<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Workfare: a policy on the brink</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.redpepper.org.uk/workfare-a-policy-on-the-brink/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.redpepper.org.uk/workfare-a-policy-on-the-brink/</link>
	<description>Red Pepper</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 18 Sep 2013 17:39:37 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.6.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: John</title>
		<link>http://www.redpepper.org.uk/workfare-a-policy-on-the-brink/#comment-165716</link>
		<dc:creator>John</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 06 Mar 2013 13:00:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.redpepper.org.uk/?p=9411#comment-165716</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[If there were more vacancies than unemployed then it would make sense having training schemes that fitted people to available jobs in the local area. This happened up until 1990 when Thatcher privatised the old Government Skill Centres which had been on the go since the end of WW2. They were closed within two years. 

I got a career out of one such course and I will always be grateful for the high standard of training they provided with C&amp;G certificates that were really worth the paper they were printed on. It was voluntary as well. 

What we have now is a Work Programme which has little to do with real training and more to do with punishing claimants, providing free forced labour and creating unemployment through the displacement of paid employees by free of charge labour supplied by the DWP.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If there were more vacancies than unemployed then it would make sense having training schemes that fitted people to available jobs in the local area. This happened up until 1990 when Thatcher privatised the old Government Skill Centres which had been on the go since the end of WW2. They were closed within two years. </p>
<p>I got a career out of one such course and I will always be grateful for the high standard of training they provided with C&amp;G certificates that were really worth the paper they were printed on. It was voluntary as well. </p>
<p>What we have now is a Work Programme which has little to do with real training and more to do with punishing claimants, providing free forced labour and creating unemployment through the displacement of paid employees by free of charge labour supplied by the DWP.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: lori</title>
		<link>http://www.redpepper.org.uk/workfare-a-policy-on-the-brink/#comment-163644</link>
		<dc:creator>lori</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Mar 2013 00:08:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.redpepper.org.uk/?p=9411#comment-163644</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[just copied this from scope http://www.scope.org.uk/news/mandatory-work-experience]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>just copied this from scope <a href="http://www.scope.org.uk/news/mandatory-work-experience" rel="nofollow">http://www.scope.org.uk/news/mandatory-work-experience</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Claire</title>
		<link>http://www.redpepper.org.uk/workfare-a-policy-on-the-brink/#comment-163478</link>
		<dc:creator>Claire</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Feb 2013 10:58:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.redpepper.org.uk/?p=9411#comment-163478</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Workfare people don&#039;t even get fares paid, or lunches!
This is outrageous. My workplace has volunteers and student interns who get fares and lunches and we are a not-for-profit (and how!). The volunteers all do it to support us, the students get the benefit of learning the art of writing for a small publication, journalism skills etc and it&#039;s part of their college course. 

If we can afford to pay them fares and lunches there&#039;s no excuse for anyone else. As far as I&#039;m aware charity shops and campaigning organisations seem to offer these basic benefits as well.

Sometimes doing &#039;work experience&#039; is very valuable so I wouldn&#039;t knock it as such. I got into paid work after volunteering for a campaigning organisation. My daughter interned at an architect practice and I feel sure she got accepted at a university asking for higher grades than she achieved because of that work experience. They paid her fares &amp; lunch as well. 

But this is the crucial thing - any work experience has to be just that - experience which will improve your employability. If you already have experience in shelf-stacking, shop work, sweeping up or whatever there&#039;s no benefit in you doing more of the same. 

But that&#039;s not what it&#039;s really about is it?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Workfare people don&#8217;t even get fares paid, or lunches!<br />
This is outrageous. My workplace has volunteers and student interns who get fares and lunches and we are a not-for-profit (and how!). The volunteers all do it to support us, the students get the benefit of learning the art of writing for a small publication, journalism skills etc and it&#8217;s part of their college course. </p>
<p>If we can afford to pay them fares and lunches there&#8217;s no excuse for anyone else. As far as I&#8217;m aware charity shops and campaigning organisations seem to offer these basic benefits as well.</p>
<p>Sometimes doing &#8216;work experience&#8217; is very valuable so I wouldn&#8217;t knock it as such. I got into paid work after volunteering for a campaigning organisation. My daughter interned at an architect practice and I feel sure she got accepted at a university asking for higher grades than she achieved because of that work experience. They paid her fares &amp; lunch as well. </p>
<p>But this is the crucial thing &#8211; any work experience has to be just that &#8211; experience which will improve your employability. If you already have experience in shelf-stacking, shop work, sweeping up or whatever there&#8217;s no benefit in you doing more of the same. </p>
<p>But that&#8217;s not what it&#8217;s really about is it?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jimmy Kerr</title>
		<link>http://www.redpepper.org.uk/workfare-a-policy-on-the-brink/#comment-163268</link>
		<dc:creator>jimmy Kerr</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Feb 2013 22:04:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.redpepper.org.uk/?p=9411#comment-163268</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[As a veteran campaigner, I was out on the streets campaigning against the &quot;Work Programme&quot;, even as I was working at my placement. I have to say the people at Ingeus, the provider were really helpful in getting me a job so there is a lot to say for the idea of some kind of Government policy where the Jobcentre or some other agency gets paid by results. lthough as a socialist, I was instinctively against the mandatory work activity part of it, in practice, it was in fact crucial for me in the transition from unemployment towards work, so again there is a lot to be said for some kind of benefits system that compels people to get out of their bed in the morning and get active.

The problem for me is that the entire system is abused ruthlessly by employers. My employer is B an M, a chain of value stores, who through their relationship with the &quot;providers&quot; in effect get the equivalent of a full time worker, that they don&#039;t have to pay for. I don&#039;t blame B an M at all for taking advantage of this system, no employer in their right mind would turn that down, but what it means is that one paid worker or several part time workers are in effect out of a job because of this system. No matter what your views on so-called scroungers are, this has to be a wrong-headed approach.

there is also another problem. the people that are sent from the &quot;providers&quot; are all on some kind of &quot;course&quot; or &quot;pre-employment training&quot; system, set by the provider and, there is no nice way of saying this, but are clearly vulnerable, with medical conditions, obvious learning difficulties, etc, who as a result of their conditions, don&#039;t really appreciate just how they are being exploited and so tend not to make a fuss, when, as employers tend to do, get messed about for  breaks etc.

Now again, there is a lot to be said for giving these people some kind of experience that would help them in their search for work, but in practice, there is no job at the end of it for these people, no matter what they are told by the provider.

The system as constructed is not about helping people to work, or even the much fabled workfare idea, which in theory would be a good idea if the benefit levels increased to the minimum wage at least. It is simply abouts giving employers slave labour, the privatisation of the functions of the jobcentre and ultimately cutting the welfare bill.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As a veteran campaigner, I was out on the streets campaigning against the &#8220;Work Programme&#8221;, even as I was working at my placement. I have to say the people at Ingeus, the provider were really helpful in getting me a job so there is a lot to say for the idea of some kind of Government policy where the Jobcentre or some other agency gets paid by results. lthough as a socialist, I was instinctively against the mandatory work activity part of it, in practice, it was in fact crucial for me in the transition from unemployment towards work, so again there is a lot to be said for some kind of benefits system that compels people to get out of their bed in the morning and get active.</p>
<p>The problem for me is that the entire system is abused ruthlessly by employers. My employer is B an M, a chain of value stores, who through their relationship with the &#8220;providers&#8221; in effect get the equivalent of a full time worker, that they don&#8217;t have to pay for. I don&#8217;t blame B an M at all for taking advantage of this system, no employer in their right mind would turn that down, but what it means is that one paid worker or several part time workers are in effect out of a job because of this system. No matter what your views on so-called scroungers are, this has to be a wrong-headed approach.</p>
<p>there is also another problem. the people that are sent from the &#8220;providers&#8221; are all on some kind of &#8220;course&#8221; or &#8220;pre-employment training&#8221; system, set by the provider and, there is no nice way of saying this, but are clearly vulnerable, with medical conditions, obvious learning difficulties, etc, who as a result of their conditions, don&#8217;t really appreciate just how they are being exploited and so tend not to make a fuss, when, as employers tend to do, get messed about for  breaks etc.</p>
<p>Now again, there is a lot to be said for giving these people some kind of experience that would help them in their search for work, but in practice, there is no job at the end of it for these people, no matter what they are told by the provider.</p>
<p>The system as constructed is not about helping people to work, or even the much fabled workfare idea, which in theory would be a good idea if the benefit levels increased to the minimum wage at least. It is simply abouts giving employers slave labour, the privatisation of the functions of the jobcentre and ultimately cutting the welfare bill.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rupert Ferguson</title>
		<link>http://www.redpepper.org.uk/workfare-a-policy-on-the-brink/#comment-163253</link>
		<dc:creator>Rupert Ferguson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Feb 2013 21:26:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.redpepper.org.uk/?p=9411#comment-163253</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Although Workfare should certainly be criticized for the callous exploitation of the the work force that it truly is, Labour&#039;s &#039;New Deal&#039; was every bit as bad. The use of &#039;New Deal&#039; labour by Local Authorities as &#039;second class&#039; road sweepers is a classic case in point: and the roll on roll off system of one candidate being replaced by another, with both of them being simultaneously denied the skills that the creators of the initiative had supposedly signed up to, illustrates the extent to which Neo-Liberal social engineering and the manipulation of the economy by the money markets has destroyed the ability of millions to earn a decent living. Interestingly enough, New Labour&#039;s effective &#039;Asianization&#039; of much of the Labour Market, in a bid to attract outside investment by the multinational corporations at the forefront of the drive towards an ever more Globalized form of  Capitalism, was funded to a large by the European Social Fund: which had been set up for a very different purpose entirely. The Work Programme is also funded in part from the same funding source. Perhaps one way of putting a stop to at least some of these sharp practises, from both sides of the political spectrum, would be to organize some sort of initiative from within the European Parliament to ensure that money from the European Social Fund is used for what it is actually intended.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Although Workfare should certainly be criticized for the callous exploitation of the the work force that it truly is, Labour&#8217;s &#8216;New Deal&#8217; was every bit as bad. The use of &#8216;New Deal&#8217; labour by Local Authorities as &#8216;second class&#8217; road sweepers is a classic case in point: and the roll on roll off system of one candidate being replaced by another, with both of them being simultaneously denied the skills that the creators of the initiative had supposedly signed up to, illustrates the extent to which Neo-Liberal social engineering and the manipulation of the economy by the money markets has destroyed the ability of millions to earn a decent living. Interestingly enough, New Labour&#8217;s effective &#8216;Asianization&#8217; of much of the Labour Market, in a bid to attract outside investment by the multinational corporations at the forefront of the drive towards an ever more Globalized form of  Capitalism, was funded to a large by the European Social Fund: which had been set up for a very different purpose entirely. The Work Programme is also funded in part from the same funding source. Perhaps one way of putting a stop to at least some of these sharp practises, from both sides of the political spectrum, would be to organize some sort of initiative from within the European Parliament to ensure that money from the European Social Fund is used for what it is actually intended.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Thomas Casagranda</title>
		<link>http://www.redpepper.org.uk/workfare-a-policy-on-the-brink/#comment-162359</link>
		<dc:creator>Thomas Casagranda</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 24 Feb 2013 22:21:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.redpepper.org.uk/?p=9411#comment-162359</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#039;m concerned. I, now, have to sign on at the Work Programme provider&#039;s office. Has anyone experienced this ?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m concerned. I, now, have to sign on at the Work Programme provider&#8217;s office. Has anyone experienced this ?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andy Kempster</title>
		<link>http://www.redpepper.org.uk/workfare-a-policy-on-the-brink/#comment-161649</link>
		<dc:creator>Andy Kempster</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Feb 2013 17:49:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.redpepper.org.uk/?p=9411#comment-161649</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The problem is that it is all being politicised when it shouldn&#039;t be

http://finnspolitics.wordpress.com/2013/02/22/internships-and-the-workfare-scheme-not-a-party-political-activity/]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The problem is that it is all being politicised when it shouldn&#8217;t be</p>
<p><a href="http://finnspolitics.wordpress.com/2013/02/22/internships-and-the-workfare-scheme-not-a-party-political-activity/" rel="nofollow">http://finnspolitics.wordpress.com/2013/02/22/internships-and-the-workfare-scheme-not-a-party-political-activity/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gordon</title>
		<link>http://www.redpepper.org.uk/workfare-a-policy-on-the-brink/#comment-160696</link>
		<dc:creator>Gordon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Feb 2013 03:04:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.redpepper.org.uk/?p=9411#comment-160696</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This policy is not failing as some claim: it is successfully driving down workers&#039; bargaining power as intended. There are far more jobseekers than jobs; the govt. are well aware of this so their true intentions are transparent, yet the media largely play along with their pretence of targeting &#039;scroungers&#039;. 

Labour have accepted capitalism and believe that wealth trickles down from the &#039;entrepreneurship&#039; of owners. It should not come as any surprise that they, like the Tories, will follow the logic of that paradigm when an economic downturn threatens the profits of owners. 

The fact that the owners themselves caused the downturn is immaterial - due to corruption, careerism and the prevailing dogma, the politicians will be more interested in preserving the existing power structure than in economic justice or alleviating the suffering of citizens. 

The reality is, capitalism is a deliberately engineered system of social control and exploitation; it is still widely considered the best system available and there&#039;s a dearth of the imagination and optimism needed to try to find a new and better system. 

Commenters saying &quot;I&#039;m no scrounger, but...&quot; are accepting their chains - this acceptance that you should feel ashamed for lazing about and refusing a meaningless job is just an idea that&#039;s programmed into you. You should feel ashamed when you know you are being called upon to do something actually worthwhile but fail to do so. Working in Argos is not such a calling; it is meaningless. There is enough wealth &amp; technology now for everyone to live a nice easy life yet people work longer hours than mediaeval serfs and struggle to pay the rent. 

Reject this system outright; don&#039;t try to tame it or argue on its terms. People should never work just to serve some master&#039;s interests; they should only ever work when they see that there&#039;s work that really needs done, that is meaningful to them. This is only healthy, sane and natural. It should not be considered radical or idealistic in a society that supposedly is against slavery &amp; exploitation in principle. 

Our aim should be: work because a sick person needs treatment, or because your neighbour needs a lift across town, or because a kid needs to learn how to write - don&#039;t work because you need to pay the rent or because you want to enjoy excessive power and luxury. The essentials of life can and should be guaranteed for everyone - &#039;laziness&#039; is just a matter of engagement, and who can blame anyone for being disengaged these days?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This policy is not failing as some claim: it is successfully driving down workers&#8217; bargaining power as intended. There are far more jobseekers than jobs; the govt. are well aware of this so their true intentions are transparent, yet the media largely play along with their pretence of targeting &#8216;scroungers&#8217;. </p>
<p>Labour have accepted capitalism and believe that wealth trickles down from the &#8216;entrepreneurship&#8217; of owners. It should not come as any surprise that they, like the Tories, will follow the logic of that paradigm when an economic downturn threatens the profits of owners. </p>
<p>The fact that the owners themselves caused the downturn is immaterial &#8211; due to corruption, careerism and the prevailing dogma, the politicians will be more interested in preserving the existing power structure than in economic justice or alleviating the suffering of citizens. </p>
<p>The reality is, capitalism is a deliberately engineered system of social control and exploitation; it is still widely considered the best system available and there&#8217;s a dearth of the imagination and optimism needed to try to find a new and better system. </p>
<p>Commenters saying &#8220;I&#8217;m no scrounger, but&#8230;&#8221; are accepting their chains &#8211; this acceptance that you should feel ashamed for lazing about and refusing a meaningless job is just an idea that&#8217;s programmed into you. You should feel ashamed when you know you are being called upon to do something actually worthwhile but fail to do so. Working in Argos is not such a calling; it is meaningless. There is enough wealth &amp; technology now for everyone to live a nice easy life yet people work longer hours than mediaeval serfs and struggle to pay the rent. </p>
<p>Reject this system outright; don&#8217;t try to tame it or argue on its terms. People should never work just to serve some master&#8217;s interests; they should only ever work when they see that there&#8217;s work that really needs done, that is meaningful to them. This is only healthy, sane and natural. It should not be considered radical or idealistic in a society that supposedly is against slavery &amp; exploitation in principle. </p>
<p>Our aim should be: work because a sick person needs treatment, or because your neighbour needs a lift across town, or because a kid needs to learn how to write &#8211; don&#8217;t work because you need to pay the rent or because you want to enjoy excessive power and luxury. The essentials of life can and should be guaranteed for everyone &#8211; &#8216;laziness&#8217; is just a matter of engagement, and who can blame anyone for being disengaged these days?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Baz</title>
		<link>http://www.redpepper.org.uk/workfare-a-policy-on-the-brink/#comment-160646</link>
		<dc:creator>Baz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 Feb 2013 21:59:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.redpepper.org.uk/?p=9411#comment-160646</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Why can&#039;t we agree to work for them for the hourly rate of whatever it amounts to (ie:the money you get for jsa divided by the hrs worked!)and claim working tax allowance which as we all know bumps up our income to what the dwp say is what the LAW SAYS YOU NEED TO LIVE ON!?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Why can&#8217;t we agree to work for them for the hourly rate of whatever it amounts to (ie:the money you get for jsa divided by the hrs worked!)and claim working tax allowance which as we all know bumps up our income to what the dwp say is what the LAW SAYS YOU NEED TO LIVE ON!?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: trev howarth</title>
		<link>http://www.redpepper.org.uk/workfare-a-policy-on-the-brink/#comment-160080</link>
		<dc:creator>trev howarth</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 Feb 2013 10:01:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.redpepper.org.uk/?p=9411#comment-160080</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[while it was obvious from the start that the Tories would re-introduce slavery , the most outrageous thing is Labour are doing nothing whatsoever about it . They should hang their heads in shame - if it was THEY forced to work for nothing you can bet they&#039;d be up in arms!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>while it was obvious from the start that the Tories would re-introduce slavery , the most outrageous thing is Labour are doing nothing whatsoever about it . They should hang their heads in shame &#8211; if it was THEY forced to work for nothing you can bet they&#8217;d be up in arms!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic page generated in 0.525 seconds. -->
<!-- Cached page generated by WP-Super-Cache on 2013-09-18 20:38:48 -->