Slavery "Work for Your Benefit"

[RaeUK]

Rae gives a big smile ... :)

xx

[Peepo]

I think a lot of you are completely missing the point here.

 

What this is about is 2 fold

 

1, the use of a work force that can be hired and fired at will with no repercussions on the employer but a devastating effect on the "worker" due to loss of benefit through sanctions.

 

2, the use of this new labour force to create a permanent pool of people to fill low skilled jobs at very little cost (in all sectors) which would previously be filled by junior permanent staff or temporary workers.

 

So in one political master stroke; unemployed (but not for Unemployment statistics as they are now on training allowances) scroungers now work for benefits which the public love, employers have an ultra cheep and unlimited labour pool and no liability (e.g. wages, benefits and pensions) and the government looks good on all sides.

 

In reality unscrupulous employers will lay off staff and reduce permanent positions, so there will be a reduction in the number of permanent and temporary jobs available (usually filled by working mums, students and old/young people) which all amounts to an increase in unemployment and a growth in the pool etc etc etc.....

 

Nail on the head there!

[Allwood]

Totally agree with the above posts, where I am working part time they are cherry picking ie taking on temporary workers for a month at a time and laying them off to be taken on again at a later time ie busy periods when permanent staff are on long term leave.

[loopinlouie]

Totally agree with the above posts, where I am working part time they are cherry picking ie taking on temporary workers for a month at a time and laying them off to be taken on again at a later time ie busy periods when permanent staff are on long term leave.

 

I reckon we will end up with the old style workers cueing up for a days work and if none there, sent home till next day to do it all again.

[ee-bee]

well i`ll be there in my invisible wheel chair;)

[loan_ranger]

Workers make up the majority of voters, so in order to make them less discontented about the depression and the hundreds of billions of pounds given to failing banks, a convenient scapegoat was required (shades of Nazi Germany here) and who better than benefits claimants to fit the bill - the disabled, their carers, JSA claimants, lone parents, us. The voters then forget that decent government regulation of the banks might have lessened our exposure, taxes are saved by reducing and removing peoples benefits thus pleasing the tabloid papers audience, it's pure genius!

[PriorityOne]

Hi PO

 

My son went on a YTS scheme and he got a very good job as result if it. He have never been out of work since he was 18. I think it had something to do with me working and brining him up on my own. It was a total different kettle of fish during the 70's and 80's being a single parent. I remember when my son was born child benefit was only 10 shillings and and there was a promised of a rise to £1.50 and we though would be wonderful. Unlike today when a child is born they get a large sum to put into a saving bond for them plus a very good child allowance.

 

You could not get a flat in them days without a partner signature on the rent book, no council housing whatsoever for single parents. It was very much like that TV programm Cathy come home.

 

I'm really glad for your son Allwood .... it worked for him and that has to be good and you're right that things were very different years ago. I can't remember exactly what I was doing when the whole YTS thing was introduced but know that I missed it and went straight into employment like my friends. There were loads of jobs then.... but YTS was brought in when the recession started to bite and the Gov. needed somewhere to put young people and keep them off the stats.

 

Cathy Come Home is a terribly sad film..... I've watched it twice now...

 

Workers make up the majority of voters, so in order to make them less discontented about the depression and the hundreds of billions of pounds given to failing banks, a convenient scapegoat was required (shades of Nazi Germany here) and who better than benefits claimants to fit the bill - the disabled, their carers, JSA claimants, lone parents, us. The voters then forget that decent government regulation of the banks might have lessened our exposure, taxes are saved by reducing and removing peoples benefits thus pleasing the tabloid papers audience, it's pure genius!

 

Absolutely right... those who own the media pull its strings to suit themselves.... .... creating a moral panic and stirring people up against each other rather than at the ones who help create and perpetuate how the vulnerable classes live. Lone parent bashing was rife until asylum seekers took over.... I'm not really sure who's being bashed the most right now actually.... but it's never those with power, influence, money and/or celebrity. Not for very long anyway...