York delivery worker hit by benefit sanctions

York Press: MP Hugh Bayley MP Hugh Bayley

A YORK man who works part-time 364 days a year has had to turn to the Salvation Army for food, after falling victim to controversial benefit-sanctioning policies, his MP says.

The man had a small part-time, low-paid delivery job, 364 days of the year, but also received Jobseeker’s Allowance to top up his income, said York Central MP Hugh Bayley.

He says that to qualify for this, the Job Centre said he had to apply for ten jobs a week.

But Mr Bayley said: “He is dyslexic and struggles to use a computer to apply for jobs online. One week he only managed to apply for nine of the ten jobs and his benefit was “sanctioned”.

This means his allowance was taken away for a month. His housing benefit was also stopped and he was forced to go to the Salvation Army for food parcels.”

Mr Bayley tells the story today in his monthly column in The Press.

He says another constituent who worked in a bar had his hours reduced to a zero-hours contract, which meant he was no longer guaranteed enough hours of work to live on.

Mr Bayley said: “When he applied for benefits, the Job Centre wrote to his employer to ask when he left his job.

“His employer said that he didn’t know he had left and sacked him. The Job Centre then sanctioned him because they said he had left his job voluntarily.”

Mr Bayley said many such people had contacted him after being sanctioned by the Job Centre, or because of a delay in getting their benefit paid.

“More and more frequently they are forced to turn to food banks because they cannot afford to feed themselves and their family,” he said. He said that anyone who could work should do all they could to get a job, but sanctions should be applied fairly.

A Department of Work and Pensions spokesman said: “It’s only right that people claiming benefits should do everything they can to find work if they are able.

“The rules regarding someone’s entitlement to Jobseekers’ Allowance – and what could happen to their benefits if they don’t stick to those rules – are made very clear at the start of their claim.

“We will provide jobseekers with the help and support they need to find a job, but it is only fair that in return they live up to their part of the contract.

“Sanctions are used as a last resort and anyone who disagrees with a decision can appeal.”

Comments (21)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

10:23am Fri 20 Dec 13

smudge2 says...

There's alway one.
There's alway one. smudge2

10:34am Fri 20 Dec 13

asd says...

Hmm apeal after they have sanctioned you and you have nothing to live off. Unfortuantley the workers are told to stick to the letter of legistation even if they have legitamate reasons like a death, disability, illness. Just need to look at ATOS doctor who resigned as he was appaled at the inhuman way they were applying there policies unfairly to the extreme that they were actually falsifying results. Scum Goverments past and present dont give a toss except for the wealthy
Hmm apeal after they have sanctioned you and you have nothing to live off. Unfortuantley the workers are told to stick to the letter of legistation even if they have legitamate reasons like a death, disability, illness. Just need to look at ATOS doctor who resigned as he was appaled at the inhuman way they were applying there policies unfairly to the extreme that they were actually falsifying results. Scum Goverments past and present dont give a toss except for the wealthy asd

10:39am Fri 20 Dec 13

Pedro says...

asd wrote:
Hmm apeal after they have sanctioned you and you have nothing to live off. Unfortuantley the workers are told to stick to the letter of legistation even if they have legitamate reasons like a death, disability, illness. Just need to look at ATOS doctor who resigned as he was appaled at the inhuman way they were applying there policies unfairly to the extreme that they were actually falsifying results. Scum Goverments past and present dont give a toss except for the wealthy
ATOS never employs actual doctors. They are too expensive. They are called Heath Professionals.
[quote][p][bold]asd[/bold] wrote: Hmm apeal after they have sanctioned you and you have nothing to live off. Unfortuantley the workers are told to stick to the letter of legistation even if they have legitamate reasons like a death, disability, illness. Just need to look at ATOS doctor who resigned as he was appaled at the inhuman way they were applying there policies unfairly to the extreme that they were actually falsifying results. Scum Goverments past and present dont give a toss except for the wealthy[/p][/quote]ATOS never employs actual doctors. They are too expensive. They are called Heath Professionals. Pedro

10:52am Fri 20 Dec 13

Pedro says...

The benefit office look for easy targets. If you work (or look after somebody full time) you can get Income Support. Not JSA.
The benefit office look for easy targets. If you work (or look after somebody full time) you can get Income Support. Not JSA. Pedro

10:58am Fri 20 Dec 13

Zetkin says...

Ah yes, Atos's "Health Professionals"...

I think the person who conducted an interview with a disabled member of my family recently had perhaps worked as a cleaner or switchboard operator in a dental surgery at some time in his life.

My relative's ability to receive a text message from a family member in another city, and to travel half a mile to the assessment centre seem to be the crucial things that prove she can work, according to this "professional."

As for the DWP spokesmen, you can almost see the odious IDS pulling his strings; the right of appeal means virtually nothing if you are left with no money to live on for a fortnight while the Byzantine bureaucracy decides whether it thinks you are "deserving" or "undeserving" poor..
Ah yes, Atos's "Health Professionals"... I think the person who conducted an interview with a disabled member of my family recently had perhaps worked as a cleaner or switchboard operator in a dental surgery at some time in his life. My relative's ability to receive a text message from a family member in another city, and to travel half a mile to the assessment centre seem to be the crucial things that prove she can work, according to this "professional." As for the DWP spokesmen, you can almost see the odious IDS pulling his strings; the right of appeal means virtually nothing if you are left with no money to live on for a fortnight while the Byzantine bureaucracy decides whether it thinks you are "deserving" or "undeserving" poor.. Zetkin

11:06am Fri 20 Dec 13

roskoboskovic says...

the health professional who conducted my interview was the least professional person i ve ever met as well as being rude and obnoxious.you do realise though that ATOS get paid for every person knocked off benefit and the supposed health professional gets an incentive to force claimants into work.
the health professional who conducted my interview was the least professional person i ve ever met as well as being rude and obnoxious.you do realise though that ATOS get paid for every person knocked off benefit and the supposed health professional gets an incentive to force claimants into work. roskoboskovic

1:47pm Fri 20 Dec 13

Thecynic says...

I don't have a problem with people getting sanctioned if they deserve it. However it does seem that there is a political motif behind the recent spate of increases in benefit sanctions, and it really should be questioned.

When a person is sanctioned they no longer appear on the unemployment statistics for that month or however long they have been sanctioned for, distorting the figures and making the Gov't and Jobcentres look good.
The question is, how many of these increases in the rate of sanctions are genuine, and how many are for the purposes of making the figures look better? either by Government, or by the Jobcentre.

If it's the former and they are all genuine examples of sanctions for repeated breaches then fine, however if they (or some of them) are not, then those who issue these sanctions really need to disciplined and trained how to apply the rules as they were intended.

After all, sanctioning someone means stopping ALL income for at least a Month, pushing people further into debt, crime and possible money lending sharks, so the decision shouldn't be made either lightly, or to achieve some sort of political goal.
Even the Courts wouldn't dream of fining someone to the point that they had no income at all left for a Month. Though I'm sure that there would be some unscrupulous employers who may wish that they could get away without paying someones salary for a Month for a minor breach of their contract, while they still had to turn in a do their job!

Maybe in time ? I'm sure the Tories will look at something along those lines.
I don't have a problem with people getting sanctioned if they deserve it. However it does seem that there is a political motif behind the recent spate of increases in benefit sanctions, and it really should be questioned. When a person is sanctioned they no longer appear on the unemployment statistics for that month or however long they have been sanctioned for, distorting the figures and making the Gov't and Jobcentres look good. The question is, how many of these increases in the rate of sanctions are genuine, and how many are for the purposes of making the figures look better? either by Government, or by the Jobcentre. If it's the former and they are all genuine examples of sanctions for repeated breaches then fine, however if they (or some of them) are not, then those who issue these sanctions really need to disciplined and trained how to apply the rules as they were intended. After all, sanctioning someone means stopping ALL income for at least a Month, pushing people further into debt, crime and possible money lending sharks, so the decision shouldn't be made either lightly, or to achieve some sort of political goal. Even the Courts wouldn't dream of fining someone to the point that they had no income at all left for a Month. Though I'm sure that there would be some unscrupulous employers who may wish that they could get away without paying someones salary for a Month for a minor breach of their contract, while they still had to turn in a do their job! Maybe in time ? I'm sure the Tories will look at something along those lines. Thecynic

1:54pm Fri 20 Dec 13

MarkyMarkMark says...

"The rules regarding someone’s entitlement to Jobseekers’ Allowance – and what could happen to their benefits if they don’t stick to those rules – are made very clear at the start of their claim."

Sometimes. And sometimes not. And they appear to be inconsistent "rules" anyway around the number of jobs that must be applied for, the amount of time you must spend doing it, no check made on the understanding of those rules by people claiming ...

I do think people should fulfill their half of the deal and be actively seeking work - but I also think the Jobseekers Allowance "Sanctions" process has become a rather nasty stick used to punish the unemployed for being unemployed, not to give them an incentive to seek work.

And I hate to say it, but it's beginning to sound like some people think that's a good thing and are enjoying the misery it causes others less fortunate/well off than themeselves.
"The rules regarding someone’s entitlement to Jobseekers’ Allowance – and what could happen to their benefits if they don’t stick to those rules – are made very clear at the start of their claim." Sometimes. And sometimes not. And they appear to be inconsistent "rules" anyway around the number of jobs that must be applied for, the amount of time you must spend doing it, no check made on the understanding of those rules by people claiming ... I do think people should fulfill their half of the deal and be actively seeking work - but I also think the Jobseekers Allowance "Sanctions" process has become a rather nasty stick used to punish the unemployed for being unemployed, not to give them an incentive to seek work. And I hate to say it, but it's beginning to sound like some people think that's a good thing and are enjoying the misery it causes others less fortunate/well off than themeselves. MarkyMarkMark

3:10pm Fri 20 Dec 13

Maquis says...

Hugh Bailey jumping in when someone looses benefits.... now there is a surprise.
Strangely quiet when the major industry in York is moved elsewhere, but vocal on benefits.
Typical of him and his welfare party.
Hugh Bailey jumping in when someone looses benefits.... now there is a surprise. Strangely quiet when the major industry in York is moved elsewhere, but vocal on benefits. Typical of him and his welfare party. Maquis

3:15pm Fri 20 Dec 13

mike.......durkin says...

I lost my job at remploy in york most of them are still looking for jobs
when they do get a job they use them and get rid of them when the time is up..
I like my self work park time been waiting for a full time work for a long time
there...
i dont get benifits we all need help..
its a hard life
not got help off hugh bayley when we lost remploy
I lost my job at remploy in york most of them are still looking for jobs when they do get a job they use them and get rid of them when the time is up.. I like my self work park time been waiting for a full time work for a long time there... i dont get benifits we all need help.. its a hard life not got help off hugh bayley when we lost remploy mike.......durkin

4:11pm Fri 20 Dec 13

big boy york says...

as i posted earlier in week about falling jobless figures, its 10 jobs a fortnight you have to look for minimum, but when i did 22 job applications in my fortnight i got bollocked by my advisor for applying for to many jobs. so if you dont do your 10 a fortnight you get sanctioned, do more you get bollocked you cant win with this govt
as i posted earlier in week about falling jobless figures, its 10 jobs a fortnight you have to look for minimum, but when i did 22 job applications in my fortnight i got bollocked by my advisor for applying for to many jobs. so if you dont do your 10 a fortnight you get sanctioned, do more you get bollocked you cant win with this govt big boy york

4:16pm Fri 20 Dec 13

Guthred says...

mike.......durkin wrote:
I lost my job at remploy in york most of them are still looking for jobs
when they do get a job they use them and get rid of them when the time is up..
I like my self work park time been waiting for a full time work for a long time
there...
i dont get benifits we all need help..
its a hard life
not got help off hugh bayley when we lost remploy
I was up in arms about the Remploy closures, so much so I stopped my modest monthly payment to Scope (one of the charities supporting the closure). Do you know any ex-employee of Remploy in York that managed to find suitable and sustainable work and is now better off? I do not see any companies in York making a pledge of being "disability friendly" - perhaps they should come forward and show the commitment they are making to our city?
[quote][p][bold]mike.......durkin[/bold] wrote: I lost my job at remploy in york most of them are still looking for jobs when they do get a job they use them and get rid of them when the time is up.. I like my self work park time been waiting for a full time work for a long time there... i dont get benifits we all need help.. its a hard life not got help off hugh bayley when we lost remploy[/p][/quote]I was up in arms about the Remploy closures, so much so I stopped my modest monthly payment to Scope (one of the charities supporting the closure). Do you know any ex-employee of Remploy in York that managed to find suitable and sustainable work and is now better off? I do not see any companies in York making a pledge of being "disability friendly" - perhaps they should come forward and show the commitment they are making to our city? Guthred

4:32pm Fri 20 Dec 13

mike.......durkin says...

Guthred wrote:
mike.......durkin wrote:
I lost my job at remploy in york most of them are still looking for jobs
when they do get a job they use them and get rid of them when the time is up..
I like my self work park time been waiting for a full time work for a long time
there...
i dont get benifits we all need help..
its a hard life
not got help off hugh bayley when we lost remploy
I was up in arms about the Remploy closures, so much so I stopped my modest monthly payment to Scope (one of the charities supporting the closure). Do you know any ex-employee of Remploy in York that managed to find suitable and sustainable work and is now better off? I do not see any companies in York making a pledge of being "disability friendly" - perhaps they should come forward and show the commitment they are making to our city?
yes i do no them and we not better off you got no idear wot we all went throw
[quote][p][bold]Guthred[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mike.......durkin[/bold] wrote: I lost my job at remploy in york most of them are still looking for jobs when they do get a job they use them and get rid of them when the time is up.. I like my self work park time been waiting for a full time work for a long time there... i dont get benifits we all need help.. its a hard life not got help off hugh bayley when we lost remploy[/p][/quote]I was up in arms about the Remploy closures, so much so I stopped my modest monthly payment to Scope (one of the charities supporting the closure). Do you know any ex-employee of Remploy in York that managed to find suitable and sustainable work and is now better off? I do not see any companies in York making a pledge of being "disability friendly" - perhaps they should come forward and show the commitment they are making to our city?[/p][/quote]yes i do no them and we not better off you got no idear wot we all went throw mike.......durkin

4:47pm Fri 20 Dec 13

mike.......durkin says...

mike.......durkin wrote:
Guthred wrote:
mike.......durkin wrote:
I lost my job at remploy in york most of them are still looking for jobs
when they do get a job they use them and get rid of them when the time is up..
I like my self work park time been waiting for a full time work for a long time
there...
i dont get benifits we all need help..
its a hard life
not got help off hugh bayley when we lost remploy
I was up in arms about the Remploy closures, so much so I stopped my modest monthly payment to Scope (one of the charities supporting the closure). Do you know any ex-employee of Remploy in York that managed to find suitable and sustainable work and is now better off? I do not see any companies in York making a pledge of being "disability friendly" - perhaps they should come forward and show the commitment they are making to our city?
yes i do no them and we not better off you got no idear wot we all went throw
some of them got jobs but still not better off some off them have still out of a jobs
[quote][p][bold]mike.......durkin[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Guthred[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mike.......durkin[/bold] wrote: I lost my job at remploy in york most of them are still looking for jobs when they do get a job they use them and get rid of them when the time is up.. I like my self work park time been waiting for a full time work for a long time there... i dont get benifits we all need help.. its a hard life not got help off hugh bayley when we lost remploy[/p][/quote]I was up in arms about the Remploy closures, so much so I stopped my modest monthly payment to Scope (one of the charities supporting the closure). Do you know any ex-employee of Remploy in York that managed to find suitable and sustainable work and is now better off? I do not see any companies in York making a pledge of being "disability friendly" - perhaps they should come forward and show the commitment they are making to our city?[/p][/quote]yes i do no them and we not better off you got no idear wot we all went throw[/p][/quote]some of them got jobs but still not better off some off them have still out of a jobs mike.......durkin

1:46am Sat 21 Dec 13

Magicman! says...

Pedro wrote:
The benefit office look for easy targets. If you work (or look after somebody full time) you can get Income Support. Not JSA.
Only if you're working over 16 hours a week, otherwise it's Jobseekers - as the benefits office don't see less than 16 hours a week as actually 'working'.
[quote][p][bold]Pedro[/bold] wrote: The benefit office look for easy targets. If you work (or look after somebody full time) you can get Income Support. Not JSA.[/p][/quote]Only if you're working over 16 hours a week, otherwise it's Jobseekers - as the benefits office don't see less than 16 hours a week as actually 'working'. Magicman!

1:49am Sat 21 Dec 13

Magicman! says...

roskoboskovic wrote:
the health professional who conducted my interview was the least professional person i ve ever met as well as being rude and obnoxious.you do realise though that ATOS get paid for every person knocked off benefit and the supposed health professional gets an incentive to force claimants into work.
And the funny thing is that the hundreds of millions of pounds that Cameron and his crooks are paying to ATOS is actually several times MORE than the money they are actually saving by not paying benefits to the people kicked off disability allowance etc. SO in essence they're wasting taxpayer money and at the same time killing off the most vulnerable disabled members of society by removing their support net.... I would say this government is one of the most despicable ones for a generation, but sadly Labour agree with these policies too.
[quote][p][bold]roskoboskovic[/bold] wrote: the health professional who conducted my interview was the least professional person i ve ever met as well as being rude and obnoxious.you do realise though that ATOS get paid for every person knocked off benefit and the supposed health professional gets an incentive to force claimants into work.[/p][/quote]And the funny thing is that the hundreds of millions of pounds that Cameron and his crooks are paying to ATOS is actually several times MORE than the money they are actually saving by not paying benefits to the people kicked off disability allowance etc. SO in essence they're wasting taxpayer money and at the same time killing off the most vulnerable disabled members of society by removing their support net.... I would say this government is one of the most despicable ones for a generation, but sadly Labour agree with these policies too. Magicman!

1:52am Sat 21 Dec 13

Magicman! says...

Thecynic wrote:
I don't have a problem with people getting sanctioned if they deserve it. However it does seem that there is a political motif behind the recent spate of increases in benefit sanctions, and it really should be questioned.

When a person is sanctioned they no longer appear on the unemployment statistics for that month or however long they have been sanctioned for, distorting the figures and making the Gov't and Jobcentres look good.
The question is, how many of these increases in the rate of sanctions are genuine, and how many are for the purposes of making the figures look better? either by Government, or by the Jobcentre.

If it's the former and they are all genuine examples of sanctions for repeated breaches then fine, however if they (or some of them) are not, then those who issue these sanctions really need to disciplined and trained how to apply the rules as they were intended.

After all, sanctioning someone means stopping ALL income for at least a Month, pushing people further into debt, crime and possible money lending sharks, so the decision shouldn't be made either lightly, or to achieve some sort of political goal.
Even the Courts wouldn't dream of fining someone to the point that they had no income at all left for a Month. Though I'm sure that there would be some unscrupulous employers who may wish that they could get away without paying someones salary for a Month for a minor breach of their contract, while they still had to turn in a do their job!

Maybe in time ? I'm sure the Tories will look at something along those lines.
I doubt it.

I got sanctioned when I got a job!! Apparently I hadn't been doing enough to find work in the days after I had been told I had got a position of employment and the next time I had to sign on. When you are dealing with a system and beaurocrats beyond belief like that then where can you do, what is there to be done?
[quote][p][bold]Thecynic[/bold] wrote: I don't have a problem with people getting sanctioned if they deserve it. However it does seem that there is a political motif behind the recent spate of increases in benefit sanctions, and it really should be questioned. When a person is sanctioned they no longer appear on the unemployment statistics for that month or however long they have been sanctioned for, distorting the figures and making the Gov't and Jobcentres look good. The question is, how many of these increases in the rate of sanctions are genuine, and how many are for the purposes of making the figures look better? either by Government, or by the Jobcentre. If it's the former and they are all genuine examples of sanctions for repeated breaches then fine, however if they (or some of them) are not, then those who issue these sanctions really need to disciplined and trained how to apply the rules as they were intended. After all, sanctioning someone means stopping ALL income for at least a Month, pushing people further into debt, crime and possible money lending sharks, so the decision shouldn't be made either lightly, or to achieve some sort of political goal. Even the Courts wouldn't dream of fining someone to the point that they had no income at all left for a Month. Though I'm sure that there would be some unscrupulous employers who may wish that they could get away without paying someones salary for a Month for a minor breach of their contract, while they still had to turn in a do their job! Maybe in time ? I'm sure the Tories will look at something along those lines.[/p][/quote]I doubt it. I got sanctioned when I got a job!! Apparently I hadn't been doing enough to find work in the days after I had been told I had got a position of employment and the next time I had to sign on. When you are dealing with a system and beaurocrats beyond belief like that then where can you do, what is there to be done? Magicman!

2:04am Sat 21 Dec 13

Magicman! says...

MarkyMarkMark wrote:
"The rules regarding someone’s entitlement to Jobseekers’ Allowance – and what could happen to their benefits if they don’t stick to those rules – are made very clear at the start of their claim."

Sometimes. And sometimes not. And they appear to be inconsistent "rules" anyway around the number of jobs that must be applied for, the amount of time you must spend doing it, no check made on the understanding of those rules by people claiming ...

I do think people should fulfill their half of the deal and be actively seeking work - but I also think the Jobseekers Allowance "Sanctions" process has become a rather nasty stick used to punish the unemployed for being unemployed, not to give them an incentive to seek work.

And I hate to say it, but it's beginning to sound like some people think that's a good thing and are enjoying the misery it causes others less fortunate/well off than themeselves.
True... but the reason behind that is because for several years the government has been very craftily putting in either subliminal or outright obvious messages to make the general public think anybody on benefits is "a scrounger" or "a sponger" or a "hapless workshy layabout" and that they are poor "because they don't work hard enough" - a quick read of a certain 2 tabloid newspapers will show that off perfectly. Then you get the TV programmes.... "In this programme two rich people pair up people who work with examples of benefits claimants that took our production staff several months to find such people that get benefits and then spend it on Sky TV, fags and alcohol, or that live with family members and get everything paid for and bought by those members; so that the working people say to them 'you should get a proper job'", or "in this programme we have got some modern benefits claimants and set up examples of what it was like to be on benefits several years ago to make them think they are doing something wrong now", or "we managed to find somebody who keeps popping out children just to get more benefits money" - even hijacking a news item about a mentally imbalanced bloke on benefits who tried to commit insurance fraud by setting his house on fire but accidentally killed his kids in the process, politicians hijacking it saying that his actions were somehow a direct result of him being on benefits.... then you get storylines in popular TV programmes against a person on benefits...
... all of that adds up so as to convice those too stupid to realise they are being force fed a load of tripe that somehow all the country's woes are due to people on benefits - this then turns the population against each other, meanwhile going out the back door into a waiting limo are the politicians and their wealthy friends who have grabbed all the money and are running with it.

A powerful man once said "All propaganda has to be popular and has to accommodate itself to the comprehension of the least intelligent of those whom it seeks to reach." and "By the skillful and sustained use of propaganda, one can make a people see even heaven as hell or an extremely wretched life as paradise.".... pity he then went on to invade Poland.
[quote][p][bold]MarkyMarkMark[/bold] wrote: "The rules regarding someone’s entitlement to Jobseekers’ Allowance – and what could happen to their benefits if they don’t stick to those rules – are made very clear at the start of their claim." Sometimes. And sometimes not. And they appear to be inconsistent "rules" anyway around the number of jobs that must be applied for, the amount of time you must spend doing it, no check made on the understanding of those rules by people claiming ... I do think people should fulfill their half of the deal and be actively seeking work - but I also think the Jobseekers Allowance "Sanctions" process has become a rather nasty stick used to punish the unemployed for being unemployed, not to give them an incentive to seek work. And I hate to say it, but it's beginning to sound like some people think that's a good thing and are enjoying the misery it causes others less fortunate/well off than themeselves.[/p][/quote]True... but the reason behind that is because for several years the government has been very craftily putting in either subliminal or outright obvious messages to make the general public think anybody on benefits is "a scrounger" or "a sponger" or a "hapless workshy layabout" and that they are poor "because they don't work hard enough" - a quick read of a certain 2 tabloid newspapers will show that off perfectly. Then you get the TV programmes.... "In this programme two rich people pair up people who work with examples of benefits claimants that took our production staff several months to find such people that get benefits and then spend it on Sky TV, fags and alcohol, or that live with family members and get everything paid for and bought by those members; so that the working people say to them 'you should get a proper job'", or "in this programme we have got some modern benefits claimants and set up examples of what it was like to be on benefits several years ago to make them think they are doing something wrong now", or "we managed to find somebody who keeps popping out children just to get more benefits money" - even hijacking a news item about a mentally imbalanced bloke on benefits who tried to commit insurance fraud by setting his house on fire but accidentally killed his kids in the process, politicians hijacking it saying that his actions were somehow a direct result of him being on benefits.... then you get storylines in popular TV programmes against a person on benefits... ... all of that adds up so as to convice those too stupid to realise they are being force fed a load of tripe that somehow all the country's woes are due to people on benefits - this then turns the population against each other, meanwhile going out the back door into a waiting limo are the politicians and their wealthy friends who have grabbed all the money and are running with it. A powerful man once said "All propaganda has to be popular and has to accommodate itself to the comprehension of the least intelligent of those whom it seeks to reach." and "By the skillful and sustained use of propaganda, one can make a people see even heaven as hell or an extremely wretched life as paradise.".... pity he then went on to invade Poland. Magicman!

2:15am Sat 21 Dec 13

Magicman! says...

mike.......durkin wrote:
I lost my job at remploy in york most of them are still looking for jobs
when they do get a job they use them and get rid of them when the time is up..
I like my self work park time been waiting for a full time work for a long time
there...
i dont get benifits we all need help..
its a hard life
not got help off hugh bayley when we lost remploy
This is what annoys me.... the government have shut down facilities that helped disabled people, then they have brought in conmen who hide behind a veil posing to be "helping disabled people reach their potential" whereas in reality they've been hired to kick as many disabled people off of the benefits they were given life entitlement to (Autism, Cerebal Palsy, etc are lifelong diseases, you can't just take a pill and it goes away) so that less money is paid out in benefits that way - this then puts a lot of disabled people onto the Jobseekers roll; but that maens the person has to actively seek work by means of filling out application forms and attending interviews - what if the person has Dyslexia and MS or ME and so on the day of the interview cannot even get out of bed? according to the jobcentre the person skipped the interview on purpose and so gets benefits cut for a month (then 6 months, and so on); and the number of hoops to jump through increases the longer a person is on Jobseekers... couple this to the fact it is an employers market out there (whereby companies can cream off the very best of the best and leave everybody else) and a disabled person has a higher chance of winning several million pounds on Lotto than of actually getting a meaningful job - and eventually the requirements for getting jobseekers allowance will not be able to be met, so the disabled person loses their Jobseekers:- so what the plan is, is a lengthy way of brutally forcing people off of benefits entirely - by cutting their disability benefits and shifting them to something that they have to meet targets to obtain, targets which eventually cannot be attained. So what Cameron is doing is cutting the very weak and most vulnerable in our society away from the system put in place to support them and help them have some form of life.... That is low and debased, utterly despicable.
[quote][p][bold]mike.......durkin[/bold] wrote: I lost my job at remploy in york most of them are still looking for jobs when they do get a job they use them and get rid of them when the time is up.. I like my self work park time been waiting for a full time work for a long time there... i dont get benifits we all need help.. its a hard life not got help off hugh bayley when we lost remploy[/p][/quote]This is what annoys me.... the government have shut down facilities that helped disabled people, then they have brought in conmen who hide behind a veil posing to be "helping disabled people reach their potential" whereas in reality they've been hired to kick as many disabled people off of the benefits they were given life entitlement to (Autism, Cerebal Palsy, etc are lifelong diseases, you can't just take a pill and it goes away) so that less money is paid out in benefits that way - this then puts a lot of disabled people onto the Jobseekers roll; but that maens the person has to actively seek work by means of filling out application forms and attending interviews - what if the person has Dyslexia and MS or ME and so on the day of the interview cannot even get out of bed? according to the jobcentre the person skipped the interview on purpose and so gets benefits cut for a month (then 6 months, and so on); and the number of hoops to jump through increases the longer a person is on Jobseekers... couple this to the fact it is an employers market out there (whereby companies can cream off the very best of the best and leave everybody else) and a disabled person has a higher chance of winning several million pounds on Lotto than of actually getting a meaningful job - and eventually the requirements for getting jobseekers allowance will not be able to be met, so the disabled person loses their Jobseekers:- so what the plan is, is a lengthy way of brutally forcing people off of benefits entirely - by cutting their disability benefits and shifting them to something that they have to meet targets to obtain, targets which eventually cannot be attained. So what Cameron is doing is cutting the very weak and most vulnerable in our society away from the system put in place to support them and help them have some form of life.... That is low and debased, utterly despicable. Magicman!

5:00am Sat 21 Dec 13

ReginaldBiscuit says...

Funny how the worst off in society are being crapped on and yet not one of the bankers who brought the country to near disaster are punished. The money men of this country own the politicians and in turn, the politicians pick off those who are less able to fightback. JSA costs the country a fraction of it's budget yet IDS seems intent on whipping up a criminalization frenzy associated with those who claim it.

The Tories are no better than the Nazi's. They thrive on division, hate and contempt. They reward the rich and penalize the poor.
Funny how the worst off in society are being crapped on and yet not one of the bankers who brought the country to near disaster are punished. The money men of this country own the politicians and in turn, the politicians pick off those who are less able to fightback. JSA costs the country a fraction of it's budget yet IDS seems intent on whipping up a criminalization frenzy associated with those who claim it. The Tories are no better than the Nazi's. They thrive on division, hate and contempt. They reward the rich and penalize the poor. ReginaldBiscuit

2:36pm Sat 21 Dec 13

CaroleBaines says...

Anyone who thinks those working at the Job Centre are even half way competent haven't dealt with them ever. Through work I deal with many of the casualties of the Job Centre and despair at the level of mistakes made and how hard it is to put them right.
Anyone who thinks those working at the Job Centre are even half way competent haven't dealt with them ever. Through work I deal with many of the casualties of the Job Centre and despair at the level of mistakes made and how hard it is to put them right. CaroleBaines

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree