Dole claimants may have to work in community

-Trek-

What I don't understand is that the jobs they want people to do are jobs that people are already being paid a decent wage to do. So the plan is to make more people redundant, sounds like a fainna fail plan all right.

geeky

Ummm... what if someone has a job interview, or wants to go out looking for a job? Do they then lose their payment because of it?

This smacks of something entirely half-baked, and not just because Éamon Ó Cuív is the one talking about it.

Amhran Nua

geeky wrote: »

This smacks of something entirely half-baked, and not just because Éamon Ó Cuív is the one talking about it.

This is typical Irish beaurocracy thinking I'm afraid, first change the rules to classify people who have paid vast amounts of money in taxes as long term unemployed, then cut their benefits if they don't work for the bread they have already paid for. Arrogant and high handed dictums being handed down by people who feel themselves untouchable, cheered on by the red top brigade.

Wagon

Good idea. I wouldn't have minded doing something when i was on the dole. Would have been nice to feel like i was earning.

But this will only work if they keep businesses a mile away from the scheme.

EDIT: actually no. This isnt going to work at all.

Blindpew2

This, like everything introduced by Fianna Fail will come to nothing. Probably a few senators will get their holiday homes painted and a few Fás bosses will have their lawns mowed and get a few walls built. Other than that I don't see anything else happening.

gizmo

Amhran Nua wrote: »

How does that invalidate many of the concerns on the thread? The rules for JB were only changed in 2008 to limit the length of time you can receive JB to one year, meaning even if you had put in tens of thousands of euros into PRSI you were only going to get a fraction of that back. All those people paying faithfully for social insurance for years were failed entirely by a bankrupt government.

Well I'm of the opinion that if you're out of work, and I mean any work, for over a year, then there is something wrong. Either you don't want to work or you're being too picky about the work you want to do. In either case, the government should no longer be obliged to support you.

You also seem to misunderstand what PRSI is, it's not some personal fund that you pay into for your own benefit, it's a social contribution. You're not automatically entitled to it all back should you find yourself in one of the above circumstances.

Amhran Nua wrote: »

This means that JA recipients could be absolutely anyone from long term welfare sponges (a tiny number) to people who have worked for decades and have fallen on hard times, which given employment levels during the boom would be the vast majority of JA recipients.

While I don't believe everyone on JA is a "long term welfare sponge" I also don't believe they make up a tiny number either, that's besides the point anyway. As I said, even with the changes, if someone has been in work for decades and can't find a job in over a year then I don't think it's asking too much for them to take part in this scheme. Anyway, the scheme will more than likely be aimed at those on long term welfare and with only 10,000 position, even by your logic there should be plenty of people willing to take them.

skregs

PAULWATSON wrote: »

I know a man who has worked for 30 years, now he is on the dole.

You little bigots would now suggest that he should be degraded to picking up litter in town centers with a high vis vest on his back.

CLOWNS, the lot of you.

So being on the dole isn't degrading but helping the community is?
I bet your mother is so proud

flutered

Greyfox wrote: »

I think it's an absolutely superb idea, I actually felt happy after watching the news for the first time in years!

then you must be one of the unthouchable public servants who cannot loose their job, keep looking over your shoulder, methinks that the ecb and the imf are starting to rev up their shredders.

Fluorescence

drunkmonkey wrote: »

I don't get the people who say they can't find a Job, I walked through dublin today and say at least 3 places with signs looking for bar staff and waiting staff. Yet there's people saying they can't find anything. I really don't think there looking hard enough, a job is a job. Get one and it's a lot easier to find another one.

I didn't read through the rest of the thread so I don't know if anyone already replied to this but.. I'm a 19 year old student and I'm finding it impossible to find work at the moment. I see all those signs and apply in all those shops and bars and no one will hire me because I don't have 3 years experience behind a till. Nowhere wants to be the place that gives you experience, God no. Not even if I work for free. So take your assumptions and go somewhere far away with them :mad:

My name is URL

Trekmad wrote: »

What I don't understand is that the jobs they want people to do are jobs that people are already being paid a decent wage to do. So the plan is to make more people redundant, sounds like a fainna fail plan all right.

To be fair the placements sound like ones which will benefit communities first and foremost. Of course the fact is that people could be fully employed to do the same jobs but the reality is that many positions have fallen to the wayside over the last year.. villages are becoming dilapidated and bleak to pass by.. I think it's a great idea personally, and would be happy to partake if I was made redundant.. once of course that it genuinely helps those involved to secure future employment

Amhran Nua

gizmo wrote: »

Well I'm of the opinion that if you're out of work, and I mean any work, for over a year, then there is something wrong.

There is something wrong. The jobs aren't there. When the jobs were there the long term unemployment rate was miniscule.

gizmo wrote: »

Either you don't want to work or you're being too picky about the work you want to do. In either case, the government should no longer be obliged to support you.

If you've paid your PRSI you can be certain that the government at a minimum owes you your money back.

gizmo wrote: »

You also seem to misunderstand what PRSI is, it's not some personal fund that you pay into for your own benefit, it's a social contribution. You're not automatically entitled to it all back should you find yourself in one of the above circumstances.

Actually its you who is misled about what PRSI is, part unemployment assistance, part pension (that's the class S the self employed pay which is why they go straight on to JA or SWA, a very much minor part of the overall payment). You used to entitled to get it back until 2008 when the government decided it was more important to prop up Anglo than honour its half of the social agreement.

gizmo wrote: »

While I don't believe everyone on JA is a "long term welfare sponge" I also don't believe they make up a tiny number either, that's besides the point anyway.

It doesn't really matter whether or not you believe it, look up the statistics from the CSO for the boom years. Thats hard reality there. Due to the reclassification the number on JA has been growing exponentially.

gizmo wrote: »

As I said, even with the changes, if someone has been in work for decades and can't find a job in over a year then I don't think it's asking too much for them to take part in this scheme.

I don't think its too much to ask that they get back what they put in, but hey, as long as people think that the majority of welfare recipients are scrounging bums let justice go hang.

gizmo wrote: »

Anyway, the scheme will more than likely be aimed at those on long term welfare and with only 10,000 position, even by your logic there should be plenty of people willing to take them.

First of all its not optional, second of all as others have pointed out if they want people to work they should employ them properly with full pay rather than treating people down on their luck as a handy pool of forced labour shoulder to shoulder with petty criminals, and third of all it is mooted to be expanded to 40,000.

-Trek-

I'm beginning to think fianna fail advisors are reading boards and picking the worst possible suggestion posted as their new half ass - ill thought out scheme, as they seem to be on a streak this week.

It should have being brought in when there was full employment available.

Which would have sorted out the abusers in the system.

Who will police it, isn't the department who are responsible for creating jobs short staffed, which is a higher priority.

It's just another idea which looks good on paper.
Stir up a bit and take some light of one of their own crooks, a Mr C.

Typical of this government.

Blah......

Donkey Oaty

Trekmad wrote: »

I'm beginning to think fianna fail advisors are reading boards and picking the worst possible suggestion posted as their new half ass - ill thought out scheme, as they seem to be on a streak this week.

Have they denied members of the Orange Order the right to vote yet, or is that being saved for closer to the election?

bryaner

gizmo wrote: »

Well I'm of the opinion that if you're out of work, and I mean any work, for over a year, then there is something wrong. Either you don't want to work or you're being too picky about the work you want to do. In either case, the government should no longer be obliged to support you.

You also seem to misunderstand what PRSI is, it's not some personal fund that you pay into for your own benefit, it's a social contribution. You're not automatically entitled to it all back should you find yourself in one of the above circumstances.


While I don't believe everyone on JA is a "long term welfare sponge" I also don't believe they make up a tiny number either, that's besides the point anyway. As I said, even with the changes, if someone has been in work for decades and can't find a job in over a year then I don't think it's asking too much for them to take part in this scheme. Anyway, the scheme will more than likely be aimed at those on long term welfare and with only 10,000 position, even by your logic there should be plenty of people willing to take them.

Ok Biffo.

-Trek-

Donkey Oaty wrote: »

Have they denied members of the Orange Order the right to vote yet, or is that being saved for closer to the election?

I don't know, depends if it was a good or bad suggestion, haven't read that thread.
I was referring to the motor tax debacle.

gizmo

Amhran Nua wrote: »

There is something wrong. The jobs aren't there. When the jobs were there the long term unemployment rate was miniscule.

When the jobs were there there were still around 100,000 people on the dole. This is despite the fact we had the influx of Europeans into our workforce who could still find jobs, even multiple jobs in some cases.

Amhran Nua wrote: »

If you've paid your PRSI you can be certain that the government at a minimum owes you your money back.

Again I completely disagree with this, it's a social contribution not your own personal guaranteed savings account.

Amhran Nua wrote: »

Actually its you who is misled about what PRSI is, part unemployment assistance, part pension (that's the class S the self employed pay which is why they go straight on to JA or SWA, a very much minor part of the overall payment). You used to entitled to get it back until 2008 when the government decided it was more important to prop up Anglo than honour its half of the social agreement.

Outside of the pension aspect for the Class S workers I fail to see how every other aspect isn't exactly what I stated it to be, a social contribution. Part of your PRSI payment is also a health contribution yet it also does not entitle you to treatment up to the value of what you have paid in.

Amhran Nua wrote: »

First of all its not optional, second of all as others have pointed out if they want people to work they should employ them properly with full pay rather than treating people down on their luck as a handy pool of forced labour shoulder to shoulder with petty criminals, and third of all it is mooted to be expanded to 40,000.

€210 for 19.5 hours work is pretty damn good for someone with no job and none of the work described sounds like forced labour to me. Even if one was to take the "worst" job available such as street cleaner, there are plenty of people around the country who do that as their job rather than face unemployment. Why do the long term unemployed feel they are better than that? Also where did the petty criminals come into it? As for the numbers involved in the scheme, the expansion was mentioned if the scheme was successful, I guess time will tell.

Amhran Nua

gizmo wrote: »

When the jobs were there there were still around 100,000 people on the dole. This is despite the fact we had the influx of Europeans into our workforce who could still find jobs, even multiple jobs in some cases.

As has already been explained twice in this thread, there is a significant difference between unemployment and long term unemployment. 4% in the boom is normal churn, temp workers between jobs and so on, and is perfectly healthy (some say essential) for an economy. Long term unemployment is a different kettle of fish, and was around the 1% mark including those on disability etc.

gizmo wrote: »

Again I completely disagree with this, it's a social contribution not your own personal guaranteed savings account.

Every tax you pay is a social contribution. PRSI was earmarked specifically for welfare assistance. Thats why the stamp system existed.

gizmo wrote: »

Part of your PRSI payment is also a health contribution yet it also does not entitle you to treatment up to the value of what you have paid in.

Do you really believe the entire €14 billion health sector is paid for out of PRSI?

gizmo wrote: »

€210 for 19.5 hours work is pretty damn good for someone with no job and none of the work described sounds like forced labour to me.

Sure, do the work or don't get any money and starve, thats not forced at all. No health benefits. No contributions towards PRSI. No employment rights. No possibility of advancement. How anyone could describe this as a good idea is far beyond me.

gizmo wrote: »

Even if one was to take the "worst" job available such as street cleaner, there are plenty of people around the country who do that as their job rather than face unemployment.

Street cleaners get paid pretty well actually.

gizmo wrote: »

Why do the long term unemployed feel they are better than that?

Did anything I wrote sink in here - what used to be long term unemployed has been redefined completely to encompass a lot more people. And whatever the case its not right to force people to do work they should be properly compensated for.

You can deny that this is the most comprehensive failure of the government to date as long as you want, it won't change the reality.

gizmo wrote: »

Also where did the petty criminals come into it?

Community service.

gizmo wrote: »

As for the numbers involved in the scheme, the expansion was mentioned if the scheme was successful, I guess time will tell.

Well before time tells us anything, maybe you could tell us how exactly it might fail? People will choose to be thrown out on the street begging instead?

starbelgrade

The only way I could see this working as a form of "social inclusion", would be if it were offered soley to those of the long-term unemployed who have no underlying entitlement to social welfare payments.

It would at least provide the option of some part time work & an income.

poppyvalley

what about a guy who's lost his job..the wifes working...and he's at home minding the kids. What does he do with the kids if he has to go on one of these schemes? Pay someone to mind them?

Terry

poppyvalley wrote: »

what about a guy who's lost his job..the wifes working...and he's at home minding the kids. What does he do with the kids if he has to go on one of these schemes? Pay someone to mind them?

Yes and no.
He will be sent to a town five miles down to road to mind some children (he's experienced at this, don't you know), and someone from 10 miles away in the other direction will be tasked with minding the first person's child.
That'll teach that bastard not to lose his job due to his government failing him.

I now have a question for those at the start of the thread who felt they were above sweeping the streets.
You know how you've been unemployed for over a year due to your prestigious arts degree from Trinity not really being worth a fúck?
Why are you exempt from sweeping streets, when it's quite obvious that nobody will employ you?
Could you also explain why this, let's say philosophy degree, is worth more than the wage of a person who regularly cleaned up your puke when you were asking questions such as why are we here? and the like?

To those with practical degrees, what make you think you are better than an average street sweeper when you are actually not currently employed, and the street sweeper is?

round tower huntsman

i'd have no problem with this as long as expenses are paid. eg travel,child care.......

gizmo

Amhran Nua wrote: »

Every tax you pay is a social contribution. PRSI was earmarked specifically for welfare assistance. Thats why the stamp system existed.

I don't disagree with this in the slightest, my sole point is that people shouldn't feel the right to stay on social welfare long term because they feel they've earned the right through paying for social welfare in the past.

Amhran Nua wrote: »

Do you really believe the entire €14 billion health sector is paid for out of PRSI?

I never said it did, I merely made reference to it in the context of the above point.

Amhran Nua wrote: »

Sure, do the work or don't get any money and starve, thats not forced at all. No health benefits. No contributions towards PRSI. No employment rights. No possibility of advancement. How anyone could describe this as a good idea is far beyond me.

The term "forced labour" immediately brings to mind other terms which have severely negative connotations, none of which usually result in the recipient earning above minimum wage. The other factors haven't been mentioned in the plan thus far so we have no idea how they would be applied. It's also worth bearing in mind that this is not a long term solution to the problem, in which case the likes of career advancement would be more important.

Amhran Nua wrote: »

Street cleaners get paid pretty well actually.

I'm sure they do, my point was in relation to the people who felt they'd be "degrading" themselves doing it. Terry has dealt with this issue in further detail in the post above and is more along the lines of what I was getting at originally i.e. those who could get work but are being too picky based on their qualifications.

Amhran Nua wrote: »

Did anything I wrote sink in here - what used to be long term unemployed has been redefined completely to encompass a lot more people. And whatever the case its not right to force people to do work they should be properly compensated for.

Again I think being paid above minimum wage for the work alluded to in the article is being fairly compensated.

Amhran Nua wrote: »

You can deny that this is the most comprehensive failure of the government to date as long as you want, it won't change the reality.

I'm not denying that in the slightest, however it should be pointed out that the social welfare system is far more generous at home than it is in the UK but that's an issue for a different thread.

Amhran Nua wrote: »

Community service.

Community service shouldn't be the sole responsibility of petty criminals though.

Amhran Nua wrote: »

Well before time tells us anything, maybe you could tell us how exactly it might fail? People will choose to be thrown out on the street begging instead?

I will depend on a case-by-case basis of course. I'm sure there will be some horror stories in the papers regarding certain individuals and I'm sure there'll be plenty of actual sponges being rightfully inducted into the scheme.

DB10

As seen on this thread, the reason many are unemployed is the snobbery towards certain manual jobs and lower profile work.

doctorwu

When people were flying in from the other side of the world to clean faeces and blood from nightclub toilets there wasnt a word about the wasters who were hanging about outside bookies and pubs with there staffs and dobermans their owner with his hand down his track suit bottoms scratching his nethers and creating havoc day and night in this country. Now when theres no jobs they will persecute the genuine job seekers while the usual scroungers carry on regardless.

aDeener

PAULWATSON wrote: »

I know a man who has worked for 30 years, now he is on the dole.

You little bigots would now suggest that he should be degraded to picking up litter in town centers with a high vis vest on his back.

CLOWNS, the lot of you.

is it not more degrading sitting round the house at nothing?

gizmo

doctorwu wrote: »

When people were flying in from the other side of the world to clean faeces and blood from nightclub toilets there wasnt a word about the wasters who were hanging about outside bookies and pubs with there staffs and dobermans their owner with his hand down his track suit bottoms scratching his nethers and creating havoc day and night in this country. Now when theres no jobs they will persecute the genuine job seekers while the usual scroungers carry on regardless.

How do you know these measures won't target the "wasters who were hanging about outside bookies and pubs with there staffs and dobermans"?

round tower huntsman

DB10 wrote: »

As seen on this thread, the reason many are unemployed is the snobbery towards certain manual jobs and lower profile work.

not always. im on the dole. working in construction 14 yrs. sent away cv's for all manner of jobs, industrial cleaner,general op,storeman etc...min wage stuff and didnt get one reply. im starting a fas course,yr long, fas will pay my dole while im retraining. but its shown me that there's no jobs out there.

round tower huntsman

but what will happen with this new idea is that people that are new to the dole will be harrassed while life long scroungers will be left alone,as usual.

youngmoney

To those with practical degrees, what make you think you are better than an average street sweeper when you are actually not currently employed, and the street sweeper is?[/QUOTE]

terry those with practical degrees im sure dont think they are any better than a street sweeper...but if they have a degree in accounting or engineering that many of them will have gained top marks for by persevering through hours and hours of studying away in the library, often weekends upon weekends of being abused in their part time jobs trying to raise funds to keep them going through college, making numerous sacrifices to get the marks they needed, on top of all the money they sapped from their poor parents to get them leaving cert grinds..... all on the basis of false promises and chinese whispers that told us, put in the slog now and you will be comfortable later on for your efforts..... you would have to pardon someone if after all the expense and 5 or 6 years of studying that they would slightly resent having to do a job, that had they known they were going to end up doing, could have saved themselves 1000's in educational fees and simply went working straight after the junior/leaving cert....