"Guaranteed Jobs" experiment in Austria
Discussion
New Yorker article
Interesting - guaranteed work for people on benefits - mostly 'volunteer' type work (gardening, carpentry). Not forcing them to work in return for benefits though, but they basically 'earn' the same amount as they would do on benefits.
Advantage is that gives people a sense of purpose and well being, plus keeps them 'in the market' for employment. Wouldn't impact the truly work shy, but certainly seems better to give people the option to do this rather than atrophy.
Interesting - guaranteed work for people on benefits - mostly 'volunteer' type work (gardening, carpentry). Not forcing them to work in return for benefits though, but they basically 'earn' the same amount as they would do on benefits.
Advantage is that gives people a sense of purpose and well being, plus keeps them 'in the market' for employment. Wouldn't impact the truly work shy, but certainly seems better to give people the option to do this rather than atrophy.
dukeboy749r said:
Maybe a degree of 'compulsory' volunteering, whilst claiming benefits (if physically and mentally capable), would help?
Not a dig at anyone, but more if you are getting benefits you can use your skill, labour, ability, to help others.
This, and I'm sure there are plenty who would jump at the chance to do something useful with themelves and perhaps pick up a few new skills along the way.Not a dig at anyone, but more if you are getting benefits you can use your skill, labour, ability, to help others.
b
hstewie said:
hstewie said: It does surprise me we don't seem to have any similar nationwide schemes (that I know of).
It was suggested a while ago. I think (IIRC) it was the LibDems that shouted it down, on the basis that working for their money would offend people's basic Human Dignity.I strongly disagree with this and in fact hold the exact opposite position: that sitting on your arse doing nothing at all in return for free money gathered from other people who do work would be the thing to offend your dignity. If you had any.
defblade said:
It was suggested a while ago. I think (IIRC) it was the LibDems that shouted it down, on the basis that working for their money would offend people's basic Human Dignity.
I strongly disagree with this and in fact hold the exact opposite position: that sitting on your arse doing nothing at all in return for free money gathered from other people who do work would be the thing to offend your dignity. If you had any.
I imagine it's been suggested in various forms and I guess there is a difference between "work full time for free but for less money" v something that helps give people some life skills and sense of purpose.I strongly disagree with this and in fact hold the exact opposite position: that sitting on your arse doing nothing at all in return for free money gathered from other people who do work would be the thing to offend your dignity. If you had any.
Damned if I can remember the name of it now but I think there was a Government scheme that did this for people with disabilities who otherwise might not be employable and when it got shut down there was a lot of fuss (rightly) from the people it helped as for them it wasn't about the money.
Similar schemes have been tried here in the recent past and were known as workfare.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Workfare_in_the_Un...
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Workfare_in_the_Un...
defblade said:
It was suggested a while ago. I think (IIRC) it was the LibDems that shouted it down, on the basis that working for their money would offend people's basic Human Dignity.
I strongly disagree with this and in fact hold the exact opposite position: that sitting on your arse doing nothing at all in return for free money gathered from other people who do work would be the thing to offend your dignity. If you had any.
The article highlights that one of the big issues with worklessness is not just the monetary aspects but everything that comes with it in terms of the affect on the individual. I strongly disagree with this and in fact hold the exact opposite position: that sitting on your arse doing nothing at all in return for free money gathered from other people who do work would be the thing to offend your dignity. If you had any.
Guaranteed work at minimum wage would be a genuinely interesting alternative to welfare and one that would provide a much better safety net to many who don't receive much benefit from the current system. Being at the minimum wage as well it would likely be a ladder into work for most rather than a permanent state.
I've always thought the answer to unemployment is to provide a guaranteed minimum wage job rather than money for nothing.
Obviously some people cannot work, but there are plenty that can and claim to be looking for work.
You are in a much better position to get a job when you already have one, and are gaining experience.
As an example my son was looking for work when he left Uni, but in the mean time volunteered at a charity shop. His first employer said it was a big plus in the decision to hire him.
Obviously some people cannot work, but there are plenty that can and claim to be looking for work.
You are in a much better position to get a job when you already have one, and are gaining experience.
As an example my son was looking for work when he left Uni, but in the mean time volunteered at a charity shop. His first employer said it was a big plus in the decision to hire him.
SWoll said:
dukeboy749r said:
Maybe a degree of 'compulsory' volunteering, whilst claiming benefits (if physically and mentally capable), would help?
Not a dig at anyone, but more if you are getting benefits you can use your skill, labour, ability, to help others.
This, and I'm sure there are plenty who would jump at the chance to do something useful with themelves and perhaps pick up a few new skills along the way.Not a dig at anyone, but more if you are getting benefits you can use your skill, labour, ability, to help others.
Some days are good, others she's unable to do basic functions so holding down a regular job is nigh-on impossible. Rather than sit and do nothing though, she's doing an OU degree and volunteering at the local community café whenever she feels capable, and hopes that one day she'll be able to work properly again. I have immense respect for her in how she's dealing with things. There are many on benefits who aren't workshy and legitimately don't have it in them physically to be able to work and I know that given a choice between staying as she is or being able to go back to work, she'd far rather be working. A life on benefits can be incredibly lonely and fearful.
dukeboy749r said:
Maybe a degree of 'compulsory' volunteering, whilst claiming benefits (if physically and mentally capable), would help?
Not a dig at anyone, but more if you are getting benefits you can use your skill, labour, ability, to help others.
I do think that if you are on benefits you should have to "work" 16 hours a week or something, (basically 2 days a week, leaving you 3 days a week to search for gainful employment opportunities)Not a dig at anyone, but more if you are getting benefits you can use your skill, labour, ability, to help others.
Things like community outreach, tidying up the flower beds in the local park, etc.
It will do wonders for peoples sense of community and self esteem. Beats sitting at home watching Jeremy Kyle !
GranpaB said:
It will never work here as most of the people on benefits are too bone idle and would rather do fk all for free money.
I could work exactly the same way a normal job does. If you don't turn up you won't get money. The vast majority of people are expected to work for money, it's how society works. k all for free money.Giving people guaranteed work is more inclusive. Free money to the bone idle creates division.
98elise said:
GranpaB said:
It will never work here as most of the people on benefits are too bone idle and would rather do fk all for free money.
I could work exactly the same way a normal job does. If you don't turn up you won't get money. The vast majority of people are expected to work for money, it's how society works. k all for free money.Giving people guaranteed work is more inclusive. Free money to the bone idle creates division.
98elise said:
I could work exactly the same way a normal job does. If you don't turn up you won't get money. The vast majority of people are expected to work for money, it's how society works.
Giving people guaranteed work is more inclusive. Free money to the bone idle creates division.
cant work m8 , got some made up disability and 6 retarded kids to look after Giving people guaranteed work is more inclusive. Free money to the bone idle creates division.
defblade said:
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: It does surprise me we don't seem to have any similar nationwide schemes (that I know of).
It was suggested a while ago. I think (IIRC) it was the LibDems that shouted it down, on the basis that working for their money would offend people's basic Human Dignity.I strongly disagree with this and in fact hold the exact opposite position: that sitting on your arse doing nothing at all in return for free money gathered from other people who do work would be the thing to offend your dignity. If you had any.
The problem is the concept of personal responsibility is seen as a bit dirty by the hive mindset that has the institutions.
CarCrazyDad said:
dukeboy749r said:
Maybe a degree of 'compulsory' volunteering, whilst claiming benefits (if physically and mentally capable), would help?
Not a dig at anyone, but more if you are getting benefits you can use your skill, labour, ability, to help others.
I do think that if you are on benefits you should have to "work" 16 hours a week or something, (basically 2 days a week, leaving you 3 days a week to search for gainful employment opportunities)Not a dig at anyone, but more if you are getting benefits you can use your skill, labour, ability, to help others.
Things like community outreach, tidying up the flower beds in the local park, etc.
It will do wonders for peoples sense of community and self esteem. Beats sitting at home watching Jeremy Kyle !
Having seen the inner workings of the DWP's system it's not fit for deciding who can work and who can't properly. Having initially tried to be honest about the delta between best and worst days, my friend found her housing benefit, PIP and Disability payments completely stopped for a year while she had to go through a horrendous tribunal process (which took over a year). She was lucky with support from family and friends to bridge the gap and she eventually won her case against the DWP - the judge not only reinstated but uplifted her payments as well as back-dating to the date the DWP illegally stopped her payments. And she did all this while trying to manage a permanent, life-long condition that's getting worse - and is enormously affected by stress.
It's easy to make assumptions about those on benefits - indeed, I used to as well - but having now been closely involved with fighting the system (at her request, I was in court with my friend on the day of the hearing) it's not fit for purpose and the default setting for many DWP assessors is one of zero care or compassion. targeted to stop or refuse benefits payments wherever possible. They also, through no fault of their own, have no real understanding of most illnesses and conditions and just how dehabilitating they can be, yet they make decisions that massively affect peoples' lives.
It took a judge and panel of 4 other people (including, thankfully, a fully-qualified doctor) to tell the DWP they'd f
ked up on several points of law and to reinstate and uplift my friend's benefits. Even today my friend says that the appearance of any DWP-related paperwork immediately spikes her anxiety as to to whether or not the letter may or may not arbitrarily revoke payments etc.P.S. - The Jeremy Kyle show hasn't been on TV since early 2019.
Funk said:
The issue is how do you reliably and fairly sort those who can work and those who can't? The worst ordeal my friend with epilepsy had was getting the DWP to understand that she 'looks normal' and on many days can function completely normally. However, on her worst days I've had to call an ambulance and get her to hospital for stitches due to the fact she's had a sudden seizure and smashed her head open as she's hit doorways or the worktop on the way to floor. She's often unable to get out of bed. It's as polar as that and she doesn't ever know which type of day it's going to be.
Having seen the inner workings of the DWP's system it's not fit for deciding who can work and who can't properly. Having initially tried to be honest about the delta between best and worst days, my friend found her housing benefit, PIP and Disability payments completely stopped for a year while she had to go through a horrendous tribunal process (which took over a year). She was lucky with support from family and friends to bridge the gap and she eventually won her case against the DWP - the judge not only reinstated but uplifted her payments as well as back-dating to the date the DWP illegally stopped her payments. And she did all this while trying to manage a permanent, life-long condition that's getting worse - and is enormously affected by stress.
It's easy to make assumptions about those on benefits - indeed, I used to as well - but having now been closely involved with fighting the system (at her request, I was in court with my friend on the day of the hearing) it's not fit for purpose and the default setting for many DWP assessors is one of zero care or compassion. targeted to stop or refuse benefits payments wherever possible. They also, through no fault of their own, have no real understanding of most illnesses and conditions and just how dehabilitating they can be, yet they make decisions that massively affect peoples' lives.
It took a judge and panel of 4 other people (including, thankfully, a fully-qualified doctor) to tell the DWP they'd fked up on several points of law and to reinstate and uplift my friend's benefits. Even today my friend says that the appearance of any DWP-related paperwork immediately spikes her anxiety as to to whether or not the letter may or may not arbitrarily revoke payments etc.
P.S. - The Jeremy Kyle show hasn't been on TV since early 2019.
Obviously you take it on a case by case basis.Having seen the inner workings of the DWP's system it's not fit for deciding who can work and who can't properly. Having initially tried to be honest about the delta between best and worst days, my friend found her housing benefit, PIP and Disability payments completely stopped for a year while she had to go through a horrendous tribunal process (which took over a year). She was lucky with support from family and friends to bridge the gap and she eventually won her case against the DWP - the judge not only reinstated but uplifted her payments as well as back-dating to the date the DWP illegally stopped her payments. And she did all this while trying to manage a permanent, life-long condition that's getting worse - and is enormously affected by stress.
It's easy to make assumptions about those on benefits - indeed, I used to as well - but having now been closely involved with fighting the system (at her request, I was in court with my friend on the day of the hearing) it's not fit for purpose and the default setting for many DWP assessors is one of zero care or compassion. targeted to stop or refuse benefits payments wherever possible. They also, through no fault of their own, have no real understanding of most illnesses and conditions and just how dehabilitating they can be, yet they make decisions that massively affect peoples' lives.
It took a judge and panel of 4 other people (including, thankfully, a fully-qualified doctor) to tell the DWP they'd f
ked up on several points of law and to reinstate and uplift my friend's benefits. Even today my friend says that the appearance of any DWP-related paperwork immediately spikes her anxiety as to to whether or not the letter may or may not arbitrarily revoke payments etc.P.S. - The Jeremy Kyle show hasn't been on TV since early 2019.
For everyone person who has a condition such as your friend there is a completely perfectly able bodied person who just cannot be arsed to work.
In my experience for every genuinely hard done by person there are 2 or 3 people who could work but are lazy.
In any event in majority of cases those who are on benefits could do something positive for the community in one way or another.
I am not commenting on the pros and cons of DWP's actions.
Just that I think the country would be a better place with some sort of scheme active, get people back interacting within the community.
CarCrazyDad said:
Obviously you take it on a case by case basis.
For everyone person who has a condition such as your friend there is a completely perfectly able bodied person who just cannot be arsed to work.
In my experience for every genuinely hard done by person there are 2 or 3 people who could work but are lazy.
In any event in majority of cases those who are on benefits could do something positive for the community in one way or another.
I am not commenting on the pros and cons of DWP's actions.
Just that I think the country would be a better place with some sort of scheme active, get people back interacting within the community.
Trouble is - a case by case approach is very expensive. Needs lots of people to interview and follow up.For everyone person who has a condition such as your friend there is a completely perfectly able bodied person who just cannot be arsed to work.
In my experience for every genuinely hard done by person there are 2 or 3 people who could work but are lazy.
In any event in majority of cases those who are on benefits could do something positive for the community in one way or another.
I am not commenting on the pros and cons of DWP's actions.
Just that I think the country would be a better place with some sort of scheme active, get people back interacting within the community.
SWoll said:
This. If there's work to be done then no excuses for not doing it, that's the way a functional society works. Can't keep demanding more and more from those working hard in order to support an increasingly large number of lazy chancers.
If there is work to be done; bundle it up, call it a job, advertise it, appoint someone and pay them to do it. That is the way a functioning society works.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff