The Office of Tony Blair, which helps to administrate his consultancy and diplomatic interests has agreed to pay his interns the National Minimum Wage. It was the government of Tony Blair in 1998 who introduced the minimum wage. This decision to modify such shoddy behaviour only came about after the Office of Tony Blair was exposed by a careers website named Graduate Fog, their reports were picked up by the Guardian newspaper.
The current rate for the minimum wage stands at £6.08 per hour. The current rate for the London Living Wage stands at £8.30. But the Office of Tony Blair are not offering that which seems odd given that his office is based in central London. The London Living Wage campaign was started by a group called Citizens UK who describe themselves as the national home of community organising.
Estimates for the sainted Tony Blair's wealth vary. Both the Financial Times and the Daily Telegraph have estimated this year that his annual income is in the region of £20 million.
Gus Baker from Intern Aware queried why Tony Blair wasn't paying all his interns:
"While it is good and welcome that Blair has relented and agreed to pay the interns in his private office, he still reportedly does not pay those working for his charity. Failing to pay at least the national minimum wage isn't just unfair on those who are asked to work for free, it excludes those who can't afford to. Tony Blair should know better and pay all his interns a fair wage."
Friday, 2 November 2012
Friday, 19 October 2012
What the Prince's Trust say about our out of work young people
The Prince's Trust; Prince Charles' charity have just this week published a report which reveals the full extent of long term unemployment among young people and how much worse it has become in recent years. as I have mentioned being unemployed when you are young causes real damage and longer term problems later in life. See Lost Generations: http://inmyshoesnorthlondon.blogspot.co.uk/2012/01/lost-generations_17.html
The number of 18 - 24 year olds claiming JSA for at least six months has risen by 315% THREE HUNDRED AND FIFTEEN PER CENT in the recession. In August 2008 the number stood at 40 360. In October 2012 it stands at 167 580.
As regards long term unemployment the figures aren't much better: In 2008 there were 38 550 18 - 24 year olds who had been out of work for more than TWO years. By July this year that figure had risen to over 100 000. An increase of 170 %. ONE HUNDRED AND SEVENTY PER CENT
Martina Milburn who is the Chief Executive of the Prince's Trust said: "Long term unemployment can lead to a downward spiral of poverty, homelessness and depression."
The number of 18 - 24 year olds claiming JSA for at least six months has risen by 315% THREE HUNDRED AND FIFTEEN PER CENT in the recession. In August 2008 the number stood at 40 360. In October 2012 it stands at 167 580.
As regards long term unemployment the figures aren't much better: In 2008 there were 38 550 18 - 24 year olds who had been out of work for more than TWO years. By July this year that figure had risen to over 100 000. An increase of 170 %. ONE HUNDRED AND SEVENTY PER CENT
Martina Milburn who is the Chief Executive of the Prince's Trust said: "Long term unemployment can lead to a downward spiral of poverty, homelessness and depression."
Wednesday, 17 October 2012
A guest blog from a woman with autism in her 40s
At the end of 2009 I left a job in a government department. I was very pleased to leave, as my disabilities were not being supported effectively. Government departments talk the talk on disability but don't get their act together. After being misinformed by the Jobcentre and applying for Job Seeker's Allowance I worked out that I should have applied for Employment Support Allowance and was assessed for ESA mid way through 2010. Dealing with government bodies from the outside from outside proved no better than dealing with them from the inside.
The ESA assessment was farcical. The contractors doing the assessment proved they knew nothing about disability when they called themselves ATOS Healthcare with a section called Medical Services. Looking at disability as if it were health issue misses the point. Someone with, say Downs Syndrome might be fighting fit and able to run fundraising marathons and still not able to hold down a job. Treating this person as a malingerer misses the point. Looking at this person's ability to complete the ESA fitness for work test which asks participants to lift their arms above their head and walk so many steps, misses the point too and is humiliating for those being assessed.
One of my disabilities is autism. At my assessment I arranged for an expert volunteer from the National Autistic Society to advocate for me. I had brought with me copies of lengthy expert reports on my disabilities and my advocate and I sat there and educated the assessor on what autism is. Neither the assessor nor the people back at the office she sent her notes to, have training on specific disabilities, so before they could assess me I had to educate them. Not easy when I have a communication disability and the NAS does not have enough advocates for more than a handful of cases.
I have recently been asked to attend a reassessment for ESA. I refused - writing to ATOS and asking what the purpose of the meeting could be. I have already provided all the information on my disabilities that I can, my disabilities are lifelong conditions which do not change. Reassessment would provide ATOS with no more information and would be a burden to me in terms of finding advocacy.
ATOS Healthcare Medical Services wrote to me to explain that reassessment was necessary because the ESA rules have changed. Well that explains everything, now that the government has new rules I am to undertake all and any forms of work and my disabilities have magically disappeared. I continue to refuse reassessment because I refuse to be humiliated by a bureaucracy which has been disabled from supporting me by its assumption that disability can be seen in terms of health instead of inclusion and writes its rules accordingly.
The ESA assessment was farcical. The contractors doing the assessment proved they knew nothing about disability when they called themselves ATOS Healthcare with a section called Medical Services. Looking at disability as if it were health issue misses the point. Someone with, say Downs Syndrome might be fighting fit and able to run fundraising marathons and still not able to hold down a job. Treating this person as a malingerer misses the point. Looking at this person's ability to complete the ESA fitness for work test which asks participants to lift their arms above their head and walk so many steps, misses the point too and is humiliating for those being assessed.
One of my disabilities is autism. At my assessment I arranged for an expert volunteer from the National Autistic Society to advocate for me. I had brought with me copies of lengthy expert reports on my disabilities and my advocate and I sat there and educated the assessor on what autism is. Neither the assessor nor the people back at the office she sent her notes to, have training on specific disabilities, so before they could assess me I had to educate them. Not easy when I have a communication disability and the NAS does not have enough advocates for more than a handful of cases.
I have recently been asked to attend a reassessment for ESA. I refused - writing to ATOS and asking what the purpose of the meeting could be. I have already provided all the information on my disabilities that I can, my disabilities are lifelong conditions which do not change. Reassessment would provide ATOS with no more information and would be a burden to me in terms of finding advocacy.
ATOS Healthcare Medical Services wrote to me to explain that reassessment was necessary because the ESA rules have changed. Well that explains everything, now that the government has new rules I am to undertake all and any forms of work and my disabilities have magically disappeared. I continue to refuse reassessment because I refuse to be humiliated by a bureaucracy which has been disabled from supporting me by its assumption that disability can be seen in terms of health instead of inclusion and writes its rules accordingly.
Friday, 7 September 2012
Millionaires picking on cripples
That's the Government bullying the sick and disabled. Whilst the nation is singing the praises of the Paralympians, what is the Government doing? Firstly David Cameron announced that he was going to set up a special Olympic and Paralympic honours list just to commemorate their achievements, and the flip side of what the Government are doing?
Yep that's right - threatening to withdraw £71 a week from sick and disabled benefit claimants! This is from a weekly total of £99.15.
People who claim Employment Support Allowance are judged to be too ill or disabled to work.
These people are split into two groups: Firstly the support group, who are deemed to be a long way off from rejoining the workplace. The second group are named the Wrag group. This is an acronym for Work Related Activity Group. This latter group are assessed to be capable of taking steps towards moving into work straight away. Therefore they must undertake a range of activities to help them get back into work
According to the Department of Work and Pensions these activities are to include:
This is to include unpaid and unlimited work experience according to what the DWP told the Guardian newspaper. In order to legally permit officials to make the sick and disabled in the Wrag group do work experience as a condition of their benefit claim the Government had to pass an additional clause to their Welfare Reform Act of 2012.
There are people concerned about the implications such new conditions will have for those affected. Gillian Guy the chief executive of the Citizens Advice Bureau, said there were already lots of cases that had cropped up where benefit sanctions had been applied "inappropriately, often causing great hardship". Ms Guy went on: " People have their benefits cut with little or no warning or explanation or understanding of what they failed to do."
Paul Farmer, who is the chief executive of Mind, the mental health charity warned: "It is important to remember that people in the work-related activity group have been assessed as unfit for work - they are not at full health and are still very vulnerable, they face significant barriers to return to employment and need support rather than the threat of sanction."
On top of this, the Government are "reforming " payment of Disability Living Allowance. What they are doing is replacing DLA with the more restrictive personal independence payment (PIP) from next year. DLA helps with the cost of transport, equipment, care and other specialist needs. DLA is currently paid to 3.2 million people. Under PIP, the Government estimates that up to 500 000 people will lose entitlement to the benefit in the coming years as the eligibility criteria are tightened and people's claims are reassessed.
Here are just a selection of remarks from some of the British paralympian team:
Some legacy Mr Cameron.
Yep that's right - threatening to withdraw £71 a week from sick and disabled benefit claimants! This is from a weekly total of £99.15.
People who claim Employment Support Allowance are judged to be too ill or disabled to work.
These people are split into two groups: Firstly the support group, who are deemed to be a long way off from rejoining the workplace. The second group are named the Wrag group. This is an acronym for Work Related Activity Group. This latter group are assessed to be capable of taking steps towards moving into work straight away. Therefore they must undertake a range of activities to help them get back into work
According to the Department of Work and Pensions these activities are to include:
- Attending and taking part in work-focused interviews.
- Carrying out work-related activities that the claimant's adviser asks the claimant to do.
This is to include unpaid and unlimited work experience according to what the DWP told the Guardian newspaper. In order to legally permit officials to make the sick and disabled in the Wrag group do work experience as a condition of their benefit claim the Government had to pass an additional clause to their Welfare Reform Act of 2012.
There are people concerned about the implications such new conditions will have for those affected. Gillian Guy the chief executive of the Citizens Advice Bureau, said there were already lots of cases that had cropped up where benefit sanctions had been applied "inappropriately, often causing great hardship". Ms Guy went on: " People have their benefits cut with little or no warning or explanation or understanding of what they failed to do."
Paul Farmer, who is the chief executive of Mind, the mental health charity warned: "It is important to remember that people in the work-related activity group have been assessed as unfit for work - they are not at full health and are still very vulnerable, they face significant barriers to return to employment and need support rather than the threat of sanction."
On top of this, the Government are "reforming " payment of Disability Living Allowance. What they are doing is replacing DLA with the more restrictive personal independence payment (PIP) from next year. DLA helps with the cost of transport, equipment, care and other specialist needs. DLA is currently paid to 3.2 million people. Under PIP, the Government estimates that up to 500 000 people will lose entitlement to the benefit in the coming years as the eligibility criteria are tightened and people's claims are reassessed.
Here are just a selection of remarks from some of the British paralympian team:
- Aaron Phipps, Wheelchair Rugby:: "DLA pays for those essential things I would need. It is just completely essential, I would be completely lost without it."
- David Clarke, Blind five-a-side football: "It seems as though disabled people's independence is being jeopardised by the Government's proposals, but it is so wide of the mark..."
- Natasha Baker, Dressage: "DLA enables disabled people another life...it allows us to be independent. I love my independence."
- Kylie Grimes, Wheelchair Rugby: "DLA is really important.I have been injured now five and a half years. For me it is hugely important. I would have been lost without it, to be honest."
Some legacy Mr Cameron.
Friday, 31 August 2012
You couldn't make this stuff up
They have got a French company Atos sponsoring the Paralympics. These are the people who have been charged by the Government with deciding whether sick and disabled people are fit and able and suitable for work.
Atos hold more than £3 billion of government contracts across 10 different departments. The contract with the Department of Work and Pensions is annually worth more than £100 million alone and it is that which is provoking the most ire. What Atos are doing is carrying out what are called Work Capability Assessments.
Anyone who claims Employment Support Allowance must pass a WCA, conducted by one of Atos's 1400 staff. At the time of writing, more than 40 of Atos's doctors and nurses have been reported to medical authorities for alleged misconduct.
Paddy Murphy of Disabled People Against Cuts described the firm's sponsorship of the Paralympics as "beyond a joke". One of DPAC's co-founders; Linda Burnip commented: "The fact is that Atos is getting all the credit for the Paralympics and at the same time it is destroying disabled people's lives through Work Capability Assessments."
40% of people who are deemed fit for work by Atos apppeal. Of these, 70% of claimants who attend an appeal with the support of the Citizen's Advice Bureau successfully overturn the decision. The figure for those who go it alone is 40%.
I just think that the whole business is a very cruel irony.
Atos hold more than £3 billion of government contracts across 10 different departments. The contract with the Department of Work and Pensions is annually worth more than £100 million alone and it is that which is provoking the most ire. What Atos are doing is carrying out what are called Work Capability Assessments.
Anyone who claims Employment Support Allowance must pass a WCA, conducted by one of Atos's 1400 staff. At the time of writing, more than 40 of Atos's doctors and nurses have been reported to medical authorities for alleged misconduct.
Paddy Murphy of Disabled People Against Cuts described the firm's sponsorship of the Paralympics as "beyond a joke". One of DPAC's co-founders; Linda Burnip commented: "The fact is that Atos is getting all the credit for the Paralympics and at the same time it is destroying disabled people's lives through Work Capability Assessments."
40% of people who are deemed fit for work by Atos apppeal. Of these, 70% of claimants who attend an appeal with the support of the Citizen's Advice Bureau successfully overturn the decision. The figure for those who go it alone is 40%.
I just think that the whole business is a very cruel irony.
Tuesday, 29 May 2012
Hidden homeless
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-18145323
Here is a link to a piece written by young rapper Speech Debelle who made a TV programme that was broadcast on BBC Three the other day about homelessness. I've included it for In My Shoes because this young woman was eloquent on the subject of hidden homelessness.
Here is a link to a piece written by young rapper Speech Debelle who made a TV programme that was broadcast on BBC Three the other day about homelessness. I've included it for In My Shoes because this young woman was eloquent on the subject of hidden homelessness.
Friday, 25 May 2012
London living wage and hotels
There was some good news on the jobs front yesterday if you are one of the 850 staff who work in one of the eight hotels in London managed by the InterContinental Hotels Group. But the fanfare of publicity comes with a caveat - there's always a but.
The managing director for the UK and Ireland, Stephen McCall made the announcement: "We've made a commitment to become a London living wage employer in all the London hotels we manage...over the next five years."
The Living Wage Campaign was started by the campaign group London Citizens in 2001. Since that time the Living Wage Foundation has accredited over 100 Living Wage Employers.
The reason the story caught my eye was that hotels in London are notoriously poor employers. So the fact that an international chain has made this commitment is something of a surprise. OK so they're not going to fully implement it for five years, but I think the fact that IHG have made a public commitment is a start.
I know of one hotel near Tower Bridge where if you queue up from 6.30 in the morning you stand a good chance of getting a day's work - and this has been the case for years. You are paid a pittance and they don't ask too many questions, they hassle you to clean as many rooms as possible, but they'll pay you cash at the end of the day.
I've never worked there but have pointed people I know in that direction - they tell me it's awful and that they shout at you constantly. This is only one example I know of but you do hear of horror stories often. All of which puts what IHG in quite a good light.
On the subject of the London living wage the Evening Standard carried out a survey of the shops on Oxford Street before Christmas just gone. There was only a handful of those shops that paid the London living wage. This is supposed to be London's premier shopping street. It is clearly not so first class for the workers!
The managing director for the UK and Ireland, Stephen McCall made the announcement: "We've made a commitment to become a London living wage employer in all the London hotels we manage...over the next five years."
The Living Wage Campaign was started by the campaign group London Citizens in 2001. Since that time the Living Wage Foundation has accredited over 100 Living Wage Employers.
The reason the story caught my eye was that hotels in London are notoriously poor employers. So the fact that an international chain has made this commitment is something of a surprise. OK so they're not going to fully implement it for five years, but I think the fact that IHG have made a public commitment is a start.
I know of one hotel near Tower Bridge where if you queue up from 6.30 in the morning you stand a good chance of getting a day's work - and this has been the case for years. You are paid a pittance and they don't ask too many questions, they hassle you to clean as many rooms as possible, but they'll pay you cash at the end of the day.
I've never worked there but have pointed people I know in that direction - they tell me it's awful and that they shout at you constantly. This is only one example I know of but you do hear of horror stories often. All of which puts what IHG in quite a good light.
On the subject of the London living wage the Evening Standard carried out a survey of the shops on Oxford Street before Christmas just gone. There was only a handful of those shops that paid the London living wage. This is supposed to be London's premier shopping street. It is clearly not so first class for the workers!
Tuesday, 22 May 2012
The Work Programme - how come it doesn't work very well?
I think we all know what the Work Programme is - it is a compulsory scheme for those claiming Job Seekers Allowance for 12 months or more. I've written about this before; http://inmyshoesnorthlondon.blogspot.co.uk/2011/09/welfare-to-work-new-way-with-new.html
It says on the Directgov website that it is: "delivered for Jobcentre Plus by specialist organisations, called 'providers'. Your provider will give you all the support you need to find and stay in work,"
So the DWP wrote to me and said I'd failed to go to an appointment and unless I came up with a valid reason, they were going to "sanction" my benefit - which means; cutting it off. I knew I'd missed the appointment, when I'd signed on they told me - all these buggers are linked up on some giant computer.
So I rang my adviser that afternoon, her words to me were: "Oh, maybe I didn't send you out a letter, don't worry, you're getting a new adviser, I'm being promoted, I'll let her know - she's really nice."
The morning after I'd received the threatening letter from the DWP I rang the office that sent it. I explained the nature of my call to be told by the man on the other end - who doesn't know me from Adam, that he has "proof" that I'm not keeping up with my responsibilities. I point out to the man that he should be a little more careful with the language he uses and agree to write them a reply. I ask if there is a time limit, he tells me I have five working days and that I need to contact my provider.
The funny thing is if you need their help, or you're trying to get signed on say, it will take them weeks to sort it out. If they want to cut your benefit off, you have five working days to stop them!
So then I get another letter, this time from my provider telling me of a mandatory appointment warning of dire consequences should I fail to attend. Funny thing is, it is for the day when I am working. I am now working part-time at Poached Creative. My provider knows this. When I ring the new adviser to reappoint it turns out there is no record whatsoever of when I work, although my file does tell her that I am working part-time.
My point is, if the Work Programme providers are employing people who can't cope with sending out letters, can't manage basic record keeping and fail to communicate basic information to their colleagues, how in heaven's name are they going to "give you all the support you need to find and stay in work."?
And this "specialist organisation" promoted this woman!
It says on the Directgov website that it is: "delivered for Jobcentre Plus by specialist organisations, called 'providers'. Your provider will give you all the support you need to find and stay in work,"
So the DWP wrote to me and said I'd failed to go to an appointment and unless I came up with a valid reason, they were going to "sanction" my benefit - which means; cutting it off. I knew I'd missed the appointment, when I'd signed on they told me - all these buggers are linked up on some giant computer.
So I rang my adviser that afternoon, her words to me were: "Oh, maybe I didn't send you out a letter, don't worry, you're getting a new adviser, I'm being promoted, I'll let her know - she's really nice."
The morning after I'd received the threatening letter from the DWP I rang the office that sent it. I explained the nature of my call to be told by the man on the other end - who doesn't know me from Adam, that he has "proof" that I'm not keeping up with my responsibilities. I point out to the man that he should be a little more careful with the language he uses and agree to write them a reply. I ask if there is a time limit, he tells me I have five working days and that I need to contact my provider.
The funny thing is if you need their help, or you're trying to get signed on say, it will take them weeks to sort it out. If they want to cut your benefit off, you have five working days to stop them!
So then I get another letter, this time from my provider telling me of a mandatory appointment warning of dire consequences should I fail to attend. Funny thing is, it is for the day when I am working. I am now working part-time at Poached Creative. My provider knows this. When I ring the new adviser to reappoint it turns out there is no record whatsoever of when I work, although my file does tell her that I am working part-time.
My point is, if the Work Programme providers are employing people who can't cope with sending out letters, can't manage basic record keeping and fail to communicate basic information to their colleagues, how in heaven's name are they going to "give you all the support you need to find and stay in work."?
And this "specialist organisation" promoted this woman!
Friday, 18 May 2012
Bully-boy landlords
My landlord served me seven days notice the other day because I'm in arrears - I wasn't especially worried as he often says this. The amount we're talking about is less than £150!
When I say landlord, I mean one of the two managers of the place where I live. I live in a Bed and Breakfast cum hostel. The deal is that Housing Benefit pay my rent and I pay a surcharge on top of that of £25 per week. This is to cover electricity, heating, hot water and breakfast. (Breakfast is two sausages, two eggs, baked beans and two toast.)
The next time I saw this man he assured me he meant it "this time". It wasn't until I spoke to one of the security people on the front door who forewarned me that Mr X was really gunning for me and had spoken to the lawyers that I became alarmed.
So I took myself down to the jobcentre to use their free phones and phoned the advice people at Shelter. I knew I had very few rights as I only had a licence to live in my room, nothing like a tenancy. I was under the impression that due to the length of my stay, my landlord had to give me more than a week's notice.
When I got through and spoke to one of Shelter's advisers she quickly disabused me of this notion. I didn't have a legal leg to stand on - I had no more rights than a guest in a hotel who hadn't paid the bill! The adviser was able to give chapter and verse on the small claims court in terms of getting my stuff back, and also to point me in the direction of Community Legal Advice for any future difficulties.
So I went back to my room, packed up three boxes of important bits and pieces, stashed these in the room of one of the few people in my B and B I can call a mate, along with my suit and a leather jacket. I then wrote a careful note to the landlord with future payment dates and pondered my lot.
The thing that really pissed me off was that it was so arbitrary, that I could become homeless on just the whim of someone else! Come the morning, nothing happened.
When I say landlord, I mean one of the two managers of the place where I live. I live in a Bed and Breakfast cum hostel. The deal is that Housing Benefit pay my rent and I pay a surcharge on top of that of £25 per week. This is to cover electricity, heating, hot water and breakfast. (Breakfast is two sausages, two eggs, baked beans and two toast.)
The next time I saw this man he assured me he meant it "this time". It wasn't until I spoke to one of the security people on the front door who forewarned me that Mr X was really gunning for me and had spoken to the lawyers that I became alarmed.
So I took myself down to the jobcentre to use their free phones and phoned the advice people at Shelter. I knew I had very few rights as I only had a licence to live in my room, nothing like a tenancy. I was under the impression that due to the length of my stay, my landlord had to give me more than a week's notice.
When I got through and spoke to one of Shelter's advisers she quickly disabused me of this notion. I didn't have a legal leg to stand on - I had no more rights than a guest in a hotel who hadn't paid the bill! The adviser was able to give chapter and verse on the small claims court in terms of getting my stuff back, and also to point me in the direction of Community Legal Advice for any future difficulties.
So I went back to my room, packed up three boxes of important bits and pieces, stashed these in the room of one of the few people in my B and B I can call a mate, along with my suit and a leather jacket. I then wrote a careful note to the landlord with future payment dates and pondered my lot.
The thing that really pissed me off was that it was so arbitrary, that I could become homeless on just the whim of someone else! Come the morning, nothing happened.
Tuesday, 10 April 2012
George Osborne video
Please check this out - it is very funny and says so much about our Chancellor!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rxBMT0rH9hU
Many thanks to the comedian and writer Wendy Wason who flagged it up to me when she was reviewing the papers on BBC London radio on Sunday morning.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rxBMT0rH9hU
Many thanks to the comedian and writer Wendy Wason who flagged it up to me when she was reviewing the papers on BBC London radio on Sunday morning.
Monday, 9 April 2012
Idiot boat race protester causes havoc
Protester Trenton Oldfield wreaked havoc at the boat race on Saturday causing it to be halted just over halfway through and then restarted half an hour later as well as placing himself in considerable danger.
He claims, we are told, to be protesting against elitism. The boat race is contested between crews from the universities of Oxford and Cambridge.
Mr Oldfield was educated at public school and has studied at the London School of Economics. So we're not talking a life of deprivation.
Now it's fair to say that I'm fairly anti elitism in our society. OK so I've not been on the front pages of the national press but I would suggest that as a protest against privilege in our society In My Shoes kind of knocks Mr Oldfield into a cocked hat.
He claims, we are told, to be protesting against elitism. The boat race is contested between crews from the universities of Oxford and Cambridge.
Mr Oldfield was educated at public school and has studied at the London School of Economics. So we're not talking a life of deprivation.
Now it's fair to say that I'm fairly anti elitism in our society. OK so I've not been on the front pages of the national press but I would suggest that as a protest against privilege in our society In My Shoes kind of knocks Mr Oldfield into a cocked hat.
Wednesday, 4 April 2012
Untapped Skills
Many of us find looking for work daunting enough even if you have the relevant skills or experience for the job. I have a bulging file of rejections and letters letting me know that unfortunately I have not been successful. I even attended an interview for a job that I was overqualified for thinking to myself I’ve got this job in the bag, as a lot of you would, but as with most things in life nothing ever goes according to plan. The interview itself wasn’t too bad it was what the employer said at the end which confused me “I’m sorry but you’re just not what we’re looking for at the moment”. WHAT! I have the relevant skills, I have done this job before so I have experience, I am what you’re looking for.
I came away from the interview like every other one: dejected, angry and relentlessly cursing the fact that I have to go through this every time. But that’s not the end of it because we the jobless still have these skills that are not being taken advantage of and are just going to waste. Like a lot of people, I have experienced homelessness and have gained skills and knowledge throughout the journey and I am becoming quite concerned having talked to a number of homeless and non-homeless people that they share this common grievance.
When asked, a number of people agreed that it seemed as though image was number one priority-not the fact that you are capable of doing the job. I have, in frustration, even resorted to embellishing my CV and skills a little in the hope that it would show me as the best candidate, but never did. Why is it so hard for these employers to accept the fact that OK, you might not have done this kind of work before but it doesn’t mean that you can’t learn to do it, the more you do something the easier it becomes until it is second nature-that is the process of learning. To shed some light on this matter I actually spoke to a few employers who remarked that it was down to a few reasons, that companies have a quota to meet on employing people belonging to certain groups (this seems to be about image again not whether they can do the job), but mostly down to the fact that they can’t afford the time or money to train anyone.
I believe that there is something that can be done and networking is the key. We’ve all heard the saying “its not what you know but who you know” and through my own experiences I’ve found that this has never been truer. Being part of an organisation called Camden Calling and meeting the group leader within two years I, along with other members are about to finish the first series of our radio podcast shows and start the second series with internet radio station Recharged Radio, I am currently creating music to put with poetry to record a spoken word album which I will be performing onstage in April along with the videos. So by just meeting the right person a number of doors have opened up.
Tuesday, 13 March 2012
What the Tories really think of their leaders...
One of the Tories rising stars, Nadine Dorries MP, was quoted the other
day as saying about the Government that: "policy is being run by two
public schoolboys who don't know what it's like to go to the supermarket
and have to put things back on the shelves because they can't afford
it...What's worse, they don't care either."
This blog isn't apolitical but it isn't party political either. Sure, I do say negative things about the Government, but I say negative things about all the parties and all policies that I disagree with.
For me it is about issues, things that happen in Government, decisions taken, that affect people who through no fault of their own, are generally at the bottom of the heap: the unemployed, the poor, the disabled, the disenfranchised.
Wednesday, 7 March 2012
Maths and the budget
On Wednesday 21 March the Chancellor George Osborne will make his budget statement. Now I'm sure George Osborne doesn't welcome it but he's not short of people offering him advice.
Now one of the big talking points has been taking away child benefit from high earners. Up until now child benefit hasn't been means tested. The current plan is that for families where one parent earns more than £44k they will not be able to claim child benefit for any offspring they may have. However if you are a family where both parents work and are earning, say £35k each you will be allowed to hang on to any child benefit for any offspring you may have.
Now clearly I'm no economist but this neither adds up, nor does it make any sense, nor does it seem very fair. The Treasury estimates that this would save at least £1 billion, although at the time of the Comprehensive Spending Review (autumn 2010) they were saying it would save up to £2.5 billion.
The other issue being chewed over in the media this week is the so-called mansion tax. This emerged courtesy of the Liberal Democrat financial whizz - Vince Cable. What he is proposing is a tax on properties worth £2 million or more. Were this to be introduced it is thought it would raise up to £1.7 billion.
In the autumn of 2010 the Chancellor announced his Comprehensive Spending Review. This was essentially his outline of where his cuts were going to fall. One of the main thrusts of his CSR was benefit cuts.
Aside from the Child Benefit changes, George Osborne was expecting to make cuts to the welfare budget totalling £15.5 billion. These cuts will be to benefits that are paid to those who are out of work, those who are disabled, those who receive housing benefit etc.
What I really fail to understand is how savings of a lesser amount of money can generate so much debate when cuts to those who are sick, disabled, vulnerable, or out of work, those who are undoubtably the poorest in our society warrants so little comment.
Now one of the big talking points has been taking away child benefit from high earners. Up until now child benefit hasn't been means tested. The current plan is that for families where one parent earns more than £44k they will not be able to claim child benefit for any offspring they may have. However if you are a family where both parents work and are earning, say £35k each you will be allowed to hang on to any child benefit for any offspring you may have.
Now clearly I'm no economist but this neither adds up, nor does it make any sense, nor does it seem very fair. The Treasury estimates that this would save at least £1 billion, although at the time of the Comprehensive Spending Review (autumn 2010) they were saying it would save up to £2.5 billion.
The other issue being chewed over in the media this week is the so-called mansion tax. This emerged courtesy of the Liberal Democrat financial whizz - Vince Cable. What he is proposing is a tax on properties worth £2 million or more. Were this to be introduced it is thought it would raise up to £1.7 billion.
In the autumn of 2010 the Chancellor announced his Comprehensive Spending Review. This was essentially his outline of where his cuts were going to fall. One of the main thrusts of his CSR was benefit cuts.
Aside from the Child Benefit changes, George Osborne was expecting to make cuts to the welfare budget totalling £15.5 billion. These cuts will be to benefits that are paid to those who are out of work, those who are disabled, those who receive housing benefit etc.
What I really fail to understand is how savings of a lesser amount of money can generate so much debate when cuts to those who are sick, disabled, vulnerable, or out of work, those who are undoubtably the poorest in our society warrants so little comment.
Tuesday, 6 March 2012
Art for Crisis at Somerset House
Copyright: Yinka Shonibare. Image: Shaun Bloodworth.
Starting next week on Wednesday 14 March for five weeks or so there will be an exhibition at Somerset House on the Strand. Some famous names will be showimg their work and the aim is to draw attention to the issue of homelessness.
Some of the artists who will be exhibiting work are, in no particular order: Anthony Gormley, Tracey Emin, Nathan Coley, Nika Neelova, Anthony Caro, Bob and Roberta Smith, Yinka Shonibare, Gillian Wearing and Jonathan Yeo.
Alongside these big names, clients of Crisis will also have their work exhibited in the gallery and the chance to show to a much wider audience.
The works are to be auctioned off at Christie's May 2012 to raise money for Crisis, the national charity for single homeless people.
Friday, 2 March 2012
I live in an unemployment blackspot
It's official - I live in one of the very worst boroughs in London for unemployment. There are 32 boroughs in London if you don't count the city of London where the population is low.
The figures come from the Office for National Statistics. In December 2011 there were 11 209 residents who were claiming Jobseekers Alllowance. That figure equates to 7.3% of the working age population. In London generally, the unemployment rate is 4.3%.
This means there are 22 claimants for every unfilled vacancy in the Jobcentres of my home borough. This figure was 13.4 claimants for each vacancy this time last year. I must stress these figures relate to those who can claim JSA.
I also discovered this week that the borough where I live is the fourth worst local authority in the UK for child poverty. This depressing statistic emerged when the End Child Poverty campaign published a new child poverty map of the UK. Nationally there are four million children, that's one in three children currently living in poverty in the UK. I don't have kids but these figures are a national disgrace.
Perhaps the statistics I've cited give some indication of the kind of place I live. I've lived in this borough for the past 17 years and in fact it's a cracking place to live; busy, vibrant and creative, but perhaps I'm just biased.
The figures come from the Office for National Statistics. In December 2011 there were 11 209 residents who were claiming Jobseekers Alllowance. That figure equates to 7.3% of the working age population. In London generally, the unemployment rate is 4.3%.
This means there are 22 claimants for every unfilled vacancy in the Jobcentres of my home borough. This figure was 13.4 claimants for each vacancy this time last year. I must stress these figures relate to those who can claim JSA.
I also discovered this week that the borough where I live is the fourth worst local authority in the UK for child poverty. This depressing statistic emerged when the End Child Poverty campaign published a new child poverty map of the UK. Nationally there are four million children, that's one in three children currently living in poverty in the UK. I don't have kids but these figures are a national disgrace.
Perhaps the statistics I've cited give some indication of the kind of place I live. I've lived in this borough for the past 17 years and in fact it's a cracking place to live; busy, vibrant and creative, but perhaps I'm just biased.
Friday, 24 February 2012
Money for nothing
So Emma Harrison has resigned. For those of you who don't know, Emma Harrison was the woman appointed by our Prime Minister, David Cameron as "families tsar". That is, she was specifically put in Government in December 2010 to work with the estimated 120 000 families who the government regards as "problem families". These are families who have more than one generation who are what is termed welfare dependent - that is, not working.
That has nothing to do with why she has resigned. She is the head of a company called A4e. A4e are one of the companies who run Iain Duncan Smith's Work Programme. They run the Work Programme in five regions in the UK. They are also a Work Programme subcontractor in five other regions.
They are currently being investigated for fraud. Their head office in Slough has been raided by the police. In recent years they have been investigated by the DWP nine times.
Their work, providing the Work Programme has been called into question by many people, not just the jobless who are working with them. Fiona Mactaggart MP whose constituency Slough is where the head office for A4e is, has said due to the allegations of malpractice A4e are "not fit to receive a government contract". Margaret Hodge MP who is the chair of the public accounts committee has spoken of aspects of A4e's record on welfare-to-work as "abysmal". Ms Hodge goes on to describe A4e's habit of subcontracting, that it "seems like a scam,".
Emma Harrison hasn't done too badly out of the Work Programme. She paid herself a dividend of £8.6 million last year. She lives in Thornbridge Hall. This is a grade II listed mansion set in 100 acres of land. Margaret Hodge says of the dividend: "It's a rip off. Emma Harrison lives entirely on public contracts. She's got a load of contracts with the DWP."
That has nothing to do with why she has resigned. She is the head of a company called A4e. A4e are one of the companies who run Iain Duncan Smith's Work Programme. They run the Work Programme in five regions in the UK. They are also a Work Programme subcontractor in five other regions.
They are currently being investigated for fraud. Their head office in Slough has been raided by the police. In recent years they have been investigated by the DWP nine times.
Their work, providing the Work Programme has been called into question by many people, not just the jobless who are working with them. Fiona Mactaggart MP whose constituency Slough is where the head office for A4e is, has said due to the allegations of malpractice A4e are "not fit to receive a government contract". Margaret Hodge MP who is the chair of the public accounts committee has spoken of aspects of A4e's record on welfare-to-work as "abysmal". Ms Hodge goes on to describe A4e's habit of subcontracting, that it "seems like a scam,".
Emma Harrison hasn't done too badly out of the Work Programme. She paid herself a dividend of £8.6 million last year. She lives in Thornbridge Hall. This is a grade II listed mansion set in 100 acres of land. Margaret Hodge says of the dividend: "It's a rip off. Emma Harrison lives entirely on public contracts. She's got a load of contracts with the DWP."
Thursday, 26 January 2012
Unhappy capping
So there's all this hoo-ha about the benefit cap of £26 000 and how it's absolutely essential for the nation's financial well-being that we implement this benefit cap as soon as possible to prevent these feckless scroungers bankrupting the country any further.
As I understand, they arrived at the figure of £26 grand as it is the national average salary for 2011, according to the Office for National Statistics. In order to take home £26k you would have to earn £35k gross. (Which is not the national average salary - £26k is.)
To listen to those in Government indignantly bang on about this you would think that people sign on and are given a big wad of cash that adds up to £26k! This is just not the case.
This is a huge deception being played on the British public and it is a pernicious lie, it is a disgraceful sleight of hand on the part of the Government. What they are trying to get us to believe is that "THESE PEOPLE" are taking your money. This is bollocks!
If you are in receipt of benefit this is money to which you are entitled. The Government will ensure that you prove that entitlement several times over before you get any benefit.
Housing is a right. Also, we have no right whatsoever to interfere with people's right to reproduce.
So to return to this benefit cap: First off it is a national cap and does not consider the vast differences in rental costs depending on what part of the country you are living in. The rental cost of housing in London is so much higher than almost anywhere else in the country. London is my part of the UK and that is where I concentrate on. It is also the place where most of the people who are going to be affected by this benefit cap live. It is estimated thet there are 67 000 households who receive this sum due to their circumstances.
A cursory look at two or three estate agent's websites in my part of London and I discover that three and four bedroom properties start at £15 grand a year, most were over £20 grand, so it's very easy to see how a couple with two or three children would hit the £26 grand benefit cap.
So the real problem with the benefit cap is the cost of renting adequate family housing yet with all the fuss this week there has been hardly anyone talking about rent controls. (One exception was David Lammy MP on Question Time last night on the telly.)
As far as I'm concerned the Government are looking at this in a really cock-eyed way and being deliberately disingenuous in the hope that they can play one section of society off against another - the working poor and the unemployed.
As I understand, they arrived at the figure of £26 grand as it is the national average salary for 2011, according to the Office for National Statistics. In order to take home £26k you would have to earn £35k gross. (Which is not the national average salary - £26k is.)
To listen to those in Government indignantly bang on about this you would think that people sign on and are given a big wad of cash that adds up to £26k! This is just not the case.
This is a huge deception being played on the British public and it is a pernicious lie, it is a disgraceful sleight of hand on the part of the Government. What they are trying to get us to believe is that "THESE PEOPLE" are taking your money. This is bollocks!
If you are in receipt of benefit this is money to which you are entitled. The Government will ensure that you prove that entitlement several times over before you get any benefit.
Housing is a right. Also, we have no right whatsoever to interfere with people's right to reproduce.
So to return to this benefit cap: First off it is a national cap and does not consider the vast differences in rental costs depending on what part of the country you are living in. The rental cost of housing in London is so much higher than almost anywhere else in the country. London is my part of the UK and that is where I concentrate on. It is also the place where most of the people who are going to be affected by this benefit cap live. It is estimated thet there are 67 000 households who receive this sum due to their circumstances.
A cursory look at two or three estate agent's websites in my part of London and I discover that three and four bedroom properties start at £15 grand a year, most were over £20 grand, so it's very easy to see how a couple with two or three children would hit the £26 grand benefit cap.
So the real problem with the benefit cap is the cost of renting adequate family housing yet with all the fuss this week there has been hardly anyone talking about rent controls. (One exception was David Lammy MP on Question Time last night on the telly.)
As far as I'm concerned the Government are looking at this in a really cock-eyed way and being deliberately disingenuous in the hope that they can play one section of society off against another - the working poor and the unemployed.
Tuesday, 17 January 2012
Lost generations
Just before Christmas, unemployment in the UK according to the Office for National Statistics hit 2.62 million. This is the highest recorded total since 1994. The unemployment rate in the UK now stands at 8.3%.
Within these statistics, the number of people aged 16-24 years old who are unemployed is now 1.02 million. This means that the unemployment rate for 16-24 year olds is 21.9%. That means that over one in five of our young people are NEETs. Not in employment, education or training.
Social commentators talk of a lost generation at times of recession and high unemployment. I heard on the Today programme this morning that unemployment won't peak until sometime in 2013.
It is well known and statistically borne out that if you suffer unemployment when young it drastically increases your your chances of being unemployed later in life.
Two professors in the west country have examined this in detail. Lindsey Macmillan - Centre for Market and Public Organisation in Bristol and Paul Gregg who is professor of economic and social policy at the University of Bath.
If you spend six months unemployed before the age of 23, it is statistically probable that you will spend 20% of your time unemployed five years later and 15% of your time unemployed twelve years later. These figures come from a study of two UK birth cohorts, which track babies born in a particular period for the rest of their lives.
I left school in 1982 - when the recession under the Thatcher government was in full swing and unemployment topped three million.
My first "job", which I didn't especially want and wasn't especially suited to was a YOP scheme as a builder. YOP is an acronym for Youth Opportunity Programme, basically a government job creation scheme and it certainly wasn't an opportunity. Sometime later I did another job as part of a government scheme in a college library which I loved.
It wasn't until I was 21 that I was able to land a proper job and that was a full four years after I finished school. I was only able to secure a job due to the fact I had done a full 12 months as a CSV. As a Community Service Volunteer I was paid £13.75 a week. (I lived in) This was 1985. There followed well over a decade of full employment.
I'm 47 years old, I should have been working for 30 years. When I look back over my life I've been working for 20 plus of those years so I'm living proof that if you experience unemployment when you are young it does blight your life.
Within these statistics, the number of people aged 16-24 years old who are unemployed is now 1.02 million. This means that the unemployment rate for 16-24 year olds is 21.9%. That means that over one in five of our young people are NEETs. Not in employment, education or training.
Social commentators talk of a lost generation at times of recession and high unemployment. I heard on the Today programme this morning that unemployment won't peak until sometime in 2013.
It is well known and statistically borne out that if you suffer unemployment when young it drastically increases your your chances of being unemployed later in life.
Two professors in the west country have examined this in detail. Lindsey Macmillan - Centre for Market and Public Organisation in Bristol and Paul Gregg who is professor of economic and social policy at the University of Bath.
If you spend six months unemployed before the age of 23, it is statistically probable that you will spend 20% of your time unemployed five years later and 15% of your time unemployed twelve years later. These figures come from a study of two UK birth cohorts, which track babies born in a particular period for the rest of their lives.
I left school in 1982 - when the recession under the Thatcher government was in full swing and unemployment topped three million.
My first "job", which I didn't especially want and wasn't especially suited to was a YOP scheme as a builder. YOP is an acronym for Youth Opportunity Programme, basically a government job creation scheme and it certainly wasn't an opportunity. Sometime later I did another job as part of a government scheme in a college library which I loved.
It wasn't until I was 21 that I was able to land a proper job and that was a full four years after I finished school. I was only able to secure a job due to the fact I had done a full 12 months as a CSV. As a Community Service Volunteer I was paid £13.75 a week. (I lived in) This was 1985. There followed well over a decade of full employment.
I'm 47 years old, I should have been working for 30 years. When I look back over my life I've been working for 20 plus of those years so I'm living proof that if you experience unemployment when you are young it does blight your life.
Thursday, 12 January 2012
Hiccups for the Welfare Reform Bill
On Wednesday this week the Government's Welfare Reform Bill took a kicking in the House of Lords from crossbenchers and Labour peers.
There were three amendments that were passed AGAINST Government proposals. The Welfare Reform Bill is a huge piece of legislation and there is more of it to come. The Government are looking to cut payments of Employment Support Allowance. ESA used to be known as sickness benefit.
This is your caring-sharing coalition government, how could any of us forget - "we are all in this together."? Lady Meacher, the crossbench peer describes the proposals as "crossing the line of British decency."
ESA is a contribution-based benefit. So if you are young and disabled and haven't beeen paying in, ie too young or too disabled to work, the Government are suggesting you won't be entitled to claim ESA because you haven't been paying National Insurance contributions. So an amendment was proposed saying this was wrong and unfair and that young people should still be able to claim ESA regardless. This amendment was passed.
The Government were further proposing that you would only be able to claim ESA for one year and then be means tested as to further entitlement. An amendment was proposed that the time limit should be two years. This amendment was passed.
Under Government proposals relating to ESA, the same rules were to be applied to cancer patients. This was rejected by the Lords and cancer sufferers and stroke victims are to exempted from the time limit altogether to be means tested as to further entitlement.
ESA is subject to what are called Work Capability Assessments - this is essentially a fit-for-work test. These have long been criticised - even by those who devised them.
Here's what one woman, Chris Linacre, had to say to the Guardian when she was turned down for sickness benefits and passed fit for work, in spite of the fact she suffers long-standing spinal problems and arthritis: " I think they (the assessors) expect you to be a Beano cartoon character, complete with ouch bubbles above your head, but people tend to be stoic. I try not to labour the fact that I'm in pain. I wasn't going to tell them that some days I can't even put my knickers on I'm in so much pain." Ms Linacre is now appealing against the decision.
The Government has already said it is to continue with its plans when the bill returns to the Commons in spite of major misgivings expressed in the Lords this week. That remains to be seen as opposition to their plans is growing - people are beginning to see their plans for what they really are: cruel and attacking the rights of people who are not in a position to fight back.
The Children's Commissioner - Maggie Atkinson, has published an assessment of the impact of the Welfare Reform Bill on children's rights. This report says: "We have identified groups of children whose rights may be breached by the implementation of the Bill." The report goes on to say that "there are many areas of risks that are of real concern."
So that's what the Government's Welfare Reform Bill means to two groups of our population: the disabled and children - an attack on their living standards.
There were three amendments that were passed AGAINST Government proposals. The Welfare Reform Bill is a huge piece of legislation and there is more of it to come. The Government are looking to cut payments of Employment Support Allowance. ESA used to be known as sickness benefit.
This is your caring-sharing coalition government, how could any of us forget - "we are all in this together."? Lady Meacher, the crossbench peer describes the proposals as "crossing the line of British decency."
ESA is a contribution-based benefit. So if you are young and disabled and haven't beeen paying in, ie too young or too disabled to work, the Government are suggesting you won't be entitled to claim ESA because you haven't been paying National Insurance contributions. So an amendment was proposed saying this was wrong and unfair and that young people should still be able to claim ESA regardless. This amendment was passed.
The Government were further proposing that you would only be able to claim ESA for one year and then be means tested as to further entitlement. An amendment was proposed that the time limit should be two years. This amendment was passed.
Under Government proposals relating to ESA, the same rules were to be applied to cancer patients. This was rejected by the Lords and cancer sufferers and stroke victims are to exempted from the time limit altogether to be means tested as to further entitlement.
ESA is subject to what are called Work Capability Assessments - this is essentially a fit-for-work test. These have long been criticised - even by those who devised them.
Here's what one woman, Chris Linacre, had to say to the Guardian when she was turned down for sickness benefits and passed fit for work, in spite of the fact she suffers long-standing spinal problems and arthritis: " I think they (the assessors) expect you to be a Beano cartoon character, complete with ouch bubbles above your head, but people tend to be stoic. I try not to labour the fact that I'm in pain. I wasn't going to tell them that some days I can't even put my knickers on I'm in so much pain." Ms Linacre is now appealing against the decision.
The Government has already said it is to continue with its plans when the bill returns to the Commons in spite of major misgivings expressed in the Lords this week. That remains to be seen as opposition to their plans is growing - people are beginning to see their plans for what they really are: cruel and attacking the rights of people who are not in a position to fight back.
The Children's Commissioner - Maggie Atkinson, has published an assessment of the impact of the Welfare Reform Bill on children's rights. This report says: "We have identified groups of children whose rights may be breached by the implementation of the Bill." The report goes on to say that "there are many areas of risks that are of real concern."
So that's what the Government's Welfare Reform Bill means to two groups of our population: the disabled and children - an attack on their living standards.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
