To Jonathon Portes of NIESR (posted in response to his blog)
In reference to (specifically) Mr Portes blog post pertaining to the Mandatory Work Activity contract, and (generally) the media reporting of non-connected specific examples of how this has been delivered.
What this post does not reflect is the amount of people who, once referred to this programme, have found that it has made a difference in their lives. The longer you are out of work the harder it is to get back in - we know this to be true. If a job comes down to being between you and another person who HAS worked within the last 6 months, the other person is almost certainly going to be looked upon more favourably. This is even more prevalent now, when so many employers can afford to 'cherry-pick' with the multitude of people competing for vacancies.
If you are not working, many things start to go downhill; your sleep pattern can change because you don't always go to bed at the right time because you do not HAVE to be up in the morning. You eat at strange times. You spend more time in your own company or that of the TV/radio because you do not have as much money to be active. You may get into negative patterns, spend time mainly with other people who are not working (or in some cases are determined not to), lose focus on what your goals were, lose self-esteem, spend less time on the things that will move you closer to getting back into work.
This may seem one of 2 things to you, depending on your viewpoint - either histrionic or blindingly obvious.
It was certainly blindingly obvious to the people withint DWP that developed MWA. The kind of people that are referred through MWA are a lot more diverse than was ever expected, and certainly a lot more diverse than is reflected in the media, or on these blogs.
On a 'shop floor' level, we have seen single parents who have ASKED for an opportunity to get work experience because they are very aware that they have developed a large gap on the CV due to being raising their children.
We have seen people that have previous criminal convictions and are in the process of trying to make a clean start - what they really need to help springboard them back into society is a reference from an employer to say that they were given an opportunity to prove themselves in a workplace and that they did everything that they were asked to do (which many of them do, whether you choose to believe me or not). So MWA and those co-ordinating it liaise to set up such a placement, support the client through the disclosure process, and ensure that they are not setting someone up to fail. My belief on this is simple - it's called the REHABILITATION of Offenders Act.
We have also seen people that DO have a negative view of JCP, the DWP, the government and the idea of being in work. They are often people that have been on JSA for a very long time. These people can be defensive, frightened or misinformed, but there are many who also know 'the system' as they have been a part of it for some time.
The percentage of people 'going onto ESA' is frustratingly misrepresentative because what is not mentioned is that under JCP policy and the guidance given to companies running MWA, is that IF A PERSON SAYS THAT THEY ARE SICK FOR A PERIOD OF OVER A WEEK, THAT PERSON MUST SIGN OFF JSA AND MAKE A CLAIM FOR ESA. This means that 2 things will happen:
1 - A person who knows that this is the process realises that the only thing they have to do to avoid MWA for a while longer is get their doctor to write them a sick note
2 - Statistically we see an increase in people 'going onto a more expensive benefit'.
However this person will then have to be fully assessed for ESA to continue claiming, and if they fail to prove that they are unfit to work long term (very likely in this case as the process is very comprehensive), they will then be put back on JSA before very long. This person has then merely delayed the process of being encouraged to seek work, and one could even say that in making a fragile claim for ESA that they are demonstrating that they have no intention of actively seeking employment.
As far as the placement goes, as a provider of the MWA contract in my area, we have a very strict remit that all our placements must be with charitable/non-profit organisations. This is something that is also NOT reflected in the media, and sadly not adhered to by every Welfare to Work provider who delivers MWA. I agree that we HAVE seen companies deliver this programme in an inefficient (and some have also said unethical) manner. Anyone wishing to see an example for this need only google 'MWA' and 'A4E' who have now lost this contract. But I can confirm that this is certainly NOT the case everywhere. What I am seeing is that the media or semi-professional right-on bloggers have been doing little more than display a smorgasbord of non-connective events up and down the country, without more in depth knowledge of the DWP Provider Guidance on what MWA is set up to deliver and how. I can confirm that within our own delivery, we ensure that people on MWA placements DO have:
* travel costs paid
* work-wear provided
* safety wear / equipment provided
* a limit to the amount of hours they can complete to enable them to still keep searching for work
* a further restriction on mandatory hours to lone parents or carers claiming LP/Carers JSA
* the ability to approve time off for domestic emergencies or medical appointments
* access to support and advice from the placement co-ordinator by phone, email or in person
* advice on what will be involved in the process and guidance on how to manage the transition into working life
* full information on what is expected of them while they are at work and the consequences of non-compliance BEFORE THEY BEGIN
The reason all these things are in place is because MWA is designed to mirror the practices of work. This means that:
* If you are sick or cannot come into work you have to call someone.
* If you have too much time off sick people will want to have a conversation with you as to why this has been happening.
* If you behave in a way that is unprofessional, rude or aggressive then chances are your employment will be terminated and you will have less money (hence the sanctioning)
* If you do well, complete the tasks set to you, demonstrate a good attitude or at least that you are trying to do your best, when someone approaches that company for a reference they will tell them that you are someone that it is worth them considering for employment.
I fully agree that some companies have not delivered good examples of what this contract is set up to achieve - motivation, structure, refreshing skills, the understanding that JSA should be to cover unforeseen circumstances or short periods of time, not a lifestyle choice - however there ARE companies and areas where it IS ethical, it IS working, and even if someone is not physically IN A JOB by the end of the 4 weeks, they are likely to be a lot more 'job-ready' than if they are just sitting at home apart from going in to sign on once a fortnight. They will be back in a normal routine, they will have an awareness of what the benefits of having a team of colleagues around you can be, and the self-esteem that comes from being active, contributing to society, and moving yourself forwards in your own life.
Ultimately people that have been unemployed on JSA for some time have either been letting life wander past them, or have had some extraordinarily unpleasant things happen to them, and the Jobcentre has not been able to catch them in time. What they really need is someone to put something in place for them, and encourage them in the right way. Some people need a more firm approach than others, but I can tell you that MWA does work when delivered professionally and correctly at all stages of the process.
What this post does not reflect is the amount of people who, once referred to this programme, have found that it has made a difference in their lives. The longer you are out of work the harder it is to get back in - we know this to be true. If a job comes down to being between you and another person who HAS worked within the last 6 months, the other person is almost certainly going to be looked upon more favourably. This is even more prevalent now, when so many employers can afford to 'cherry-pick' with the multitude of people competing for vacancies.
If you are not working, many things start to go downhill; your sleep pattern can change because you don't always go to bed at the right time because you do not HAVE to be up in the morning. You eat at strange times. You spend more time in your own company or that of the TV/radio because you do not have as much money to be active. You may get into negative patterns, spend time mainly with other people who are not working (or in some cases are determined not to), lose focus on what your goals were, lose self-esteem, spend less time on the things that will move you closer to getting back into work.
This may seem one of 2 things to you, depending on your viewpoint - either histrionic or blindingly obvious.
It was certainly blindingly obvious to the people withint DWP that developed MWA. The kind of people that are referred through MWA are a lot more diverse than was ever expected, and certainly a lot more diverse than is reflected in the media, or on these blogs.
On a 'shop floor' level, we have seen single parents who have ASKED for an opportunity to get work experience because they are very aware that they have developed a large gap on the CV due to being raising their children.
We have seen people that have previous criminal convictions and are in the process of trying to make a clean start - what they really need to help springboard them back into society is a reference from an employer to say that they were given an opportunity to prove themselves in a workplace and that they did everything that they were asked to do (which many of them do, whether you choose to believe me or not). So MWA and those co-ordinating it liaise to set up such a placement, support the client through the disclosure process, and ensure that they are not setting someone up to fail. My belief on this is simple - it's called the REHABILITATION of Offenders Act.
We have also seen people that DO have a negative view of JCP, the DWP, the government and the idea of being in work. They are often people that have been on JSA for a very long time. These people can be defensive, frightened or misinformed, but there are many who also know 'the system' as they have been a part of it for some time.
The percentage of people 'going onto ESA' is frustratingly misrepresentative because what is not mentioned is that under JCP policy and the guidance given to companies running MWA, is that IF A PERSON SAYS THAT THEY ARE SICK FOR A PERIOD OF OVER A WEEK, THAT PERSON MUST SIGN OFF JSA AND MAKE A CLAIM FOR ESA. This means that 2 things will happen:
1 - A person who knows that this is the process realises that the only thing they have to do to avoid MWA for a while longer is get their doctor to write them a sick note
2 - Statistically we see an increase in people 'going onto a more expensive benefit'.
However this person will then have to be fully assessed for ESA to continue claiming, and if they fail to prove that they are unfit to work long term (very likely in this case as the process is very comprehensive), they will then be put back on JSA before very long. This person has then merely delayed the process of being encouraged to seek work, and one could even say that in making a fragile claim for ESA that they are demonstrating that they have no intention of actively seeking employment.
As far as the placement goes, as a provider of the MWA contract in my area, we have a very strict remit that all our placements must be with charitable/non-profit organisations. This is something that is also NOT reflected in the media, and sadly not adhered to by every Welfare to Work provider who delivers MWA. I agree that we HAVE seen companies deliver this programme in an inefficient (and some have also said unethical) manner. Anyone wishing to see an example for this need only google 'MWA' and 'A4E' who have now lost this contract. But I can confirm that this is certainly NOT the case everywhere. What I am seeing is that the media or semi-professional right-on bloggers have been doing little more than display a smorgasbord of non-connective events up and down the country, without more in depth knowledge of the DWP Provider Guidance on what MWA is set up to deliver and how. I can confirm that within our own delivery, we ensure that people on MWA placements DO have:
* travel costs paid
* work-wear provided
* safety wear / equipment provided
* a limit to the amount of hours they can complete to enable them to still keep searching for work
* a further restriction on mandatory hours to lone parents or carers claiming LP/Carers JSA
* the ability to approve time off for domestic emergencies or medical appointments
* access to support and advice from the placement co-ordinator by phone, email or in person
* advice on what will be involved in the process and guidance on how to manage the transition into working life
* full information on what is expected of them while they are at work and the consequences of non-compliance BEFORE THEY BEGIN
The reason all these things are in place is because MWA is designed to mirror the practices of work. This means that:
* If you are sick or cannot come into work you have to call someone.
* If you have too much time off sick people will want to have a conversation with you as to why this has been happening.
* If you behave in a way that is unprofessional, rude or aggressive then chances are your employment will be terminated and you will have less money (hence the sanctioning)
* If you do well, complete the tasks set to you, demonstrate a good attitude or at least that you are trying to do your best, when someone approaches that company for a reference they will tell them that you are someone that it is worth them considering for employment.
I fully agree that some companies have not delivered good examples of what this contract is set up to achieve - motivation, structure, refreshing skills, the understanding that JSA should be to cover unforeseen circumstances or short periods of time, not a lifestyle choice - however there ARE companies and areas where it IS ethical, it IS working, and even if someone is not physically IN A JOB by the end of the 4 weeks, they are likely to be a lot more 'job-ready' than if they are just sitting at home apart from going in to sign on once a fortnight. They will be back in a normal routine, they will have an awareness of what the benefits of having a team of colleagues around you can be, and the self-esteem that comes from being active, contributing to society, and moving yourself forwards in your own life.
Ultimately people that have been unemployed on JSA for some time have either been letting life wander past them, or have had some extraordinarily unpleasant things happen to them, and the Jobcentre has not been able to catch them in time. What they really need is someone to put something in place for them, and encourage them in the right way. Some people need a more firm approach than others, but I can tell you that MWA does work when delivered professionally and correctly at all stages of the process.