It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by michael1983l
The government should just refuse benafit payments then. They are under no obligation to pay them.
Originally posted by Cosmic4life
Originally posted by woodwardjnr
reply to post by michael1983l
Well you are lucky to be in such a safe job that you don't have to worry about being unemployed. I imagine employees of HMV and Jessops felt pretty safe and resented their taxes going to those on benefits.. I'm sure many of their perspectives may have changed in light of recent developments.
Well said..
And not to mention the 3000 Barclays staff who have just been told they are now no longer required.
C...
Get Britain Working
We are making a transformational reform of the benefit system and introducing Universal Credit, to make work pay.
We are modernising the way Jobcentre Plus delivers its services – giving more responsibility to Jobcentre Plus advisers to assess claimants’ individual needs and to offer the support they think most appropriate, including access to a number of Get Britain Working measures.
The Work Programme replaces an array of employment schemes, pilots and projects , giving providers greater freedom to make judgements about how best to support jobseekers who need extra help.
There is now a greater focus on partnership working – Jobcentre Plus, providers, local authorities, employers, and jobseekers working together to find new solutions to unemployment.
There is now a focus on results: Jobcentre Plus staff will be more results-focussed, providers will be paid by results and incentivised to support the hardest to help.
In response to the challenge of youth employment the Youth Contract will provide extra help to young unemployed people to get a job.
Our mainstream provision is complemented by specialist disability employment programmes including Work Choice, Access to Work, which will continue to provide support for disabled people facing the most complex barriers to getting and keeping a job.
There are also a number of measures in place to support older people in choosing to work longer.
None of this will be done in a vacuum. Wider government will create an environment that encourages enterprise and sustained economic growth to help create sustained jobs and businesses.
Originally posted by BlindBastards
That’s an insane system - “30 hours unpaid work per week for six months” ? How did the sorry sack of sh!t who dreamt this scheme up remotely consider it to be legal or fair? This is disgusting, really.
Originally posted by stumason
reply to post by SprocketUK
That's a very skewed way of looking at the heavy industry jobs you speak of.. Back in the 70's and 80's, owing to the Unions, all those workers demanded more and more pay to the point it was simply daft to expect it to continue.
The workers, through their own greed and being mislead by even greedier Union bosses, priced themselves out the market. Had the miners, for example, not been led down the garden path by Skargill et al, many mines would have remained open, just at a lower volume of production - we were producing too much coal and it sat in mountains around the country, but they still demanded more pay for a product that had a falling value. It was idiocy of the most extreme form.
It's akin to me and my colleagues, upon hearing that 2 jobs out of 10 are to go owing to reduced workload, all standing up and demanding 15% pay rises...
Yes, Maggie and the Government should share some of the blame for what happened to our industry as well, but it wasn't all the Governments fault. The Unions and the workers have to shoulder quite a bit of the blame as well. [/quote
Pay miners a decent wage and have low price energy or sack them and privatise and pay much higher bills..
I think you are very wrong. Where do you get your info?
there wouldnt be unemployment if 7 out or 8 jobs diddnt go to immigrants working for peanuts.
Originally posted by poet1b
I'm all for people on welfare being forced to work, but they should do public work, or else the private employers should have to pay the government for the work they get from people on welfare.
Originally posted by stumason
reply to post by SprocketUK
In the case of Germany (and many other EU countries for that matter) is many of them receive state support which often flouts EU law, while we stick to them. Siemens, for example, gets interest free "loans" and guarantees from the German state and recently they have signed an agreement that before any German worker can be laid off, they will shed jobs at their foreign operations, no matter whether the operation is profitable or not.
The French, for their part, often prop up industries with loans and grants under the EU provision of "protecting national interest" - we use this to safeguard defence industries, which is what it is meant for, while the French use it to prop up their economy in general. For example, EU law said we had to privatise and liberalise our Energy market, so we did. The French and Germans, however, retain state control and now all our power companies are French and German owned....
Good for the Germans, yes, but hardly sticking to the "free market" principles we like to push and upon which the EU is founded.edit on 13/2/13 by stumason because: (no reason given)