Since employers don't need to employ disabled workers and it is almost impossible to bring a case of discrimination the numbers have gone up.
Long term IB claimants (>6months) are assessed by a DWP doctor.
Check the numbers on the web. Around 90000 in 1997 against 140000 today and not counting all the PCSOs and parking attendants. That's a lot of salary and a lot of long term pension paid from the time they hit 50 or 55
Answer what
Most of them are sitting in offices waiting for their pensions
And the doctor is human and can be fooled by the professional sponger. As I personally know of 2 people who have hoodwinked the doctor, I presume plenty more exist, but of course it is impossible to verify or to count.
It sure is. It is about time someone did something about it, like keep them employed in a different job until 65 at the same rate of pay as a comparative worker.
asking you why the numbers of IB claiments have shot up.
"The fact is that today's benefit system has had an appalling effect upon the country and created huge incentives for many people not to seek work."
Now that is a fact and I do not withdraw one word of it. I did *NOT* say that all benefits claimants are scroungers - and nor do I believe it. My wife and I received child benefit when our children were growing up. I don't regard myself (or anyone else) in receipt of such benefits as scroungers.
The fact remains that our present system is crazy. I will be 62 next month and for the past two years I have been entitled to: free prescriptions, free eyesight tests, winter fuel allowance, free bus travel (not to mention 30% off specs at Specsavers, 10% of shopping at B&Q and Focus, etc).
For heaven's sake why? I am perfectly able to pay for all of these things and can afford my fuel bills without difficulty - and yet the government are throwing money at me. By contrast, there are plenty of young families who are desperately in need of help with their fuel bills and prescription charges - and these are the very people who are being taxed to the hilt to pay for many well-off over sixties to get free hand-outs. They system is crazy and needs a drastic overhault. Incidentally, I split my £250 fuel allowance this year and gave half each to my kids - who needed it more than I did.
I have a friend who was a shopworker. He had a mild heart attack four years ago and has never worked since. He still manages to do stacks of DIY jobs around the house and for other people. There is no reason whatever for him to be claiming incapacity benefit - and yet he does because he is no worse off than when he was working - and would obviously prefer to stay at home than go out to work.
Of course it is - but when did that ever stop Alan from making ludicrous and outrageously untrue statements?
You mean a bit like this attitude: "Most of them are sitting in offices waiting for their pensions". Yes indeed - it's impossible to argue with someone who holds such patently stupid beliefs.
No - they are chasing from job to job to job and then spending hours on paperwork to satisfy the CPS demands for court files.
She was intending to go on to 6th form college but at the last minute decided against it. She looked in the local paper, saw an advert for a hairdressing job - went down for an interview and got the job. She was there for around six months, didn't like it very much, hunted around and went for an interview for a job as an administrator in a printing firm. She got that job and worked there until she moved down to Hatfield.
No I'm not. The only people I am writing off as lazy are those who are capable of working but choose not to do so.
Exactly - the system has an in-built disincentive for people to go out and find work.
But I have to ask again - what effort are these people making to *obtain* these desirable skills? I had to work hard to get where I am. You don't get anywhere without some effort and motivation.
I don't believe that I am being 'smug' because I recognise that I am in an extremely fortunate position. The credit crunch has had barely any effect upon me at all. I'm retired, I've got an excellent pension (not far short of the average working wage), my mortgage is paid off, I have money in the bank - and in three years time (two years for my wife) we'll have even more money coming in when our State Pensions kick in. I do believe, however, that there are far too many people who are simply not willing to get out and *do* something with their lives. If they cannot get a job with the skills that they have - then they need to get additional skills - and they should be prepared to move to where the work is. I know someone who was a factory worker. The factory where he was working closed down - but he was offered the same job at an alternative site that would have meant him moving (the firm would pay for all expenses involved in the move). He turned it down because he didn't want to move - and now he is living on benefits. I'm sorry but I don't think he should be allowed benefits because he turned down the offer of a job.
A lot of employers, when they need a new employee, will initially take on an agency worker to 'try them out'. This is a simpler option for them than putting someone on their own books - only to have to get rid of them if they are no good. If an agency worker turns out to be a hard worker, however, they will be offered a permanent position with the company when the agency contract ends. Agency work is not all bad.
It is not a fact. It is a lie and one that has been repeated since the
1830s and the days of the Poor Law. In fact, the welfare state is the grease that keeps today's liberal economy going without the threat of revolution or food riots or severe social dislocation. The reality is that the nature of employment has changed. Many millions of people have been left high and dry and our capitalist society has been unwilling and unable to do very much for them other than to pay them to exist. Before the days of welfare, these people would have disappeared into a criminal underclass and the more organised and intelligent of them would have formed the nucleus of a revolutionary movement. It would be far truer to say that our free-booting capitalist system has had an appalling effect on those least able to compete and we have used the benefits system to avoid dealing with the problem and to keep us safe in our middle class beds.
BeanSmart website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.