A New Coach/Athlete Model

The DWP Coach/Athlete Model

"Dear Rosie,

I’ve confirmed with policy experts that we don’t require either a legislative change or new legislation to enable the roll-out of the Claimant Commitment to JSA Claimants. This is because the Claimant Commitment will be used within the current JSA regime. Building on the successful Live Innovation Trials and Pathfinder approach, we are preparing for the introduction of Universal Credit by introducing a programme of learning and development for advisers to embed a cultural change and a new coach/athlete model for supporting claimants. This will include strengthening how we shift claimant behaviour towards proactive job-search that sets the right foundation ahead of Universal Credit’s smoother, clearer, more stable incentives to work. This will be supported by improved products, primarily the Claimant Commitment, which will help to enable this change. It is important to note that whilst the Claimant Commitment will replace the existing product for the claimant group agreed for roll-out, it will for legislative purposes act as the Jobseeker’s Agreement and claimant acceptance of it will not be a condition of entitlement for JSA as it will be for Universal Credit.

You are correct to say that generally claimants who are able to work would fall into the All Work Related Requirements group when claiming Universal Credit. Our aim is to encourage them to get into as much work as they reasonably can do as quickly as possible. Advisers will take account of individual circumstances and set requirements that, if complied with, give the claimant the best possible prospects of finding paid work.

The Claimant Commitment is at the heart of this personalised approach. Compliance with requirements such as active job search and engagement with advisers, increases the chances that claimants find work more quickly than they would otherwise, but too often in the current system there is a lack of clarity about requirements and consequences. The Claimant Commitment will address this, for the first time setting out all requirements and consequences in one place – ensuring claimants understand what is required.

One of the main differences between current JSA and Universal Credit conditionality is that claimants in the All Work Related Requirements group have a responsibility to look for and find work. Claimants should treat this responsibility as their “job” and our intention is that claimants should aim to spend as many hours looking for work as we would expect them to spend in work - for the All Work Related Requirements group this has been set at 35 hours per week. These more robust requirements will be supported by a new sanctions framework under Universal Credit.

However, as I have explained, the JSA Claimant Commitment will be underpinned by JSA and not Universal Credit legislation and as such will not have the same powers as for those claiming Universal Credit. Current JSA conditionality will continue to be applied and the Claimant Commitment will be a tool which facilitates a culture change and a more robust approach to diagnosing claimants circumstances and setting appropriate work related requirements, which will provide the best chance of finding work.

Kind Regards ... DWP Communications"

http://www.rightsnet.org.uk/forums/viewthread/5264

Nigel

IAD, No Idea

Update: (28 Aug 2013)

Universal Jobmatch: Your rights

“JSA Work Programme (WP) participants

90. You must not mandate JSA WP participants to create a profile and public CV in Universal Jobmatch.”https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/174251/response/424013/attach/html/3/WDTK%204024.pdf.html

Update: (22 Aug 2013) The DWP suggested the only mandatory place a Universal Jobmatch account could be created then used was on a Jobcentre Internet Access Device (IAD/Computer). However the quote below contradicts this outright:

“A3. Claimants will not be mandated to use IADs available in Jobcentre Plus offices and will, therefore, not be sanctioned if they refuse to use them. Use of IADs by claimants is voluntary.” https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/173127/response/422728/attach/html/3/FOI3884%20Gazz%20WDTK%20Reply.pdf.html

Note: Clarification is being sort on above, here and here.

Do not tick the boxes below, when you create a Universal Jobmatch account. Use can be made mandatory via a Jobseeker’s Direction ..."

http://consentarchive.wordpress.com/universaljobmatch

Nigel

Alrighty DWP, Set Me Free (Part 1)

Last week, I signed on, in the new 'end of the room' room, well-away from the vanilla signers. Briefly, for now, I will just say, that I have 'recently' (July, as I recall) come to the fruitless end, of my two years with A4e (more to follow, on that, later). I had told JCP, at the last few signings, that it had terminated and, in fact, that I had been parked, for some time, but nothing was done, until last Friday.

I told them, on that day, once again, and the 'adviser' jumped up to see his manager and returned, reminding me, of my Post-Work Programme Interview (PWPI?), dated, today. Of course, I had not been informed, before, or in writing (still have not been), so I nodded, kindly, and arrived today, for the new era.

For reasons which may be described, later, I have been out-of-the-loop, on employment niceties, recently, so, for now, I just wanted to recreate this piece, in its entirety (I hope the author does not mind; I will inform Andrew), so that the full background, to this series, here, is clear.

Here goes nothing (I predict)
____________________________________________________________________


The Unemployed and the 35 Hours a Week Job Search  

August 24, 2013 Andrew Coates

"Boycott Workfare said in July,

"The government appears to have abandoned their previous plans for compulsory 6 month workfare placements for everyone finishing the 2 years on the Work Programme. There was no mention of it when they announced their post-Work Programme plans yesterday, which is a victory for all anti-workfare campaigns. By us all putting pressure on workfare providers there are no longer enough companies and charities who are willing to be involved to make such a huge scheme possible."

This was the government’s plan.

Work Programme leavers targeted by specialist advisers as part of a tough approach to get them into a job.

Gov UK Press Release. 3rd June.

Work Programme leavers will be targeted by a hit squad of specialist advisers as part of a tough approach to get them into a job.

Up to 5 specialist advisers will be based in individual Jobcentres dedicated to working with people not in sustained work after 2 years on the Work Programme.

Claimants will be given an end-of-term report from their Work Programme provider assessing what progress they have made and their ongoing needs, to inform their new adviser before facing the toughest Jobcentre regime to help them find work. At their first appointment they will have to agree a binding back-to-work plan laying out what they are required to do.

Minister for Employment Mark Hoban said:

"The Work Programme is getting some of the hardest to help claimants into work despite a tough economic climate.

We always knew that there would be some who would require further support after the Work Programme, which is why we’re introducing this intensive and uncompromising regime.

We’ll be stepping up the pressure on claimants, who will be expected to attend the Jobcentre more frequently, with rigorous monitoring to ensure they are doing everything they can to find work."

Claimants will be expected to be on a training scheme, Mandatory Work Activity placement or intensive work preparation within days of finishing on the Work Programme – losing their benefit if they fail to comply. An extra £30m will be available to pay for extra training and specialist help to prepare them for work, for instance counselling for people dependent on drug and alcohol.

Claimants will also have to attend the Jobcentre far more frequently than other jobseekers, with weekly signing on being routine and some people being required to meet their adviser every day.

Every Work Programme returner will also be required to register with Universal Jobmatch to aid work search and job matching. This will allow their adviser to check their work search activity online should the claimant give permission.

The tough sanctions regime will see anyone failing to comply with mandatory activity lose benefit for 4 weeks for a first failure, with penalties of up to 3 years for serial offenders.

The intensive support will last for 6 months, and will be used for all Jobseeker’s Allowance claimants returning from the Work Programme who need more intensive support.

What We are Concerned about

Universal Credit will be based on four ‘work-related’ criteria for unemployed claimants.

What are the work-related requirements?

There are four work-related requirements (From Citizen’s Advice):

>the work-focused interview requirement
>the work preparation requirement
>the work search requirement
>the work availability requirement.

Your claimant commitment may include one or more of these requirements, depending on your circumstances. You will be told at your interview which requirements you’ll be expected to meet.

If you have to meet the work search requirement, it means you have to take all reasonable steps to find paid work.

If you’re already working, it means you have to take all reasonable steps to find better paid work or work more hours.

You may have to do any of these things as part of your work search requirement:

>spend a certain amount of time looking for work
>apply for jobs
>create and maintain an online profile. For example, you may have to put details of your skills, qualifications and experience on a website such as Universal Jobmatch
>register with an employment agency
>get references.

Jobcentre Plus can also tell you to take specific steps to help you find work or to help you find more or better paid work, such as applying for a specific job. They can decide how long you must spend taking these steps.

If you’re required to apply for a specific job, you get an interview but you fail to take part in it, you won’t meet your work search requirement.

How much time do you have to spend looking for work?

You normally have to spend 35 hours a week doing the things in your work search requirement. Some people with caring responsibilities or who have a physical or mental disability don’t have to spend as long as this.

You must usually spend 35 hours a week looking for work. This time is known as your expected number of hours. The time you spend only counts if it gives you the best chances of getting work. If you use it in a way that doesn’t give you the best chances of getting work, it won’t count towards your expected number of hours.

Your expected number of hours may be less than 35 hours a week if you’ve got caring responsibilities or a physical or mental disability.

In some circumstances, you may not have to spend as long as your expected number of hours a week looking for work. This may apply to you if:

>you’ve got a physical or mental disability
>you’ve spent time doing paid work as well as looking for work
>you’ve spent time doing voluntary work as well as looking for work
>you’ve spent time meeting the work preparation requirement or doing voluntary work preparation
>a temporary change in your situation affects the time you can spend looking for work
>Jobcentre Plus is satisfied you’ve taken all reasonable action to get work, even though you’ve spent less than your expected number of hours doing this.

35 Hours a week doing what exactly?

What kind of sick joke is that?"

http://intensiveactivity.wordpress.com/2013/08/24/the-unemployed-and-the-35-hours-a-week-job-search
____________________________________________________________________

Now, although I had expected change, today, there was obviously much jiggery-pokery going on, as we 'agreed' my fresh JSAg - being 'assisted', by one of the Hit Squad and her manager, I presume?

I will describe how it went, next installment. By then, I will have seen, what special provisions (if any) they will be making, for one of their 'Locally Sensitive'.

Next signing 6/8/13.

Nigel 

*****

Government announces details of post Work Programme support (GOV.uk)

New Regime

DWP minister Hoban gets JSA amount WRONG – and jobseeking unaffordable

AT LEAST 100k a year hit by highest-level benefit sanctions
 
Universal Credit/JSA Regulations

***** 

Request To The Information Commissioner's Office, Regarding Universal Jobmatch Privacy Issues

"WP/UJ/Cookies

Nigel Oldfield, 7 Mar, to casework, casework@ico.gsi.gov.uk

Dear Sir or Madam,

I refer you to my previous communication:

*****

Nigel Oldfield 24/12/2012

Dear Sir or Madam,

As you may be aware, the DWP appears to be on the verge of making access to The Universal Jobmatch system, mandatory, for those claiming certain benefits.

The system uses multiple cookies, from the DWP/Monster, so as to monitor claimants' activities, whenever it will choose to do so.

It appears, that the suggested mandatory nature, can only require, that these cookies be accepted and maintained; to not do so, will lead to sanctions and loss of benefits.

For personal, security, reasons, I clean my PC, at regular intervals. I am sure you will recognise, how these conflicting issues will be a problem, in the future, for many users.

Have you (or others) done any preliminary work, with the DWP (or others), on the legality and ramifications, of this issue?

I look forward to your reply.

Yours,

Dr Nigel Leigh Oldfield"

Reply

"Response from the Information Commissioner's Office[Ref. ENQ*******]

casework@ico.org.uk, 14:38 (1 hour ago), to me, PROTECT, 28 March 2013

Case Reference Number ENQ*******

Dear Dr Oldfield

We are now in a position to provide you with a response to your enquiry regarding the DWP’s Universal Jobmatch system and we apologise for the length of time it has taken to respond to you.

Following a number of enquiries/complaints which we received regarding the DWP and the new Universal Jobmatch service, our Strategic Liaison department contacted the DWP to raise concerns about the new online service, particularly in relation to the quality of information about the service, security of the site and contradictory messages about whether it was mandatory or not. We also highlighted to the DWP people’s concerns about the wording of the terms and conditions, particularly the disclaimers about who could access people’s information, and the lack of clarity about who was the data controller for the online service.

Organisations that process personal information are required to do so in accordance with the principles of the Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA). The first data protection principle states that personal data shall be processed ‘fairly and lawfully’ and a key element of fairness is ensuring people know who is processing their information and how it will be used. We raised our concerns with the DWP and advised that they should review the information they were providing to ensure it complied with the DPA requirements and we recommended that privacy notices should be visible, easy to access and written in a way that could be easily understood by their client group. We also advised of the lack of clarity about which organisation was responsible for the personal data on the Universal Jobmatch online service.

DWP confirmed that the Universal Jobmatch site is a separate, bespoke job search site created for DWP by Monster. It also confirmed that security safeguards had been built into the site but accepted that the disclaimers in the terms and conditions made it appear that this was not the case. DWP informed us that the site was secure and they would look again at the privacy notice and terms and conditions to ensure these complied with the DPA.

In response to contradictory information about whether the service was compulsory or not, DWP confirmed on 28 February that Jobseeker Allowance claimants could be required to use the Universal Jobmatch service from 1 March 2013, and that this could well be mandatory.

It would appear that to a large extent the enquiries/complaints we have received mainly resulted from unclear information provided through either their websites or staff. We now understand after consulting with the DWP that they have revised the privacy policy, provided additional guidance to advisers, produced leaflets and used easier to understand information about the scheme. We also understand that the terms and conditions have been replaced by a webpage on ‘standards of behaviour for jobseekers’ (see link below). DWP has also assured us that they have taken additional steps to guard against bogus employers, including increased checks on employer and vacancy details.

https://jobsearch.direct.gov.uk/register.aspx?redirect=http%3a%2f%2fjobsearch.direct.gov.uk%2fhome.aspx

Moving forward from this point

If you now have any further concerns in relation to the Universal Jobmatch process, its implementation or the DWP services then you will need to raise these directly with the DWP. It is not within our remit to comment on how this process works or the fact that this has now become a mandatory process.

If you wish to raise concerns with the DWP you can access information about their complaint process through this link - http://www.dwp.gov.uk/contact-us/complaints-and-appeals/

We are satisfied that the DWP have taken on board the nature of the complaints and enquiries we have received in relation to Universal Jobmatch and matters of concern with the DPA and that they have put the necessary steps in place to comply with the DPA.

Therefore, if you have specific concerns in relation to your personal data and compliance with the DPA, then in the first instance you would need to raise this in writing with the DWP to give them the opportunity to look into your concerns and respond to you.

If after doing this you are not satisfied with their response you may be able to raise this as a complaint with our office, for further information on this process please helpline on 0303 123 1113 to discuss your concerns.

I appreciate that this information may not address all your concerns but hope this satisfies the DPA element for which our office regulates. If you wish to know more about the DPA please see our website www.ico.org.uk Yours sincerely

Thomas Booker
Case Officer - First Contact Group
Information Commissioner’s Office
Direct dial number - 01625 545552
____________________________________________________________________

The ICO’s mission is to uphold information rights in the public interest, promoting openness by public bodies and data privacy for individuals.

If you are not the intended recipient of this email (and any attachment), please inform the sender by return email and destroy all copies. Unauthorised access, use, disclosure, storage or copying is not permitted.

Communication by internet email is not secure as messages can be intercepted and read by someone else. Therefore we strongly advise you not to email any information, which if disclosed to unrelated third parties would be likely to cause you distress. If you have an enquiry of this nature please provide a postal address to allow us to communicate with you in a more secure way. If you want us to respond by email you must realise that there can be no guarantee of privacy.

Any email including its content may be monitored and used by the Information Commissioner's Office for reasons of security and for monitoring internal compliance with the office policy on staff use. Email monitoring or blocking software may also be used. Please be aware that you have a responsibility to ensure that any email you write or forward is within the bounds of the law.

The Information Commissioner's Office cannot guarantee that this message or any attachment is virus free or has not been intercepted and amended. You should perform your own virus checks. __________________________________________________________________

Information Commissioner's Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire, SK9 5AF, Tel: 0303 123 1113 Fax: 01625 524 510 Web: www.ico.org.uk"

*****

Universal Jobmatch website – Standards of Behaviour for Jobseekers (DWP)

Universal Jobmatch website – Standards of Behaviour for Jobseekers (DWP)

*****

Nigel

The Problem Is Particularly Stark

Published on 12 December 2012 03:30 PM

Over 55s let down by Government’s Work Programme

"New analysis of the Government’s Work Programme by Age UK shows that participants in the scheme aged 55 and over are finding it harder than any other age group to move back into work.

The problem is particularly stark for people aged over 60. The figures show that of the 9,500 people aged over 60 referred by Job Centre Plus to the Work Programme in the first 14 months of the scheme, only 140 people (1.48%) managed to find a job through the scheme.

For people aged 55-59 the rate was 2.79 %. These figures compare to a success rate for 18-24 year olds of 3.78% and (3.75%) for those aged 25-34. The overall rate is 3.56%."

Nigel

A Little Preparation - WP05 (Start Notification Letter), Sanctions And Law

Versions and release dates for Work Program WP05 (FOIR)

"I hope you share my concerns about the effect unsatisfactory replies and dubious reviews such as these may have on the reputation of the DWP. I also hope that with a view to minimising any tendency to increased cynicism and mistrust you can clarify what occurred on this occasion."

The Most Recent (09/11 v 3)? - published on 30 September for use in Jobcentres from 3 October 2011

"You must complete any activities that [insert name of Provider], or one of their partners, tells you to do"

*****

Part 1 DWP

"Please Note: The below information is provided "as is" freely on the internet expressing an idea.There is no warranty that it is correct or the extent of its effectiveness. There is no guarantee that it will work or that such persons will be exempt from benefit sanctions for such refusal. It might help you, it might not. It could inspire you into a better letter. It is expected that a person wanting to Refuse the Work Programme has a genuine objection that is sincere."

*****

WP05 : Work Programme notification letter, SEETEC

"Below we have a copy of the notification letter to an unemployed person already in receipt of the Jobseekers Allowance. The manner of the letter is the first point of contention, it is a clear document of orders, the second comes in the offer of contract and its rules, specifically the terms by which the receiver of the offer of contract must obey all commands coming from the outsource provider, Seetec, quote :

“You must complete any activities that SEETEC tells you to do”"

"Your Terms

First you must understand that for contract law to support your actions you need to ensure your terms are of a reasonable nature, example: keeping terms in accordance with your employment history and your abilities, as such you need to consider your position in these terms:

pay
conditions
timetable
benefits
your human rights

So let us say you, in general, worked in an office, that this should be seen as your career choice as a whole, that after your consideration of the offer you will present your terms in relation to acceptance in accordance that should you accept the offer, (subject to consideration) the offers of employment would fall within your skill base, and that you would expect a similar rate of pay as that deserving of your qualities. (you would have to present an acceptable rate of pay acceptable to you as part of your terms)

You would then want to clarify the term; “You must complete any activities that SEETEC tells you to do”, because it is so open ended, you would in theory lose benefit payments should you refuse to kill your next door neighbour if a member of SEETEC demanded such of you. Such clarification even in law, would not be seen as an unreasonable request, so you would open negotiation in order the boundaries of such a term, especially as consent is being sought under contractual obligation for which sanctions would have been consented to be used as a tool of enforcement, to be set and then accepted to the agreement of both parties."

WP Start letter 23 Oct 2012 21:35

"People mandated to the WP have to be issued with a letter which cites the correct regulations enabling the mandation. The letter that should be used is coded WP05. The original version of this letter dod not cite the regulations. The DWP altered the WP05 without giving it a new version number (sneaky!). Some people were also incorrectly mandated by use of other letters (e.g. WP02 which also does not contain the required wording). There have already been instances - some documented on this site! - of successful challenges to the WP mandation (see posts from Bryan). In these instances the person has checked which letter they received and whether it was the correct version. This can be done by a Subject Access Request if original not available. WHERE the original mandation has been done incorrectly complaints have been made - and upheld. The result being withdrawal from the WP and reinstatement of normal signing on procedures at JCP."

*****

[2012] EWHC 2292 (Admin) and revised standard letters (FOIR)

"In The Queen (on the application of) Caitlin Reilly and Jamieson Wilson -v- Secretary of State for Work and Pensions http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/media/judgme... ruling it highlighted DWP letters warning of potential sanctions are unlawful. Today you said "We do not believe there is anything wrong with the original letters and we will appeal this aspect of the judgement, but in the meantime we have revised our standard letters.""

The Queen (on the application of) Caitlin Reilly and Jamieson Wilson -v- Secretary of State for Work and Pensions

Reilly - CO/260/2012 and Wilson - CO/1087/2012

Neutral Citation Number: [2012] EWHC 2292 (Admin)

*****

The Jobseeker’s Allowance (Employment, Skills and Enterprise Scheme) Regulations 2011

JSA SANCTIONS FROM 22.10.12 - Memo DMG 37/12 (DWP)

Changes to Jobseeker’s Allowance sanctions from 22 October 2012 (DWP)

DMG Chapter 34 - Sanctions (DWP)

DMG Chapter 35 - Hardship (DWP)

Work Programme Provider Guidance (DWP)

*****

Friday 1 April 2011 19.46 BST

Jobcentres 'tricking' people out of benefits to cut costs, says whistleblower

"Soaring number of sanctions against unemployed amid claims that DWP staff are being told to trip people up with paperwork."

Posted on February 19, 2012

Chris Grayling is a Lying Bastard
Critics of Government work experience programme are 'jobs snobs', says minister
Stalin Would Blush at this Government’s Workfare Tantrum
DWP Rewrite History – Mandatory Work Disappears from the Work Programme Provider’s Guidance

"That an over-privileged Oxbridge twat like Chris Grayling can accuse benefit claimants of being snobs for objecting to forced labour shows how pitifully out of touch this government are.

Grayling, clearly rattled about the ongoing disintegration of the government’s welfare policy, has unleashed a torrent of lies in the Telegraph this morning.

Perhaps the most brazen is the quote: “We won’t and don’t force anyone to take a work experience placement. Where we use mandation in our welfare policies, it will be to do useful work on community projects. We will never mandate anyone to work for a big company. They wouldn’t take them if we did.“

Just one of several new workfare schemes is called the ‘Mandatory Work Programme’ (the clue’s in the name). Under this scheme, which Job Centre advisors can re-refer people onto indefinitely, claimants will be expected to work 30 hours a week, for four weeks per referral, or face benefit sanctions of three months. If they leave and then return to the placement the sanction will still remain in force. Where claimants end up working will be down to providers, almost all of whom are private sector poverty pimps. Claimants could be referred to private companies or charities alike. Whilst it is true that on this scheme the DWP has stipulated that placements should have some community benefit, one of those benefits is astonishingly ‘working towards the profit of the host organisation’."

Nigel

A New Battle Begins

Rt Hon Iain Duncan Smith MP

*****

To: caxtonhouse.clerkpru@dwp.gsi.gov.uk
Subject: FAO Rt Hon Iain Duncan Smith MP
Date: 22/12/12

Dear Sir,

Since your organisation (DWP) does not offer 24 hours support (outrageous, in this day and age), and it is not operational (Jobcentre) until 27/12/12, if falls upon you, as the responsible person, to deal with this issue, particularly in the spirit and operation of 'Digital by Default'.

I carried out all the legal requirements, required of me (and more), under my JSAg (12/5/11 - JSA 1995), over the last cycle, and you have failed to pay me my benefit entitlement (on 19/12/12).

No warnings. No communications. No indications of issues raised. Confirmation of the latter, at interview (A4e - 13/12/12).

Please note this official complaint and ensure that my entitlement is paid, directly (with interest and punitive consideration).

I am sure your Christmas will be merry.

Yours,

Dr Nigel Leigh Oldfield
http://criticalestoppel.blogspot.co.uk

*****

Copy sent to local Jobcentre Plus (24/12/12 - post collection, 28/12/12), for information and action.

*****

Outcome (27/12/12, by telephone, to local JCP)

Not a sanction issue, simply SNAFU - emergency money transfer, within 3 hours.

Nigel