“@JMonners

Oh dear, another one that doesn't read what's actually written before ****ging people off with their (probably) Daily Mail/Express/Sun inspired comments. Read what I wrote again mate. I suppose you think I actually WANTED to lose my house and go and live with my parents for a while, do you? No, it was forced on me by the fact, unlike what seems to be the popular opinion, the reality is that there is virtually no help atall for people that lose their jobs.”

“Some years ago in the midlands, a group of unemployed were ordered to go on a "work for your dole" scheme doing tree-pruning work along a railway line, and there was quite a hoo-ha when some disgruntled members began putting obstructions on the line.
The moral?- you can force people to work for their dole but you can't stop them sabotaging whatever project they're put on.”

“To all those claiming it is "slave labour" here is the definition:

1.treated as property to be bought and sold
2.forced to work
3.held against their will from the time of their capture, purchase or birth, and deprived of the right to leave, to refuse to work, or to demand compensation

Doing work experience may be inconvenient for some but it's not "slave labour".

As for PLC's making big profits, let's not forget that those profits raise massive tax income for the country.

Rick O'Shay
Zog”

“In a lot of other countries if you haven't found employment after six months they get you sweeping the streets and doing other menial tasks, which, is what THIS country SHOULD do to those who have never worked a day in their life's, why should they be allowed to sit at home all day in front of the TV while the rest of us go out and earn a living. Please note I do NOT include those who are out of work after working for a period of time and who WANT to get back into paid employment or those who are GENUINELY disabled and are unable to work my comment is aimed at those who are work shy and haven't had a job at all and have NO intention of getting one”

“Can i point out that these schemes are being used now in place of job advertising by these companies. They are not extra or new jobs.

The statistics show only 1 in 6 gain employment from this scheme, so for every one person that these companies would have employed anyway, they get 40 weeks of free work. Its slave labour. For every person that does not get employed, they then have it on their CV that they didnt get the job. How does this enhance their job prospects in any way? That 40 weeks of work could of been done by a real employee (the work has to be done by someone) and helped the already deflated youth job market.

Yet another clever scheme by the Tories to reward their corporate sponsors with free workers. It does nothing to help the unemployment problem. More is to come, believe me, workfare is just around the corner.”

“@ Steve Kay - Most of these people probably don't like anything associated with the work 'Work'. It mean missing Jeremy Kyle, Homes Under the Hammer and Bargain Hunt on day time TV. Then off down the pub .....”

“Surely the idea here is to get the experience before you apply for jobs as well? To see if you like the work offered? Who knows what may come of it if you work hard enough and show initiative.”

“@ Hydra 1.

Firstly the £65 JSA reference is what you are given for looking for work, not for doing it, so shouldn't be used in the context of calculating the hours you'd need to work, it's a free handout to help people along, not a salary.

Secondly there's no accounting in your figures from the "new" temporary employee perspective. Starting in the transition period when they aren't as adept as an experienced worker therefore you aren't as efficient, the fact you have to be trained which pulls another experienced person to one side, all the behind the scenes health and safety issues and form-filling, clothing, time recording, disruption and upheaval for a temproary placement isn't really in the interests of any major company that wants to remain efficient, but people will continue to see it as a company fleecing the individual. From my experience in high volume manufacturing, you only ever wanted long-term, committed individuals working for you, temporary placements are simply a headache to contend with.

Personally I don't think anone wins, but I'd like to see the companies addind a bit to the earnings of the individual, just to boost their self-respect and offer the incentive to work.”

“£65 a week JSA = 10.7 hours work at minimum wage (£6.08 per hour). If you are under 21, minimum wage is £4.98 an hour which means you would have to work just over 13 hours a week to earn £65.

That is easy enough to understand, so why are these young people being made to work 30 HOURS a week? How can anyone say that is not slave labour?

£65 a week for 30 hours work = an hourly rate of £2.16 per hour.

Do their transport costs to and from work get paid? The cost of lunch at work? If not, they will be coming home with a fair bit less than £65 a week in their hands.

They can't be said to be gaining anything valuable in the kind of jobs they are being forced to do - I know, I stacked shelves and cleaned and served in various low-end jobs as a teenager and it did absolutely NOTHING for my self-esteem, personal development or skills, nor did it earn me enough money for any quality of life whatsoever outside of the lousy job. If I had been forced to do it for nothing I can't imagine how low that would have made me feel.

This horrible scheme is further disempowering and disillusioning an already fed-up and disadvantaged group of young people, while simultaneously helping giant companies to further swell their profits - I think many of these young people could grow up really resenting society, and who could blame them?”

“Where are the 'Occupy Job Centre' crowd when you need them? lol”