Work TV

The NHS have been running some important national intiatives to cut down on the inappropriate use of their services. It is important to remeber the NHS 111 telephone number, for non-emergency issues.  

We love 'our' NHS, and the great work the doctors, nurses and all the support staff do. As we intend working with the NHS much more in the future we thought we would introduce you to this intiative in Colchester.  

Do see the video below:

Doctors urge local people to use pharmacists more as ‘yellow men’ visit Colchester

Local people across north east Essex are being encouraged to make greater use of pharmacies for the treatment of minor illness, and to avoid using A&E except for life-threatening emergencies.

Doctors at the NHS North East Essex Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) say that during the winter, hospital emergency departments and local GPs are under significant pressure with people coming in with coughs and colds. 

They add that a lot of that pressure could be relieved if people use pharmacies more.

Their calls come as a group of yellow men visited Lion Walk in Colchester on Thursday 18 December to highlight the alternatives to going to A&E.

These seven-foot tall ‘yellow men’ depict a range of illnesses and injuries and are part of the CCG’s winter campaign to help people get the best out of the NHS.

Some GREAT news today is, we have added the Trussell Trust, one [if not the] UK's most successful social enterprises. 

From the Trussell Trust in their own words:    

The Trussell Trust runs a network of over 400 foodbanks across the UK. Every day people in the UK go hungry for reasons ranging from redundancy to receiving an unexpected bill on a low income. Trussell Trust foodbanks provide a minimum of three days emergency food and support to people experiencing crisis in the UK. Foodbanks also make time to chat and to signpost clients to other helpful services.

Everyone who comes to a Trussell Trust foodbank has been referred by a front-line care professional, such as a doctor or social worker. If you are in need of emergency food, please follow this link to our Foodbank Map – from here you will be able to find the contact details for your nearest foodbank, who will be able to talk to you about who refers to them in your area: http://www.trusselltrust.org/map ”

Christmas is a time of year where that rotund chap in red comes down the chimney and gives people lots of presents (if you have been good of course). However, it also has another meaning for the ABC. It means it is time to get ready to review the accounts for SEETEC BUSINESS TECHNOLOGY CENTRE LIMITED Registered Address: 75/77 Main Road, Hockley, Essex, SS5 4RG, an Essex based - Work Programme provider.

Your author was in fact one of the first people on the 'Work Programme' and our experiences working with the Jobcentre Plus and Seetec, were one of the reasons that the founder saw a need for an Association to help those on State Pensions & Benefits.

Our own experiences of Seetec’s were mixed. But first some general information... 

The Human Rights Act 1998 (also known as the Act or the HRA) came into force in the United Kingdom in October 2000. It is composed of a series of sections that have the effect of codifying the protections in the European Convention on Human Rights into UK law. All public bodies (such as courts, police, local governments, hospitals, publicly funded schools, and others) and other bodies carrying out public functions have to comply with the Convention rights. This means, among other things, that individuals can take human rights cases in domestic courts; they no longer have to go to Strasbourg to argue their case in the European Court of Human Rights. The Act sets out the fundamental rights and freedoms that individuals in the UK have access to.

The sad thing about a lot of EU legislation, is that it appears, that it is not difficult to get round it, if you are determined enough? This is one reason we are vehemently opposed to a UK ‘Bill of Rights’  which if written by the present government may mean you have NO rights, or few that cannot be taken away if need be.

The government uses phrases such as: The Mandatory Work Programme is voluntary but if you fail to take part in it, you may be subject to a sanction. The Work Experience programme is different in that it is voluntary to join, but it becomes compulsory after you have accepted an offer of a place.

In forcing you, to sign away your rights to say ‘no thank you’ in in this way, claiming your actions are voluntary - but in reality where your actions are taken under the threat of having your benefits stopped…. The government has successfully found a way to force people to do things they don’t want to do, or feel they have no need to do, when in reality claimants have had about as much choice, as a participant of not taking part, on the WW2 Bataan Death March!

The National Minimum Wage requires that “workers” and “employees”, as defined, receive a minimum rate of pay set under regulations. Those on work placement schemes designed to help [?] those on benefits into work are neither “workers” nor “employees” and therefore the National Minimum Wage legislation does not apply. This is because these arrangements, including schemes such as the now discontinued Flexible New Deal or the existing Work Programme, do not constitute a “contract” as such, but are simply a requirement linked to ongoing receipt of Jobseeker’s Allowance (JSA).

Many benefit claimants don’t lack a work ethic, and they don’t need to work as what is in effect ‘slave labour’. The use of unpaid labour in the economy has driven down wages in real terms by 15% since 2008, however this has also eroded the tax base, the money that pays the wages of those in the public sector. To prevent those working in that sector from withdrawing their labour, the Conservative government are talking about future draconian legislation to stop public sector workers from striking.

The Nazis called their inter-war years scheme ‘The Work Programme’ and you can guess how voluntary that was! Although I use the term ‘slave’ that term is not technically correct. If your car is stolen, the thief cannot steal the ‘Title’ which you retain. As people are forced to work for no wages - their ‘title’ is not sold and they are not ‘slaves’. Indenture servitude, is where people work without pay but for a fixed period after which they are given a benefit - cow and a bit of land. The British Empire built on slavery eventually banned the practise, however slavery carried on with some legal adjustment to unpaid workers status. Slavery lost its appeal as a business model as with growing unrest, the cost of controlling the reluctant participants was a disincetive. There was a growing desire to kill those who benefitted from the slaves explotation. 

A major catalyst for the French Revolution was during a period of economic turmoil, French peasants were forced to work for no pay on a road building program. Louis XVI was advised by his finance minister not to operate this scheme. and the rest they say is history. Many reasons are considered responsible for the French Revolution by historians, but forced labour was a factor that ignited the revolutionary uprising. History has shown the French pesant classes, are not as 'docile' as their British equivalents. 

BACK TO THE PRESENT.

I refused to sign the Work Programme agreement, and as such my manager refused to pay for any assistance such as Travel-to-Interview expenses or clothing. I eventually threatened to take Seetec to Court, and my manager claimed she had said had such help was available. This was not true. 

However, my work programme adviser had asked the manager for clarification about my treatment, and there was evidence now in the database my adviser had written, that could not be denied, and I had a copy. I was ‘parked’ to use the expression in use at the time, and far from helping me, Seetec were hindering my efforts to find work.

Despite making a formal complaint to the relevant Seetec director, my complaint, was to all intents and purposes not acted on Certainly not with my involvement. The manager left, a short time afterwards, though there was never any indication of whether this was related to my experiences?

Time spent at Seetec was boring and frankly a waste of time. I was forced to carry out tasks that simply took up all my time. I was put on a basic ‘learn to use a computer course’ when I had run a software company in South Africa and so on. It seemed a complete waste of money, though later things did improve (a little). 

Seetec did become much more generous clothing wise, and with other help. Despite that a £5 budget for my interview shoes, nearly crippled me for life.

I was denied a fair hearing and the opportunity for an explanation [reasons] which is very much a requirement in EU Law. 

Life has been good to Seetec since I moved on. In 2010 they had just over thirteen million pounds in the bank, and today it is over forty five and a half million. Recessions are not all bad it would seem? 

At a time many businesses have struggled or failed, Seetec fortunes have skyrocketed.

Those who complain about their high taxes, and air their frustration about their wages funding (what they are being told are the feckless and the lazy) they should certainly note this example below:

So what are the public getting for the millions ploughed into organisations like Seetec and the other Work Programme providers whose results in getting people into work?

Here is an example from that time of a quiz from a Seetec training course

You realize you are going to be late for an interview, do you..

1.       Forget it , there’ll be other opportunities
2.       Call the company straight away and explain the situation
3.       Arrive as soon as you can

If the position you are applying for offers a casual dress code, how would you dress for the interview?

1.        Smart
2.        Casual
3.        Whatever’s clean
4.        Low cut blouse and a short skirt

On the day of the interview, you have eaten a tuna sandwich for your lunch. Before leaving the house, do you,,,

1.       Rinse your mouth with water
2.       Clean your teeth
3.       Eat some garlic to cover the smell of the tuna

Are the millions being given to companies like Seetec really providing value for money, or is the government more focused on transferring tax payer’s wealth into the private sector, supplying unpaid labour, and driving down the wages of those in work benefitting their donor base, creating higher profits and bonuses for capitalists, who own most of our economy.

The debate will continue, but here at least are some figures to help you form an opinion.   

With the election opening shots for 2015 being fired, we are preparing for the worse as all sides lie, conceal and obfuscate the facts in a bid to win votes. Nothing new in that you might say, however; it just seems that things are getting worse in that department. 

One such ‘hot’ area for divided opinions will be immigration, when we have found some interesting facts that might dispel some of the 'low ground mist' over the subject.

The replacement [human being] rate needed to resupply our population at its current level, is 2.1 per woman. Higher in the developing world as more children die. The birth rate in the EU is 1.59. These people are needed to pay the next generations bills for health and retirement costs.

Short of this next generation of taxpayers, the only thing we can do is import them. We need high and sustained levels of immigration. The Office of Budgetary Responsibility estimates the UK will need 140,000 immigrants a year in order to meet these rising costs.

The problem with immigration is the benefits come in the medium and long term. Encouraging smart students with science, computing and engineering degrees to study, then live in the UK needs investment and forward thinking. In the short term migrant workers may need benefits to get established.

Towns that attract these people are going to have a short-term issue with a shortage of schools, housing and health care. However if we want a benefit system that can afford to provide the help and support most people want and expect, this influx of workers is needed.

In the long term conditions in the EU will even out. Right now the under developed areas of the EU will not produce the conditions to create work for all their citizens and inevitably people want to come the more prosperous areas, an effect rather like water on a tin tray.

If we can see beyond the pockets where high immigration has caused tensions and look at an EU in ten to fifteen years’ time, a lot of these immediate issues will have smoothed themselves out. Or so we hope. 

If companies can move their cash around the EU then workers have to be able to move too. Or companies can hold them, to ransom, threatening to move but leaving the workers behind, if they will not agree to lower wages or poorer terms.

The energy wars between China and the US are already causing tensions, and the EU and Russia are locked in conflict in Ukraine. The UK with its dwindling army of a mere 80,000 odd soldiers and a service based economy could never mix it up alone with the worlds superpowers of tomorrow. We are in a connected world and although we understand people will have short term frustration over immigration – long term we need to attract people and remain in the EU.

If we scrapped the benefits system we could turn off the immigration flow, but what will the vast majority of citizens live on in old age? The most expensive healthcare system in the world is in the USA and despite its faults, the Health Service is one of our nations great assets. To fund it we need to accept that immigration is needed. As they say however the devil may be 'in the detail'.  How much is acceptable and under what terms? 

New Years is a time to make resolutions.

To save not spend but how easy will that be?

CPI stands for Consumer Price Index - a way of measuring prices. It is used by the Bank of England that controls the amount of money in circulation in order to stabilise prices. A basket of goods make up the CPI and is used to base decisions on. Once upon a time the numbers of bricks used to be counted at the UKs largest brickworks. The brickworks produced a steady stream of new bricks and measuring the number in stock would give an indication of how much house building was going on. Of course since those days, computers can crunch massive amonts of data and arrive at figures one hopes are more up to the minuet and more reliable. 

So what should we be spending for those commiitted to living more frugally and cutting debts and saving. This is what the average member of society spends:

The CPI is an important target as the Bank of England has an explicit inflation target of 2 per cent to stick too. According to bestselling author, John Lanchester, the Joseph Rowntree Foundation has published these figures for the last five years. Childcare has risen twice as fast as inflation at 37 per cent. Rent and social housing has gone up by 26 per cent. Food costs have increased by 24 per cent. Energy costs are 39 per cent more, and public transport is up by 30 per cent.  

No wonder those on low incomes are suffering. It is understandable that those on low incomes need state help (Tax Credits,or Housing Benefit) and why those in the private sector are driving up prices far above (it would appear) the official CPI inflation figures. 

We are a benefit dependant society, not because of a culture of laziness but because wages and their purchasing power has fallen since the 70s. The government in recent years has been driving down the value of benefits to make work pay, when in reality rising wages are what is needed.  If wages rise however, firms become less profitable and the owners and shareholders and managers (whose pay is linked to profitability) stand to lose out. The alternative is getting those in work to subsidise their own jobs and those of their fellow workers by providing funding [via tax] that subsidises those on low incomes.

We contacted Baroness Jenkin about her recent remarks about poor people and their cooking skills. Was it a Freudian slip, or simply a bit of press miss-reporting - commets 'taken out of context' to use the often quoted vernacular. Follow these links and see what you think?

Dear Mr Collyer

Thank you for your email sent to my husband (Bernard Jenkins MP).

You may be interested to read a full copy of the report and its recommendations, many of which got lost in the noise around my remarks.

https://foodpovertyinquiry.files.wordpress.com/2014/12/food-poverty-feeding-britain-final.pdf

You make a number of good points.  The reason I knew my bowl of porridge cost  4p is that every year for the past five years I have taken up a challenge to live on a pound a day (food and drink only) for five days and I have to budget very stringently.

https://www.livebelowtheline.com/uk/thankyou

Of course I can’t begin to know properly what it is like to live in poverty but the experience has taught me quite a lot about budgeting, as well as food waste.

Forgive me if I don’t respond in detail to your points, but I have a lot of emails to get through.

I have learned a lot over the past year of travelling round the country, meeting individuals and organisations which do amazing things in their communities.

Yours sincerely,

Anne Jenkin

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/foodanddrink/foodanddrinknews/11299144/When-did-Britain-lose-the-ability-to-cook.html

Image courtesy of the Colchester Gazette

The effects capping of benefits can clearly be seen in what is happening to London residents, such as those living in the New Era Estate. Tenants are being pushed out of their homes so that speculators can sell or let these properties, trippling rents overnight.

All this behaviour has been seen before, and it takes one back to another era of (coincidentally) Conservative government, when 'bad landlordism' was given the name Rachmanism.

From Wikipedia - Peter Rachman (1919 – 29 November 1962) was a landlord in the Notting Hill area of London in the 1950s and early 1960s, who became notorious for his exploitation of his tenants. The word "Rachmanism" entered the Oxford English Dictionary as a synonym for the exploitation and intimidation of tenants.

In order to maximise his rental income from the properties in Notting Hill, he is said to have driven out the—mostly white—sitting tenants, who had statutory protection against high rent increases, and then filled the properties with recent immigrants from the West Indies. New tenants did not have the same protection under the law as had the previous ones, and so could be charged any amount Rachman wished. Most of the new tenants were West Indian immigrants who had no choice but to accept the high rents, as it was difficult for them to obtain housing in London at the time. Indeed, Rachman's initial reputation, which he even promoted in the media, was as someone who could help to find and provide accommodation for immigrants.

According to his biographer, Shirley Green, parts of the traditional Rachman story, such as the use of violence to drive away the sitting tenants (described by the press as "Rachman Terror Tactics"), may be mythical. More devious methods may have been used, such as moving the protected tenants in a smaller concentration of properties or buying them out, in order to minimise the number of tenancies with statutory rent controls. Houses were also subdivided into a number of flats in order to increase the number of tenancies without rent controls. Rachman who died age 48 of a heart attack, later became famous as a result of the Profumo scandal.

Ironically today New Era estate residents are fighting their own battle, (according to the Hoxteth Post) battling a landlord trying to achieve much the same objective. Buying up properties with sitting tenants then inflating the rents and driving them out of their homes. 

Westbrook Partners, the US property firm that owns the New Era estate, has indicated to Hackney Council that it plans to push ahead with its original development plans and raise rents to “market value”. When Westbrook Partners and the Benyon Estate bought the estate in April this year, residents were told they would be building penthouse apartments and refurbishing the existing flats.

They were also informed that to fund the development their rent would increase from £600 to £2,400 a month. Unable to afford the rise, 93 families protested against the plans, and with the help of ward councillors, secured a deal which delayed the rent increases and refurbishments until 2016. But Lindsey Garrett, one of the leaders of the campaign to save New Era, said that of the 93 flats, all but seven or eight were rented on contracts with two-week break clauses, meaning families could be evicted before Christmas.

The earlier promises about no new rent rises had never been formalised. Last Thursday, the Benyon Estate, owned by Richard Benyon, the Conservative MP, announced it was selling its 10 per cent stake in the estate.

Residents had mounted a highly publicised campaign, including a protest march with comedian Russell Brand, to force Benyon’s withdrawal from the estate. Comedian Russell Brand led protests last Saturday in a bid to save the New Era residents from eviction. Philip Glanville, the housing cabinet member, and other councillors delivered letters to residents on Saturday explaining the news the council had received from Westbrook Partners. The letters stated: “Since this week’s departure of the Benyon Estate, we understand the council have now been informed that Westbrook no longer plan to honour [the deal] and have been told that their plan is to refurbish the current estate in its entirety and then rent all the properties without secure tenancies at market rent levels with no affordable housing.” Danielle Molinari, another leader of the campaign said: “We were just breaking down when we found out. This has been a knock, but we are not going anywhere.”

She added: “Westbrook can threaten us as much as they like but we have everything to protect; our families, our children and our homes. We’re not going to go without a fight, because we have nowhere to go.” The estate was built in the 1930s to provide affordable housing for all, but has become sought after by investors because of its proximity to the fashionable location of Shoreditch.

On Sunday, Westbrook Partners announced the appointment of property services firm Knight Frank to manage the estate, in place of Benyon. Westbrook Partners was branded as “predatory landlords” in April this year when they invested in 44 buildings housing low-income families in New York, where they delayed repairs and raised the rent.

It all sounds rather familiar, and is hardly going to assist the government, whose arguments that benefit capping is fair to hardworking taxpayers, when in reality, driving people out of their homes, is benefitting those British and overseas investors, who want to make a fast profit, in a manner that Peter Rachman would have fully understood and most likely approved of.

Article Compiled courtesy of Wikipedia and the Hoxteth Post

The Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne will give his annual Autumn Statement to Parliament on 3 December 2014. The statement provides an update on the government’s plans for the economy based on the latest forecasts from the Office for Budget Responsibility. These forecasts will be published alongside the Autumn Statement on 3 December.

George Osborne has already said he is aiming at tax credits and benefits in new squeeze on working poor a contrast to Ed Miliband’s promise to easy the cost of living crisis for working class people

A re-elected Tory government would hit 10m households with a two-year freeze on benefits and tax credits in a bid to cut £3bn a year from the welfare budget.

The freeze will hit the poorest third in society most and see in-work families with children lose as much as £490 a year in child benefit and tax credits. The average loss will be £300 a year per household but this loss could vary across different families.

Osborne has still to find a further £9bn in welfare cuts in the first two years of the next parliament. Osborne also said he would cut general departmental spending by a further £13bn in the first two years of the parliament – enough, alongside growth, to put the overall budget in surplus by 2018. He said the latest Treasury estimate calculated £25bn was needed overall to eliminate the deficit.

Osborne said a Tory government would cut the maximum benefits a household could claim in a year from £26,000 to £23,000.

The Chancellor has also said he would seek to end youth unemployment by giving unemployed 18 to 21-year-olds six months to find work or training before their jobseeker’s allowance would be withdrawn.

According to the Independent Newspaper the Chancellor will have to borrow as much as £75bm more over the next five years. Ed Miliband, is blaming the Government for lost revenues due to their policies.

Falling North Sea oil prices, but most importantly the loss of tax receipts from falling wages and ballooning social security payments are at the heart of the Chancellors problems.

According to the Independent Newspaper, in a highly critical report, Maggie Atkinson, the Governments Children’s Commissioner says that deficit-reduction policies have cut the incomes of single parents and poor working families by as much as 10 per cent. The cuts are in breach of the commitments to the United Nations, the Governments Children’s Commissioner warns.  

For those wanting to hear what a potential future PM might have to say. The Fabian New Year Conference 2015, will take place on Saturday 17 January, at the Institute of Education (please see the Events section).

Ed Miliband MP, leader of the Labour party, will be the keynote speaker at this year’s conference.

Labour are edging ahead in our favorite poll, Electorial Calculus, however they are still short of a majority by ten seats. Much can change however, but this is a good opportunity to see [and hear] Ed Miliband in the flesh. There will be other guest speakers to be announced shortly. 

Concession tickets will be available for those who are retired, unemployed, registered disabled, or full-time students.

MP Debbie Abrahams has revealed that Oxford academics will report next month on what has happened to half a million jobseekers allowance (JSA) claimants who were sanctioned and subsequently disappeared from official employment statistics.

The Oxford University study led by Professor David Stuckler and Dr. Rachel Loopstra, is in the process of analysing what has happened to the 4.5 million people who have been sanctioned under the Coalition government's sanctioning regime. According to the Universal Declaration signed by the UK with the EU, Sanctions were meant to be 'No more than necessary'. 

The research suggests more than 500,000 Job Seekers Allowance claimants have ‘disappeared’ since the sanctions regime was toughened in October 2012.

This could mean the claimant count - one of the ways of measuring unemployment – is actually 20,000 to 30,000 lower per month than it should be. 

Stuckler and Loopstra, who have analysed data from 375 local authority areas have said they are ‘shocked’ by what they have found so far.

We are looking forward to these findings. We found that unpaid Workfare participants forced to work without wages were being counted as 'in-work'. When we asked the Office of National Statistics (ONS) about this they said they were contibuting to the economy.  Whether Mandatory Work experience without wages is really a 'job' is a point of debate. We look forward to hearing more from Professor David Stuckler and Dr. Rachel Loopstra in due course. 

Origional Article from turn2us.org  Benefits and Work newsletter