According to Iain Duncan Smith [url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21490542smart people over look the importance of effective shelf-stacking[/url.

This bloke is just a disgrace but he knows what he's doing, so he'll carry on mentioning that job seekers get paid to stack shelves at pound land whilst completely ignoring that others get paid more to do the same job as those on JSA.

I also find IDS claims of most young people loving their work experience placements laughable. Shelf staking isn't a job many people love but they'll do it for the right amount of money. Even his arch nemesis Cait Reilly is stacking shelves at Morrisons now

IDS spoke of the thousands of youngsters who came upto him, the length and breadth of the country, begging to work for next to nothing just to gain some work experience.
Must be true, he said it on the AMS this morning.

I hope his government are busy creating the thousands of [ireal[/i jobs ready to facilitate these experienced workers once they've finished their incredibly sought after Workfare placements.

IDS = T0SSER with a capital T.

There are a couple of things in that reported conversation that IDS had that concern me...

1. His assertion that JSA and other benefits can only be "earned" by being forced to labour in a job not of your choosing, forced labout by any other definition, totally ignoring the fact that most benefits paid to the unemployed come under the banner of "contribution" benefits (like JSA for instance), benefits which you are ENTITLED to request after you have paid NIS contributions - we'll also ignore the fact that he carefully avoids using the word "wage" when refering to the forced labour priciple and therefore side-steps the illegality of paying someone half the legal minimum wage.

2. His assertion that 50% of those on the workfare program do not draw benefits after they have completed the course - I'd like to know what happens to them because I have not seen any statistics that suggests that 50% of those on the program find employment at the end of it, indeed the figure I have seen have been in single percentage digits - so where do 50% of workfare claimants go after completion, why do they not claim the benefits that they were claiming before and during the program, who or what stops their benefits at the end of the six week program - we deserve to be given an explanation from IDS, its either true in which case why, or its complete bollax in which case why.

He was nauseatingly aggressive in his interview this morning.
Was basically saying that Miss Reilly was a smart@rse who thinks she is too superior to work in Poundland.
'Who does she think she is', type of attitude.

Just more hoodwinking from these bullies running the show.
Trying to dumb down the most needy in our society because they themselves haven't got a fooking clue how to kickstart the economy.

[iCommenting further on the case, Mr Duncan Smith said: "I understand she said she wasn't paid. She was paid jobseeker's allowance, by the taxpayer, to do this.[/i


Two things about that statement:

1) She was paid jobseekers allowance. Either IDS is thick or just plain ignorant because I like the rest of this country assume jobseekers allowance is paid to allow you to "jobseek", or use the money for basics while you "jobseek" which then leads onto..

2). she "sought" a "job" at Poundstretcher. Why wasn't she paid minimum wage for the duration of that job and why was she allowed to continue receiving jobseekers allowance when she couldn't "seek work" because she was working???

I'll tell you what happens and this is from firsthand experience. The antidotes I'm about to mention are ones I've wrote about on these very boards before.

When I was younger and naive I did two weeks of free labor at ASDA. This was all organised by Remploy who promised that they'll help me get some work but I'd have to prove my worth first. Well at this point I've been unemployed for a year so with encouragement (outright pressure from some) from a lot of people I though I'd give it a go. Now I'd be working for my Job Seekers Allowance whilst working alongside people who I went to school with who'd be getting paid more on a hourly rate than me for doing the same work. These schoolmates went straight from school and got a job at ASDA. None of them needed 'work experience' to stack shelves and staff the tills - just a little bit of training.

Anyhow I was working alongside a fellow job seeker (also with Remploy) who stuck out his ten week placement at ASDA. After that ten weeks he was offered a temporary job with ASDA but once this temporary contract was up he was back on the dole with me. The next time I bumped into this bloke he's done ten free weeks at Morrison's and got a temporary job at Morrison's after that. But he's back on the dole because I've recently caught up with him at Ingeus where he'll no doubt be sent off to do more free labor.

He's had it bad but the worse example of exploitation I came across was when I went on a little demonstration across Leeds with SOL-FED to protest against the likes of Best LTD, a4e and ATOS.

I got talking to this woman who was about twenty and she said that Best LTD have helped her get a job. So told me that she went on a six month unpaid placement at Primark and ended up getting a one year fully paid contact with Primark. But after that year was over she was back on the dole and the now defunct Best LTD (now renamed Interserve) probably packed her off to six more months of free labor at another retail shop in Leeds.

This is what I think is happening with the work programme at its best. Yeah people are getting proper paid work at the end unpaid placements but it'll be temporary and they'll soon be on the dole to make way for the next person who's completed an unpaid placement.

Schemes like New Deal, Flexible New Deal and The Work Programme to me are nothing more than sophisticated versions of a Long Firm that criminal gangs run.

Here is the wikipedia definition:



Basically the unemployed are the goods and the likes of a4e are long firms that collaborate with big multinational companies for one shared motive: profit. Education should have led the people of this country to better places but instead it's took some of them into the hands of poverty pimps like a4e.

Once the Work Programme is scrapped it'll be renamed something else so that this scam will continue on just like the long firms of yesteryear. The likes of a4e have all been paid off for the cancellation of the failed Flexible New Deal and that money has been used to fund the Work Programme.

My final antidote.

I know a bloke who's never had paid work in his life but he's done thirteen years worth of voluntary work for the council which he enjoyed. However after those thirteen years he spent ten years in complete isolation and then at 47 years old he was diagnosed with Aspergers Syndrome. This diagnoses has helped him socially but the chances of staff from the Work Programme helping him get permanent fully paid work for the first time in his life is zero.

Now this bloke has some stories to tell about how bad staff are on these back-to-work schemes. Recently he was asked to build a giraffe out of tin foil in order to build up his confidence.

How is building tinfoil giraffes going to get anyone a job?

It's just wrong all of it.

I'd suggest that the vast majority of the working-age population have plenty of ongoing experience of shelf-stacking. Whenever we shop at a supermarket, we take products from a shelf, pay for them at the checkout and then take them home and stack them in our cupboards/fridges/freezers. Whoever thought up the idea of paying a company to teach us to do this is beyond barmy

She ought to have him in court or at least demand an apology for deliberate misrepresentation of her position.

She went out of her way to mention she doesn't think such jobs are below her and is now working (for a wage!) in Morrisons while still doing her voluntary work to try and further her career ambitions.

For IDS to basically attack this young woman with a pile of opinionated lies is a disgrace.

A certain A Bevan had a very low opinion of Tories and I am sure IDS fits the bill down to a tee:

From a speech made in 1945:

"That is why no amount of cajolery, and no attempts at ethical or social seduction, can eradicate from my heart a deep burning hatred for the Tory Party that inflicted those bitter experiences on me. So far as I am concerned they are lower than vermin. They condemned millions of first-class people to semi-starvation. Now the Tories are pouring out money in propaganda of all sorts and are hoping by this organised sustained mass suggestion to eradicate from our minds all memory of what we went through. But, I warn you young men and women, do not listen to what they are saying now. Do not listen to the seductions of Lord Woolton. He is a very good salesman. If you are selling shoddy stuff you have to be a good salesman. But I warn you they have not changed, or if they have they are slightly worse than they were."

Replace Lord Woolton with IDS and that is as applicable today as in 1945!

Hence the last part of my sig

And mine

[url=http://www.geolsoc.org.uk/en/Policy%20and%20Media/Press%20Releases/Were%20not%20above%20shelf%20stacking%20say%20geologistsGeological Society responds to IDS's daftness.[/url

I think the idea has merit for the long term unemployed (of working age etc) I think the skills that it develops are more to do with the whole process of getting up and going to work for a few weeks.

It's quite a transition for someone who is used to having the day as their own to then have to be up, dressed and in work for a relatively early time in the morning.

Totally unsuitable for the recently unemployed, but think it has use to the long term jsa claimants imo.

That is the most ridiculous justification of the lot. No one needs to learn how to get up and go to work.



An equally ridiculous assertion.



It is totally unsuitable for anyone. Shelf stacking at poundland benefits no one except poundland who get free labour. The idea the long term unemployed need to do this so they can learn to get up in the morning is beyond moronic.

Mencap are pulling out of the Work Programme.

I am shocked they were in it in the first place.

Charities like Mencap have been involved with placing disabled people into free labor for a very long time. It's just hard and universally unacceptable to criticize charities because they help the children.

[urlhttp://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/02/17/iain-duncan-smith-hits-ou_n_2705512.html[/url

[i"I am not going to give way on this. I absolutely clearly tell you this: people who think it is their right to take benefit and do nothing for it - those days are over."[/i

Thats the sound of an angry man.

Unfortunately we don't want legislation based on anger for people who can't control their anger seldom make rational decisions, someone in his party needs to sit Mr Duncan-Smith down and explain that people like Ms Reilly don't "sign up for this" much less "get paid" JSA for working 20 to 30 hours per week in menial tasks, they should point out just how close his statement came to admitting that HM Government broke their own employment legislation if, as he thinks, Ms Reilly "got paid" for doing her shelf stacking task.

Is there anyone in his party who will explain the error of his ways ?

Probably not, depressingly there are too many in his party who think he hasn't gone far enough.

What is it about Chingford and the twaaats that represent that constituency?

DaveO - you are mistaken, I have worked with many many individuals who have been on the dole that long, they don't even see it as a "benefit." It's never crossed their mind that the job centre is about getting work, to them it's just a place they have to go every fortnight and say well drilled in lines so that they can get "paid." They have absolutely no concept of responsibility.

These are people who think that "oh well I was asleep" should be sufficient justification for missing an 11:30 appointment and then kick off that their benefits get sanctioned.

I don't judge them on this, they are a product of their environment and it's gutting to see so many like that, but I feel the welfare state has created much of the environment in the first place.

For these people, and as I say there are a LOT - I think that the whole experience of mixing with people outside their usual circles and dealing with the public for a few weeks, as well as getting in the habit of up, showered, dressed, work etc - is beneficial.

Sorry but this is ridiculous. I am sure there are some workshy people put there but the [uvast majority[/u are not. IDS wants to force [uall[/u unemployed people onto workfare because he thinks they should work for their benefits. He shows contempt toward people genuinely seeking work as his comments about Cait Reilly show. She doesn't need to be trained to get up and neither do the vast majority of the unemployed.

As someone tweeted earlier:

[i"I went to Uni so I could leave my job at Kwik Save, not so that I could go back and work there for benefits!"[/i

Yeah but it's not like their work shy, it doesn't even cross their mind that they are doing anything wrong, dole is just what you do.

But it does need tailoring, it's ridiculous to make that girl go on the programme, but I feel it could have a place for the people I describe.

What was their degree in - "The practical aspects of retail display" or something equally intellectual?