I see on this mornings TV that Peter Haine is now going to harass and
attack disabled next year.
Fair enough there probably are Benefit cheats but I feel that a lot of
fragile people are going to be forced back into work just to satisfy
government figures.

Does the end justify the means? I think not.

nuffink wrote:
> I see on this mornings TV that Peter Haine is now going to harass and
> attack disabled next year.
> Fair enough there probably are Benefit cheats but I feel that a lot of
> fragile people are going to be forced back into work just to satisfy
> government figures.
> 
> Does the end justify the means? I think not.
I would suggest that the target is going to be the +50s with "mental 
health" problems - which is often related to the difficulty of anyone 
over 50 to get another job if made redundant.

There is usually very little chance for the 50+ to get a job that pays 
anything like the amount they were earning previously, or has anything 
like the same status.  Many would rather not be employed, than take on a 
low paid, low status job.

That attitude has to change.

-- 
Sue

Why do the Government not attack the scum on drugs, booze etc first. People 
who have never worked, never intend to work and laugh at everyone else. I do 
not work because I love the lifestyle, I can promise you. I was forced to 
stop. Concerned about the future, you I am.

On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 09:05:37 +0000, nuffink wrote:

> I see on this mornings TV that Peter Haine is now going to harass and
> attack disabled next year.
> Fair enough there probably are Benefit cheats but I feel that a lot of
> fragile people are going to be forced back into work just to satisfy
> government figures.
> 
> Does the end justify the means? I think not.

Yes, but let's keep a sense of proportion. Hain has said he expects 50%
will fail the test. That means 50% of claimants will continue to receive
benefits. If you are incapable of work for whatever reason, you will not be
penalised.

Mind you, I do find it interesting that the test will take in keyboard and
mouse skills. Wonder how many posters will suddenly go to ground.....


-- 
the dot wanderer at tesco dot net

On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 10:48:00 GMT, cyberwraith wrote:

> Why do the Government not attack the scum on drugs, booze etc first. People 
> who have never worked, never intend to work and laugh at everyone else. 

One could argue that exactly what they are doing.

I do 
> not work because I love the lifestyle, I can promise you. 

I realise what you mean, but that's not how it read.....


-- 
the dot wanderer at tesco dot net

"The Wanderer"  wrote in message 
news:pf5fckudwfb5.1xjrloc6cey6l.dlg@40tude.net...
> On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 09:05:37 +0000, nuffink wrote:
>
>> I see on this mornings TV that Peter Haine is now going to harass and
>> attack disabled next year.
>> Fair enough there probably are Benefit cheats but I feel that a lot of
>> fragile people are going to be forced back into work just to satisfy
>> government figures.
>>
>> Does the end justify the means? I think not.
>
> Yes, but let's keep a sense of proportion. Hain has said he expects 50%
> will fail the test. That means 50% of claimants will continue to receive
> benefits. If you are incapable of work for whatever reason, you will not 
> be
> penalised.
>
> Mind you, I do find it interesting that the test will take in keyboard and
> mouse skills. Wonder how many posters will suddenly go to ground.....
>
There is some considerable difference between posting on usenet and having 
employable keyboard skills, hopefully this fact will be recognised by Mr 
Haine's subordinates.

Wonder if any employer would seriously consider having to provide an extra 
large monitor, possibly specialist software and accessible office, loo, 
canteen etc. a fair return for being able to employ a 5-10 wpm typist?

..

On 19 Nov, 09:05, nuffink  wrote:
> I see on this mornings TV that Peter Haine is now going to harass and
> attack disabled next year.
> Fair enough there probably are Benefit cheats but I feel that a lot of
> fragile people are going to be forced back into work just to satisfy
> government figures.
>
> Does the end justify the means? I think not.

Ah, at last, a non-MI5 posting.

Seriously, I've read something about it and it sounds good.

Thats usually the trouble - something sounds good in a meeting
somewhere, spin is applied for the press, and off you go with the
idea.
After all, who wouldn't want to work if they could, right?

But what sounds good in a meeting can, when getting down to real
people being affected, cause major problems.
It will almost certainly end up with targets to be hit, employers
annoyed, more debt for some and a lot more hassle for many. Simply
because government is crap at....you know, anything really.  :)

There are times I wish they wouldn't use the population of countries
to test out ideas someone had while sat on the kazi.
<mental image of some overweight guy sat on the toilet dreaming up
ideas that can make him look good in meetings>

Martin  <><

On 19 Nov, 09:37, Palindrome  wrote:
> nuffink wrote:
> > I see on this mornings TV that Peter Haine is now going to harass and
> > attack disabled next year.
> > Fair enough there probably are Benefit cheats but I feel that a lot of
> > fragile people are going to be forced back into work just to satisfy
> > government figures.
>
> > Does the end justify the means? I think not.
>
> I would suggest that the target is going to be the  with "mental
> health" problems - which is often related to the difficulty of anyone
> over 50 to get another job if made redundant.
>
> There is usually very little chance for the 50 to get a job that pays
> anything like the amount they were earning previously, or has anything
> like the same status.  Many would rather not be employed, than take on a
> low paid, low status job.
>
> That attitude has to change.
>
> --
> Sue

True.
That attitude does need to change. Though its not just the over 50s
who have it.
I've met many ex-university students who seem to be under the
impression, based on no skills whatsoever but a piece of paper saying
'degree', that they should be senior managers on £30K and have a
company car.  :)

Seriously, if someone has built up the skills to make them valuable to
many other organisations, they probably can get a job elsewhere at
some point without starting at the bottom.
But for many, they don't want to start at the bottom elsewhere. Maybe
they think life should be fair, maybe they think the world owes them
something.

But back to this new idea (well, alright, the idea of ill or disabled
people being prodded back to work isn't new) - I have to wonder what
employers will think of it?
After all, once they've got their quota of disabled staff (and
suprising how many companies do have both quota disabled and quota
minorites - ie 1 of each), who is going to force employers to take the
risk of employing someone who has been off sick for ages?
Employers tend to be risk-averse. Its how they stay in business.
Government can afford to take risks, but with departmental budgets
being cut for many - then the threat of someone not working out as a
valuable employee becomes a big risk for them too.

So how do employers get forced to take the staff on rather than
someone with a working record, including low sickness record?
I can't see it happening, offhand.

Martin  <><

On 19 Nov, 10:48, "cyberwraith"  wrote:
> Why do the Government not attack the scum on drugs, booze etc first. People
> who have never worked, never intend to work and laugh at everyone else. I do
> not work because I love the lifestyle, I can promise you. I was forced to
> stop. Concerned about the future, you I am.

Many of those scum aren't on incapacity benefit, for starters.
Many are working, or on jobseekers. A few are on the game (crack
habits tend to build up into big money needed daily).

Now those who have never worked, never intend to work, they are a
different problem.
One the jobcentre tend to force onto courses, get interviews for etc.
Having to jump through hoops for usually less money and more hassle
than incapacity benefit claimants get.

Martin  <><

<snipped>
> Mind you, I do find it interesting that the test will take in keyboard and
> mouse skills. Wonder how many posters will suddenly go to ground.....
>
> --
> the dot wanderer at tesco dot net

LOL.
Thanks for that, brought the first smile of the day to my face.

Martin  <><

On 19 Nov, 16:26, "Terry"  wrote:
> "The Wanderer"  wrote in message
>
> news:pf5fckudwfb5.1xjrloc6cey6l.dlg@40tude.net...
>
>
>
> > On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 09:05:37 +0000, nuffink wrote:
>
> >> I see on this mornings TV that Peter Haine is now going to harass and
> >> attack disabled next year.
> >> Fair enough there probably are Benefit cheats but I feel that a lot of
> >> fragile people are going to be forced back into work just to satisfy
> >> government figures.
>
> >> Does the end justify the means? I think not.
>
> > Yes, but let's keep a sense of proportion. Hain has said he expects 50%
> > will fail the test. That means 50% of claimants will continue to receive
> > benefits. If you are incapable of work for whatever reason, you will not
> > be
> > penalised.
>
> > Mind you, I do find it interesting that the test will take in keyboard and
> > mouse skills. Wonder how many posters will suddenly go to ground.....
>
> There is some considerable difference between posting on usenet and having
> employable keyboard skills, hopefully this fact will be recognised by Mr
> Haine's subordinates.
>
> Wonder if any employer would seriously consider having to provide an extra
> large monitor, possibly specialist software and accessible office, loo,
> canteen etc. a fair return for being able to employ a 5-10 wpm typist?
>
> ..- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

There's not a massive difference, I feel.
I'm on the computer pretty much my entire working day. My typing speed
is a mere 20 words per minute on a good day, less on a not so good
day. But typing is a small part of my job, despite being the bit that
makes the money.
Doesn't matter if I type 500 words in a day or just 5 - its other
skills that come into play during the day too.
But typing isn't everything in many jobs. Accuracy & ability to think
come into things too.

Most employers perhaps wouldn't want to create those facilities
directly. But if they've had work done on the building in the last few
years, or have had disabled visitors (never mind staff), you'll often
find accessable office, loo and canteen already.
5-10 wpm typist is perhaps a poor example. But there are ways round
that.
Years ago while working at DLA in Blackpool I used to do 2 or 3
letters a day. Didn't type any, just dictated them into the automated
service and someone else typed them.
Usually the blind typist, but occasionally someone else. Now that lady
could type, never did find any errors....

Its not always a good use of skills to have everyone typing their own
stuff. Many people's skills are far better utilised doing something
other than typing.

Martin  <><

> I see on this mornings TV that Peter Haine is now going to harass and
> attack disabled next year.
> Fair enough there probably are Benefit cheats but I feel that a lot of
> fragile people are going to be forced back into work just to satisfy
> government figures.
>
> Does the end justify the means? I think not.


The amount of money they are throwing at Iraq and Afganistan whilst 
pretending to be world power must be pinching the purse a bit.
Anyway, this government will be out at the next election, so the new mob 
will be interested in other things for a while.

On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 17:26:59 -0000, Phi wrote:

>> I see on this mornings TV that Peter Haine is now going to harass and
>> attack disabled next year.
>> Fair enough there probably are Benefit cheats but I feel that a lot of
>> fragile people are going to be forced back into work just to satisfy
>> government figures.
>>
>> Does the end justify the means? I think not.
> 
> 
> The amount of money they are throwing at Iraq and Afganistan whilst 
> pretending to be world power must be pinching the purse a bit.
> Anyway, this government will be out at the next election, so the new mob 
> will be interested in other things for a while.

Then I think you are very naive if you think this little chestnut is going
to go away. 



-- 
the dot wanderer at tesco dot net

>Then I think you are very naive if you think this little chestnut is going
>to go away.

Unless, a study shows that people on benefits have a much smaller carbon 
footprint than daily travellers to and from work. That would cause a 
quandary for the decision makers. They could then call it a subsidy.

On 19 Nov, 19:22, "Phi"  wrote:
> >Then I think you are very naive if you think this little chestnut is going
> >to go away.
>
> Unless, a study shows that people on benefits have a much smaller carbon
> footprint than daily travellers to and from work. That would cause a
> quandary for the decision makers. They could then call it a subsidy.

Smaller carbon footprint? Not so sure about that.
At home using electrical devices. Heating the house in winter, and so
on.

We need people to work. Just don't necessarily want it to be us.

Martin  <><

On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 13:58:48 +0000, The Wanderer 
wrote:

>On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 09:05:37 +0000, nuffink wrote:
>
>> I see on this mornings TV that Peter Haine is now going to harass and
>> attack disabled next year.
>> Fair enough there probably are Benefit cheats but I feel that a lot of
>> fragile people are going to be forced back into work just to satisfy
>> government figures.
>> 
>> Does the end justify the means? I think not.
>
>Yes, but let's keep a sense of proportion. Hain has said he expects 50%
>will fail the test. That means 50% of claimants will continue to receive
>benefits. If you are incapable of work for whatever reason, you will not be
>penalised.

But he also said the test would be to see what work can be done.
>
>Mind you, I do find it interesting that the test will take in keyboard and
>mouse skills. Wonder how many posters will suddenly go to ground....

Exactly. They coud say "Hey you can operate a computer so we can train
you as a a computer operator" PASS TEST
Next!.

On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 16:26:56 -0000, "Terry"  wrote:

>
>"The Wanderer"  wrote in message 
>news:pf5fckudwfb5.1xjrloc6cey6l.dlg@40tude.net...
>> On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 09:05:37 +0000, nuffink wrote:
>>
>>> I see on this mornings TV that Peter Haine is now going to harass and
>>> attack disabled next year.
>>> Fair enough there probably are Benefit cheats but I feel that a lot of
>>> fragile people are going to be forced back into work just to satisfy
>>> government figures.
>>>
>>> Does the end justify the means? I think not.
>>
>> Yes, but let's keep a sense of proportion. Hain has said he expects 50%
>> will fail the test. That means 50% of claimants will continue to receive
>> benefits. If you are incapable of work for whatever reason, you will not 
>> be
>> penalised.
>>
>> Mind you, I do find it interesting that the test will take in keyboard and
>> mouse skills. Wonder how many posters will suddenly go to ground.....
>>
>There is some considerable difference between posting on usenet and having 
>employable keyboard skills, hopefully this fact will be recognised by Mr 
>Haine's subordinates.

'Hopefully'
>
>Wonder if any employer would seriously consider having to provide an extra 
>large monitor, possibly specialist software and accessible office, loo, 
>canteen etc. a fair return for being able to employ a 5-10 wpm typist?

I went for an interview last year. I told them I can and will work at
anything, as long as you can find me an employer who doesnt mind me
falling over a lot (along with the resultant consequences), Having to
sit in the toilet occasionally for half an hour (as the painkillers
make me horribly constipated) then having to lay down for a few hours
per day.
Also, usually by around 2 PM my hips and back are so painfull I would
need to go home.

I suppose I could become an MP?

On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 08:29:15 -0800 (PST), "mart2306@hotmail.com"
 wrote:

>On 19 Nov, 09:05, nuffink  wrote:
>> I see on this mornings TV that Peter Haine is now going to harass and
>> attack disabled next year.
>> Fair enough there probably are Benefit cheats but I feel that a lot of
>> fragile people are going to be forced back into work just to satisfy
>> government figures.
>>
>> Does the end justify the means? I think not.
>
>Ah, at last, a non-MI5 posting.
>
>Seriously, I've read something about it and it sounds good.
>
>Thats usually the trouble - something sounds good in a meeting
>somewhere, spin is applied for the press, and off you go with the
>idea.
>After all, who wouldn't want to work if they could, right?

Damned right. See my other post.

On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 17:26:59 -0000, "Phi" 
wrote:

>> I see on this mornings TV that Peter Haine is now going to harass and
>> attack disabled next year.
>> Fair enough there probably are Benefit cheats but I feel that a lot of
>> fragile people are going to be forced back into work just to satisfy
>> government figures.
>>
>> Does the end justify the means? I think not.
>
>
>The amount of money they are throwing at Iraq and Afganistan whilst 
>pretending to be world power must be pinching the purse a bit.
>Anyway, this government will be out at the next election, so the new mob 
>will be interested in other things for a while.
>
Oh yes, the Junior school mob. I wont trust them as far as I can throw
them.

nuffink wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 16:26:56 -0000, "Terry"  wrote:
> 
>> "The Wanderer"  wrote in message 
>> news:pf5fckudwfb5.1xjrloc6cey6l.dlg@40tude.net...
>>> On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 09:05:37 +0000, nuffink wrote:
>>>
>>>> I see on this mornings TV that Peter Haine is now going to harass and
>>>> attack disabled next year.
>>>> Fair enough there probably are Benefit cheats but I feel that a lot of
>>>> fragile people are going to be forced back into work just to satisfy
>>>> government figures.
>>>>
>>>> Does the end justify the means? I think not.
>>> Yes, but let's keep a sense of proportion. Hain has said he expects 50%
>>> will fail the test. That means 50% of claimants will continue to receive
>>> benefits. If you are incapable of work for whatever reason, you will not 
>>> be
>>> penalised.
>>>
>>> Mind you, I do find it interesting that the test will take in keyboard and
>>> mouse skills. Wonder how many posters will suddenly go to ground.....
>>>
>> There is some considerable difference between posting on usenet and having 
>> employable keyboard skills, hopefully this fact will be recognised by Mr 
>> Haine's subordinates.
> 
> 'Hopefully'
>> Wonder if any employer would seriously consider having to provide an extra 
>> large monitor, possibly specialist software and accessible office, loo, 
>> canteen etc. a fair return for being able to employ a 5-10 wpm typist?
> 
> I went for an interview last year. I told them I can and will work at
> anything, as long as you can find me an employer who doesnt mind me
> falling over a lot (along with the resultant consequences), Having to
> sit in the toilet occasionally for half an hour (as the painkillers
> make me horribly constipated) then having to lay down for a few hours
> per day.
> Also, usually by around 2 PM my hips and back are so painfull I would
> need to go home.
> 
> I suppose I could become an MP?

OK, so what skills do you have and what are you good at?  What skills 
could you acquire? It sounds like your problems could be managed at 
home, with a job that allowed you to work there and gave total 
flexibility of hours.

Fluent in another language? How about being an online or offline 
translator? Just good with English? How about technical author, turning 
legal and engineering speak into plain English? Good at ASIC design? 
That can be done in bed using a computer by a tetraplaegic...I know 
because I know one - who earns 40kGBP pa doing it...

The telecommunications revolution is still happening and has huge 
potential for levelling the playing field, just a little, for the disabled.

--
Sue

On Tue, 20 Nov 2007 07:58:34 +0000, nuffink wrote:

> On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 13:58:48 +0000, The Wanderer 
> wrote:
> 
>>On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 09:05:37 +0000, nuffink wrote:
>>
>>> I see on this mornings TV that Peter Haine is now going to harass and
>>> attack disabled next year.
>>> Fair enough there probably are Benefit cheats but I feel that a lot of
>>> fragile people are going to be forced back into work just to satisfy
>>> government figures.
>>> 
>>> Does the end justify the means? I think not.
>>
>>Yes, but let's keep a sense of proportion. Hain has said he expects 50%
>>will fail the test. That means 50% of claimants will continue to receive
>>benefits. If you are incapable of work for whatever reason, you will not be
>>penalised.
> 
> But he also said the test would be to see what work can be done.

Alright, look at that in a slightly different light - what work, if any,
the individual is capable of doing. Is that so wrong? Is there any reason
why an individual shouldn't contribute their bit towards society if the y
are capable, rather than stick out a hand for benefits?

The crux of the matter is whether or not such work will pay as much as
benefits - but that's altogether a different argument.

>>Mind you, I do find it interesting that the test will take in keyboard and
>>mouse skills. Wonder how many posters will suddenly go to ground....
> 
> Exactly. They coud say "Hey you can operate a computer so we can train
> you as a a computer operator" PASS TEST

See above.

> Next!.

Your post suggests you are in favour of putting out a hand for benefits
than work if you are capable of so doing. 

-- 
the dot wanderer at tesco dot net

On Tue, 20 Nov 2007 09:05:18 GMT, Palindrome  wrote:

>OK, so what skills do you have and what are you good at?  What skills 
>could you acquire? It sounds like your problems could be managed at 
>home, with a job that allowed you to work there and gave total 
>flexibility of hours.
>
>Fluent in another language? How about being an online or offline 
>translator? Just good with English? How about technical author, turning 
>legal and engineering speak into plain English? Good at ASIC design? 
>That can be done in bed using a computer by a tetraplaegic...I know 
>because I know one - who earns 40kGBP pa doing it...
>
>The telecommunications revolution is still happening and has huge 
>potential for levelling the playing field, just a little, for the disabled.

All of this might be applied to many carers like me, too. But my
experience in the past is that few employers are prepared to hire
someone with little or no experience in the type of work offered,
still fewer are content to hire someone to work at home from the
outset. Not to mention that long breaks in your employment record tend
to send your cv/application down the list. That assumes you can track
down these jobs in the first place. 

I hope more employers are waking up to the fact that if they want to
use the skills available, they will have to adapt in how their
businesses/organisations are run, but like others here, my hopes are
not high.

Regards, VivienB

Caring for elderly father, disabled by FSH Dystrophy and diabetic.
Please respond to group; mail to newsgroups address is deleted.

VivienB wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Nov 2007 09:05:18 GMT, Palindrome  wrote:
> 
>> OK, so what skills do you have and what are you good at?  What skills 
>> could you acquire? It sounds like your problems could be managed at 
>> home, with a job that allowed you to work there and gave total 
>> flexibility of hours.
>>
>> Fluent in another language? How about being an online or offline 
>> translator? Just good with English? How about technical author, turning 
>> legal and engineering speak into plain English? Good at ASIC design? 
>> That can be done in bed using a computer by a tetraplaegic...I know 
>> because I know one - who earns 40kGBP pa doing it...
>>
>> The telecommunications revolution is still happening and has huge 
>> potential for levelling the playing field, just a little, for the disabled.
> 
> All of this might be applied to many carers like me, too. But my
> experience in the past is that few employers are prepared to hire
> someone with little or no experience in the type of work offered,
> still fewer are content to hire someone to work at home from the
> outset. Not to mention that long breaks in your employment record tend
> to send your cv/application down the list. That assumes you can track
> down these jobs in the first place. 
> 
> I hope more employers are waking up to the fact that if they want to
> use the skills available, they will have to adapt in how their
> businesses/organisations are run, but like others here, my hopes are
> not high.
> 
> Regards, VivienB
> 
> Caring for elderly father, disabled by FSH Dystrophy and diabetic.
> Please respond to group; mail to newsgroups address is deleted.

I would suggest that many employers are looking to hire people with a 
strong sense of responsibility, staying power, loyalty, determination 
and empathy for the needs of others - things that most carers have in 
spades.

One person's "big gap in their CV" is another person's 24x7 dedication 
to what is usually an extremely difficult and demanding role that would 
challenge anyone.


They also need staff with skills - which is where things like the 
Leonard Cheshire Workability Scheme really help:

http://www.lcdisability.org


The right person for the job is rarely the best trained, or the most 
experienced, or the most qualified - it is almost invariably the best 
person for the job; most other weaknesses can be allowed for, but you 
can't change what a person is..

Employers are waking up to this...There is no point in hiring someone 
who will only be there until a better offer turns up, or who will not 
give a stuff about giving a fair day's work for a fair day's pay, or may 
not even turn up at all...



--
Sue

On 20 Nov, 17:57, Palindrome  wrote:
> VivienB wrote:
> > On Tue, 20 Nov 2007 09:05:18 GMT, Palindrome  wrote:
>
> >> OK, so what skills do you have and what are you good at?  What skills
> >> could you acquire? It sounds like your problems could be managed at
> >> home, with a job that allowed you to work there and gave total
> >> flexibility of hours.
>
> >> Fluent in another language? How about being an online or offline
> >> translator? Just good with English? How about technical author, turning
> >> legal and engineering speak into plain English? Good at ASIC design?
> >> That can be done in bed using a computer by a tetraplaegic...I know
> >> because I know one - who earns 40kGBP pa doing it...
>
> >> The telecommunications revolution is still happening and has huge
> >> potential for levelling the playing field, just a little, for the disabled.
>
> > All of this might be applied to many carers like me, too. But my
> > experience in the past is that few employers are prepared to hire
> > someone with little or no experience in the type of work offered,
> > still fewer are content to hire someone to work at home from the
> > outset. Not to mention that long breaks in your employment record tend
> > to send your cv/application down the list. That assumes you can track
> > down these jobs in the first place.
>
> > I hope more employers are waking up to the fact that if they want to
> > use the skills available, they will have to adapt in how their
> > businesses/organisations are run, but like others here, my hopes are
> > not high.
>
> > Regards, VivienB
>
> > Caring for elderly father, disabled by FSH Dystrophy and diabetic.
> > Please respond to group; mail to newsgroups address is deleted.
>
> I would suggest that many employers are looking to hire people with a
> strong sense of responsibility, staying power, loyalty, determination
> and empathy for the needs of others - things that most carers have in
> spades.
>
> One person's "big gap in their CV" is another person's 24x7 dedication
> to what is usually an extremely difficult and demanding role that would
> challenge anyone.
>
> They also need staff with skills - which is where things like the
> Leonard Cheshire Workability Scheme really help:
>
> http://www.lcdisability.org
>
> The right person for the job is rarely the best trained, or the most
> experienced, or the most qualified - it is almost invariably the best
> person for the job; most other weaknesses can be allowed for, but you
> can't change what a person is..
>
> Employers are waking up to this...There is no point in hiring someone
> who will only be there until a better offer turns up, or who will not
> give a stuff about giving a fair day's work for a fair day's pay, or may
> not even turn up at all...
>
> --
> Sue- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

While responsibility, empathy, staying power and loyalty might be
factors, skills and track record in employment count quite a lot more.
I've lost count of application forms asking for number of days off
sick in last 3 years. I've also yet to come across an employer who can
afford to take big risks with getting staff who might not work out.
There's always some risk, but many employers do what they can to limit
the risk.

Amusingly a friend was told she didn't have enough experience to do
the job advertised. Only 22 years experience as an office manager for
an investment company. The job? Office manager for an investment
company!
I've been turned down on a job involving quick decisions and reacting
accordingly. Perfect score on a rumble strip at 50 metres. Not a good
enough score (only got 12/0, which can't be beat at that level) was
the reason not to give me the position.

Anyone remember when guaranteed interviews for disabled came out? I've
had loads of interviews as met requirements, didn't get a job from any
of them. A couple I know from knowing people who work there that there
was no intention of employing a 'sickie'. Just had to interview a few
to meet legal requirements.

Martin  <><

"VivienB"  wrote in message 
news:v966k35e2fhca98b99dd4g875a3ll0kqkc@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 20 Nov 2007 09:05:18 GMT, Palindrome  wrote:
>
>>OK, so what skills do you have and what are you good at?  What skills
>>could you acquire? It sounds like your problems could be managed at
>>home, with a job that allowed you to work there and gave total
>>flexibility of hours.
>>
>>Fluent in another language? How about being an online or offline
>>translator? Just good with English? How about technical author, turning
>>legal and engineering speak into plain English? Good at ASIC design?
>>That can be done in bed using a computer by a tetraplaegic...I know
>>because I know one - who earns 40kGBP pa doing it...
>>
>>The telecommunications revolution is still happening and has huge
>>potential for levelling the playing field, just a little, for the 
>>disabled.
>
> All of this might be applied to many carers like me, too. But my
> experience in the past is that few employers are prepared to hire
> someone with little or no experience in the type of work offered,
> still fewer are content to hire someone to work at home from the
> outset. Not to mention that long breaks in your employment record tend
> to send your cv/application down the list. That assumes you can track
> down these jobs in the first place.
>
> I hope more employers are waking up to the fact that if they want to
> use the skills available, they will have to adapt in how their
> businesses/organisations are run, but like others here, my hopes are
> not high.
>
> Regards, VivienB
>
> Caring for elderly father, disabled by FSH Dystrophy and diabetic.
> Please respond to group; mail to newsgroups address is deleted.
>

The trouble is that carers can find that caring gets too much for them.
My own wife was my unpaid carer until last Saturday night when she decided 
to do a moonlight flit to be with a man who is still a man.
I had an anonymous letter last May, warning me that I should see the letters 
that were being passed between my wife and an inmate of HMP Acklington.
I found those, and they were/are in love.
He's 4 years older than me, and on the sex-offenders register - but he's 
still got working parts that interest her more than staying with me.

I was broken up at first and never wanted to see her again, until I found 
out that she also took money from me to leave with along with the Christmas 
presents I had already bought for her.
Took my cashcard to the machine, drew out the money and put the card back - 
I only found out today when checking my online balance.
The police aren't interested as the evidence is circumstantial they say.
Lucky she had her own motability car, or she'd likely have taken mine.
Now I can't even divorce her because I don't know where she is, and can't 
afford private detectives.

All this, just one month before we would have been married 21 years.
And they ask why I feel like taking my own life, yet they don't know that I 
am seriously thinking of doing just that..
There's only so much sh1t that one person can take in one life.

On Tue, 20 Nov 2007 09:05:18 GMT, Palindrome  wrote:

>> I suppose I could become an MP?
>
>OK, so what skills do you have and what are you good at?  What skills 
>could you acquire? It sounds like your problems could be managed at 
>home, with a job that allowed you to work there and gave total 
>flexibility of hours.

I do not wish to work from home. It might suit some but not me. Doing
so would increase my Insurance plus cause complications with the
Mortgage and may be against Council legislation

>Fluent in another language? How about being an online or offline 
>translator? Just good with English? How about technical author, turning 
>legal and engineering speak into plain English? Good at ASIC design? 
>That can be done in bed using a computer by a tetraplaegic...I know 
>because I know one - who earns 40kGBP pa doing it...
Good for him. However I just dont fany that
>
>The telecommunications revolution is still happening and has huge 
>potential for levelling the playing field, just a little, for the disabled.

Great for those that want it but I dont fancy any of the above. Am I
to be railroaded into a job that I dont want to do or lose benefits
simply to appease government bean counters?

On Tue, 20 Nov 2007 11:55:41 -0800 (PST), "mart2306@hotmail.com"
 wrote:

>> - Show quoted text -
>
>While responsibility, empathy, staying power and loyalty might be
>factors, skills and track record in employment count quite a lot more.
>I've lost count of application forms asking for number of days off
>sick in last 3 years. I've also yet to come across an employer who can
>afford to take big risks with getting staff who might not work out.
>There's always some risk, but many employers do what they can to limit
>the risk.

But for some the risk is dangerous. What if they employ a DP, he/she
falls over,hurting someone or damaging something.?

On Tue, 20 Nov 2007 14:46:22 +0000, The Wanderer 
wrote:

>> 
>> But he also said the test would be to see what work can be done.
>
>Alright, look at that in a slightly different light - what work, if any,
>the individual is capable of doing. Is that so wrong? Is there any reason
>why an individual shouldn't contribute their bit towards society if the y
>are capable, rather than stick out a hand for benefits?
But its the Doctors, consultand and surgeons who say what a person is
capable of, NOT the Government. It will only take one poor sod being
forced into a job and who falls or hurts himself or someone else so
badly that legal action will be taken.
If I were an employer, I wouldnt want tp employ me or anyone like me
>
>The crux of the matter is whether or not such work will pay as much as
>benefits - but that's altogether a different argument.
No the crux of the matter is that vulnerable people will be harassed
and embarrassed into work that they probably are unfit for.
Yep there are probably benefit fiddlers but Im not interested in them.
>
>>>Mind you, I do find it interesting that the test will take in keyboard and
>>>mouse skills. Wonder how many posters will suddenly go to ground....
>> 
>> Exactly. They coud say "Hey you can operate a computer so we can train
>> you as a a computer operator" PASS TEST
>
>See above.
Its OK training something to do something. Its another thing to find a
job for that person. when he/she may need a lot of time off work or as
in my case be in bed for weeks on end.
>
>> Next!.
>
>Your post suggests you are in favour of putting out a hand for benefits
>than work if you are capable of so doing. 

Shows how badly you misunderstand things

nuffink wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Nov 2007 09:05:18 GMT, Palindrome  wrote:
> 
>>> I suppose I could become an MP?
>> OK, so what skills do you have and what are you good at?  What skills 
>> could you acquire? It sounds like your problems could be managed at 
>> home, with a job that allowed you to work there and gave total 
>> flexibility of hours.
> 
> I do not wish to work from home. It might suit some but not me. Doing
> so would increase my Insurance plus cause complications with the
> Mortgage and may be against Council legislation

Me, I've generally found something positive to say about work but found 
it a lot harder to say anything good about the process of getting there. 
  Especially on cold, dark mornings standing waiting for a bus. Or 
having to walk through a place where robberies, muggings and murder are 
commonplace, to get to my office and back. So, for me at least, working 
from home has its attractions. However, it isn't too practical for a bus 
driver..

There are, of course, costs in commuting, just as there could be costs 
in home working. I doubt any increase in insurance could match the cost 
of my last annual travel pass into Central London..

As to Councils - they are a lot more flexible these daya, now that their 
tenants have some rights and know them.


> 
>> Fluent in another language? How about being an online or offline 
>> translator? Just good with English? How about technical author, turning 
>> legal and engineering speak into plain English? Good at ASIC design? 
>> That can be done in bed using a computer by a tetraplaegic...I know 
>> because I know one - who earns 40kGBP pa doing it...
> Good for him. However I just dont fany that
>> The telecommunications revolution is still happening and has huge 
>> potential for levelling the playing field, just a little, for the disabled.
> 
> Great for those that want it but I dont fancy any of the above. Am I
> to be railroaded into a job that I dont want to do or lose benefits
> simply to appease government bean counters?

Yep, I suspect so. Rejecting a job because you "don't fancy it" is not 
going to be an option. Rejecting a job that is available and that you 
could do, simply because you don't wish to do it or you don't like where 
you have to do it aren't going to be options. The bean counter looking 
at individual cases probably doesn't like their job, hates the commute 
to and from work and loathes their office with its view of people 
enjoying themselves in the street outside.

Never mind, there is always the health card to play..

--
Sue

On Wed, 21 Nov 2007 09:10:29 GMT, Palindrome  wrote:

>> I do not wish to work from home. It might suit some but not me. Doing
>> so would increase my Insurance plus cause complications with the
>> Mortgage and may be against Council legislation
>
>Me, I've generally found something positive to say about work but found 
>it a lot harder to say anything good about the process of getting there. 
>  Especially on cold, dark mornings standing waiting for a bus. Or 
>having to walk through a place where robberies, muggings and murder are 
>commonplace, to get to my office and back. So, for me at least, working 
>from home has its attractions. However, it isn't too practical for a bus 
>driver..

I live in the country. Its beautifull. I adore getting up in the early
mornings when its cold and frosty and standung at my back door looking
out over fields. ButI just dont want to work from home.
>
>There are, of course, costs in commuting, just as there could be costs 
>in home working. I doubt any increase in insurance could match the cost 
>of my last annual travel pass into Central London..
I once worked in Central London for 5 weeks back in the 70's. I have
never neither do I wish to return, other than to go to heathrow, which
is very rare. But I still enjoy getting out and about on those rare
occasions when I am able.
>
>As to Councils - they are a lot more flexible these daya, now that their 
>tenants have some rights and know them.
Not mine.
>

>> 
>> Great for those that want it but I dont fancy any of the above. Am I
>> to be railroaded into a job that I dont want to do or lose benefits
>> simply to appease government bean counters?
>
>Yep, I suspect so. Rejecting a job because you "don't fancy it" is not 
>going to be an option. Rejecting a job that is available and that you 
>could do, simply because you don't wish to do it or you don't like where 
>you have to do it aren't going to be options. The bean counter looking 
>at individual cases probably doesn't like their job, hates the commute 
>to and from work and loathes their office with its view of people 
>enjoying themselves in the street outside.
But they are fit and able enough to seek alternatives.

So theyll put me in a job I dislike. How long do you think that will
last. Im also curious if its HMG who will pay me damages for forcing
me back to work if it makes my condition any worse?
>
>Never mind, there is always the health card to play..

On Wed, 21 Nov 2007 08:04:29 +0000, nuffink wrote:

> On Tue, 20 Nov 2007 14:46:22 +0000, The Wanderer 
> wrote:
> 
>>> 
>>> But he also said the test would be to see what work can be done.
>>
>>Alright, look at that in a slightly different light - what work, if any,
>>the individual is capable of doing. Is that so wrong? Is there any reason
>>why an individual shouldn't contribute their bit towards society if the y
>>are capable, rather than stick out a hand for benefits?
> But its the Doctors, consultand and surgeons who say what a person is
> capable of, NOT the Government. 

But at this stage you don't know how the new proposals will work. You seem
hell bent on meeting trouble half way. Do you think any review panel will
ignore valid input from the medical profession?

> It will only take one poor sod being
> forced into a job and who falls or hurts himself or someone else so
> badly that legal action will be taken.

That is merely scare-mongering.

> If I were an employer, I wouldnt want tp employ me or anyone like me

Funnily enough, if I were an employer, I don't think I'd want to employ
you, for no other reason than your attitude alone.

>>
>>The crux of the matter is whether or not such work will pay as much as
>>benefits - but that's altogether a different argument.
> No the crux of the matter is that vulnerable people will be harassed
> and embarrassed into work that they probably are unfit for.
> Yep there are probably benefit fiddlers but Im not interested in them.
>>
>>>>Mind you, I do find it interesting that the test will take in keyboard and
>>>>mouse skills. Wonder how many posters will suddenly go to ground....
>>> 
>>> Exactly. They coud say "Hey you can operate a computer so we can train
>>> you as a a computer operator" PASS TEST
>>
>>See above.
> Its OK training something to do something. Its another thing to find a
> job for that person. when he/she may need a lot of time off work or as
> in my case be in bed for weeks on end.

Then I am sure you will have well-documented medical evidence as and when
you are called to any assesment.

>>
>>> Next!.
>>
>>Your post suggests you are in favour of putting out a hand for benefits
>>than work if you are capable of so doing. 
> 
> Shows how badly you misunderstand things

No, it shows how badly you've put your case forward. 

-- 
the dot wanderer at tesco dot net

On 21 Nov, 08:00, nuffink  wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Nov 2007 11:55:41 -0800 (PST), "mart2...@hotmail.com"
>
>  wrote:
> >> - Show quoted text -
>
> >While responsibility, empathy, staying power and loyalty might be
> >factors, skills and track record in employment count quite a lot more.
> >I've lost count of application forms asking for number of days off
> >sick in last 3 years. I've also yet to come across an employer who can
> >afford to take big risks with getting staff who might not work out.
> >There's always some risk, but many employers do what they can to limit
> >the risk.
>
> But for some the risk is dangerous. What if they employ a DP, he/she
> falls over,hurting someone or damaging something.?

Exactly the same as if another employee did.
As a group, we aren't more or less likely to fall over, hurting
someone or damaging something. As individuals we may, but an employer
can try and reduce problems from that in the same way they do for any
other employee.
I've seen it done for a blind person on crutches with no more effort
than for me at the time (when I was able-bodied).

As for hurt or damage that does occur - thats why God invented
insurance.

Martin  <><

On 21 Nov, 07:57, nuffink  wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Nov 2007 09:05:18 GMT, Palindrome  wrote:
> >> I suppose I could become an MP?
>
> >OK, so what skills do you have and what are you good at?  What skills
> >could you acquire? It sounds like your problems could be managed at
> >home, with a job that allowed you to work there and gave total
> >flexibility of hours.
>
> I do not wish to work from home. It might suit some but not me. Doing
> so would increase my Insurance plus cause complications with the
> Mortgage and may be against Council legislation
>
> >Fluent in another language? How about being an online or offline
> >translator? Just good with English? How about technical author, turning
> >legal and engineering speak into plain English? Good at ASIC design?
> >That can be done in bed using a computer by a tetraplaegic...I know
> >because I know one - who earns 40kGBP pa doing it...
>
> Good for him. However I just dont fany that
>
>
>
> >The telecommunications revolution is still happening and has huge
> >potential for levelling the playing field, just a little, for the disabled.
>
> Great for those that want it but I dont fancy any of the above. Am I
> to be railroaded into a job that I dont want to do or lose benefits
> simply to appease government bean counters?

Ok, you don't want to work from home.
Insurance, council tax and mortgage don't come into it for most
working from home jobs - though the employer still has a duty of
health and safety even when you work from home.
OK, you don't fancy that. But could physically and mentally do it?

Again with languages - you don't fancy that. But could physically and
mentally do it?

By the sound of it, you won't be railroaded into a job by these
government ideas. But could be railroaded onto JSA if found that you
can work.
And JSA don't fancy the idea of someone refusing jobs or refusing to
look for work.....

Martin  <><

On 21 Nov, 08:04, nuffink  wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Nov 2007 14:46:22 +0000, The Wanderer 
> wrote:
>
>
>
> >> But he also said the test would be to see what work can be done.
>
> >Alright, look at that in a slightly different light - what work, if any,
> >the individual is capable of doing. Is that so wrong? Is there any reason
> >why an individual shouldn't contribute their bit towards society if the y
> >are capable, rather than stick out a hand for benefits?
>
> But its the Doctors, consultand and surgeons who say what a person is
> capable of, NOT the Government. It will only take one poor sod being
> forced into a job and who falls or hurts himself or someone else so
> badly that legal action will be taken.
> If I were an employer, I wouldnt want tp employ me or anyone like me
>
> >The crux of the matter is whether or not such work will pay as much as
> >benefits - but that's altogether a different argument.
>
> No the crux of the matter is that vulnerable people will be harassed
> and embarrassed into work that they probably are unfit for.
> Yep there are probably benefit fiddlers but Im not interested in them.
>
> >>>Mind you, I do find it interesting that the test will take in keyboard and
> >>>mouse skills. Wonder how many posters will suddenly go to ground....
>
> >> Exactly. They coud say "Hey you can operate a computer so we can train
> >> you as a a computer operator" PASS TEST
>
> >See above.
>
> Its OK training something to do something. Its another thing to find a
> job for that person. when he/she may need a lot of time off work or as
> in my case be in bed for weeks on end.
>
>
>
> >> Next!.
>
> >Your post suggests you are in favour of putting out a hand for benefits
> >than work if you are capable of so doing.
>
> Shows how badly you misunderstand things

Actually its not medical people who will say what you are capable of.
They will know what you can't do because of your condition, but won't
have the first clue what you can do.

eg arthritis in leg joints. They may know that you cannot play
football or rugby. But won't know about your ability to drive a
forklift. Or your ability to load a truck. Or your ability to enter
data onto a spreadsheet database.

The government can offer loads of training (they do already). But
can't find you work if you don't also make an effort.
However, they also don't need to pay you jobseekers allowance at the
full rate.....

And I'm not so sure we misunderstand things. Can you explain?

Martin  <><

On 21 Nov, 11:55, nuffink  wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Nov 2007 09:10:29 GMT, Palindrome  wrote:
> >> I do not wish to work from home. It might suit some but not me. Doing
> >> so would increase my Insurance plus cause complications with the
> >> Mortgage and may be against Council legislation
>
> >Me, I've generally found something positive to say about work but found
> >it a lot harder to say anything good about the process of getting there.
> >  Especially on cold, dark mornings standing waiting for a bus. Or
> >having to walk through a place where robberies, muggings and murder are
> >commonplace, to get to my office and back. So, for me at least, working
> >from home has its attractions. However, it isn't too practical for a bus
> >driver..
>
> I live in the country. Its beautifull. I adore getting up in the early
> mornings when its cold and frosty and standung at my back door looking
> out over fields. ButI just dont want to work from home.
>
> >There are, of course, costs in commuting, just as there could be costs
> >in home working. I doubt any increase in insurance could match the cost
> >of my last annual travel pass into Central London..
>
> I once worked in Central London for 5 weeks back in the 70's. I have
> never neither do I wish to return, other than to go to heathrow, which
> is very rare. But I still enjoy getting out and about on those rare
> occasions when I am able.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >As to Councils - they are a lot more flexible these daya, now that their
> >tenants have some rights and know them.
> Not mine.
>
> >> Great for those that want it but I dont fancy any of the above. Am I
> >> to be railroaded into a job that I dont want to do or lose benefits
> >> simply to appease government bean counters?
>
> >Yep, I suspect so. Rejecting a job because you "don't fancy it" is not
> >going to be an option. Rejecting a job that is available and that you
> >could do, simply because you don't wish to do it or you don't like where
> >you have to do it aren't going to be options. The bean counter looking
> >at individual cases probably doesn't like their job, hates the commute
> >to and from work and loathes their office with its view of people
> >enjoying themselves in the street outside.
>
> But they are fit and able enough to seek alternatives.
>

Are you sure of that?
The bean counters have their quota of diabled people doing the job
too.
And being able to use a keyboard and mouse, sounds like something
useful in a bean-counters job.
They do advertise for staff.....

> So theyll put me in a job I dislike.

No, they will expect you to get a job. If you dislike it, thats up to
you. But they will also want good reason why you won't take a job.
Or risk cut in benefit for you.

JSA isn't claimed until you find the perfect job. Its supposed to be
until you find a job. Whether shovelling shit or running a bank,
doesn't matter. Its a job as far as benefits office are concerned.

How long do you think that will
> last. Im also curious if its HMG who will pay me damages for forcing
> me back to work if it makes my condition any worse?

No, can't see them paying for damages. However, you can either accept
benefits or accept work.
For many of us, time makes our condition worse. Never heard of someone
suing the government over not stopping time.

Come to think of it, travel makes my condition worse. Can someone move
London closer to the Black Country please?  :)

>

Martin  <><

On Tue, 20 Nov 2007 23:03:01 GMT, "Dark Horse"
 wrote:

>>>The telecommunications revolution is still happening and has huge
>>>potential for levelling the playing field, just a little, for the 
>>>disabled.
>>
<Snip>
>>
>The trouble is that carers can find that caring gets too much for them.
>My own wife was my unpaid carer until last Saturday night when she decided 
>to do a moonlight flit to be with a man who is still a man.
>I had an anonymous letter last May, warning me that I should see the letters 
>that were being passed between my wife and an inmate of HMP Acklington.
>I found those, and they were/are in love.
>He's 4 years older than me, and on the sex-offenders register - but he's 
>still got working parts that interest her more than staying with me.
>
>I was broken up at first and never wanted to see her again, until I found 
>out that she also took money from me to leave with along with the Christmas 
>presents I had already bought for her.
>Took my cashcard to the machine, drew out the money and put the card back - 
>I only found out today when checking my online balance.
>The police aren't interested as the evidence is circumstantial they say.
>Lucky she had her own motability car, or she'd likely have taken mine.
>Now I can't even divorce her because I don't know where she is, and can't 
>afford private detectives.
>
>All this, just one month before we would have been married 21 years.
>And they ask why I feel like taking my own life, yet they don't know that I 
>am seriously thinking of doing just that..
>There's only so much sh1t that one person can take in one life. 

How are you today, Dark Horse?

Regards, VivienB

Caring for elderly father, disabled by FSH Dystrophy and diabetic.
Please respond to group; mail to newsgroups address is deleted.

"nuffink"  wrote in message 
news:lt45k3pl3h21ra7uen85e3lnerd7hqqlt7@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 16:26:56 -0000, "Terry"  wrote:
>
>>
>>"The Wanderer"  wrote in message
>>news:pf5fckudwfb5.1xjrloc6cey6l.dlg@40tude.net...
>>> On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 09:05:37 +0000, nuffink wrote:
>>>
>>>> I see on this mornings TV that Peter Haine is now going to harass and
>>>> attack disabled next year.
>>>> Fair enough there probably are Benefit cheats but I feel that a lot of
>>>> fragile people are going to be forced back into work just to satisfy
>>>> government figures.
>>>>
>>>> Does the end justify the means? I think not.
>>>
>>> Yes, but let's keep a sense of proportion. Hain has said he expects 50%
>>> will fail the test. That means 50% of claimants will continue to receive
>>> benefits. If you are incapable of work for whatever reason, you will not
>>> be
>>> penalised.
>>>
>>> Mind you, I do find it interesting that the test will take in keyboard 
>>> and
>>> mouse skills. Wonder how many posters will suddenly go to ground.....
>>>
>>There is some considerable difference between posting on usenet and having
>>employable keyboard skills, hopefully this fact will be recognised by Mr
>>Haine's subordinates.
>
> 'Hopefully'
>>
>>Wonder if any employer would seriously consider having to provide an extra
>>large monitor, possibly specialist software and accessible office, loo,
>>canteen etc. a fair return for being able to employ a 5-10 wpm typist?
>
> I went for an interview last year. I told them I can and will work at
> anything, as long as you can find me an employer who doesnt mind me
> falling over a lot (along with the resultant consequences), Having to
> sit in the toilet occasionally for half an hour (as the painkillers
> make me horribly constipated) then having to lay down for a few hours
> per day.
> Also, usually by around 2 PM my hips and back are so painfull I would
> need to go home.
>
> I suppose I could become an MP?

If you are photogenic, then you can't be an MP, especially if you wanna kip 
in the chamber
-- 
the_constructor

Don't tip it, recycle it. Join your local group.

http://freecycle.org/display.php?region=United%20Kingdom