It seems any interaction with the DWP, it's services or those making use of it for offering employment ultimatley results in me being called a liar.
Take for example the position I applied for the other day. Now it flashed up on the DWP website as being valid & live. But had a closing date of earlier this month. Odd. Not unheard off but strange. So I chance my arm and send a quick hello, explain that this appeared on the DWP website and whilst the date's long past I can see it... so it might well be live and here's a copy of my CV.
Now I'd have accepted "Odd", "technical glitch", "WTF?" or similar as a response.
The e-mail I get back pretty much calls me a liar. I'm tempted to go for Libel/Slander but it is a private communication. Ho hum.
Saturday 27 November 2010
Friday 26 November 2010
Back to Work session #1
Had my first back to work session today. I'm not sure what the point of it was.
We were told that applying via newspapers is not the best way of finding work (been that way for years) but that the internet was brilliant so were the websites of agencies themselves. Which confused the ever loving hell out of me.
Speculative letters to large corporations were mentioned (I kept quiet about that one being a waste of paper). They also mentioned again all of the help and services both they and 3rd parties provide... which I had to question because it was a 3rd party that had sent me for the Back to Work sessions in the first place and I could see myself heading back to see him again; after being told he couldn't do anything for me.
The vast bulk of the hour was made up by telling us of her times 'up North', veiled threats about keeping up with our paperwork and the consequences for not living up to our end of the Jobseekers agreement and well you get the idea.
Fair enough. However they then went on to suggest something to do with disability advice, which rang a bell from my Incapacity Benefit days... as in "when you come off IB we'll get you a session with this" sort of which other sectors my skills apply to and how to minimise the issues my medical problems cause. Good stuff. So after the session I talk to the person running it.
Then I was sent to reception.
Then I was sent to speak to the wrong person, who went to get the right person.
The right person told me this wasn't something I couldn't arrange myself. If it hadn't of been arranged when I first signed on to Jobseekers then it was unlikely I'd be eligible for the help. She seemed almost irate at having to meet the great unwashed such as myself.
I asked her to explain to the people who had just held the Back to Work session that what they'd said to do was impossible. She reiterated that I couldn't arrange this myself and I once again explained that I was simply doing as I'd been told. Finally, with a roll of her eyes, she suggested she'd be having a word with them... to make sure it didn't happen again.
Now who here things a) I was just called a liar by a member of DWP staff (again)? b) she'll actually have that talk to iron out things? c) I'll have a black mark on my record for trying something? d) All of the above?
I'm going with option d here personally. But hey, today we only wasted and hour of 2 DWP staffers, 1 3rd part vendors and 15 unemployed peoples time (and money) today. We're getting better aren't we? On the plus side I was able to sign and get out.
Today's "Local" job (according to Jobcentre Plus job point machine) location: Tipton, West Midlands (165miles, 2hr 53min away).
We were told that applying via newspapers is not the best way of finding work (been that way for years) but that the internet was brilliant so were the websites of agencies themselves. Which confused the ever loving hell out of me.
Speculative letters to large corporations were mentioned (I kept quiet about that one being a waste of paper). They also mentioned again all of the help and services both they and 3rd parties provide... which I had to question because it was a 3rd party that had sent me for the Back to Work sessions in the first place and I could see myself heading back to see him again; after being told he couldn't do anything for me.
The vast bulk of the hour was made up by telling us of her times 'up North', veiled threats about keeping up with our paperwork and the consequences for not living up to our end of the Jobseekers agreement and well you get the idea.
Fair enough. However they then went on to suggest something to do with disability advice, which rang a bell from my Incapacity Benefit days... as in "when you come off IB we'll get you a session with this" sort of which other sectors my skills apply to and how to minimise the issues my medical problems cause. Good stuff. So after the session I talk to the person running it.
Then I was sent to reception.
Then I was sent to speak to the wrong person, who went to get the right person.
The right person told me this wasn't something I couldn't arrange myself. If it hadn't of been arranged when I first signed on to Jobseekers then it was unlikely I'd be eligible for the help. She seemed almost irate at having to meet the great unwashed such as myself.
I asked her to explain to the people who had just held the Back to Work session that what they'd said to do was impossible. She reiterated that I couldn't arrange this myself and I once again explained that I was simply doing as I'd been told. Finally, with a roll of her eyes, she suggested she'd be having a word with them... to make sure it didn't happen again.
Now who here things a) I was just called a liar by a member of DWP staff (again)? b) she'll actually have that talk to iron out things? c) I'll have a black mark on my record for trying something? d) All of the above?
I'm going with option d here personally. But hey, today we only wasted and hour of 2 DWP staffers, 1 3rd part vendors and 15 unemployed peoples time (and money) today. We're getting better aren't we? On the plus side I was able to sign and get out.
Today's "Local" job (according to Jobcentre Plus job point machine) location: Tipton, West Midlands (165miles, 2hr 53min away).
Thursday 25 November 2010
From the mists of time.
A conversation between two DWP staff, overheard by myself and several others, on a site, several years ago:
DWP1: Did you hear about X (male DWP worker)? He's been suspended.
DWP2: What for?
DWP1: Signing on whilst working, apparently he was doing it 5 times.
DWP2: That's just too much, everyone's fine with you doing it 3 times.
DWP1: I know. Five times is just taking the piss.
Now, nobody would of believed this. People would just assume it was two malicious people twisting the knife in to the unemployed people in ear shot. But then nobody would have believed a famous jewelry mogul would stand up and declare his products as shit and having less value than a prawn sandwich (Gerald Ratner for those wondering).
Math time again (62 a week * number of signings * 4 weeks a month):
Suspended dude was getting £1,240p/m
Those two DWP staff were getting: £744p/m each
Legitimate single sign-on claim gets: £248p/m
I'm willing to bet 'reasonable' money that a DWP advisor pays about £700 in tax a month all told (tax, NI, council tax, VAT on purchases, etc.), so they were quite probably working tax free.
Now I'm not suggesting for a moment that this was wide spread, nor am I suggesting for a second that ALL staff are doing this or that the rules haven't changed over the years since hearing this to stamp it out. But I am suggesting that two people in the DWP were claiming their tax back, at that point in history and were intimating that everyone else in the office was doing likewise.
DWP1: Did you hear about X (male DWP worker)? He's been suspended.
DWP2: What for?
DWP1: Signing on whilst working, apparently he was doing it 5 times.
DWP2: That's just too much, everyone's fine with you doing it 3 times.
DWP1: I know. Five times is just taking the piss.
Now, nobody would of believed this. People would just assume it was two malicious people twisting the knife in to the unemployed people in ear shot. But then nobody would have believed a famous jewelry mogul would stand up and declare his products as shit and having less value than a prawn sandwich (Gerald Ratner for those wondering).
Math time again (62 a week * number of signings * 4 weeks a month):
Suspended dude was getting £1,240p/m
Those two DWP staff were getting: £744p/m each
Legitimate single sign-on claim gets: £248p/m
I'm willing to bet 'reasonable' money that a DWP advisor pays about £700 in tax a month all told (tax, NI, council tax, VAT on purchases, etc.), so they were quite probably working tax free.
Now I'm not suggesting for a moment that this was wide spread, nor am I suggesting for a second that ALL staff are doing this or that the rules haven't changed over the years since hearing this to stamp it out. But I am suggesting that two people in the DWP were claiming their tax back, at that point in history and were intimating that everyone else in the office was doing likewise.
Bringing back New Deal!
Well that's pretty much what the government have said. For those not in the UK or who are and aren't aware of the full story I shall give a breif overview of New Deal as it existed in the late 90's & early 00's.
New Deal was originally for 18 - 25 year olds who were out of work. It would be an 'gateway' period which pretty much involved intesive jobsearch to escape the damn thing, CV writing courses, interview technique courses and such, followed by six month work program and finally followed by another intensive job hunting phase. The program was extended to include the over 25's and I think towards the end over 60's before they retired. If it exists currently it is only in the 18 - 25 year old range. For being on New Deal the amount of money you'd get slightly increased although you couldn't 'opt-out' of New Deal... so why they added that sweetener I don't know.
Now it sounds like a good thing right? In principal it sounds good. After all to get a New Dealer in to your business you had to have a vacancy for them to try out for at the end of it and a lot of kids do need help with job interviews and getting their CV in order so excellent.
It's also worth considering what wasn't public reported: for each New Dealer you find a place for that's £2000 tax free. The procedures for making sure a vacancy were real were very well documented and avaliable for viewing.
I encountered one scammer of the system. They were not in reciept of any state benefits. They'd set up a string of charities and businesses with themselves and partner (in crime) as directors and a sap as secretary. Then hoovered up as much National Lottery grant money as possible before staffing the place with New Dealers who she delighted in abusing. The one site I found was staffed by 6 New Dealers who were rotated out every 5 1/2 months; in the final month there was always a problem (they were suddenly racist, lackadaisical, insolent, basically whatever was required to get rid of them) now keep in mind a 'problem' and being removed from site means your in serious danger of loosing your benefit for a while... this is not a good place to be.
But lets break out the math shall we? See how big this scam was.
6 heads
2000 per head
6 months
That's £72,000 every 6 months. £144,000 per year (2 cycles of New Dealers). As stated the person was running several other sites, 4 of them active at the time I appeared, I see no reason to doubt they weren't staffed in a similar manner or with similar numbers so lets factor that in. Per year these two people (three if you count the sap) managed to slurp £576,000 (Five hundred and seventy six thousand pounds) out of the government and I've no idea how much Lottery money they were able to grab. But then as now it was the poor bastard getting £62 a week who was the evil in society and should be made to suffer.
So all these current plans to "make the scoungers work" that are being bandied about I do, in theory support. But I'm also fully aware that the person running that scam was never arrested, never punished and is as far as I know still out there scamming away. So once Mk2 New Deal starts up you can bet your bottom dollar that they or people like them will be back, in force and taking every penny they can from the government.
It gets more interesting when you consider this: The MP's proposing this specifically mention "council jobs" and "sweeping streets" and "clearing graffiti", something local county councils already employ people to do and flicking around the internet they are reasonably well paid for it and heavily unionized. I don't see that ending well do you?
New Deal was originally for 18 - 25 year olds who were out of work. It would be an 'gateway' period which pretty much involved intesive jobsearch to escape the damn thing, CV writing courses, interview technique courses and such, followed by six month work program and finally followed by another intensive job hunting phase. The program was extended to include the over 25's and I think towards the end over 60's before they retired. If it exists currently it is only in the 18 - 25 year old range. For being on New Deal the amount of money you'd get slightly increased although you couldn't 'opt-out' of New Deal... so why they added that sweetener I don't know.
Now it sounds like a good thing right? In principal it sounds good. After all to get a New Dealer in to your business you had to have a vacancy for them to try out for at the end of it and a lot of kids do need help with job interviews and getting their CV in order so excellent.
It's also worth considering what wasn't public reported: for each New Dealer you find a place for that's £2000 tax free. The procedures for making sure a vacancy were real were very well documented and avaliable for viewing.
I encountered one scammer of the system. They were not in reciept of any state benefits. They'd set up a string of charities and businesses with themselves and partner (in crime) as directors and a sap as secretary. Then hoovered up as much National Lottery grant money as possible before staffing the place with New Dealers who she delighted in abusing. The one site I found was staffed by 6 New Dealers who were rotated out every 5 1/2 months; in the final month there was always a problem (they were suddenly racist, lackadaisical, insolent, basically whatever was required to get rid of them) now keep in mind a 'problem' and being removed from site means your in serious danger of loosing your benefit for a while... this is not a good place to be.
But lets break out the math shall we? See how big this scam was.
6 heads
2000 per head
6 months
That's £72,000 every 6 months. £144,000 per year (2 cycles of New Dealers). As stated the person was running several other sites, 4 of them active at the time I appeared, I see no reason to doubt they weren't staffed in a similar manner or with similar numbers so lets factor that in. Per year these two people (three if you count the sap) managed to slurp £576,000 (Five hundred and seventy six thousand pounds) out of the government and I've no idea how much Lottery money they were able to grab. But then as now it was the poor bastard getting £62 a week who was the evil in society and should be made to suffer.
So all these current plans to "make the scoungers work" that are being bandied about I do, in theory support. But I'm also fully aware that the person running that scam was never arrested, never punished and is as far as I know still out there scamming away. So once Mk2 New Deal starts up you can bet your bottom dollar that they or people like them will be back, in force and taking every penny they can from the government.
It gets more interesting when you consider this: The MP's proposing this specifically mention "council jobs" and "sweeping streets" and "clearing graffiti", something local county councils already employ people to do and flicking around the internet they are reasonably well paid for it and heavily unionized. I don't see that ending well do you?
The Story so Far: Grand Finale
Final chunk I promise.
With the battle lost I sat there and waited for the wheels to spin and final letters to be sent. I realized that the past few years had been an absolute waste of time; at no point did the DWP as an organization have any intention of living up to its end of the deal it'd made. So despite reassurances that there would be careers advice looking at my skills & industries I could move to, training, support and various other promises being put on the table the only thing they actually cared about was fiddling their JSA stats for a few months then fiddling their IB stats after that.
I'm reasonably sure if I hadn't of kicked up a fuss I'd have been ping-ponged between the two benefits never actually receiving any money from them. Then a final letter arrived from the DWP. All of the things they'd promised me were on the table if I signed on for Jobseekers... so I did.
But think about where we are at this point in time. In order to stop paying me £62 a week (and instead put me on the £40 a week contingency which they didn't always pay) for two years whilst I sort everything out and cover up for the manager overstepping her authority they did the following:
Are you getting value for your tax money here folks? Because frankly I don't think you are. I know I feel decidedly ripped off by getting this level of support from the safety net I've helped fund.
With the battle lost I sat there and waited for the wheels to spin and final letters to be sent. I realized that the past few years had been an absolute waste of time; at no point did the DWP as an organization have any intention of living up to its end of the deal it'd made. So despite reassurances that there would be careers advice looking at my skills & industries I could move to, training, support and various other promises being put on the table the only thing they actually cared about was fiddling their JSA stats for a few months then fiddling their IB stats after that.
I'm reasonably sure if I hadn't of kicked up a fuss I'd have been ping-ponged between the two benefits never actually receiving any money from them. Then a final letter arrived from the DWP. All of the things they'd promised me were on the table if I signed on for Jobseekers... so I did.
But think about where we are at this point in time. In order to stop paying me £62 a week (and instead put me on the £40 a week contingency which they didn't always pay) for two years whilst I sort everything out and cover up for the manager overstepping her authority they did the following:
- Sent me off to a private health care firm
- Broke a verbal contract
- Lied to a court
- Had private investigators parked outside the place I live
- Sent literally a ream of paperwork through the postal service.
- Had ME send about the same amount back (using stamps brought with tax payers money).
- Made someone take several days off work.
- Tied up a room at the magistrates court for several hours.
- Took up several hours of a solicitors/magistrates time.
- Took up several hours of a GP's time.
- Made my skin condition far worse as it doesn't respond well to high levels of stress (I pretty much spent the whole time bleeding from every major joint).
- Declared, possibly legally, that a psychiatric condition is a life style choice.
- Declared that an auto-immune condition is a simple hormone imbalance induced acne.
Are you getting value for your tax money here folks? Because frankly I don't think you are. I know I feel decidedly ripped off by getting this level of support from the safety net I've helped fund.
The Story so Far: Part 3
The Tribunal Service is billed as an independant arbitration service used by the DWP, however I have my doubts. But they are, to the best of my knowledge, paid for by the state just like someone who works at the DWP.
The first hearing was called off for more information. The second hearing was called off for more information, as was the third and fourth hearing; my witness to events taking days off when we were summoned.
After each hearing I'd receive letters from the DWP reminding me that I should be on Jobseekers (and wouldn't it be nice if all this scary stuff went away) with additional paperwork to add to my file. At various points they also stated I wasn't eligible for Income Support, Disability Living Allowance and Tax Credits although I'd never applied for those benefits personally. Reading the paperwork became something of a laugh for the two of us in the "what bit of their story are they changing this time?" vein. And change it they did! I've the complete set of paperwork sat here and we go from a meeting with no witness to there was no meeting. Similar things happen with the application for Incapacity Benefit being on their insistence to it was my insistence it happen.
Letters from my psychiatrists weren't requested nor from my Dermatologist and the veracity of the private health care firms' report went unchallenged despite the odd circumstances surrounding it. The long and short of it being that whatever the DWP changed their story too at that point in time I'd have to argue against. Did I mention we also had cars parked across the road with cameras recording us? Didn't think so but when you deal with DSLR's and video cameras you can spot the little green & red "I am recording you/taking picture of you" light on the front.
One of the Tribunal people let slip about another investigation taking place but nobody knew anything about it and whatever the outcome of it I have no idea.
The first hearing was called off for more information. The second hearing was called off for more information, as was the third and fourth hearing; my witness to events taking days off when we were summoned.
After each hearing I'd receive letters from the DWP reminding me that I should be on Jobseekers (and wouldn't it be nice if all this scary stuff went away) with additional paperwork to add to my file. At various points they also stated I wasn't eligible for Income Support, Disability Living Allowance and Tax Credits although I'd never applied for those benefits personally. Reading the paperwork became something of a laugh for the two of us in the "what bit of their story are they changing this time?" vein. And change it they did! I've the complete set of paperwork sat here and we go from a meeting with no witness to there was no meeting. Similar things happen with the application for Incapacity Benefit being on their insistence to it was my insistence it happen.
Letters from my psychiatrists weren't requested nor from my Dermatologist and the veracity of the private health care firms' report went unchallenged despite the odd circumstances surrounding it. The long and short of it being that whatever the DWP changed their story too at that point in time I'd have to argue against. Did I mention we also had cars parked across the road with cameras recording us? Didn't think so but when you deal with DSLR's and video cameras you can spot the little green & red "I am recording you/taking picture of you" light on the front.
One of the Tribunal people let slip about another investigation taking place but nobody knew anything about it and whatever the outcome of it I have no idea.
The Story So Far: Part 2
So I return the forms to that person and everything seems fine. I begin figuring out exactly what I'm going to do with the money so I can get the issues that seem to be rapidly developing under control, maintained and in a position where I'm not leaking like a sieve whilst working.
It turns out the person wasn't exactly on the level (surprise surprise) with, in their words, "being left alone for two years to get this sorted out". I was sent off to a private healthcare facility for an assesment. This, for those with long memories, is the same assessment which has been in the news for being anywhere from overly complex & difficult to fill in to not being complete enough to take in to account all variables; the news story I remember was a woman with chronic pain being told she was able to work, despite being wired on morphine 23 hours of the day.
Now things to keep in mind: 1) This is not a diagnosis. 2) The person perfoming the assesment is NOT a medical specialist (mine had on a badge proudly announcing they had an NVQ Level 1). 3) If you have something unusual, rare or a weird interaction they aren't going to have a clue about it. 4) As best as I can tell they're paid by the number of forms filled in.
Now when a "certified medical professional" (the words of the healthcare firm) calls an auto-immune condition "acne" and a psychiatric condition a "lifestyle choice" doesn't inspect any of the abcseses and seems to be randomly ticking boxes as they see fit... you aren't going to be getting an acurate result. I was surprised to learn that I wasn't eligable for Incapacity Benefit shortly after.
You might be thinking at this point "no durr" but I complained. I had only filled the forms in at the behest of a DWP manager, the person doing the assessment used completely the wrong terminology about the illnesses despite being corrected several times and I contested the accuracy of the medical examination because of it and stated if they wanted further proof of how inaccurate this was to contact my dermatologist and psychiatrist at the provided addresses.
They declined the offer and instead wrote back flat out calling me a liar, denied I'd ever had a witness in the meeting (so she's a liar as well). They made it very clear that only because I was making such a fuss would they send my case off to the tribunal service, but that I shouldn't hold out much hope (being a liar and all) and that the medical assessment stood as it was... despite the person who took it no longer working for the company for "unstated reasons".
It turns out the person wasn't exactly on the level (surprise surprise) with, in their words, "being left alone for two years to get this sorted out". I was sent off to a private healthcare facility for an assesment. This, for those with long memories, is the same assessment which has been in the news for being anywhere from overly complex & difficult to fill in to not being complete enough to take in to account all variables; the news story I remember was a woman with chronic pain being told she was able to work, despite being wired on morphine 23 hours of the day.
Now things to keep in mind: 1) This is not a diagnosis. 2) The person perfoming the assesment is NOT a medical specialist (mine had on a badge proudly announcing they had an NVQ Level 1). 3) If you have something unusual, rare or a weird interaction they aren't going to have a clue about it. 4) As best as I can tell they're paid by the number of forms filled in.
Now when a "certified medical professional" (the words of the healthcare firm) calls an auto-immune condition "acne" and a psychiatric condition a "lifestyle choice" doesn't inspect any of the abcseses and seems to be randomly ticking boxes as they see fit... you aren't going to be getting an acurate result. I was surprised to learn that I wasn't eligable for Incapacity Benefit shortly after.
You might be thinking at this point "no durr" but I complained. I had only filled the forms in at the behest of a DWP manager, the person doing the assessment used completely the wrong terminology about the illnesses despite being corrected several times and I contested the accuracy of the medical examination because of it and stated if they wanted further proof of how inaccurate this was to contact my dermatologist and psychiatrist at the provided addresses.
They declined the offer and instead wrote back flat out calling me a liar, denied I'd ever had a witness in the meeting (so she's a liar as well). They made it very clear that only because I was making such a fuss would they send my case off to the tribunal service, but that I shouldn't hold out much hope (being a liar and all) and that the medical assessment stood as it was... despite the person who took it no longer working for the company for "unstated reasons".
The story so far: Part 1
Lets get rolling with some back story so we're all up to date. This is going to be a cliff notes version.
First of all I have two medical conditions neither of which on their own are serious, life threatening or a barrier to work. But when you combine the two it becomes problematic. I lost my position in a company in 2005, job hunted like crazy and then finally having run out of cash signed on for Jobseekers Allowance, which was my first contact with the DWP since I was in college.
Now lets be clear here, I was looking for work in the IT industry at the peak of the Outsource/Offshore EVERYTHING binge and right at the start of what would become "the credit crunch" (aka double dip recession), so I sign on and keep job hunting. To be honest the money the DWP trickled in to my bank account wasn't all that great but whatever. Eventually someone far younger than me and frankly way to perky for that time of the day decides that I'm not doing enough and is going to take my benefits away from me.
I complain. Loudly. I'm frankly doing my best and their suggestions aren't appropriate, applicable or remotely sensible. Eventually a meeting is arranged between myself and one of the managers of the local Jobcentre to discuss the matter and the difficulties I'm having. I'm already at the stage of "I don't trust these guys" so I bring along a witness which I think is rather sensible. You'd do that wouldn't you?
I explain in complete, detailed and to the best of my ability, medically accurate details what's wrong with me and how these two conditions interact. I explain how I'm job hunting, my methodologies and thinking behind avoiding doing certain thing (speculative letters to large corporations usually result in a "talk to our agency" response). I was told by the person on the other side of the desk that I shouldn't be on Jobseekers Allowance. I should be on Incapacity Benefit.
Lets be clear here I didn't say I want to be on that benefit. It was the person who worked for the DWP themselves who said that. Just want to be certain people understand that. I was handed a bucket load of forms to fill in and send to the woman directly for her to deal with.
First of all I have two medical conditions neither of which on their own are serious, life threatening or a barrier to work. But when you combine the two it becomes problematic. I lost my position in a company in 2005, job hunted like crazy and then finally having run out of cash signed on for Jobseekers Allowance, which was my first contact with the DWP since I was in college.
Now lets be clear here, I was looking for work in the IT industry at the peak of the Outsource/Offshore EVERYTHING binge and right at the start of what would become "the credit crunch" (aka double dip recession), so I sign on and keep job hunting. To be honest the money the DWP trickled in to my bank account wasn't all that great but whatever. Eventually someone far younger than me and frankly way to perky for that time of the day decides that I'm not doing enough and is going to take my benefits away from me.
I complain. Loudly. I'm frankly doing my best and their suggestions aren't appropriate, applicable or remotely sensible. Eventually a meeting is arranged between myself and one of the managers of the local Jobcentre to discuss the matter and the difficulties I'm having. I'm already at the stage of "I don't trust these guys" so I bring along a witness which I think is rather sensible. You'd do that wouldn't you?
I explain in complete, detailed and to the best of my ability, medically accurate details what's wrong with me and how these two conditions interact. I explain how I'm job hunting, my methodologies and thinking behind avoiding doing certain thing (speculative letters to large corporations usually result in a "talk to our agency" response). I was told by the person on the other side of the desk that I shouldn't be on Jobseekers Allowance. I should be on Incapacity Benefit.
Lets be clear here I didn't say I want to be on that benefit. It was the person who worked for the DWP themselves who said that. Just want to be certain people understand that. I was handed a bucket load of forms to fill in and send to the woman directly for her to deal with.
Ok, so first post...
So the first post, new blog, OMG! Lets start with what this blog is about and why it exists.
Unemployment and pretty much all other benefits in the UK are handled by an entity called the "Department of Work and Pensions" (DWP) known many years ago as "Department of Social Security" (DSS, who used to issue UB40 books for signing on, hence the bands name.. ES40 doesn't have the same ring IMHO), now the DWP gobbles up great gobs of cash and every so often the media jumps up and down about how much money this is and how everyone should rally against the unemployed scroungers who are sucking the country dry.
Fair enough you might think. But how exactly are the DWP spending all of that money we've all paid in to the system to form our safety net? Whilst their figures are as with all government spending available to the public it makes for dry reading and frankly the amount of hyperbole surrounding it means everyone gets a little... excited.
Now depending on who you talk to and who you believe I am a "work shy scrounger who should be sweeping the streets for my benefits" or a "down on my luck person who needs help and wrapping in cotton wool and assistance", but that does mean that I'm intrinsically involved with the great machine that is the DWP; I get to see its underbelly and unlike a lot of people I'm cynical and twisted enough to poke at it and see where my money went.
I also figured that with the current media outrage over unemployment and public spending this might make a small (very small) counter-point to it. So yeah in essence this is me sticking two fingers up at the press and going "Bite me" in a somewhat factual way.
Unemployment and pretty much all other benefits in the UK are handled by an entity called the "Department of Work and Pensions" (DWP) known many years ago as "Department of Social Security" (DSS, who used to issue UB40 books for signing on, hence the bands name.. ES40 doesn't have the same ring IMHO), now the DWP gobbles up great gobs of cash and every so often the media jumps up and down about how much money this is and how everyone should rally against the unemployed scroungers who are sucking the country dry.
Fair enough you might think. But how exactly are the DWP spending all of that money we've all paid in to the system to form our safety net? Whilst their figures are as with all government spending available to the public it makes for dry reading and frankly the amount of hyperbole surrounding it means everyone gets a little... excited.
Now depending on who you talk to and who you believe I am a "work shy scrounger who should be sweeping the streets for my benefits" or a "down on my luck person who needs help and wrapping in cotton wool and assistance", but that does mean that I'm intrinsically involved with the great machine that is the DWP; I get to see its underbelly and unlike a lot of people I'm cynical and twisted enough to poke at it and see where my money went.
I also figured that with the current media outrage over unemployment and public spending this might make a small (very small) counter-point to it. So yeah in essence this is me sticking two fingers up at the press and going "Bite me" in a somewhat factual way.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)