Got Called To Go On Jobpath

dhaughton99 · 22-11-2018 05:09PM

frosty123 wrote: »

Asked turas nua for a grant for a forklift course a week ago and they've never got back to me...yet if i miss an appointment there on to me in a shot ffs!

I wonder if its like Tus or Back to education, where they are allocated 500e a year for each participant for training.

dhaughton99 · 27-11-2018 04:49PM

Just a quick one for anyone interested in what's at the end of Jobpath. I finished the year, the last day I received a letter to say I completed the year and was told to give it to Social at my next appointment. I didn't go up to the SW, I just waited.
I got a letter 3 weeks later to attend an 'individual activation meeting' with an SW employment support member. At that meeting, I got a couple of tips on Jobsplus and if I was interested in TUS scheme and that e500 available for training if wanted to pick something through Obair. Meeting lasted 20 mins. Was told the LES /Obair would be in contact soon.

Jimmyireland · 30-11-2018 12:26PM

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=1993429747405279&id=784299231651676

After 3 years of trying to get figures relating to Jobpath, today I finally managed to get them. The figures are shocking! Since 2015, €149million has been given to the private companies Turas Nua and Seetec. 190,000 people have been referred to the companies and unbelievably only 9% of people or 17,100 have been sustained in a job for 52 weeks or more. JobPath is a complete waste of taxpayers’ money and needs to be scrapped immediately

bri007 · 30-11-2018 08:49PM

Seetec were a total joke to deal with, I am working over a year and a half now and I’ve blocked their calls so many times yet they use a different number, same with email.

The last email they sent they wanted contact information of my current manager to ‘have on their files and link in with’

I totally ignored that email and any correspondence since. This has been going on and on, plus ringing 5-8 times a day. I did inform them I have a permanent job and don’t require their assistance, as I literally signed on for 4 weeks and got a job straightaway. Roll on a year and half later, they are still in contact

dhaughton99 · 30-11-2018 09:08PM

bri007 wrote: »

Seetec were a total joke to deal with, I am working over a year and a half now and I’ve blocked their calls so many times yet they use a different number, same with email.

The last email they sent they wanted contact information of my current manager to ‘have on their files and link in with’

I totally ignored that email and any correspondence since. This has been going on and on, plus ringing 5-8 times a day. I did inform them I have a permanent job and don’t require their assistance, as I literally signed on for 4 weeks and got a job straightaway. Roll on a year and half later, they are still in contact

Under GDPR, you should be able to send them a letter and ask them to delete any details they have on you on file. Being a private company, they have to comply.

Seth Brundle · 30-11-2018 11:33PM

dhaughton99 wrote: »

Under GDPR, you should be able to send them a letter and ask them to delete any details they have on you on file. Being a private company, they have to comply.

As agents for the Dept I assume they are entitled to process personal data on their clients in order to do their tasks. This meets the requirements under GDPR (assuming data storage and retention policies are in order).
Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

dhaughton99 · 30-11-2018 11:37PM

Seth Brundle wrote: »

As agents for the Dept I assume they are entitled to process personal data on their clients in order to do their tasks. This meets the requirements under GDPR (assuming data storage and retention policies are in order).
Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

But when the client is no longer required to attend?

Seth Brundle · 30-11-2018 11:42PM

dhaughton99 wrote: »

But when the client is no longer required to attend?

What is their role for the Dept in terms closing out each clients case?

splinter65 · 30-11-2018 11:53PM

Seth Brundle wrote: »

What is their role for the Dept in terms closing out each clients case?

The Dept contracted them to help Jobseekers find jobs.
For some reason “helping Jobseekers find jobs” never took off in the local SW offices, in any way, so outside agents had to be brought in.
I’m kinda close to the situation and what Seetec/TN have been brilliant at is identifying Jobseeker payment claimants who aren’t actually eligible for Jobseekers but should/could qualify for a different payment instead that they are entitled to.
This of course should have been identified when the claimant was being processed for Jobseekers in the beginning, but that’s not what happens.
They direct them to the payment they should be on, the claimant then applies for that instead, is cut off Jobseekers, and gets SWA while their new claim is being heard.
In my experience, at least 40% of Jobseekers should be on some other payment be it Carers, Disabilty, OPFP, WFP.

Seth Brundle · 01-12-2018 12:15AM

splinter65 wrote: »

The Dept contracted them to help Jobseekers find jobs.

Ok and how do they close the case as per their contract with the Dept?
I don’t know but I’ll make the assumption that they have to inform the Dept that the person is now in stable FT employment. How do they prove that?

01-12-2018 01:39AM

splinter65 wrote: »

The Dept contracted them to help Jobseekers find jobs.
For some reason “helping Jobseekers find jobs” never took off in the local SW offices, in any way, so outside agents had to be brought in.
I’m kinda close to the situation and what Seetec/TN have been brilliant at is identifying Jobseeker payment claimants who aren’t actually eligible for Jobseekers but should/could qualify for a different payment instead that they are entitled to.
This of course should have been identified when the claimant was being processed for Jobseekers in the beginning, but that’s not what happens.
They direct them to the payment they should be on, the claimant then applies for that instead, is cut off Jobseekers, and gets SWA while their new claim is being heard.
In my experience, at least 40% of Jobseekers should be on some other payment be it Carers, Disabilty, OPFP, WFP.

No one in TN or Seetec are even remotely qualified or trained to tell people they are on the wrong payment. Nor do they care. People find out after they have been cut off after those agencies report them for non engagement. So unless you work for the DSP or one of those agencies which you often deny here then you are not in a position to claim "in my experience" or "I'm kinda close to the situation"

Of course you could be someone with years of experience in applying for JSA, JSB, disability or carers allowance or it's just your hobby researching welfare. In which case I bow your superior knowledge :rolleyes:

splinter65 · 01-12-2018 08:36AM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

No one in TN or Seetec are even remotely qualified or trained to tell people they are on the wrong payment. Nor do they care. People find out after they have been cut off after those agencies report them for non engagement. So unless you work for the DSP or one of those agencies which you often deny here then you are not in a position to claim "in my experience" or "I'm kinda close to the situation"

Of course you could be someone with years of experience in applying for JSA, JSB, disability or carers allowance or it's just your hobby researching welfare. In which case I bow your superior knowledge :rolleyes:

Your wrong I’m afraid but that’s because you have a nuanced view because of your own experience,
It doesn’t take very much training or skill in fact to identify people who are on the wrong payment.
If a parent on JSA turns up at TN and says “ no I can’t go to that job interview because I have to mind the kids while my partner is working” then that parent is not eligible for JSA but probably the family is eligible for WFP.
If someone turns up and says “ I can’t go to that interview because I’m minding my sick mother full time” then that person needs to be on Carers Allowance
If the single parent of a young child says “ I can’t go to the interview because I have no one to mind my baby” then that parent needs to be on Lone Parent.
And most of all, if people say “ I can’t go to the interview because I’m not well enough” then they need to be on Disabilty Allowance.
And yes you can leave out the eye rolling emoji. It’s rude and disrespectful and marks you out as someone who thinks they no more then they actually do.

04-12-2018 01:52AM

splinter65 wrote: »

Your wrong I’m afraid but that’s because you have a nuanced view because of your own experience,
It doesn’t take very much training or skill in fact to identify people who are on the wrong payment.
If a parent on JSA turns up at TN and says “ no I can’t go to that job interview because I have to mind the kids while my partner is working” then that parent is not eligible for JSA but probably the family is eligible for WFP.
If someone turns up and says “ I can’t go to that interview because I’m minding my sick mother full time” then that person needs to be on Carers Allowance
If the single parent of a young child says “ I can’t go to the interview because I have no one to mind my baby” then that parent needs to be on Lone Parent.
And most of all, if people say “ I can’t go to the interview because I’m not well enough” then they need to be on Disabilty Allowance.
And yes you can leave out the eye rolling emoji. It’s rude and disrespectful and marks you out as someone who thinks they no more then they actually do.

If a parent of any description shows up at ST or TN with a child in tow, they are promptly and quite forcefully told to gtfo due to insurance reasons. Doesn't matter what their business is there, they won't let you past the reception with a child in the building. Says it all about them really. A single parent of a young child would not get near them to explain their situation and be referred to the correct payment if they had no one to mind the child to get to an "advisor" in the first place.

Seth Brundle · 04-12-2018 08:14AM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

If a parent of any description shows up at ST or TN with a child in tow, they are promptly and quite forcefully told to gtfo due to insurance reasons. Doesn't matter what their business is there, they won't let you past the reception with a child in the building. Says it all about them really. A single parent of a young child would not get near them to explain their situation and be referred to the correct payment if they had no one to mind the child to get to an "advisor" in the first place.

It's a workplace, it's not a creche!
If you had a job somewhere would you and your co-workers be allowed bring your kids in tow?

Wanderer78 · 04-12-2018 08:33AM

Seth Brundle wrote: »

It's a workplace, it's not a creche!
If you had a job somewhere would you and your co-workers be allowed bring your kids in tow?

so should the kids be left at home, possibly alone?

Seth Brundle · 04-12-2018 08:41AM

Wanderer78 wrote: »

so should the kids be left at home, possibly alone?

If a person with children was working where would the kids be left?
Kids aren't allowed in my workplace. Are they allowed in yours?

Wanderer78 · 04-12-2018 08:44AM

Seth Brundle wrote: »

If a person with children was working where would the kids be left?
Kids aren't allowed in my workplace. Are they allowed in yours?

if a person is unemployed due to child careering needs, and is requested to attend a meeting, what should they do with the kids if no other careering options are available?

colm_mcm · 04-12-2018 08:47AM

Wanderer78 wrote: »

if a person is unemployed due to child careering needs, and is requested to attend a meeting, what should they do with the kids if no other careering options are available?

Should they be claiming jobseekers if they clearly aren’t available to work?

Wanderer78 · 04-12-2018 08:48AM

colm_mcm wrote: »

Should they be claiming jobseekers if they clearly aren’t available to work?

so what should they be claiming?

engiweirdo · 04-12-2018 08:52AM

Have been with Turas Nua now a few months. To be fair Ive found them to be no hassle while not really being of any use either. A lot of the courses etc they would offer are for people who would actually struggle with making a CV, jobsearching and the like. And they were fairly straightforward with the fact they get no commission if you dont stay in a job for a year so no point pushing you into something unsuitable. No point being obstructive to someone just trying to do their job.

splinter65 · 04-12-2018 10:27AM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

If a parent of any description shows up at ST or TN with a child in tow, they are promptly and quite forcefully told to gtfo due to insurance reasons. Doesn't matter what their business is there, they won't let you past the reception with a child in the building. Says it all about them really. A single parent of a young child would not get near them to explain their situation and be referred to the correct payment if they had no one to mind the child to get to an "advisor" in the first place.

I never suggested that a parent showed up with a child in tow. I certainly would hope that someone with a child in tow would be turned away.
Some parents who should be on lone parent are actually on JSA because that's what they were on before the baby was born. That's my point. They're on the wrong scheme.

splinter65 · 04-12-2018 10:30AM

Wanderer78 wrote: »

if a person is unemployed due to child careering needs, and is requested to attend a meeting, what should they do with the kids if no other careering options are available?

If you have at least one of your kids under 7 and you are parenting alone then you are entitled to OPFP

splinter65 · 04-12-2018 10:31AM

Wanderer78 wrote: »

so what should they be claiming?

Opfp

Wanderer78 · 04-12-2018 05:24PM

splinter65 wrote: »

If you have at least one of your kids under 7 and you are parenting alone then you are entitled to OPFP

what if you dont, and/or are not?

splinter65 · 04-12-2018 05:31PM

Wanderer78 wrote: »

what if you dont, and/or are not?

Well if your not parenting alone then the other parent should be able to mind the children while you attend your TN/Seetec meeting.
If the other parent is working and on such low wages that you qualify for JSA then you should give up your JSA and the other parent apply for WFP and BTWFD instead.

redarmy · 04-12-2018 05:33PM

https://jobpathmyexperienceoftheemploymentandskillsprogram.wordpress.com/ Great Read.

Wanderer78 · 04-12-2018 05:36PM

splinter65 wrote: »

Well if your not parenting alone then the other parent should be able to mind the children while you attend your TN/Seetec meeting.
If the other parent is working and on such low wages that you qualify for JSA then you should give up your JSA and the other parent apply for WFP and BTWFD instead.

what if the other parent is working and cannot take time off work to accommodate the meeting?

if jsa is given up, what is the likelihood of receiving reductions in income?

splinter65 · 04-12-2018 06:12PM

Wanderer78 wrote: »

what if the other parent is working and cannot take time off work to accommodate the meeting?

if jsa is given up, what is the likelihood of receiving reductions in income?

I’ve covered that in my reply to you wanderer.
If one parent is working then he/she must be on low enough income if the other is getting JSA.
The JSA parent should give up their claim and get BTWFD and the working parent claim WFP instead.
That way the at home parent is no longer tied to the conditions for JSA.

05-12-2018 12:49AM

Seth Brundle wrote: »

It's a workplace, it's not a creche!
If you had a job somewhere would you and your co-workers be allowed bring your kids in tow?

Don't think I was suggesting Seetec workers be allowed take their kids to work? Nor was i suggesting people should be allowed have the kids along while doing job search and reviews there. They are offices accessible to the public though.

What I have witnessed is people point blank being refused to be spoken to by reception if they so much as wheel a buggy in the door, and told their insurance doesn't cover kids in the building which means they are cheaping on it . Could you imagine that in an Intreo office or car tax or hse clinic, sorry no you can't come in with a buggie and explain your situation at reception or get information that you are in fact on the wrong payment and then get reported for non compliance and cut off just so you can square the circle with the DSP?

splinter65 · 05-12-2018 01:06AM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Don't think I was suggesting Seetec workers be allowed take their kids to work? Nor was i suggesting people should be allowed have the kids along while doing job search and reviews there. They are offices accessible to the public though.

What I have witnessed is people point blank being refused to be spoken to by reception if they so much as wheel a buggy in the door, and told their insurance doesn't cover kids in the building which means they are cheaping on it . Could you imagine that in an Intreo office or car tax or hse clinic, sorry no you can't come in with a buggie and explain your situation at reception or get information that you are in fact on the wrong payment and then get reported for non compliance and cut off just so you can square the circle with the DSP?

Why not leave the child with the minder or crèche you have lined up for when you start work?

Got Called To Go On Jobpath

Comments