Not of the blog but of my benefits. Something they seem to do every 13 weeks or so it seems.
Now considering being honest with the DWP had me chased through the courts for two years I'm wondering what, exactly, they want me to put on this form I've got to fill in. The staff couldn't offer me any clues as to what they want to see... so this could get interesting.
Monday 17 January 2011
Xmas & New Year
So that's 2010 done and dusted and we're off in to 2011 with a flying start from the DWP. Do you think they've paid me any money? Of course not. Do you think the people at the job center know why? Of course not, they just direct you to the phones in the corner to ring up "Jobseekers Direct" so do you think they know why? Nope.
None of the people on the phone can actually access my account, which necessitates getting a supervisor to take a look at it and then call me back. I've no idea if we've even gotten to the "supervisor" stage of things but I do know we've not yet reaching "call me back" yet either.
So that made for an awesome Christmas & New Years didn't it? Of course the media is still, occasionally, reporting about the increase in unemployment figures, the state of the economy and how it's all the fault of the scroungers. But I've got to wonder... how many of those people are not actually recieving money despite being included in the figures? It's highly doubtful I'm the only one.
None of the people on the phone can actually access my account, which necessitates getting a supervisor to take a look at it and then call me back. I've no idea if we've even gotten to the "supervisor" stage of things but I do know we've not yet reaching "call me back" yet either.
So that made for an awesome Christmas & New Years didn't it? Of course the media is still, occasionally, reporting about the increase in unemployment figures, the state of the economy and how it's all the fault of the scroungers. But I've got to wonder... how many of those people are not actually recieving money despite being included in the figures? It's highly doubtful I'm the only one.
Tuesday 7 December 2010
Still no word
Still no word on payment. It looks like that's me done until after Christmas. I'm guessing that someone, somewhere thinks this'll improve the months budget or something.
Wednesday 1 December 2010
I'm no longer surprised
Had a letter through from my bank, it states my account is over its limit.
This in itself is a bit perplexing as to be honest I've been signing on and providing evidence of job hunting. Now I've had a single payment from them, but I guess asking about that disability interview means I'm now in a punishment phase.
I would phone them up but with the protection system they've put on the account (it was either that or denied signing on) means the helpline is useless and it's unlikley I'd get a supervisor on the phone when contacting the job center itself.
So for the time being I am
1. Including in the 'unemployed' statistics.
2. Called a scrounger by the media.
3. Not actually getting a penny from the government.
4. Will be expected to sign on again.
This in itself is a bit perplexing as to be honest I've been signing on and providing evidence of job hunting. Now I've had a single payment from them, but I guess asking about that disability interview means I'm now in a punishment phase.
I would phone them up but with the protection system they've put on the account (it was either that or denied signing on) means the helpline is useless and it's unlikley I'd get a supervisor on the phone when contacting the job center itself.
So for the time being I am
1. Including in the 'unemployed' statistics.
2. Called a scrounger by the media.
3. Not actually getting a penny from the government.
4. Will be expected to sign on again.
Saturday 27 November 2010
Liar, Liar, pants on fire!
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.
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.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)