Penalty for Refusing Jobpath

Johnnycanyon

Mr.H wrote: »

this time last year over 10,000 people under the age of 25 were considered long term unemployed (over 12 months)*. That is a lot of people who either cant or wont work.

Surely services like Seetec are needed in this case? Giving them the "option" is not an option. These kids need a kick up the arse to get a job. So while I have every sympathy for a 60 year old lady who has worked all her life, being sent to them. I have no sympathy for these young lads and ladies being forced to go there. 10k under the age of 25 are getting JSA for over 12 months???? Seriously how can anyone pretend we dont need jobpath

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/more-than-10-000-under-25s-now-among-long-term-unemployed-1.3319388

I was unaware of this fact. I think these young people would be better off being trained properly for jobs skills that are needed in the workforce.Having been with TN/seetec I could see how you could do your year and avoid taking up employment if you were that way inclined.

splinter65

Mr.H wrote: »

Also what is this about jobsplus that they are talking about? since I didnt know anything about this job path I have been googling it. They give employers a grant of up to 10k for taking on a person full time???????????? wtf? that is amazing. Why wouldnt every employer not want to know about that? Before I said I wouldnt care if they rang me. Now I am thinking why are they not calling me and giving me 10k

They don’t call you if you are an employer. You call them. Why would SW start phoning every employer asking them do they want to avail of the opportunity ?

Mr.H

Johnnycanyon wrote:

I was unaware of this fact. I think these young people would be better off being trained properly for jobs skills that are needed in the workforce.Having been with TN/seetec I could see how you could do your year and avoid taking up employment if you were that way inclined.

I agree. Maybe if seetwc and tn offered apprenticeships and routes into college as well as jobs it would be more beneficial?

splinter65 wrote:

They don’t call you if you are an employer. You call them. Why would SW start phoning every employer asking them do they want to avail of the opportunity ?

Sw no but my point was that if seetec are calling maybe they would be suggesting it

Ave Sodalis

Mr.H wrote:

Read it again. I said lets pretend the 5k people who are no longer on JA were long term unemployed. That was suiting your narrative. The figure helps you not me. If it was lets say 3k that were only unemployed who signes off that means 2k less comes off my 10k figure from last year.......

But why would we make that up? What possibly reason would we have for making stuff up?

Mr.H wrote:

90k people are struggling to find work

Bare in mind that the live register also does include people on part time work and people like myself who rarely get payment, but is on it just in case there is a weekend I don't get work for whatever reason. They make up a considerable percentage. Majority of people are also short term unemployed, based on those links.

stateofflux

Mr.H wrote: »

I thought someone said the activation fee was 300. Thats one and a half weeks jsa. Surely if they bring someone 2 weeks closer to a job either by helping them or annoying them, then its worth it?

Would you prefer to pay 10,000 young people (under 25) to sit at home for over a year?

You are missing the bigger picture here. its being rolled out as cost saving method to the states welfare bill.. i think its a false economy.. based mainly on the very low % of 'activated' participants that remain in employment after 12 months, the cost of funding these companies and commission fees involved and the true savings involved (which is difficult to extract from the spin)

I also question what constitutes 'unemployed'...how many of the figure are casually part time employed or on another education or disability related benefit.

Also if the current unemployment rate is now on or below 5% and considered near full employment..the activation base is much smaller than 5 years ago

I hate welfare cheats & lifetime dole scroungers as much as any hard working tax payer does, but i'm not convinced that the actual numbers of these people match the numbers government claims.

the main thing that irks me about the whole thing is that it seems to be more about quota ticking to get commission with little emphasis on long term skills matched gainful employment...this is where i question the true savings with a revolving door of people employed for short periods coming back again and again

john williams

According to the minister regina doherty you don't have to sign contract with them but you have to sign up for the personal progression plan what's the difference i mean if you refuse the first they will send you to dole office and you will be sanctioned. dole office will go by what they tell them as they assume the 2 are the same thing ? And will sanction you

splinter65

john williams wrote: »

According to the minister regina doherty you don't have to sign contract with them but you have to sign up for the personal progression plan what's the difference i mean if you refuse the first they will send you to dole office and you will be sanctioned. dole office will go by what they tell them as they assume the 2 are the same thing ? And will sanction you

Best thing your niece can do is just go along to the appointment and see if she can’t get a bit of help to find another job. What harm can it do? Hopefully she’ll get something that suits her soon and then everyone’s happy.

king2

john williams wrote: »

According to the minister regina doherty you don't have to sign contract with them but you have to sign up for the personal progression plan what's the difference i mean if you refuse the first they will send you to dole office and you will be sanctioned. dole office will go by what they tell them as they assume the 2 are the same thing ? And will sanction you

The contract and so called personal progression plan are one and the same. The official line now is that you cannot be sanctioned for refusing to sign the ppp after a successful court case by a man who had his payment cut for not signing. However in reality people are still having their payments cut for not signing. My advice would be just to sign the stupid thing. In practicality it does not make much difference to the Jobpath victim as they still have to complete the so called program and put up with all the rubbish whether they sign or not.

Ursus Horribilis

Are you looking for work?

john williams

king2 wrote: »

The contract and so called personal progression plan are one and the same. The official line now is that you cannot be sanctioned for refusing to sign the ppp after a successful court case by a man who had his payment cut for not signing. However in reality people are still having their payments cut for not signing. My advice would be just to sign the stupid thing. In practicality it does not make much difference to the Jobpath victim as they still have to complete the so called program and put up with all the rubbish whether they sign or not.

Is there a official document stating that they can't sanction or give warning given that you state above they are still sanctioning seems kinda weird not abiding by their on official line

king2

john williams wrote: »

Is there a official document stating that they can't sanction or give warning given that you state above they are still sanctioning seems kinda weird not abiding by their on official line

The head of the dept of social welfare John Conlon stated the following at a dail public accounts committee meeting in march 2018

https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/debates/debate/joint_committee_on_employment_affairs_and_social_protection/2018-03-08/



"Mr. John Conlon: I want to talk about personal progression plans for a moment as I be-
lieve there is a context that needs to be explained. Deputy Brady asked a very direct question
as to whether it is a contract. It is not. It is an agreement between the client - the person who
is receiving jobseeker payments - and their personal adviser as to how they agree to proceed in
terms of making them more job-ready and seeking employment. There is no direct penalty if a
person does not sign a personal progression plan. We make decisions on whether a person has
a continuing entitlement to a jobseeker’s payment in the round. The legislation requires people
to be available for and genuinely seeking work. Seeking work is part of activation services and
getting people work ready. While a refusal to sign a personal progression plan may not mean
that a sanction will be applied, our deciding officer should be looking at decisions in the round
and having regard to that and whether the person is participating in JobPath or any other acti-
vation service we offer and is continuously seeking employment. That has to be taken in the
round, not of itself, but deciding officers should be looking at the person’s overall capacity of
engagement with the service, of seeking employment and continuing to do so.

Senator Alice-Mary Higgins: So failure to sign a personal progression plan is not a
grounds to withdraw payment?

Mr. John Conlon: In itself, it is not a ground but it could indicate that a person is not en-
gaging otherwise as well. Every case would be dealt with on its own, but if a person does not
sign a personal progression plan, it may indicate to a deciding officer to question whether the
individual is engaging with the service, and genuinely seeking work. It will be an indicator
rather than a ground in itself."




So what he is saying in effect is that if you dont sign the ppp they will still penalise you but say its because you are not "engaging" properly. Dont forget you are dealing with a highly corrupt Government and its State agencies.

RocketRaccoon

Did OP ever get a job? It's been 2 months now

king2

king2 wrote: »

The head of the dept of social welfare John Conlon stated the following at a dail public accounts committee meeting in march 2018

https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/debates/debate/joint_committee_on_employment_affairs_and_social_protection/2018-03-08/



"Mr. John Conlon: I want to talk about personal progression plans for a moment as I be-
lieve there is a context that needs to be explained. Deputy Brady asked a very direct question
as to whether it is a contract. It is not. It is an agreement between the client - the person who
is receiving jobseeker payments - and their personal adviser as to how they agree to proceed in
terms of making them more job-ready and seeking employment. There is no direct penalty if a
person does not sign a personal progression plan. We make decisions on whether a person has
a continuing entitlement to a jobseeker’s payment in the round. The legislation requires people
to be available for and genuinely seeking work. Seeking work is part of activation services and
getting people work ready. While a refusal to sign a personal progression plan may not mean
that a sanction will be applied, our deciding officer should be looking at decisions in the round
and having regard to that and whether the person is participating in JobPath or any other acti-
vation service we offer and is continuously seeking employment. That has to be taken in the
round, not of itself, but deciding officers should be looking at the person’s overall capacity of
engagement with the service, of seeking employment and continuing to do so.

Senator Alice-Mary Higgins: So failure to sign a personal progression plan is not a
grounds to withdraw payment?

Mr. John Conlon: In itself, it is not a ground but it could indicate that a person is not en-
gaging otherwise as well. Every case would be dealt with on its own, but if a person does not
sign a personal progression plan, it may indicate to a deciding officer to question whether the
individual is engaging with the service, and genuinely seeking work. It will be an indicator
rather than a ground in itself."




So what he is saying in effect is that if you dont sign the ppp they will still penalise you but say its because you are not "engaging" properly. Dont forget you are dealing with a highly corrupt Government and its State agencies.

Why are you reading all this crap. If you are looking for a job then you shouldn't have anything to worry about.

If you aren't looking for a job you shouldn't really be expecting anything to be honest.

splinter65

king2 wrote: »

The head of the dept of social welfare John Conlon stated the following at a dail public accounts committee meeting in march 2018

https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/debates/debate/joint_committee_on_employment_affairs_and_social_protection/2018-03-08/



"Mr. John Conlon: I want to talk about personal progression plans for a moment as I be-
lieve there is a context that needs to be explained. Deputy Brady asked a very direct question
as to whether it is a contract. It is not. It is an agreement between the client - the person who
is receiving jobseeker payments - and their personal adviser as to how they agree to proceed in
terms of making them more job-ready and seeking employment. There is no direct penalty if a
person does not sign a personal progression plan. We make decisions on whether a person has
a continuing entitlement to a jobseeker’s payment in the round. The legislation requires people
to be available for and genuinely seeking work. Seeking work is part of activation services and
getting people work ready. While a refusal to sign a personal progression plan may not mean
that a sanction will be applied, our deciding officer should be looking at decisions in the round
and having regard to that and whether the person is participating in JobPath or any other acti-
vation service we offer and is continuously seeking employment. That has to be taken in the
round, not of itself, but deciding officers should be looking at the person’s overall capacity of
engagement with the service, of seeking employment and continuing to do so.

Senator Alice-Mary Higgins: So failure to sign a personal progression plan is not a
grounds to withdraw payment?

Mr. John Conlon: In itself, it is not a ground but it could indicate that a person is not en-
gaging otherwise as well. Every case would be dealt with on its own, but if a person does not
sign a personal progression plan, it may indicate to a deciding officer to question whether the
individual is engaging with the service, and genuinely seeking work. It will be an indicator
rather than a ground in itself."




So what he is saying in effect is that if you dont sign the ppp they will still penalise you but say its because you are not "engaging" properly. Dont forget you are dealing with a highly corrupt Government and its State agencies.

Can you give us examples of where the government has been proven to be corrupt?

john williams

Just came across something in irishtimes online
Think it is current haven't had time to look through it fully says something about turas nua parent company working links uk in emergency talks financial troubles .don't think it will affect turas nua here .?

king2

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/emergency-talks-under-way-on-future-of-company-which-administers-half-of-jobpath-1.3798365?mode=amp

Working Links were accused of wide scale fraud some years ago in the UK during the delivery of a program similar to Jobpath. FG awarded them the Jobpath Contract nevertheless. delighted the scum Company are gone into Liquidation, hopefully they bring Turas Nua down with them.

Ursus Horribilis

How about finding a job instead of putting all your energy into ranting about Jobpath. When did you last have a proper job?

king2

Ursus Horribilis wrote: »

How about finding a job instead of putting all your energy into ranting about Jobpath. When did you last have a proper job?

How about getting a Life instead of being a pathetic Troll on boards. When did you last have a life?

DubInTheWest

Did I not hear something on the news or maybe on here that turas nua and seetec was defeated in the dail and was to be abolished ? Maybe I'm wrong.

Ursus Horribilis

So why not answer the question? You've been asked it more than once and you're not answering. How long are you out of work?

Sardonicat

With the greatest of respect, no one is obliged to disclose their work history to a poster on boards. This is not an interview with a DSP investigator. If you want to vent outrage at "dole scroungers " go to AH.

This thread is about Turas Nua. I've had dealings with them. They don't help anybody. They continued to harrass me with phone calls to attend meetings after I became a full time carer. I was told 'as long as you are on the Live Register you have to attend' . He couldn't understand that a Carer is not on the Live Register. This is the calibre of individual who works for them. If you think they help anybody find work you're deluded.

john williams

DubInTheWest wrote: »

Did I not hear something on the news or maybe on here that turas nua and seetec was defeated in the dail and was to be abolished ? Maybe I'm wrong.

Dublinthewest another person asneered that question for me here they were defeated but motions are not worth the paper they are written on .for the cameras and pr only..gov response is they will continue as is as they have contractual obligations with this crowd .seems the government seems to have omitted a poor performance get out clause .seem they doing that lot lately their legal dept is poor in that area looks like

ebbsy

Mr.H wrote: »

submission? what happens if they submit?

The title changes hands.

john williams

Ursus Horribilis wrote: »

So why not answer the question? You've been asked it more than once and you're not answering. How long are you out of work?

Ursus hornbilus please address who you are talking to original poster , me ,or other posters .this thread is so tangled hard to know who is talking to who. for the record I am fully employed my concern is my niece working part time .second time about to be called back to them .had bad time first time she did this program (polite) I am concerned as I am sure you would be for your family

Ursus Horribilis

No it wasn't you the question was directed at. Anyway I'm going to step away as it's taking the thread off topic.

davo2001

Ursus Horribilis wrote: »

How about finding a job instead of putting all your energy into ranting about Jobpath. When did you last have a proper job?

Based on OPs post history it looks like he hasn't worked for at least 6 years.

john williams

Just thinking it used to be the case where you signed up with this crowd you were forbidden from taking up ce and other community schemes .last June if I understand regina o doherty changed that allowing people to partake in above .some of these are 19+hours .so with that thinking would part time work not be included .if exception can be made for above then why not for someone on part time work after all they are working ? Or have I missed something?

The Specialist

king2 wrote: »

How about getting a Life instead of being a pathetic Troll on boards. When did you last have a life?

It's a totally valid question seeing as you are seeking ways to dodge any expectation of getting a job and continue getting your dole (a.k.a our tax money).

rgossip30

I could not find an answer to the OP's question ??