Ideally, your benefits advisor will want to see your job search activity via Universal Jobmatch. Your advisor may vary from the official rule which is that you spend 35 hours a week on your job search.

 

When you sign up for UC the advisor should give you some information sheets explaining how to record your job search. Did you get them?

The Regulations continue to state that a) candidates may only be forced to sign up to Universal Job Match if a Job Seekers Direction is issued, and even then the candidate would only be forced to create an account, create a profile, upload a CV, make that CV Searchable, and from the Universal Job Match Toolkit, b) the introducion of Universal Job Match makes not change to the General Regulations and candidates cannot be forced to provide access to their Universal Job Match (if they have created an account), and c) the Job Seeker may provided evidence of their Job Search Activity using whatever means they choose. Sufficient evidence will be provided by the traditional Job Search Diary, and Job Printouts or Screenshots taken by a Mobile Phone/Tablet.

According to reports, it will continue until replaced by the "Health and Work Programme" from 2017. Details are pretty sparce, but I suspect that it will be another Gravy Train for existing providers.

We can all amuse ourselves with the thought that a hard pressed Business Manager, having failed to source a candidate for a vacancy through their own Professional Network (it is estimated that about 80% of jobs are never advertised), will receive (say) 1000 CV's from different run of the mill agencies, will ask some temp to make an initial success/reject decision on each CV within 10 seconds (although how long does it take to reject on the basis of age?), and shortlist down to 10 for an interview.

A CV does not need to be longer than a page - and I cannot re-emphasize the fact that candidates need not tailor a CV for each and every job that they apply for - that simply indulges the perception that an employer may expect a "perfect" or "ideal" candidate.

But, if a candidate wishes to spend days or weeks in devising a perfect CV - such a candidate deserves our commendation and respect. However, the employer will make an initial success/reject decision within, at most 10 seconds, and therefore there is absolutely no point in wasting more than sufficient time on a single application, taking time from other applications that have equal value.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/feb/20/work-programme-success-creaming-parking

The term "Parking" is even more erroneous in the context of the Welfare To Work Sector, irrespective of whether through the Flexible New Deal or successor Work Programme.

The payment-by-results model means 'job-ready' jobseekers are being helped more than those in need, costing more long term

The DWP reported through its own research findings that the Work Programme was less effective than doing nothing,

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/spending-review/10146659/5bn-Work-Programme-worse-than-doing-nothing.html

The scheme was never designed to provide any "help" to any unemployed person, but did help the self-serving Welfare To Work Sector, including the likes of A4E, to grow extremely rich at the expense of the taxpayer.

To be honest I cannot see this business model being sustainable for much longer, as stated, the number of referrals have dramatically dropped and they are not paid any more for referrals, so in my opinion the numbers game does not work for them any more, they actually have to spend resources and now will only get paid through earned results.

 

There is a phrase called "parking" where they basically go through the motions with the customer but not provide any real support, concentrating time and effort only on those customers they feel are more able to find work quickly, I think the number of "parked" customers will rise as both the job market and unemployment rate have plateaued which would indicate in my opinion that any scheme would not be cost effective at present unless they reinstate the referral fee.

 

But considering the cuts would the government reinstate the referral fee, could Ingeus survive without it ?

The Business Model was never sustainable from the outset...in the case of Deloitte-Ingeus (Deloitte entered a joint venture with Ingeus in October 2010 to bid for the Work Programme Contacts {announced December 2010 by the DWP]), bid 70% less than any other party and ended up with 23% of the Prime Contracts), they presumed that all candidates would access employment from the outset and/or become Self Employed vendors for the Acme Corporation (or similar - such as eBay Sellers)) and need not put any effort into the job selection process, and even the Deloitte-Ingeus Employer Services Teams failed to generate any interviews for candidates. In the recent year or so, Deloitte divested itself from the joint venture, and Ingeus sold its stake to a US Private Equity Business Provident Service Corporation (reported on April 1st 2014).

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/2c771c22-b9a7-11e3-b74f-00144feabdc0.html#axzz3cfu90KbR

The term "Parking" can be quite erroneous...the term simply means that Welfare To Work Clerks within Deloitte-Ingeus did not possess a basic level of competence to speak to employers on behalf of candidates. If the candidate in question, whose sole responsibility was to the Job Seekers Agreement and to Job Centre Plus, did not sign the Data Protection Waiver, then there was little incentive for Welfare To Work Clerks within Deloitte-Ingeus to put any effort in.

Given that the DWP own research suggested that the Work Programme was less effective than doing nothing, it is not surprising that the Business Model was a flawed extension of the belief system of George Iain Duncan Smith.

When candidates present themselves at the Front Desk, waiting to be signed on, you simply need to present your appointment card. Any Job Search Evidence can be presented directly to the Civil Servant interviewing you during signing on.

Also what if like me you only give them access to your ujm while you are at the jcp then when i leave i simply untick the box which lets them view it?

Although, according to the Universal Job Match Toolkit Chapter 3 [28 February 2013], the Job Centre may have been able mandate that a canddiate should create an account, create a profile, upload a CV, they cannot mandate that candidates provide access to their Universal Job Match Account. Additionally, it remains entirely at the discretion of the candidate how they should manage their job search diary and provide their job search evidence.

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/146137/response/365038/attach/4/Universal%20Jobmatch%20Toolkit.pdf

 

 

Point 95

95.You cannot issue a Jobseeker’s Direction to either require a claimant to create a profile and CV in Universal Jobmatch or to mandate a claimant to give us access to their account – this is their decision not ours.

 

 

 

Point 97

97.We cannot specify to a JSA claimant how they provide us with records of their jobsearch activity and Universal Jobmatch will not change this.

 

 

 

20% of US Citizens believe Barack Hussein Obama is a cactus.

http://www.theonion.com/article/poll-1-in-5-americans-believe-obama-is-a-cactus-18127

Interesting subject....although the Signature Capture System linked to the Digital Signing Pad does not record a signature as such, it simply builds up a Signature Profile of those signatures which a Civil Servant deems acceptable at the time the candidate accepts enrollment on the system.

I suspect that, before 100% of candidates agree to be enrolled, the Job Centre will simply ditch the technology given the increased time that Civil Servants have to spend in dealing with rejected signatures from valid candidates offering a valid signature.

What Regulations apply to the case of a Tenancy Agreement being entered into, but the gas company refuses to reconnect the gas to the boiler until the debt paid by a previous tenant is paid.

Can the Utility Company insist that a new tenant accepts liability for the debt owed by the previous tenant.

Isn't Esther McVey your MP? Well well well!

 

I thought UC wasn't coming out for at least another 3 years?

Although Universal Credit remains behind schedule, and the Project may never be implemented (watch this space after the next election), the DWP are replacing the Job Seekers Agreement with the Job Seekers Agreement Claimant Commitment (which is covered by the existing legislation), and it may be the case that Ministers may well suggest that Universal Credit has been implemented throughout the UK by January 2015.

So people are now being placed in an overcrowded room doing (choice of expletive) all! Yet again!

 

 

Funny how Chris Grayling promised this would not happen. As employment minister he said "We will not have people stuck in a room for 30hrs a week doing nothing". Of course, Graylings words mean nothing now as Justice Secretary and meant nothing in his previous role. His successor Esther McVey is even more incompetent.

 

 

Sticking people in a room 'job searching' as well as yet more MWA is a clear admission of the WP's utter failure. And yet it provides yet more £££'s for the dodgy W2W sector as it adds yet another method of fleecing the taxpayer.

What makes you think that TV Autocue Reader Esther McVey was ever qualified to do anything other than read the autocue...and it is doubtful whether, in the absense of a number of photoshopped photographs, whether she would have even made an interview on the Casting Couch.

I had similar, was asked to take off a lot of skills in a particular area because 'ten year old experience is not really valid in today's workplace'.... welll since re-writing back those skills I've ended up working in that area again!

 

If they had stuck to the 'long term' ie people who had been unemployed for more than 18 months the work providers would have had more time and resources to get people back to work, but the blanket approach of including everyone after 3 months made the system unworkable.

 

Perhaps in future governments they need to look at the reasons why jobs get squeezed in the first place - might it be something to do with the governments own policies, fiscal and otherwise causing employers to cut jobs to the bone?

Just because someone has been unemployed for more than 18 months does not necessarily imply that the candidate skills are redundant....reports suggest a) that 50% of young black men under 24 are unemployed, b) that if you are male, aged 50+, and made redundant, it is difficult to return to the jobs market, and c) some employers will reject against any female between 18-55 for fear of "Child Care" rearing itself within the workplace.

Sadly, the Welfare To Work Sector was never envisaged to "help the unemployed" - it remains Sub Prime, and the majority of welfare To Work Clerks employed were either working in the Flexible New Deal, Call Centres or Recruitment Agencies.

Well, after 10 months with these buffoons I can finally say goodbye to their pointless appointments and inane courses as I have finally secured employment. Truly pee'd off my advisor as the position I am starting is quite a fair bit more lucrative than her salary (I know this as was actually interviewed for an advisor position earlier this year). She asked me if i'd like to ring the bell to tell everyone i'd got a job but told her that as i'd got this one all on my own felt no need to boost their egos thinking they had a part of it.

Congratulations on the job..... hopefully, it will offer a stepping stone to something more robust, and allow you to make productive use of your skills. However, this could be a case of being creative on the part of Ingeus, offering a job to someone being on the Work Programme, and claiming a bung from the taxpayer for every 4 weeks that they keep them on.

Of course, other candidates in your position may not be as desperate as yourself, would be more discerning in their choice of employer, and would not touch the sub-prime Welfare To Work Sector with a barge pole.

Well, I had 4 different ones while I was with Ingeus. They apparently have the two years divided up into sections so at the end of each one you move on to someone else, so basically if the first adviser can't do anything with you then they give someone else a try at making your life miserable

 

First adviser I had - for one interview only - spent her time looking over my shoulder at something which was obviously more interesting and produced a very childish, rubbish CV for me which I never used.

 

Second adviser I had was decent enough to deal with, but did nothing for me apart from finding a whole 2 jobs to apply for during a 6 month period. Wonderful.

 

Third adviser was a miserable ^&*%6 and I took great pleasure in pulling her up for every infraction of the guidelines - and she made many too

 

Last one was a car salesman in a previous job and produced literature full of spelling mistakes. 'Fish out of water' summed him up totally.

 

Expect anything from these people - even they don't know what's coming next half the time.

Deloitte-Ingeus used to deploy a 4 Phase Programme, entitled the "Every Day Counts" Service Delivery Model, with a different Welfare To Work Clerk assigned to each candidate as they entered each Phase.. Of course, this was before Deloitte- offloaded its stake in Ingeus, and before Ingeus were sold to a Private Equity Business in the US.

Phase 1 : Insight (Weeks 1-4)

Phase 2 : Intensive Support (Weeks 5-16)

Phase 3 : Skills Plus (Weeks 17-52)

Phase 3.1 Vocational Routeway (13 weeks)

Phase 3.2 Personal Routeway (13 weeks)

Phase 4 Breakthrough (Weeks 53-104)

http://ingeusstaff.co.uk/diagram

[ATTACH=CONFIG]53291[/ATTACH]

One Ingeus staff used to be an army sniper

 

Anyway - using refuted is excellent and I used to show them the same evidence as the jobcentre and they accepted it, it was pointless IMO to use their paper to show them evidence yet also show the sanction centre the same stuff

Seriously ? Did they tell you this...or are they simply delusional, having spent a few hours playing Call of Duty ?

I think that is grossly unfair. You are dismissing people for doing a job and making them out to be slime. They have a job which i suspect most do with little training to the best of their ability. I know that in my area they are only trained in the areas they deal in so may well not understand ESA for example.

Please also remember that the pressure and sh1t flows downhill from the shareholders who like as not are your pension scheme if you are lucky enough to have one.

There is no absolutely need to be defensive....if Welfare To Work Clerks were qualified, they would have been able to secure jobs in the Real World, whereas they weren't, could not even get a job working in the Job Centre Plus Network, and otherwise had to make do with a sector that is frankly sub-prime to Call Centre.

If candidates wish to seek Professional Advice concerning Self Assessment, CV Design, Job Search etc, then they should seek a meeting with a Professional Careers Adviser.

Some of these "courses" use Neuro-linguistic programming methods to reinforce the "tutors" opinions - NLP* is generally regarded with derision and contempt by many experts in the mental health and education fields.

 

One way to challenge any placements on these "courses" is to ask (demand ?) written evidence in answer to the following:

 

 

• What steps have been taken to ascertain that this activity is suitable to my circumstances and condition ?
  
• What is the goal of this activity and how will it help me achieve the desired outcome ?
  

 

 

*) NLP was (and I suspect, still is) a popular method used by the likes of A4e - You know the line, "you're claiming benefits so you are worthless. Just think how much better off you would be if you were working".... I would respond with "you don't have anything of value to offer, why not provide something worthwhile - Bull in, s*** out"..... "... and no, I will not sign anything until I have read it, corrected all your spelling mistakes, errors, and omissions."

Sadly, some people are easily swayed, and buy anything which Snake Oil Salesmen try to sell.

the letter i received is headed work programme insight appointment,

 

and my appointment is with an employment consultant and is likely to take 2-3 hours ( she told me about an hour me mum can't sit for long she has m.s and will be attending with me)

 

i did inform them at jcp that i couldn't attend alone

 

this is really stressing me out and i aint even started on the merry go round yet

Dont get too stressed..... for the sake of clarification, note that Welfare To Work Clerks, who you meet within the Work Programme, are not THAT QUALIFIED, are more than likely to have moved out of their previous role (which could be a Sales Clerk working in a Call Centre), and there has been a trend (which commenced within the Flexible New Deal) that lowly Welfare To Work Clerks may be given the ego boosting term of "Consultant".

If you wish to discuss you case further, I suggest that you seek a meeting with a Professional Careers Advisor..... any Welfare To Work Clerk who you meet (even when they have a grand sounding job title) is not going to be of any use.

I've edited a couple of posts above. Can we keep it civil please and refrain from using abusive terms. I would also mention not for the first time, about site rules on iinsulting someone for doing their job.

 

HB

Of course, no-one should be criticised for simply doing their job. A job, is a job, is a job...even if simply one stage above slime in the Welfare To Work Sector.....conversely, Welfare To Work Clerks who otherwise eschew the mannerisms of Jobsworths, and set to make lives of candidates difficult, are simply fair game.

Just another update from my adventures with "LearnDirect" (an extension of Ingeus).

 

Today 7 young people including myself arrived at 9am (our appointment time). We were told to go on the computers and job search for an hour. Someone immediately kicked up a fuss saying they could have done a job search at home to which the advisor told her that we all need supervised to make sure we're *actually* looking for work and not just pretending. Hmm. After the job search (which, as always, was finished in about 10 minutes because how are we supposed to apply for jobs without our CV's on the computers to upload?) we were told to gather round a table and told that today's discussion was going to be on Job Advertisements. Try not to laugh but here is the gist of what we were taught today -

 

- When reading a job advertisement, it's important to make sure you're in a calm and quiet environment to properly read it and take it all in without interupptions or background noise.

- It's important to always print out any job advertisement you see and want to apply for, so that you can highlight important key words.

- Use one highlighter for key words and another coloured highlighter for "words you don't understand"

- Google the words you don't understand

- 'Challenge' is a skill you have. (WTF)

- Always make sure you can get transport to the job. If in doubt, go to Google Maps and type in the name of the place you live and the place you will be working for. Make sure to put in the correct times and try not to spell anything incorrectly. Click the button "next" and print out your route so you don't forget it.

- Always save the job advertisement by clicking "save" so you can go back to it at any time.

 

Throw in the advisor asking "Ahhh, has anyone ever told you how to do that before? No? See, that's why I'm here." about 10 times and general gloating about how she has a job and we don't ("Not trying to brag, i've been there and done it but I worked my arse off to get here and I done it by following these steps. You want a job that badly? Well listen to me. I've had 12 clients go into work in the past week. I'm telling you. What? You think i'm lying? She's laughing. Do you think I'm laughing, doll? I'm deadly serious."

 

I just dont know how she could possibly have got 12 clients into work with such generic and awful advice?

Perhaps the Welfare To Work Clerk coordinating the session was on Mandatory Work Activity, directed to report at the volition of Job Centre Plus, preparing him/her to become a student in a kindergarten class.

Quite possibly the relation between Ingeus and Remploy is that of the latter being a sub-contractor. But then, can you explain what does that work like from a legal point a view? Why signing a contract by sub-contractor with a contractor gives the former a legal permission to access all the data that it wants? It doesn't add up (but I'm not a lawyer). For example, if X contracts to Y, (and then Y to Z, etc.), then Z now has access to data? This would be crazy, as any business would gain a permission to access data by virtue of signing a contract!

 

The other thing is I've never been in a position to agree or disagree with what Ingeus just did - moved me to Remploy. You can't agree involuntarily, that's a contradiction in terms, by the way. It's not even the case of involuntariness. I have not been informed about me consenting or not about the decision that has been made.

 

To me it seems that Ingeus is in breach of DPA but I'm not certain about it.

The ability of Ingeus (or any other Welfare To Work Subprime Business) to share your data stems from your relationship with Job Centre Plus.... under Data Protection Legislation, Job Centre Plus (as a Data Processor) can share your personal data to any organisation within the Welfare To Work Sector, such as Ingeus and its Sub contractors, and need not secure your permission or approval to do so.

I asked you if you could explain a bit more about the referral and you chose not to. “No idea” was your response.

 

You are now at Remploy so you must have agreed to go or accepted it at some point. Whether you did it willingly or unwillingly you have done it. I did not use the word “involuntarily” so there is no need for you to define for my benefit a term that you erroneously introduced yourself.

 

The data in question was your CV. This you allowed Ingeus to hold with no strings attached, or if there were strings attached you did not mention them. When you say “all the data that it wants” you have not said what data that is.

 

In order for Remploy to fulfil its contractual obligations to Ingeus it has to be conceded that they have to know something about you in order to be able to help you.

 

Since you appear not to have raised any objection to Ingeus holding a copy of your CV in order to help you, it would not be unreasonable for Ingeus to assume that by passing you over to Remploy to continue the offer of help they should pass your CV over as well as it might be of value, use or help.

 

The Work Programme Provider Guidance spells out in detail what Providers can and can’t do including the rules that govern disclosure and data protection. You can read it at your leisure to look for anything that can support your charge.

There is some confusion.... if any candidate wishes to seek help, they have ample opportunity to approach Skilled and Qualified Professionals, such as Professional Careers Advisers within the Careers Service. Unless a candidate asks to be sent on the Work Programme (the theoretical possibility exists), where it may be inferred that they have asked for some help, then help may be given.... but, if a candidate is told to go on the Work Programme in threat of any sanction, then they have clearly not asked for any help, and any Welfare To Work Clerk proceeding to offer "help" is simply impudent and insolent. There is an additional argument as to whether any Welfare To Work Clerk is really qualified to delve into matters (such as Candidate Assessment, CV Design etc) where they may not necessarily be qualified to do so. And, in our society, We normally despise people who attempt to practice medicine without possessing a license and accurately suggest that they may be merely "Quacks".

Yes Mandatory Work Activity is for those who finished the Work Programme Before April 2014 and cant be put on the Help To Work Scheme - normaly your Work Coach Will Look to Put you forward for it after Being on Post Work Program support Longer than 8 weeks or more but normaly only if you are not doing any voluntary work- my old job coach put me forward for it and told me he will give me 4 weeks to find my own voluntary work or i will have to go on MWA but he got transfered to another jobcentre also u cant choose what your MWA will be as it covers Litter picking , and up keep of public buildings and also all local Recycling Plants are signed up to it aswel so it aint just charity shop work

If a future Administrative Assistant (despite calling themselves the ego-boosting term Work Coach) wishes to arrange an MWA - then advise them to Bring It On, and simply respectfully suggest that Voluntary Work is not Voluntary if there is even a hint of coersion. And simply cordially suggest that, if they were to ring an employer on your behalf, they may even be able to arrange an interview, and a job offer.

If you are skilled for the jobs that you are applying for, and possess qualifications, and do everything which is specified within the Job Seekers Agreement, then there is no logic to waste time on MWA - however, there is logic in such an eventuality for you to report the Placement Organisation to HMRC for an attempt to perpetrate Tax Fraud. If you are doing any form of job, and subject to a Verbal or Written Contract of Employment, then are you are legally entitled to National Minimum Wage, and the State entitled to its fair share through Tax and National Insurance.

Being currently unemployed, I was passed over to Avanata work programme by the DWP, I have claimed expenses for professional membership, provided them with copy of invoices, but now Avanta refuse to reimburse after I have paid them. They are now stating that unless I provide orginal receipts and also confirm I will provide them with employer details once I secure a job and keep in touch with them for two years once employed they will refuse to reimburse me.

 

I have stated that I will not provide future employer details as I consider this private and confidential and that there is no legal requirement to disclose such private information. They have basically confirmed that they will get a performance related payment from DWP once I disclose any employer information to Avanta.

 

I have raised this as a complaint with Avanta and copied the complaint to the DWP, and after a month I got a reply from Avanta saying basically the above.

 

How can I appeal against the decision not to reimburse me and is there a legal course of action one could take to recover amounts previously agreed would be paid. I am now out of pocket by over £100.

 

Do the DWP have any involvement or contractual responsibilities as they simply keep telling me to go back to Avanta.

If a Welfare To Work Clerk within the Welfare To Work Business offered an unconditional commitment towards reimbursing Professional Expenses, and you have written evidence to this effect, then simply put the claim in....your only commitment and obligation is to Job Centre Plus through the Job Seekers Agreement. If the W2W Business refuses to honour their obligation and responsibilities, speak to the Citizens Advice Bureau, and if applicable instigate litigation for redress.

I had a JSAg when at JCP but now I am at INGEUS there is no actual agreement - I just ensure I apply for one job a day not including weekends so usually around 9-12 per 2 week period just to keep them off my barying back. I am now finding 75%+ of 'jobs' are the same ones week after week, month after month so I just re-apply as that is what I was told to do. I do not trust agencies one bit and most jobs I apply for even if really trying i.e. not 'one-click- have 100+ applicants or never get back to you. In total I have had 3 interviews out of 500+ applications and one of those was via someone I know so without sounding negative the chances of getting a half decent job with enough money to pay for travel and come off benefits is practically nil IMHO

Given that you sign on at JCP, the Job Seekers Agreement remains an imperative....and provided that you do all that is expected of you, and fulfil the Job Seekers Agreement, that is sufficient. In fact, the Job Diary that you present to JCP when you sign on can be reused, and presented to Welfare To Work Clerks within Ingeus.

Finished with Ingeus at LAST!

 

My advisor asked me why I didn't answer his phonecalls or reply to his emails. I told him I just wanted to be left alone to find work because I didn't think they were helping me. He told me I have a bad attitude and that "everyone else is happy to come here and recieve our help". I couldn't argue with him because I was so ****ed off and I couldn't even make eye contact I felt I was going to explode. I told him I'd had one interview per week for the last three weeks and was unsuccessful, he said "well you need to work on your interview skills since they haven't offered you a job" which I took offense to. I'm not saying I'm great in interviews but I've had three jobs in the past and have one in the summer coming up so clearly I'm not exactly rubbish at them. I thought I was free at last but he told me I now need to go into another town (further away from my home than Ingeus) at 8:30am on Tuesday for a group induction for some new company called Direct Learning who will be "taking care of me" for the next 6 months.

 

ARGHH!

You have to sympathise with any Welfare To Work Clerk for such delusions....if they wanted to "help" job seekers, they would have returned to school and college (assuming that they had GCSE's), trained to be a Professional Careers Adviser, and after being employed in this capacity for 3-5 years, may then be taken seriously as a credible authority to disperse careers advice. But, sadly, Welfare To Work Clerks are not that qualified, and as much as they may be lucky to be employed, they are really extending themselves beyond their domain of competence.