Is the implied suggestion that the job seekers are undeserving layabouts, who should be made to work for their money? Does making them work for nothing provide a stimulus for the job seeker to find employment, however poorly paid or unattractive?
Many job seekers are graduates seeking career development. They are desperately sending out their CV’s seeking their first career break. It is always difficult for new graduates who have plenty of enthusiasm but lack work experience in their chosen field. If the government want to impose work experience on job seekers wouldn’t it make sense to find them beneficial placements that will actually help them to find that first step in their career.
But of course there are others who are long term unemployed and never held paid employment- is it helpful for them to be given work, to realise they could be in paid employment- and perhaps give them the confidence to apply?
Otherwise, using job seekers to stack shelves at no pay, does not seem beneficial to either the job seeker or the tax payer. The job seeker is not gaining any new skills that will help him or her find meaningful employment. The skills required to stack shelves would normally be gained ‘on the job’- no specific pre-qualifications are required.
Performing these tasks does however prevent some job seekers from attending interviews and filling in job applications.
There must be better ways for the DWP to help job seekers find employment. Is it impossible to arrange suitable placements, in connection with career counselling, seek genuine training opportunities to enable the unemployed of all ages acquire skills that will help them to move into genuine job opportunities?
Is the real reason for requiring the unemployed to work for nothing, an implied recognition that there are too few vacancies, and too many unemployed and there are no genuine job opportunities? Or is it a perfectly reasonable response to force those out of work into the working environment?
