Posted: July 10th, 2016 | Author: boycottworkfare | Filed under: Guest blog, Info on schemes, Personal accounts | 4 Comments »
Referrals to the Community Work Placements and Mandatory Work Placements schemes ended on 31 March 2016, but we are receiving more complaints from people put on Work Experience and Sector-based Work Academies. Here’s an account from someone who served time at B&M Bargains. Remember that these schemes are not compulsory though you may be told otherwise: please see Workfare: Know Your Rights for more information. We are in the process of updating this page but the information on Work Experience still applies.
I am currently on the Work Experience scheme at B&M in Droitwich Spa, doing over 30 hours of unpaid work for four weeks. If I do not do this I will have my Job Seekers Allowance cut.
There are four people, including myself, doing forced unpaid labour here. We have been told by the job centre and B&M that only one out the four of us might be given a job after the four weeks. So three of us will be working full time and won’t even get a chance at the position, and even the fourth person might not even get the job as they say it is only “possible” someone will be taken on. Read the rest of this entry »
Posted: July 1st, 2016 | Author: againstworkfare | Filed under: In-work conditionality, Info on schemes, Law | No Comments »
In-Work Conditionality trial notification letter
Are you a claimant who has been harassed under ‘in-work conditionality’? If you have been earning equal to or above the ‘administrative threshold’ of £338.43 a month for a single claimant and £541.02 a month for a couple, then you should NOT have been subjected to work-related requirements from February 2015. And you are entitled to claim compensation. This briefing from Housing Systems contains information on how to do this, including template letters.
So you should claim compensation if you:
- Are earning equal or above the administrative threshold
- Have been sanctioned
- Ended a Universal Credit claim while still entitled
- Suffered costs and stress as a result of mistaken work-related requirements
- Are not on the in-work conditionality ‘randomised control trial’ pilot scheme (see below).
While the government’s expanded conditionality aims eventually to punish those earning less than 35x the national minimum wage per week, this has not been fully implemented. Many DWP staff have jumped the gun in their zeal to get more sanctioning in. These amendments to the Universal Credit regulations state that sanctions for those earning over the administrative threshold should not be applied from February 2015 onwards, as outlined in point 3 of these DWP regulations. Read the rest of this entry »
Posted: June 29th, 2016 | Author: againstworkfare | Filed under: Call to action | 1 Comment »
On 9th July, at the Mechanics Institute in Manchester, groups and individuals from across the UK are getting together to discuss welfare, its challenges, and how we can most effectively fight to make it more just and equitable. There is still room for anyone who would like to join us.
There will be refreshments and food provided and we can also help out with transport for anyone who needs it. Contact email@example.com to register your interest or for more information.
The Mechanic’s Institute is a 0.4 mile walk from Manchester Piccadilly train station. The venue is fully wheelchair accessible. A creche will be available throughout the day.
And here’s the programme of workshops and discussions:
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted: June 12th, 2016 | Author: againstworkfare | Filed under: Call to action | No Comments »
Saturday 9th July, The Mechanics’ Institute, 103 Princess St, Manchester M1 6DD 11am – 4.30pm
Boycott Workfare will be holding its 3rd Welfare Action Gathering on Saturday 9 July, supported by Unite Community Manchester. We’re inviting groups and individuals from across the country to join us.
We will be coming together in Manchester to share ideas, tactics and concerns about current and future attacks on welfare. It will be a day of learning from each other and an opportunity to plan how to work together to continue to defend these fundamental rights.
Previous gatherings have seen the sharing of a huge wealth of knowledge and acted as catalysts for further successes in our fightback. At a time of continuing attempts to undermine basic rights to welfare and dignity, it is vital that those opposing these injustices come together in solidarity, to support our related struggles and exchange our expertise. Read the rest of this entry »
Posted: April 30th, 2016 | Author: againstworkfare | Filed under: Info on schemes, Uncategorized | 1 Comment »
At the Court of Appeal on Friday the government lost part of its grubby legal battle to stop claimants getting back benefit payments that were unlawfully taken from them.
The government was appealing a High Court judgement, which said that the emergency retrospective legislation the government rushed through in 2013 was ‘draconian’ and incompatible with the right to a fair trial. The Court of Appeal rejected the government’s appeal against the High Court judgement. It says the legislation is okay according to English law, but that it shouldn’t have applied to all sanctions, because this meant that claimants who were waiting for the results of appeals against sanctions found their cases automatically decided in favour of the DWP. The legislation meant that people were automatically sanctioned even when the DWP’s own appeals process would have overturned the sanction.
That emergency legislation – the Jobseekers (Back to Work Schemes) Act 2013 – rewrote history. It made it so that workfare regulations made in 2011 were lawful and had always been lawful, even though the court of appeal had said that they weren’t. Those regulations made it possible to sanction people for not taking part. So the retrospective legislation meant that all the sanctions the government had imposed under the 2011 regulations, in one block, were valid, along with the regulations – even the sanctions that would have been unlawful under the old regulations anyway. This meant, in turn, that ongoing appeals against sanctions, most of which would have succeeded before the Act was passed, were bound to fail. (Challenges to sanctions have about a 70% success rate at the moment.) Public Interest Lawyers explain more about this background here. Read the rest of this entry »
Posted: February 27th, 2016 | Author: againstworkfare | Filed under: Guest blog, Psychological coercion | 6 Comments »
In this second guest post – a follow-up to What’s What Councillor Watts? An open letter from Mental Health Resistance Network to Councillor Watts – Mental Health Resistance Network respond to Richard Watts’ comment on their open letter. Councillor Watts’ comment is reproduced below, after MHRN’s post. For more on the protest on 4th March and our reasons for opposing the ‘Working Better’ scheme, see the Facebook event, this co-written article on the DPAC website and this letter from a GP about work cures and the duty to #DoNoHarm.
Dear Cllr. Watts
As service users and survivors of the psychiatric system, we are accustomed to people in suits ignoring our real concerns, talking down to us and believing that they are acting in our best interest even when we are telling them differently. Sadly, your comment does little to persuade us that you are going to offer us a different trajectory.
It seems you are determined to ignore the problematic issues that your pilot scheme has created, and that you are somehow incapable of comprehending how horrendous it would be for someone to find a DWP funded Employment Coach from the Maximus ‘family’ in the surgery where they seek treatment for a condition that has been exacerbated by a perverse decision in the ESA or PIP sham assessment processes, or a benefits sanction which has removed their very means of survival and independence. Unfortunately such events are now everyday occurrences in your borough, and the areas to which your pilot is intended to spread. It seems we all have to somehow get used to these injustices because all the safeguards appear to have failed. Rather than providing effective opposition to these outrages, you and your pilot seem set on adding to the misery.
We told you that we would meet with you when you are ready to have an adult discussion with us. You are clearly nowhere near ready to do that. I suspect that rather than genuinely reaching out to us, your comment is merely public posturing in the hope that some people will be persuaded by your whitewash.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted: February 23rd, 2016 | Author: againstworkfare | Filed under: Call to action, Guest blog, Psychological coercion | 4 Comments »
Employment coaches have been placed in six GPs’ surgeries in Islington. ‘Jobs on prescription’ is part of toxic and dangerous government plans to merge health and employment services – putting the Jobcentre in the NHS. Boycott Workfare, Mental Health Resistance Network, and Disabled People Against Cuts will be protesting the scheme from 3pm on 4th March, outside City Road Medical Centre. For more details on the protest and our reasons for opposing the scheme, see the Facebook event, this co-written article on the DPAC website and this letter from a GP about work cures and the duty to #DoNoHarm.
This guest post is an open letter from Mental Health Resistance Network to the leader of Islington council, Richard Watts.
Dear Councillor Watts
As you are aware by now, the Mental Health Resistance Network are involved in the organisation of a demonstration due to take place outside the City Road Surgery in Islington on March 4th. The protest is intended to voice our disquiet at the introduction of Job Coaches into six Islington surgeries, in a pilot project which has been enthustiastically promoted by yourself and Dr. Josephine Sauvage, a GP at City Road surgery, and Joint Vice Chair (clinical) of Islington CCG.
We first learnt about this pilot in an article in Pulse Magazine, and immediately suspected that that the DWP were likely to be central to this scheme. Our suspicions were confirmed when we found a document, authored by Kay Peat, the CCG Employment Lead for Islington CCG. The document makes it clear that Ms. Peat’s job is directly funded by the DWP, and that the Working Better’ pilot which you and Dr. Sauvage were promoting is also directly funded by the DWP. Furthermore, Ms. Peat’s document confirms that Remploy, a company mainly owned and controlled by Maximus, have been engaged to provide the Job Coaches that Dr. Sauvage says she will be ‘prescribing’ to her patients.
Maximus, as I am sure you are aware, have taken over from ATOS, in conducting Work Capability Assessments for those claiming Employment Support Allowance. What you may not know is that we at the MHRN instigated a judicial review of the WCA which found that the procedure “disadvantages people with mental health problems, learning disabilities and autism”. Read the rest of this entry »
Posted: February 3rd, 2016 | Author: boycottworkfare | Filed under: In-work conditionality, Sanctions, Welfare to work industry | 4 Comments »
Roll up! Roll up! The first oral evidence session for the Works and Pensions Committee inquiry on ‘in-work progression in Universal Credit’ began on 3 February. This is all about ‘in-work conditionality’, where low-earning workers receiving top-up benefits such as Working Tax Credit and Housing Benefit will be subject to the tender attentions currently enjoyed by unemployed claimants. We previously covered this in Workfare: Don’t Think a Job Means You’re Safe and Suggestions, They Want? Now, with Universal Credit due to be ‘rolled out’ in more areas, we can enjoy another round of parliamentary mumbling.
Ready to welcome workers into the fold?
Despite the limited terms of reference, Boycott Workfare made a written submission to this inquiry. Given that we campaign against sanctions imposed on unemployed people, we naturally oppose sanctions against working claimants. Extending conditionality – which will include sanctions – to working claimants extends these harms to a wider population and will only punish people on the receiving end of the UK’s low-pay no-pay precarious labour market. Small rises in the national minimum wage will not make these concerns go away: with the imposition of conditionality for workers, a higher minimum wage will simply mean a higher conditionality threshold and the use of the minimum wage as a stick to hit workers who are not earning ‘enough’.
We have already stated our opposition to all sanctions in our previous submission to the same committee, and oppose any attempt to extend the regime that has been described as Britain’s ‘secret penal system’.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted: January 19th, 2016 | Author: againstworkfare | Filed under: Action report, Charities, Pulled out! | 2 Comments »
Mustard Tree is a charity that works with homeless and other disadvantaged people in Greater Manchester. Until recently, it participated in workfare. But thanks to a sustained campaign by Boycott Workfare Greater Manchester, they’re no longer involved!
Mustard Tree had been part of the government’s Mandatory Work Activity Programme (MWA) – 4 weeks’ full time unpaid work, carried out under threat of sanctions. Boycott Workfare Greater Manchester first picketed Mustard Tree in December 2014. Then again at the end of January 2015, again on March 21st, and again in November. On January 13th, Mustard Tree updated their position on MWA:
Following further consideration, the board of Trustees of Mustard Tree have decided to withdraw our offer of the 4 week work placements associated with the Mandatory Work Activity element of the Welfare to Work Programme.
This updates their earlier stance. In the previous position statement, from March 2015, they said that:
We believe that the 4 week work experience placement [i.e. MWA – unpaid work] is a wholly proportionate and effective tool for accessing sustainable employment.
Like Haringey Solidarity Group’s campaign against North London Hospice, it shows that sustained campaigns against charities using workfare are effective. BW Greater Manchester put pressure on Mustard Tree in different ways:
- they wrote to supporters of the charity, like FC United,
- they kept a dialogue going with Mustard Tree throughout the process,
- they continued picketing their shops and offering information to people passing about what workfare is and how it links to sanctions.
On all the demonstrations, people from BW Manchester had a massively positive response from passers by. Even people who were hearing about workfare for the first time very quickly understood what is wrong with workfare, and especially what is wrong with a charity participating in it.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted: November 29th, 2015 | Author: againstworkfare | Filed under: Info on schemes | 9 Comments »
Hidden in the Autumn Statement was the news that the contracts for two flagship workfare schemes – Mandatory Work Activity and Community Work Placements – will not be renewed. Their demise is significant: it means that together we have frustrated and scaled back the government’s mass workfare project.
Total spending on employment will be reduced, including not renewing Mandatory Work Activity and Community Work Placements, but introducing a Work and Health Programme for the longer term unemployed and those with health conditions.
This is down to all of us. The DWP is ditching MWA and CWP after deciding that they’re too expensive – and it’s our solidarity and resistance that contributed to those costs and ultimately made those schemes unworkable. If you named and shamed your workfare placement organisation, if you tweeted at workfare-using companies, blockaded their doors or encouraged a local community organisation to Keep Volunteering Voluntary, then you helped make this happen.
We should be proud. We know that thanks to our efforts, workfare providers have found it so hard to find organisations willing to tar their reputation with workfare that only half of the people referred for Community Work Placements were found places. We know that the government has gone to every length to avoid publishing which organisations use workfare for fear that our campaigning could lead to these schemes’ collapse.
So before we look at what’s coming next, it’s important to see what we have achieved: forced unpaid work in the UK has been beaten back from the vast scale the government had planned. This matters. Benefits have not become pegged to unpaid work in the new poverty “settlement” Osborne hopes to establish.
So what now?
Workfare is still taking place. Referrals to punitive six-month Community Work Placements are due to run until the end of March 2016, so the placements will end in October – see section 1.25 of the CWP contract details. The end date is the same for referrals to Mandatory Work Activity – so contracts for that 4-week scheme end in April 2016.
Read the rest of this entry »