Unemployed lady seeks legal advice over human rights issue.

Originally posted by mandroids
The work programme states it must be experience tailored to support your needs.

And in this case it is - obviously she needs the money, to get that money she needs to work...

Ignorance of human rights…

yes, you are

Originally posted by mandroids

Originally posted by CrikeyMagnet

Originally posted by mandroids
Let me make 2 valid points.

1, this work will not enhance her chances of finding the work she studied for. In fact, it’s an insult to a graduate.

2, would YOU enjoy being forced into work you knew would make you feel unhappy?

Isn’t that what ATS is all about…rights? Please refrain from tabloid ‘she gotta work’ posts.

1. We have to do lots of things that seem unhelpful in the short term. Should we just not do those things?
2. Happiness is irrelevant. Would that mean that if I wanted to be unemployed and supported for the rest of my life I could just go back to school to train for something I know no one will be hiring for?

Let me explain further. if she doesnt do this job, she may face losing her benefits and that is alo unfair. the work programme states the work must be 'tailored' to support your needs and a university graduate working in a dollar store is wasting her time. there is NO way around this.

Please explain to me why this is unfair? She is expecting to be supported by the taxpayer. Is it really unreasonable for the taxpayer to expect to find work in return? Particularly after a year?

Having a crappy job at some point in your life is a right of passage, but , it must be tough for youngsters nowadays. I was lucky when I graduated, there were lots of jobs around and it was unheard of that a graduate would be claiming unemployment benefit. So to have you expectations of a decent job disapear and replaced by a job in pound land must be very depressing.

Unfortunately, things have changed for the worse and this girl will now understand that life is not fair. Though what would really impress potential employers would be if she took the job, continued the volunteering and still looked for other work. Now that would look good on a CV.

I fear our American brothers are dealing in hypocrisy on this thread. They feel free to ‘occupy and spring’ those who they deem under foot ,but would like to see a university graduate work in a dollar store when the programme states ‘tailored’; this is unfair.


Dont tread on me...you, its OK to tread on, but not me...hmmm

Originally posted by Flavian

Please explain to me why this is unfair? She is expecting to be supported by the taxpayer. Is it really unreasonable for the taxpayer to expect to find work in return? Particularly after a year?

Nothing in this article say anything about the girl turning down paid work, She is upset because she was pulled out of one unpaid job in a museum in order to work UNPAID for poundland for 2 weeks.
The taxpayer paid for both things..

this is a subject i find most entertaining , governments complain about unemployment but id say at least 50% of people in the uk wont relocate or work down in jobs just to survive.

the whole system pays more to lazy people , students and junkies than what regular people (me) can earn. i work 40+ hours a week my wife does too plus we have kids and 'friends' of ours one works part time and his 'other half' doesnt work at all and they (with their kid) get 15000 more per year with top ups from the government than us working full time.

shocking

society is lazy and this sums it up

get working Cait Reilly you sponge!!!!!!

reply to post by davespanners


It isn't unpaid labour - she still gets her benefits if she does it. Why the hell should we have to support people that are too bone idle to work?

Look at the wider world at the moment. People everywhere are struggling and yet she expects preferential treatment. To be honest, if i was dictator, she would lose all entitlements simply for the having the cheek to try bringing this case to court in the first place.

I would also suggest that by doing this and getting this publicity, she really isn't helping her long term job prospects either. If she was a potential employee of mine i have to say that with that attitude i wouldn't touch her with a barge pole......

Nah i'm sorry but i've studied and am studying degrees, as complicated if not more than geology (Physics and Chemistry) but when i was on the dole (job-seekers allowance) inbetween the degrees i would happily have taken a job in a supermarket or fish and chip shop or anywhere to get me by until i found something more tailored to my skills. Instead i was lucky and found an apprenticeship with a chemical company. But seriously i would have taken a job in poundland! i was bored out of my mind after about a month on the dole and even poundland would be better than sitting on the dole scrounging other peoples money. Also with a degree in geology why doesn't she just move to Australia? i know i number of friends who have studied geology and got well paying jobs over there.

Originally posted by ken10
I don't know how this works but it looks to me that the government are effectively giving the owners of "poundland" about 10k per person per year.

If the government want to make you do voluntary work in the community, Fine. But to offer you around as slaves that profit another just seems wrong to me.

Another good and valid point.

reply to post by davespanners

She was told that she would then get an interview for an actual paid position there which never happened.

Good point. I actually read the article but missed that part. At the same time the govt. is effectively her employer until she gets a 'real' job, so they should be able to make her work wherever they want.

I hate to say this but I agree she needs to take the job at the retail store. A college undergraduate degree in geology will not take you far unless you go into teaching or go to grad school. However, retail stores tend to promote people with an college education to management positions even if their degree does not match what the position would entail. Outside of that though, if she has a chance to work, she needs to take it. You people are acting as if this would be the end all be all for her. Im sure she wont be working more than 40 hours a week, if volunteering is her passion she will find time to do it. She has an education that will not go away, but shes stuck until the demand changes. Until that happens she is not in a position to turn down a job because it is beneath her education level. I mean I know people with college educations that work on the weekends at jobs below their education level and their usual pay, because they need the extra income. You have to do, what you have to do. Sink or swim.

But this job pays nothing. she was already doing something [volunteer] that would enhance her CV more so than working in a pound/dollar store. I believe it was a museum. I hope she wins.

reply to post by mandroids


Unfortunately, that's the new thing being brought in. I know of a Poundland not far from me who are taking people on benefits on as volunteers. If they refuse to work for free, they lose their benefits. I can kind of see why, as it will prompt people to put everything into working.

I'm currently in University and finish this year, the first thing I'll do if I haven't already found a job in industry is apply to the likes of Poundland just to be in work and be grateful for it.

It only has to be temporary, and at least she'll be getting paid.

If you want to look into human rights, go look into the thousands of families who are homeless. Or the human rights of people in the US where it is illegal to feed the homeless.

reply to post by davespanners


I should always read the article before posting my knee jerk reactions. Anyway, after reading what you have said, it put's a different light on things. I can't believe they expect people to do un paid work in pound land. If the government are going to force people to work for their benefits there are so many other things people should be doing, working in museums is one. But there are also plenty of other things people could be doing to improve civic life rather than being exploited by Poundland.

reply to post by davespanners

Nothing in this article say anything about the girl turning down paid work, She is upset because she was pulled out of one unpaid job in a museum in order to work UNPAID for poundland for 2 weeks.
The taxpayer paid for both things..

Look, she receives benefits still after a year not working so yes she is being paid. Yes, i understand she had looked for voluntary work and has been doing some but the point is that she still relies on state handouts. Instead of voluntary work, how about paying your way and not expecting everyone else to pay it for you?

I genuinely do not understand why people are struggling with this concept.

Originally posted by mandroids
This morning I came across the case of Cait Reilly, who studied geology at university and is now unemployed. She may face losing her benefits if she refuses work at PoundLand. Effectively, a dollar store.

Her CV will not be enhanced by such work.

It is my understanding, concerning work programmes, that the work should be ‘tailored’ to meet your needs. This is an insult to the young lady and I hope her case is a landmark and precedent for others.

That is the most stupid post i've seen in awhile.

Really, you think having a reference for work will make her CV look no better than being unemployed? I'd sure as hell hire someone who takes work when they have none, no matter than what it is rather than sit around accepting handouts. Work can be tailored to the person but it can't fit everyone, nobody really wants to be tailored to working in Poundland but then someone has to do it.

I hope this person fails in her case and sense and sesibility is brought to order.

People have every right to not work anywhere you choose, but you don't have a choice to work where you please, nor should it be a stringless right to have money thrown at you.

Originally posted by scottlpool2003
reply to post by mandroids

 

Unfortunately, that's the new thing being brought in. I know of a Poundland not far from me who are taking people on benefits on as volunteers. If they refuse to work for free, they lose their benefits. I can kind of see why, as it will prompt people to put everything into working.

I'm currently in University and finish this year, the first thing I'll do if I haven't already found a job in industry is apply to the likes of Poundland just to be in work and be grateful for it.

It only has to be temporary, and at least she'll be getting paid.

If you want to look into human rights, go look into the thousands of families who are homeless. Or the human rights of people in the US where it is illegal to feed the homeless.

Your key point being PAID WORK. there is NOTHING wrong with legit work, wherever it may be, but when it is unpaid work then you MUST hold the government to their promise of it being 'tailored' to support your needs. and she was doing that at the museum. she is not lazy or a snob;neither am i 'Ignorant.'

Originally posted by mandroids
But this job pays nothing. she was already doing something [volunteer] that would enhance her CV more so than working in a pound/dollar store. I believe it was a museum. I hope she wins.

Me too.
I don't see the point in moving her from one unpaid job (the she enjoys) into another unpaid job that she doesn't want to do.
Yes we all have to do crap jobs and we all have to take jobs we don't like, but generally we'd get paid a fair wage for those jobs or get paid for the hours we work.

If she's unemployed but doing voluntary work, I can't see the logic in taking her from one and putting her in another, unless there is a chance of a job at poundland?

Hmmm

I read about this before and I know there are groups fighting this slave labour that is being introduced where you'll work essentially a full week but just get your unemployment benefit.
I think that it's an awful and totally unfair idea.

Instead of throwing money around and wasting money on crap (like trains), why don't the government invest in jobs? Why don't they stop reducing public sector jobs and use the money to keep them in work?
Why don't they pay for the unemployed people to be trained or go to colleges and Uni?

I dunno man...

Originally posted by Okandetre

Originally posted by mandroids
This morning I came across the case of Cait Reilly, who studied geology at university and is now unemployed. She may face losing her benefits if she refuses work at PoundLand. Effectively, a dollar store.

Her CV will not be enhanced by such work.

It is my understanding, concerning work programmes, that the work should be ‘tailored’ to meet your needs. This is an insult to the young lady and I hope her case is a landmark and precedent for others.

That is the most stupid post i've seen in awhile.

Really, you think having a reference for work will make her CV look no better than being unemployed? I'd sure as hell hire someone who takes work when they have none, no matter than what it is rather than sit around accepting handouts. Work can be tailored to the person but it can't fit everyone, nobody really wants to be tailored to working in Poundland but then someone has to do it.

I hope this person fails in her case and sense and sesibility is brought to order.

People have every right to not work anywhere you choose, but you don't have a choice to work where you please, nor should it be a stringless right to have money thrown at you.

1, she was already volunteering at a museum.
2, to call me stupid is nasty and i hope the mods remove your post.

reply to post by mandroids


nonsense!

complete and utter tripe, sorry! ... just because someone has went to uni does not mean they should be above the system if the do not have a job.

fact is, people that have never had a job , no matter what letters they have after their name will find it very hard, esspecialy today to find a job!...

If this person was as intelligent as you say, instead of arguing againt it, she would see that A. it gets her work experience and B. it gives her more money than JSA!

also, with a job they will find it alot easier to find a job.

I empthasise to a certain degree, as when i lived in blackpool i was forced to go for a job in preston, i had to accept the fact that i had to go for it or loose my money... even if the system was giving it to me from behind (mp got involved, i got an appology ... but this was over transport and expecting someone with no money to travel 40 miles a day for a job i was being forced to take).

the short of it is it is no human rights issue, tell whoever it is to wise up and go for the job! ... they are an idiot if they dont!

EDIT


@mandroids ... he never called you stupid ... for this simple fact i will also call you stupid ...

now go cry to someone!