|
Post by yattongas on Jan 27, 2022 22:57:40 GMT
Haven't read the link, but I don't have an issue with that in principle. If there are unskilled jobs available then people should have to work instead of claiming benefits. For those unable to work, fair enough but not working should not be a lifestyle choice. Working wages may need to be looked at because it should be more financially rewarding to work, than to not, wherever possible. Does it help the economy to rush people into jobs that don’t match their skills and interests, knowing that they’re more likely to be in them for a lesser amount of time, then will be claiming welfare benefits afterwards again. Than to provide more support and give them more time to find jobs that do, which they’re more likely to stay in for longer? Does it help employers that their recruitment pool is reduced, because possible candidates that have left similar jobs are now working in a lesser paid, lesser skilled jobs because they were forced to in order to pay their bills? We’re in a climate where lots of jobs are on the market, but that won’t last forever. Then what? We punish people for not finding a job within 4 weeks when the likelihood of actually getting one within 4 weeks that’s not a low paid one is slim? I see the principle of what you’re saying and I think it’s vitally important to society and the economy that these surplus jobs are filled. It’s a question I genuinely don’t know the answer to and the sort of thing that could do with a commissioned study looking into it. Precisely, sticking an accountant into a care home isn’t the right fix. You’ve got a person forced into a job they don’t want to do and an employer who’s got someone in the role who’ll be looking to jump ship asap. It makes no sense and is just red meat to the Tory right.
|
|
|
Post by francegas on Jan 28, 2022 0:56:56 GMT
Does it help the economy to rush people into jobs that don’t match their skills and interests, knowing that they’re more likely to be in them for a lesser amount of time, then will be claiming welfare benefits afterwards again. Than to provide more support and give them more time to find jobs that do, which they’re more likely to stay in for longer? Does it help employers that their recruitment pool is reduced, because possible candidates that have left similar jobs are now working in a lesser paid, lesser skilled jobs because they were forced to in order to pay their bills? We’re in a climate where lots of jobs are on the market, but that won’t last forever. Then what? We punish people for not finding a job within 4 weeks when the likelihood of actually getting one within 4 weeks that’s not a low paid one is slim? I see the principle of what you’re saying and I think it’s vitally important to society and the economy that these surplus jobs are filled. It’s a question I genuinely don’t know the answer to and the sort of thing that could do with a commissioned study looking into it. Precisely, sticking an accountant into a care home isn’t the right fix. You’ve got a person forced into a job they don’t want to do and an employer who’s got someone in the role who’ll be looking to jump ship asap. It makes no sense and is just red meat to the Tory right. But what if that accountant can not get employment again in accountancy. He can't sit at home refusing work purely on the basis that he's a trained accountant and that's all he wants to do. Maybe the UK should follow the Dutch system whereby to get your benefits you have to do voluntarily work and give something back to society. When BA pilots lost their jobs to covid a number went to work as delivery drivers.. so it can work.
|
|
|
Post by Hugo the Elder on Jan 28, 2022 6:28:31 GMT
Does it help the economy to rush people into jobs that don’t match their skills and interests, knowing that they’re more likely to be in them for a lesser amount of time, then will be claiming welfare benefits afterwards again. Than to provide more support and give them more time to find jobs that do, which they’re more likely to stay in for longer? Does it help employers that their recruitment pool is reduced, because possible candidates that have left similar jobs are now working in a lesser paid, lesser skilled jobs because they were forced to in order to pay their bills? We’re in a climate where lots of jobs are on the market, but that won’t last forever. Then what? We punish people for not finding a job within 4 weeks when the likelihood of actually getting one within 4 weeks that’s not a low paid one is slim? I see the principle of what you’re saying and I think it’s vitally important to society and the economy that these surplus jobs are filled. It’s a question I genuinely don’t know the answer to and the sort of thing that could do with a commissioned study looking into it. Precisely, sticking an accountant into a care home isn’t the right fix. You’ve got a person forced into a job they don’t want to do and an employer who’s got someone in the role who’ll be looking to jump ship asap. It makes no sense and is just red meat to the Tory right. I think that's a deliberately silly example. Citing an out of work accountant, when we all know there are more obvious examples of career benefit claimants is also a bit dishonest. There are always going to be issues of "fit" but inventing a worse case scenario to throw out the principle does not help your argument. There are also going to be certain jobs that should be exempt. Working in a care home is not a suitable place to use "forced labour". It's an unarguable fact that there are people in the UK that are 2nd and 3rd generation, professional benefit users. They are not ill, or have disabilities, they are not trained or skilled in any profession and they are not unemployed off the back of a previous history of long-term employment. Look around Bristol, or even out in the sticks where I am, and there is litter, graffiti, pot holes, benches that need painting etc. I don't find it unreasonable to explore the possibility of using people assessed as suitable to have to give something in return for their benefits. Indeed, I would go further and suggest that it's actually a more communist idea, that everyone does their bit for society as a whole. I consider myself centre/left. I've never voted Tory and I never will but I think many people, if they are being honest, see some of our benefit system as being quite unjust. To dismiss it as "Tory red meat" is a mistake in my opinion. Axe made some good points I his response, and it's definitely something that needs property reviewing and implementing. Ignoring, or dismissing it out of hand would be a big mistake for the Left wing.
|
|
|
Post by yattongas on Jan 28, 2022 8:09:00 GMT
Precisely, sticking an accountant into a care home isn’t the right fix. You’ve got a person forced into a job they don’t want to do and an employer who’s got someone in the role who’ll be looking to jump ship asap. It makes no sense and is just red meat to the Tory right. I think that's a deliberately silly example. Citing an out of work accountant, when we all know there are more obvious examples of career benefit claimants is also a bit dishonest. There are always going to be issues of "fit" but inventing a worse case scenario to throw out the principle does not help your argument. There are also going to be certain jobs that should be exempt. Working in a care home is not a suitable place to use "forced labour". It's an unarguable fact that there are people in the UK that are 2nd and 3rd generation, professional benefit users. They are not ill, or have disabilities, they are not trained or skilled in any profession and they are not unemployed off the back of a previous history of long-term employment. Look around Bristol, or even out in the sticks where I am, and there is litter, graffiti, pot holes, benches that need painting etc. I don't find it unreasonable to explore the possibility of using people assessed as suitable to have to give something in return for their benefits. Indeed, I would go further and suggest that it's actually a more communist idea, that everyone does their bit for society as a whole. I consider myself centre/left. I've never voted Tory and I never will but I think many people, if they are being honest, see some of our benefit system as being quite unjust. To dismiss it as "Tory red meat" is a mistake in my opinion. Axe made some good points I his response, and it's definitely something that needs property reviewing and implementing. Ignoring, or dismissing it out of hand would be a big mistake for the Left wing. “Red meat” is the term they have used themselves. Every ( so called) expert I heard speaking about it yesterday thought it was a very poorly thought out policy that would be counter productive.
|
|
|
Post by Hugo the Elder on Jan 28, 2022 8:10:33 GMT
I think that's a deliberately silly example. Citing an out of work accountant, when we all know there are more obvious examples of career benefit claimants is also a bit dishonest. There are always going to be issues of "fit" but inventing a worse case scenario to throw out the principle does not help your argument. There are also going to be certain jobs that should be exempt. Working in a care home is not a suitable place to use "forced labour". It's an unarguable fact that there are people in the UK that are 2nd and 3rd generation, professional benefit users. They are not ill, or have disabilities, they are not trained or skilled in any profession and they are not unemployed off the back of a previous history of long-term employment. Look around Bristol, or even out in the sticks where I am, and there is litter, graffiti, pot holes, benches that need painting etc. I don't find it unreasonable to explore the possibility of using people assessed as suitable to have to give something in return for their benefits. Indeed, I would go further and suggest that it's actually a more communist idea, that everyone does their bit for society as a whole. I consider myself centre/left. I've never voted Tory and I never will but I think many people, if they are being honest, see some of our benefit system as being quite unjust. To dismiss it as "Tory red meat" is a mistake in my opinion. Axe made some good points I his response, and it's definitely something that needs property reviewing and implementing. Ignoring, or dismissing it out of hand would be a big mistake for the Left wing. “Red meat” is the term they have used themselves. Every ( so called) expert I heard speaking about it yesterday thought it was a very poorly thought out policy that would be counter productive. I've no doubt it's poorly thought out, this is Bozo's tories after all! But, the idea is a good one.
|
|
|
Post by Hugo the Elder on Jan 28, 2022 8:22:23 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Hugo the Elder on Jan 28, 2022 8:30:57 GMT
The police stop SG reporting on things its investigating.
Police will declare no wrong doing.
No one will ever find out what SG would have reported without police intervention.
|
|
|
Post by Gassy on Jan 28, 2022 9:28:04 GMT
The police stop SG reporting on things its investigating. Police will declare no wrong doing. No one will ever find out what SG would have reported without police intervention. And there you have it, we knew the government was corrupt but now we have confirmation of a corrupt police force as well. The Tories have absolutely ruined this country and we are the laughing stock of the world.
|
|
|
Post by Officer Barbrady on Jan 28, 2022 9:32:15 GMT
The police stop SG reporting on things its investigating. Police will declare no wrong doing. No one will ever find out what SG would have reported without police intervention. And there you have it, we knew the government was corrupt but now we have confirmation of a corrupt police force as well. The Tories have absolutely ruined this country and we are the laughing stock of the world. How can anyone look at this and say its ok? I mean, sure, be a Conservative if that's what you are but how can you believe in a fair and just democracy and abide by this blatant corruption?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 28, 2022 9:35:40 GMT
Precisely, sticking an accountant into a care home isn’t the right fix. You’ve got a person forced into a job they don’t want to do and an employer who’s got someone in the role who’ll be looking to jump ship asap. It makes no sense and is just red meat to the Tory right. I think that's a deliberately silly example. Citing an out of work accountant, when we all know there are more obvious examples of career benefit claimants is also a bit dishonest. There are always going to be issues of "fit" but inventing a worse case scenario to throw out the principle does not help your argument. There are also going to be certain jobs that should be exempt. Working in a care home is not a suitable place to use "forced labour". It's an unarguable fact that there are people in the UK that are 2nd and 3rd generation, professional benefit users. They are not ill, or have disabilities, they are not trained or skilled in any profession and they are not unemployed off the back of a previous history of long-term employment. Look around Bristol, or even out in the sticks where I am, and there is litter, graffiti, pot holes, benches that need painting etc. I don't find it unreasonable to explore the possibility of using people assessed as suitable to have to give something in return for their benefits. Indeed, I would go further and suggest that it's actually a more communist idea, that everyone does their bit for society as a whole. I consider myself centre/left. I've never voted Tory and I never will but I think many people, if they are being honest, see some of our benefit system as being quite unjust. To dismiss it as "Tory red meat" is a mistake in my opinion. Axe made some good points I his response, and it's definitely something that needs property reviewing and implementing. Ignoring, or dismissing it out of hand would be a big mistake for the Left wing. If you're so upset about the benefits system why don't you read up on why it was created and what has happened to it over the last hundred years or so? Think you would find it very interesting (it is) and it may make you less of a reactionary.
|
|
|
Post by yattongas on Jan 28, 2022 10:23:09 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Hugo the Elder on Jan 28, 2022 10:32:35 GMT
I think that's a deliberately silly example. Citing an out of work accountant, when we all know there are more obvious examples of career benefit claimants is also a bit dishonest. There are always going to be issues of "fit" but inventing a worse case scenario to throw out the principle does not help your argument. There are also going to be certain jobs that should be exempt. Working in a care home is not a suitable place to use "forced labour". It's an unarguable fact that there are people in the UK that are 2nd and 3rd generation, professional benefit users. They are not ill, or have disabilities, they are not trained or skilled in any profession and they are not unemployed off the back of a previous history of long-term employment. Look around Bristol, or even out in the sticks where I am, and there is litter, graffiti, pot holes, benches that need painting etc. I don't find it unreasonable to explore the possibility of using people assessed as suitable to have to give something in return for their benefits. Indeed, I would go further and suggest that it's actually a more communist idea, that everyone does their bit for society as a whole. I consider myself centre/left. I've never voted Tory and I never will but I think many people, if they are being honest, see some of our benefit system as being quite unjust. To dismiss it as "Tory red meat" is a mistake in my opinion. Axe made some good points I his response, and it's definitely something that needs property reviewing and implementing. Ignoring, or dismissing it out of hand would be a big mistake for the Left wing. If you're so upset about the benefits system why don't you read up on why it was created and what has happened to it over the last hundred years or so? Think you would find it very interesting (it is) and it may make you less of a reactionary. I'm neither upset, nor reactionary. Are you saying that all people claiming benefits are genuinely unable to find employment?
|
|
|
Post by axegas on Jan 28, 2022 11:09:35 GMT
Precisely, sticking an accountant into a care home isn’t the right fix. You’ve got a person forced into a job they don’t want to do and an employer who’s got someone in the role who’ll be looking to jump ship asap. It makes no sense and is just red meat to the Tory right. But what if that accountant can not get employment again in accountancy. He can't sit at home refusing work purely on the basis that he's a trained accountant and that's all he wants to do. Maybe the UK should follow the Dutch system whereby to get your benefits you have to do voluntarily work and give something back to society. When BA pilots lost their jobs to covid a number went to work as delivery drivers.. so it can work. That’s the thing, this new system doesn’t give enough time for the accountant to see if he can get a new job in accountancy. I agree that if he was unable to find a job similar within 3 months, then yes he should look for other jobs such as those in the care sector. There is no reason why an accountant can’t be a good care worker.
|
|
|
Post by baggins on Jan 28, 2022 11:31:10 GMT
But what if that accountant can not get employment again in accountancy. He can't sit at home refusing work purely on the basis that he's a trained accountant and that's all he wants to do. Maybe the UK should follow the Dutch system whereby to get your benefits you have to do voluntarily work and give something back to society. When BA pilots lost their jobs to covid a number went to work as delivery drivers.. so it can work. That’s the thing, this new system doesn’t give enough time for the accountant to see if he can get a new job in accountancy. I agree that if he was unable to find a job similar within 3 months, then yes he should look for other jobs such as those in the care sector. There is no reason why an accountant can’t be a good care worker. Plenty of veg picking jobs going.
|
|
|
Post by axegas on Jan 28, 2022 11:33:18 GMT
That’s the thing, this new system doesn’t give enough time for the accountant to see if he can get a new job in accountancy. I agree that if he was unable to find a job similar within 3 months, then yes he should look for other jobs such as those in the care sector. There is no reason why an accountant can’t be a good care worker. Plenty of veg picking jobs going. Shh, don’t get Yatton started.
|
|
|
Post by yattongas on Jan 28, 2022 11:47:38 GMT
Plenty of veg picking jobs going. Shh, don’t get Yatton started. Oi
|
|
|
Post by yattongas on Jan 28, 2022 11:52:29 GMT
But what if that accountant can not get employment again in accountancy. He can't sit at home refusing work purely on the basis that he's a trained accountant and that's all he wants to do. Maybe the UK should follow the Dutch system whereby to get your benefits you have to do voluntarily work and give something back to society. When BA pilots lost their jobs to covid a number went to work as delivery drivers.. so it can work. That’s the thing, this new system doesn’t give enough time for the accountant to see if he can get a new job in accountancy. I agree that if he was unable to find a job similar within 3 months, then yes he should look for other jobs such as those in the care sector. There is no reason why an accountant can’t be a good care worker. Agreed that an accountant can make a good care worker but if my 88 yr old mum ends up in a care home I want her looked after by a care worker who has a ‘caring’ nature and sees the job as a vocation . Not someone forced into the job . It’s Ill thought out .
|
|
|
Post by yattongas on Jan 28, 2022 11:52:59 GMT
That’s the thing, this new system doesn’t give enough time for the accountant to see if he can get a new job in accountancy. I agree that if he was unable to find a job similar within 3 months, then yes he should look for other jobs such as those in the care sector. There is no reason why an accountant can’t be a good care worker. Plenty of veg picking jobs going. Pick for Britain 🇬🇧!
|
|
|
Post by stuart1974 on Jan 28, 2022 12:05:21 GMT
Not a good look, regardless of whether it's more cockup rather than collusion.
|
|
|
Post by yattongas on Jan 28, 2022 17:58:07 GMT
|
|