Work for dole

Forums › Off topic › Work for dole

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5

12411 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5811

Trusted

Reply # 2019874 21-May-2018 15:17

frankv:

Coil:

I suppose that then begs the question of where the line is drawn, What if these unwilling workers don't want to work so inturn they get no benefit and start to live on the streets.

Perhaps there's a social responsibility to ensure that workplaces are not only safe, but also rewarding to work at, so that workers *are* willing. "Rewarding" in both senses; not only cash so you get to do what you want when you're not working, but also places of useful endeavour where people feel happy.

I agree with this. As a manager I regarded it as one of my primary responsibilities was to have a happy work force, which of course made me happy. I was constantly organising activities such is share lunches, theme days, competitions, off sites. Also providing the opportunity to experience working in other areas of the business to gain knowledge, experience and affinity with others and to work at associated or supplier businesses. I was flexible with leave and sick leave. Leadership was also shared with such things as meeting chairing etc. Of course all this also meant better productivity.

Mike
Retired IT Manager.
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

It's our only home, lets clean it up then...

Take My Advice, Pull Down Your Pants And Slide On The Ice!

MikeAqua

4317 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1719

Reply # 2019877 21-May-2018 15:19

MikeB4:

It is interesting that people blame the safety net for the fall when the fall is caused elsewhere.

The safety net in this case creates an economic niche, which some people are happy to fill. Employers are paying over minimum wage and struggling to find workers. Prior to welfare people would walk around the country looking for work.

But I still think we are better with a social welfare system.

I also think it should be a lot more generous to people who genuinely have no ability to work. Long term sickness beneficiaries, shouldn't have to live in poverty.

I know two people on sickness/invalids benefits. Person A has a severe physical disability and can't undertake any work that requires either verbal communication, physical tasks or physical input of information.

Person B is taking the and living at the expense of MSD and her de-facto partner (her flatmate as far as MSD is concerned). If person B wasn't getting a benefit, person A could be paid more and have an easier life.

Mike

geek4me

824 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 77

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

Reply # 2019906 21-May-2018 15:39

WINZ need to do more to help long term unemployed get into permanent jobs in the workforce. I know of some unemployed who want to work but are finding it impossible to get jobs themselves after many years of trying. People unemployed for over 2 years should be given more of a helping hand by WINZ / the government.

WINZ provide some work courses without there being any jobs for those who pass these courses because they have no experience.

WINZ meetings check you are still alive and have applied for jobs to keep the dole going. It would be better if they had a list of jobs available where employers are looking for staff with little or no experience to give the unemployed a kick start. (Like the Labour department did back in the 70's.)

Oh no, not another end of the world prediction

MikeB4

12411 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5811

Trusted

Reply # 2019915 21-May-2018 15:47

geek4me:

WINZ need to do more to help long term unemployed get into permanent jobs in the workforce. I know of some unemployed who want to work but are finding it impossible to get jobs themselves after many years of trying. People unemployed for over 2 years should be given more of a helping hand by WINZ / the government.

WINZ provide some work courses without there being any jobs for those who pass these courses because they have no experience.

WINZ meetings check you are still alive and have applied for jobs to keep the dole going. It would be better if they had a list of jobs available where employers are looking for staff with little or no experience to give the unemployed a kick start. (Like the Labour department did back in the 70's.)

In order as you have listed....

They do this now

Work training does not guarantee employment in the same way as a BA does not guarantee work

The Employment Service of the Department of Labour merged with Work and Income. Work and Income Job Brokers work with training establishments, employers and the Work and Income Case Managers to find Jobs and assist in the applications etc.

Mike
Retired IT Manager.
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

It's our only home, lets clean it up then...

Take My Advice, Pull Down Your Pants And Slide On The Ice!

MikeAqua

4317 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1719

Reply # 2019922 21-May-2018 15:57

2 people support this post

MikeB4:

They do this now [ help people find work]

Yet there are still unemployed people and un-em-peopled employers.

Something doesn't compute.

Mike

frankv

2341 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1133

Reply # 2019930 21-May-2018 16:12

geek4me:

WINZ need to do more to help long term unemployed get into permanent jobs in the workforce. I know of some unemployed who want to work but are finding it impossible to get jobs themselves after many years of trying.

Given that it is impossible to get jobs, what should WINZ do? I'm sure that WINZ staff have long ago seen the impossibility of them finding work for the unemployed person, and naturally put little effort into it.

MikeB4

12411 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5811

Trusted

Reply # 2019931 21-May-2018 16:13

MikeAqua:

MikeB4:

They do this now [ help people find work]

Yet there are still unemployed people and un-em-peopled employers.

Something doesn't compute.

Its not hard really, companies fail, markets change eg Amazon has the potential to create jobless figures here in NZ that will surpass those of the 1930s. Work and Income cannot create jobs they can only put candidates forward and at that point they are in the competitive job seeking environment. There also needs to be a change in attitude in NZ, there is a 'NIMBY' attitude in many employers and while they want benefit numbers to drop they do not want these candidate sin their back yard. Having said that there are many great employers that take a good many candidates offered by Work and Income.

Mike
Retired IT Manager.
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

It's our only home, lets clean it up then...

Take My Advice, Pull Down Your Pants And Slide On The Ice!

gzt

9808 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1464

Reply # 2019932 21-May-2018 16:14

Rikkitic:
My title isn't quite accurate but this seems like a great initiative and it is hard to sum up in a few words. I think welfare dependency is soul-destroying but I also believe there should be welfare and it should be more generous than it currently is. People who are genuinely needy through no fault of their own should not be treated like bludgers. But there also needs to be a way to move out of welfare.

I think benefit recipients should be made to do something to 'earn' their benefit, unless their circumstances genuinely make that impossible. This programme seems like a major step in the right direction.

I have not yet read through all the replies but you have it wrong. That is not work for the dole. That is a genuine training and skills course which selects motivated people to take part. Additionally it is operated by an organisation with genuine positions to fill.

MikeB4

12411 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5811

Trusted

Reply # 2019933 21-May-2018 16:14

frankv:

geek4me:

WINZ need to do more to help long term unemployed get into permanent jobs in the workforce. I know of some unemployed who want to work but are finding it impossible to get jobs themselves after many years of trying.

Given that it is impossible to get jobs, what should WINZ do? I'm sure that WINZ staff have long ago seen the impossibility of them finding work for the unemployed person, and naturally put little effort into it.

Absolutely wrong.

Mike
Retired IT Manager.
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

It's our only home, lets clean it up then...

Take My Advice, Pull Down Your Pants And Slide On The Ice!

JimmyH

2479 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1139

Reply # 2020019 21-May-2018 18:53

frankv:

Given that it is impossible to get jobs, what should WINZ do? I'm sure that WINZ staff have long ago seen the impossibility of them finding work for the unemployed person, and naturally put little effort into it.

That's incorrect.It's not remotely impossible to find a job, indeed in some areas employers struggle to find labour. Plus, WINZ work fairly hard to try and place beneficiaries into work.

However, there are some people who are regarded as pretty much hopeless cases, who fundamentally neither want to work nor are they remotely employable. As I understand it case managers and work brokers essentially give up on these people and just pay them, in order to focus their time on those who want to work and are realistically able to be placed. And I can understand why. Not only is it human nature, but employers would pretty soon stop referring any vacancies to WINZ if they had their time wasted by being sent a procession people who were not remotely suitable for the job and didn't really want it.

Disclaimer: I don't work for WINZ. But I know several people who used to. They were very dedicated and cared about their jobs, and were proud that they helped many into work. But some of the stories they told of what they had to deal with were very depressing.

Coil

5764 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1710

Trusted

Reply # 2020050 21-May-2018 20:00

MikeB4:

frankv:

Coil:

I suppose that then begs the question of where the line is drawn, What if these unwilling workers don't want to work so inturn they get no benefit and start to live on the streets.

Perhaps there's a social responsibility to ensure that workplaces are not only safe, but also rewarding to work at, so that workers *are* willing. "Rewarding" in both senses; not only cash so you get to do what you want when you're not working, but also places of useful endeavour where people feel happy.

I agree with this. As a manager I regarded it as one of my primary responsibilities was to have a happy work force, which of course made me happy. I was constantly organising activities such is share lunches, theme days, competitions, off sites. Also providing the opportunity to experience working in other areas of the business to gain knowledge, experience and affinity with others and to work at associated or supplier businesses. I was flexible with leave and sick leave. Leadership was also shared with such things as meeting chairing etc. Of course all this also meant better productivity.

I think one of the biggest things is not to pull wool over peoples eyes with little morale boosting activities like such but in helping them see the bigger picture (as you have said above) and feel that there is some form of progression and their lives are not just wasted to being another cog in the machine, I work for a company like this right now, Outright depressing. My manager is great, flexible with leave and so fourth but that only goes so far when you see yourself as a disposable worthless asset. If I left tomorrow they would be affected but still function. I got no reason to vest in the company I work for. If only people were valued.. Who knows, maybe myself and the 40 others who all agree are worthless employees with our heads in the sand.

Besides that, I think Rikkitic implied that the money that goes to people who are bludging the benefit is wasted money, but in turn we could all socially benefit. Like people picking up rubbish, doing gardening or working on community projects. The bonus of doing so is you get a little more than the dole and you are effectively positively working for your dole.
We aren't ever going to get no hopers into wage or salary based roles but more give them purpose and maybe feel inspired to improve their lives and become reliable enough to have a permanent job.

Steam: Coil (Same photos as profile here)
Origin: Scranax
Currently playing on PC: Rust, Subnautica, CS:GO, AOE2 HD, BeamNG Drive, BF1.

Geektastic

11243 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3579

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 2020139 21-May-2018 22:44

3 people support this post

In essence, a modernised version of the Victorian Work House, where you worked in return for board and lodging.

It seems entirely reasonable to expect claimants living off the largesse of the taxpayer (especially long term) to do something useful in return.

Geektastic

11243 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3579

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 2020140 21-May-2018 22:47

MikeAqua:
MikeB4:

They do this now [ help people find work]

Yet there are still unemployed people and un-em-peopled employers.

Something doesn't compute.

I suppose it depends on what you need. If your needs are for, say, specialist surveyors, the chances of a pile of those happening to be unemployed are, I imagine, rather small.

OTOH if you want someone to stack shelves or what have you, not so much.

Rikkitic

7322 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3428

Subscriber

Reply # 2020143 21-May-2018 23:05

One person supports this post

JimmyH:

However, there are some people who are regarded as pretty much hopeless cases, who fundamentally neither want to work nor are they remotely employable. As I understand it case managers and work brokers essentially give up on these people and just pay them, in order to focus their time on those who want to work and are realistically able to be placed. And I can understand why. Not only is it human nature, but employers would pretty soon stop referring any vacancies to WINZ if they had their time wasted by being sent a procession people who were not remotely suitable for the job and didn't really want it.

And these are the very people who, at an absolute minimum, should be made to arrive at a designated place at a designated time five days a week and sit in a chair for eight hours listening to hygiene lectures in exchange for their money. These people have to be made to do something for their money. Otherwise you have the situation we have today. People should not be rewarded simply because they are in the too hard basket. This is what creates poverty cycles and criminal children.

I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage

Scott3

378 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 169

Reply # 2020144 21-May-2018 23:22

2 people support this post

Putting the title "work for the dole" on this thread has sure raised a few hairs on peoples necks...

Article is about exactly what WINZ should be doing, Assisting those who are in need of support, allowing them to build skills, assisting with placement in rewarding work, and ultimately removing that persons need for support.

It seems like WINZ spends most of it's effort in being "gate keepers" to Benefits, that they have relatively little resourcing to really helpful things like this.

Regarding "work for the dole schemes", historically their promotion seemed more to stir up resentment for "lazy dole bludgers", than to be a meaningful pathway into paid employment. They seemed to ignore the following:

Anything less than around 4% unemployment means an economy has a serious labor shortage, and is seen as economically bad. (Skill, Location & timing mismatches mean full employment is not a realistic or desirable goal).
Numbers on Jobseaker benefits are actually quite low. About 120k, relative to a 2.6m people in employment.
Job seeker benefit recipients are required to be actively looking for work - WINZ checks number of job applications etc to verify (or in WINZ supported training) - Having them work 9 to 5 in something low value would compromise their ability to look for work.
From what I have heard, dealing with WINZ is so degrading, most "job seekers" genuinely want to find stable work and get away from WINZ. (note many of them are scared or taking a job they they don't fit, and either getting fired, or having to quit (say due to unsafe working conditons, or manual handling required that is beyond their physical strength), and then getting slapped with a stand down period. It also appears that the benefit system deals poorly with casual work, - if your hours get cut to zero for a week or two, you get neither pay, or a benefit.
Spending on the Jobseakers benefit is actually quite low. It is under 1% of our government expenditure (compare to other ministry of social development costs: - Accom assistance 1.43%, Invalids: 1.62%, Student loans 1.89%, DPB 2.12%, and Superannuation at 12.46% (2013 data)). Clearly there are lower hanging fruit when it comes to cutting welfare spending...

What I would like to see is government policy changed to incentive's the kind of behavior we want.

Currently we do have a welfare trap. Some people experience benefit abatement at a rate of 70%. When you add in the costs of being employed (transport to/from work, work appropriate clothing, phone so you are contactable), the net gain from working can be very low (or negitive if transport costs are high). This is the major issue with our welfare system that I can see.

Another issue we have is our targeted benefit system is so complex, that a significant number of targeted people do not claim the full benefits they are entitled to, due to poor information. People slipping through the cracks in our systems is quite bad really.

The perfect policy for a first world country in my eyes is a Universal Basic Income. It is really simple, nobody slips through the cracks, it means our progressive tax system can be replaced with a basic flat tax on every dollar earn't.

Advantages are that it is ideal for the unstable "gig" economy, reduced bureaucratic workload (winz can go from being benefit police to being a jobseaking assistance service), eliminates benefit abatement issues, eliminates stigma currently faced by beneficiaries.

Downside is that to make the numbers work, the UBI has to be set very low, this will mean a drop in income for the more lucrative benefits such as DPB, and Super. (possible we will need to retain a supplementary means tested benefit for retirees, and those unable to work (sickness), so those people can have some quality of life). Also we would need to move a bit of the tax burden off income, and onto land, or capital to keep the income tax rate reasonable. Other main downside is that no country anywhere has tested a UBI beyond a pilot scheme.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5