Gissa Job

Anyone remember Boys from the Black Staff? Josser Hughes going round saying “Gissa job” to anyone who would listen? Well, the government is turning all long term unemployed into Josser, telling them that they must make unsolicited applications to any and every firm they can find in the hope of finding some work. Penalty for not doing this? Benefits suspended.

   Now there are many views of the long term unemployed, most fostered by the media who focus on the few that are abusing the system and boasting about living a good life on benefits. Programmes like “Benefit Street” which focused on the few making them minor celebrities, while ignoring the vast majority of the people living in the street whether they were on benefits or not. Or the newspaper coverage of the mother and daughter who proudly boast of being too fat to work and happy to live on benefits which provide them with more comfort than most people struggling on a low income can expect.

    But these cases are the minority. The headline grabbers. The true situation in this time of supposed recovery is that the vast majority of the long term unemployed would love to work but cannot find a job. There may be unfilled vacancies but they are not necessarily in the right place or require the skills the unemployed have. Whether this is due to poor training for the young or over qualification of the older people, no one has asked the question.

   People are being told to dumb down their CVs, so that managers don’t feel threatened by over-qualified applicants. Older people are struggling because younger managers don’t want to take on people who may know more than they do. When down-sizing departments, both in government, civil service and industry, the older people with experience, who cost more to employ, are the ones who are made redundant these days.

   There has been a big increase in the number of people becoming self-employed. This is fine if they have the resources to cover start-up costs, be that from personal finances or bank loans. But not everyone can or wants to do this.

So the long term unemployed are expected to send out fifty applications a week, random, not in reply to any advertisement. These applications must be printed, not hand written, so either the applicant needs a computer and printer or they have to get the applications photocopied. Either way it is likely to come out between 2p-4p per page. Then postage on top of that, First Class only is acceptable. Or if you can’t afford postage the applicants must hand deliver applications to businesses on High Streets or industrial estates.

   This is not just one Josser Hughes or Norman Tebbit on his bike, but hundreds, if not thousands, of people, so what is the likely response to these begging letters, for that is what they amount to. If they come in the post it is quite likely they go straight in the bin without anyone of importance seeing them. If they are hand delivered the applicants are faced with being told to go away, but not in such polite terms. How else are businesses likely to respond when they may get maybe one letter a day? If you need someone you advertise, you don’t want people constantly bothering you asking for a job.

   And if this doesn’t result in a job after a few months the unemployed will be forced to ‘work’ for their benefits. Now some people might cheer at this. I read someone suggest this not long ago, but they were suggesting maybe one day a week. This scheme requires people to work a full week, wherever they are sent regardless of distance from home. Failure to turn up on time for any reason –  suspension of benefit again. Serves them right, some might say. But what is the further implication of this. Supermarkets can get their shelves filled for free, warehouses can get their items picked for free. People looking for part-time work won’t be able to find any because all their jobs are being done for free, so even if you WANT to work it will be harder to find something to do.

    All this is aimed at the long term unemployed, people who have been living on basic benefits for a long time, who have used up all their savings, who might well be subject to the bedroom tax, who now have to pay for printing and postage for pointless letters, who will have to pay transport costs they cannot afford and who are told to ask for loans from friends and family.

   If this was going to save a substantial amount from the benefits bill it might be reasonable, but to be truthful, there are many other things that could save more money. The bedroom tax did not succeed in providing a vast number of larger properties for the homeless. In many places people are having to pay it regardless of whether there is a housing problem in their area or not.

   Instead of penalising the very poorest of our society the Government should be looking at how it spends money in the first place.

   Of course, with the election approaching none of this will be mentioned by the Conservatives. The focus seems to be on the NHS, an important aspect of our life certainly. But how long before the wards are being cleaned for free by the slaves of the government?

   Immigration is another point that gets lots of attention but is far less of a problem than is made out.

Why are there no protest marches against the bedroom tax and the way the long term unemployed are treated? Oh, I forgot, these people are all scroungers and unworthy. NOT! 

What are we doing to ourselves?

As we head into 2015 we, in the UK, are facing a General Election. I hate to say I am very fearful of what will happen. Faced with the rise of UKIP (UK Independence Party) all the other parties are focusing on the wrong issues as far as I can see. Immigration is NOT the biggest problem the UK is facing. The EU is NOT a threat to our way of life or the cause of masses of people coming in to the country. There are possibly more UK citizens living in other parts of the EU as there are immigrants coming into the UK. And we NEED these people. 300 Polish paramedics are needed by one health authority because they can’t recruit enough staff from home. Others have recruited nurses from Spain and Greece for the same reason.

   David Cameron keeps talking about British Values and Christian Values, without explaining what these are exactly. A vast number of people living in the UK, and I mean born and bred people, do not follow any particular religion to a strong degree. C of E might well be entered on any form that asks for a religion when really ‘none’ would be more appropriate. We are a secular society on the whole, and have always been accepting of people wishing to follow their own faiths. Sadly some of those people don’t appreciate this freedom, but that is another subject entirely.

So what are British Values? Looking after Number One would seem to be the principle of most politicians these days. Only those in work are of consequence, everyone else is a waster and a scrounger. Only home owners count, people who live in rented accommodation are the lowest of the low. They have no entitlement to a comfortable home, to spare rooms even if there is nothing else to rent.

   What no one seems to take into account is that not every graduate, every mortgage holder, every manager, has a safe and secure job. People who have done the same job for twenty years for the council, for instance, are now finding themselves on the scrap heap because cuts to budgets have meant it is cheaper to take on a younger workforce, even if that younger workforce has no idea what it is supposed to be doing.

   Under this last government the ‘jobless’ figures have been falling. But surprisingly tax revenue has not increased. One reason for this is that a large number of those taken out of the jobless figures are working in low paid jobs that are under the tax threshold. Such people have no chance of achieving that dream of owning their own home, if that is their dream.

   Another reason for the discrepancy between those taken off the jobless register and the lack of new tax revenue, could well be because many jobless are now denied benefit because they have failed in some way to meet the targets set for finding a job. Some of the criteria for continuing claiming benefit include: applying for a set number of jobs per week (I think that could be as high as 50, I’m not completely sure), providing proof that this has been done, providing CVs and postage yourself; using a computer to search for and find work whether you have access to one or not; getting a Yellow Pages or Thompson Local and writing to every company listed asking for work; completing a 38 hour week at a designated job if you fail to find something yourself, not matter how far away from your home said job is (up to 90 miles). If a claimant fails in any of these or is late on any number of days, they have their benefit suspended and they are taken off the jobless register.

   Not everyone who is claiming benefit WANTS to be jobless, however there are no jobs available. And if you have to send out applications and CVs how can you afford to pay for the postage and paper? If you have no access to the internet, and many jobcentres no longer provide this, how are you supposed to apply for jobs on-line.

   When David Cameron talks about British Values, is he referring to Victorian Values? That great time when the poor were forced into workhouses when they couldn’t pay their debts? Already homeless shelters are overcrowded and food banks are multiplying around the country. How many people will suffer more severe colds and flu this year because poor diet through the inability to buy decent food has left their bodies weakened?

   The trouble with this country is that those who 'have' don’t realise that the ‘have nots’ really exist. They are an unseen underclass who do not deserve to live. They are beggars, Big Issue sellers, they are not ordinary people trying to live a decent life. But beware. Circumstances can change and before you know it, your job could be gone, your house could be repossessed, or you could need help to pay your rent and wow! you have to pay for that spare bedroom you have been using as a study for the last ten years.      

   According to a newspaper report £3.1bn was spent on Boxing Day. Three point one BILLION pounds. I cannot begin to imagine what those people were lacking in their lives that they had to go out and spend so readily. Great for the traders, though. Bet most of the goods were imported so maybe not so good for the trade balance! Still the Chancellor should be happy, 20% of that will be VAT.

   And meanwhile those on benefit will have to decide whether to spend what they have left after the bedroom tax has been deducted on heating, food or printing more CVs. (Keeping in mind that printing ink is THE most expensive commodity on the planet!)

Electronic Signing

Unless you look at the BBC news red button or news app, or are claiming job seekers allowance you probably won’t know anything about this.

   The BBC reported on the 24^th October that the government is investing in a digital revamp of the UK’s jobcentres.

   Instead of signing a piece of paper given to the claimant by a human being, the unemployed will in future have to sign a digital pad to make their claim.

   The report makes this sound like it is something that will happen in the future but it is happening now.

   Not every jobcentre has the digital pad yet, but the idea of getting help there is a thing of the past. I have heard of a recent claimant being told the jobcentre was only there for people to sign on. People are expected to look on-line themselves to find jobs. Gone are the podiums that had the jobs listed, gone are the people you could take the details to for further information. Gone are the public-access phones.

   The BBC report states that this system is being tested at London Bridge Jobcentre, but it is also being used at other Jobcentres around the country. There will be PC workstations and free wi-fi but no one to offer help, just monitors to make sure clients are not misusing the machines for other things.

   The report goes on to comment on the issue of hacking but I think the concerns should go further than this. There are several things that worry me. While I am a fan of technology, quick to use new things, I have ebook readers and tablets as well as a smart phone, we haven’t got to the stage yet where everyone is competent with technology. I have worked all my life with new gadgets moving from a manual typewriter through to the latest laptops. But if I were a cleaner, shopworker or a computer-phobe I might well find using a PC workstation totally daunting, especially with no help available.

   Another concern is not just hacking but system failure. Computer systems fail and crash all the time. Ask anyone who has tried to use an ATM and found the entire network has crashed. I have been without a phone all day today because the computerised digital booster I need has failed and no one seems to know why. Ask anyone who uses a computer regularly and they will relate times when systems have failed. What contingency plans are there in place for failure?

   But ignoring all the glitches and hiccups there might be, there is one fundamental thing that this digital technology will never match. Human contact. Jobcentre staff may not be the most welcoming of people, but they do at least interact with clients, even if only for a few minutes. For some people this human contact is very important.

   The other thing is, with these machines replacing people that means Jobcentre staff may well find themselves on the other side of the desk, signing on. Where are the jobs for these people? The Government is boasting about getting the jobless figures down, but what will happen to those who lose out to digital technology? Is this where the £2m savings per year is coming from?  Anyone who has to sign on will tell you staff has been cut dramatically since this last government took office; some of the jobs sub-contracted out to private firms who get paid for filling positions. Sounds a bit like sacking Peter to pay Paul to me. I would love to know if these contracts come in cheaper than paying civil servants to man the Jobcentres, especially as I doubt the veracity of some of these firms. I heard of at least one case where an offer of an interview was classed as a successful application even though the applicant couldn’t make the interview let alone managed to get the job.

   So what do you think? Is it ok for Jobcentres to be run by robots?

Smoke and Mirrors

Unemployment is down again, so the government would like us to believe. Or at least the number claiming Job Seekers Allowance has fallen to its lowest level for several years.
    Sadly a fall in JSA claimants doesn't necessarily mean more people in work. It could just as well mean more people claiming other benefits or living in dire poverty, struggling to pay for food, rent, bedroom tax and fuel.
    A growing number of people are working for themselves. Good for them, less helpful for those who don't have the skills needed to work for themselves. And how will the HMRC keep track of all these people? Will they eventually lose out because the self-employed don't pay as much tax as those on PAYE. I'm not saying the self-employed will deliberately cheat the tax man but there are things they can claim for than if they are simply employed by someone else.
    The government boasts of training schemes for young unemployed but some of these make more money for the companies running the schemes than helping the young unemployed who quite simply don't want to work. I have heard of schemes that send youngsters to companies for training without any prior knowledge of what they need to do, ie lads sent to work as mechanics when they know nothing to start with and have no interest in being a mechanic. No doubt the majority youngsters do want to have a job and earn their own money, but for those forced to go on training schemes or lose benefit are not always pointed in the right direction but they magically disappear from unemployment statistics.
     Older people are safe, though aren't they?
     Don't be so sure. Older people are becoming a liability, they cost more to employ and know their rights! In some companies older people are being made compulsorily redundant and replaced with younger, cheaper, employees, often with no idea of what the job involves.
     How can this be when the retirement age is being raised? What is going to happen to these people in their fifties with no chance of finding a new job to take them to retirement?  

Lost Identity

Not so long ago I saw an item of news which said Canada was introducing a gender neutral word to add to he and she. Shock, horror, disgusting, was the reaction from one Facebook friend, but it this so surprising?
    Since the 1960s women have been seeking equality. Equal pay for the same job as men, equal rights to apply for the same jobs as men. All fully supported by most people but  has this led to a loss of identity for women.
    At one time girls wore dresses, had long hair and went to work in shops, offices, as nurses or teachers. Women were NEVER seen drunk in public, or at least not very often. I'm not saying women didn't drink, but they were more discrete if they did.
    Boys, on the other hand, always had short hair, wore trousers, played football and made new friend by fighting them. Men were the bread winners, the defenders of their families and country, they swore like troopers but never in front of women or children. They did physically demanding jobs, miners, steel workers, ship builders and those who had received better education went into banking, law or medicine. These lists are a bit sterotypical but you get the picture. People knew what was expected of them and where they fitted into society.
    This may not be an ideal situation. Class and sex discrimination certainly isn't tolerated in the second decade of the 21st century. But have we taken things a bit too far?
     The first confusion arises when children are still quite young. Girls no longer only wear dresses. Boys don't necessarily have short hair. It's a matter of choice and I have no problem with that. But we cannot get away from the fact that deep down in our psyche if you see a child with long hair you expect it to be a girl and if it is wearing trousers it should be a boy. A flaw in our identification programming maybe, but it is there in our subconscious and subconscious is hard to over-rule.
     So how has that progressed into adolescence and adulthood?
     There are a growing number of people who are unsure of where they belong on the gender scale. Nature has made them physically one thing, but society which now says you can do whatever you like, whatever gender you are, has created a sense of 'who am I?' For although we are told we can do anything, we are still expected to fit into 'type' for our physical gender.
      This had led to people feeling they have been classified as the wrong gender, but maybe this is what the Canadians have accepted as 'Gender Neutral'. Is it time to simply accept people as people, not men or women? Should we now avoid expecting the people around us to fit into a one category or another? How this bodes for the future of the human race which depends on the balance of the sexes to ensure continuation, I have no idea, but this could well be the result of the 'equality of the sexes' for what does that mean other than everyone is the same?

Holidays for All

Someone posted on Facebook that they had seen a newspaper report which claimed Hindus and Muslims wanted an official Bank Holiday in the UK. I didn't see the report myself so can't comment on it. In my view all Bank Holidays in the UK should be scrapped. Especially the two in May. I know many businesses rely on bank holidays to boost trade but that is the point. Christmas and Easter have become nothing more than an opportunity for retailers to cash in on trade and the other holidays are only a holiday for the people who don't have to work to provide the entertainment for those visitors who sit for hours in traffic jams to reach places that are over-crowded and over-priced because it is a bank holiday.
    In parts of the UK where there are already large numbers of Hindus, Sikhs, Muslims and other groups,  people already get together to celebrate their particular religious highlights. Living in the middle of the country as I do, surrounded by every faith imaginable, the local news is always full of stories about Diwali, Eid, Chinese New Year and other things. There was a big parade of Sikhs last year, I apologise, I can't remember what the festival was called. I think, possibly, what these people want, more than a bank holiday, is the chance to have a day off work without being penalised. (This is a whole different story. With the number of people in the UK being forced to work zero hours contracts, paid holidays are quickly being lost left, right and centre).
    A number of commentators on Facebook objected to this idea, saying that England (or Britain, if you want to include Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland) is a Christian country and shouldn't give holidays to other faiths.
    Why not?  Let's first look at the derivation of the word holiday. Originally it meant Holy Day. Other faiths can have Holy Days as well as Christianity. No one is saying the whole country will have to take the day off, but I bet many people would; and the shops, funfairs and seaside resorts would not object to the income coming in from the non-religious holiday makers.
    We are a Christian country, cry the detractors. Yes, we claim to be. But that doesn't mean we should deny other faiths the right to celebrate their own religion in their own way because above all we are a TOLERANT country. By giving people the freedom to practise their own way we lessen the chance of setting one group against another.
    Christians don't get the same rights in other countries! Sadly this is true. But that doesn't mean we have to be like those other countries and unfairly treat people. We are BETTER than that.
    I can't profess to agreeing with some of the teachings of Islam. But I can see why some people are radicalised by it. Often they are young and disaffected by things that have happened around them. Lack of work may often be the case, lack of understanding or being inspired by speeches of radical preachers is another. Can anyone honestly say they haven't listened to someone who had inspired them to do something? But that aside most Muslims are just ordinary people wanting to get on with their lives in peace. The problems are the fanatics.
    I would say Islam is stuck in the past, where Christians were in the middle ages. They are not the only people who have kept women separate from men. The Greeks did it, the Jews did it, and even Christians did it at some point. For a long, long time women were expected to keep their heads covered. The sight of a beautiful woman with lustrous hair could incite lustful thoughts in a man. Seems more like a problem the men have to control if you ask me.  Even when I was young and went to church, women had to cover their heads to enter church. In some places I think they still do. When I was at school boys and girls had separate playgrounds and usually sat on opposite sides of the classroom. The girls were far too sensible to want to sit next to a smelly boy!
    Are we still a Christian country? Most people would put Cof E on a form if asked for a religion, but judging by the appalling knowledge of some younger quiz contestants I don't think many actually practise any sort of religion these days. And what is Christianity? There are many sects and subdivisions of this faith and surprisingly they don't all follow the same path! Some don't even celebrate Christmas, which to me, is the defining thing of a Christian. Sadly Christmas has become more about family get-togethers (I've no objection to that, but why only at Christmas), presents, eating and drinking than celebrating the birth of Jesus Christ. And I'm not sure what the majority of the country think about Easter!
     And at what cost have we become a Christian country? The religion was originally forced on the population at the expense of other pagan religions of the time. For centuries people were forced to go to church and listen to mass in a language they didn't understand. Similarity there to being forced to learn the Quran (don't know if that is spelt correctly, there seem to be many different spellings) in Arabic even when you speak another language. And since that time there have been many splits with each giving a different interpretation to the words in the Bible. Even the Bible itself is contradictory. The Old Testament is as much a part of Christian teachings as the New and yet in the Old Testament you are taught An Eye For An Eye, and in the New, Turn The Other Cheek. How is anyone supposed to make sense of that?    
    England has always been a diverse nation with mixed nationalities and religions. Most merge into the population without being noticed because their skin is white. I have always said that if Germans were black I would be mulato because my paternal grandparents were German.
    I grew up in London in an area full of Orthodox Jews. I can't remember if the shops were closed on Saturdays. Probably, in the early days. But they did shut for their own special days. We never objected.
    So the argument that other faiths should not get a special day does not really ring true for me. Let them have whatever they need. Just so long as it's not compulsory for everyone to join in. I would happily see the end to all Bank Holidays!

Gambling Technology

I heard on the news today that Councils are to be given the power to control the number of betting shops on the High Street. Probably good news but I wonder how relevant this is in today's world.
    Is anything being done to control on-line gambling? Every evening there are constant advertisements promoting bingo and casino sites offering top-ups if you sign up and deposit so much.
    I've never gambled on-line. I don't gamble full stop. Never even bought a lottery ticket. But I have spent hours playing games either on-line or on my computer and I know how addictive they can be. I don't know how much it costs to play a game of bingo on-line, but I bet it doesn't take very long and you are soon tempted to play again, and again and again.
    How many people are sitting in front of their computers for far too long every day hoping for that jackpot?The prizes sound fantastic, but do the players realise how many other people are playing? One advert said there was a large pot and everyone would win - yeah, probably a couple of quid at the most by the time that pot was divided down to all the players.
    Once again, technology has shot ahead of legislation. Technology means you can take your casino with you everywhere you go. You don't even have to wait until you get home before you start playing. Is this good? If nothing else there should be restrictions on the number of advertisements that are put out on television.
    Has anyone done an investigation into the habits of on-line gamblers to see if this IS getting to be a problem? Maybe I'm being too pessimistic. Maybe players know when to stop. Maybe people are not running up huge bills to pay for the nightly fix of bingo or casino games on their computers, tablets or phones. I certainly hope not, but I fear these sites are going to be a far bigger problem than gaming machines in betting offices. Let's face it, you have to GO somewhere to get to a betting office. If you have the technology you could lose a fortune right in your own front room.