|
|
|
date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 12:14:08 -0000,
group: uk.gov.social-security
back
Jobseeker Direct, please do not say fuck or bugger.
Why are the JC and JD asking claimants to phone them at their expense for
job details? details that should be included in a job ad so people can
apply.
If they cant be bothered to advertise jobs properly then I cant be arsked to
waste time and money phoning those idiots to get details that should be
provided in the first place.
date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 12:14:08 -0000
author: Niteawk
|
Re: Jobseeker Direct, please do not say fuck or bugger.
On 10 Jan, 12:14, "Niteawk" wrote:
> Why are the JC and JD asking claimants to phone them at their expense for
> job details? details that should be included in a job ad so people can
> apply.
>
> If they cant be bothered to advertise jobs properly then I cant be arsked to
> waste time and money phoning those idiots to get details that should be
> provided in the first place.
And hopefully then the JC can't be arsked to pay benefit to you......
At least when you ring them they can log down that you've rung about a
job...
Martin <><
date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 04:43:14 -0800 (PST)
author: unknown
|
Re: Jobseeker Direct, please do not say fuck or bugger.
wrote in message
news:2255b307-cbcb-424c-ab5c-480a4fe7871b@i7g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> On 10 Jan, 12:14, "Niteawk" wrote:
>> Why are the JC and JD asking claimants to phone them at their expense for
>> job details? details that should be included in a job ad so people can
>> apply.
>>
>> If they cant be bothered to advertise jobs properly then I cant be arsked
>> to
>> waste time and money phoning those idiots to get details that should be
>> provided in the first place.
>
> And hopefully then the JC can't be arsked to pay benefit to you......
Its the law, they have to pay :)
>
> At least when you ring them they can log down that you've rung about a
> job...
>
They can do that when I sign on, still no excuse for wasting claimants very
limited resources.
date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 12:49:59 -0000
author: Niteawk
|
Re: Jobseeker Direct, please do not say fuck or bugger.
On 10 Jan, 12:49, "Niteawk" wrote:
> wrote in message
>
> news:2255b307-cbcb-424c-ab5c-480a4fe7871b@i7g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
> > On 10 Jan, 12:14, "Niteawk" wrote:
> >> Why are the JC and JD asking claimants to phone them at their expense for
> >> job details? details that should be included in a job ad so people can
> >> apply.
>
> >> If they cant be bothered to advertise jobs properly then I cant be arsked
> >> to
> >> waste time and money phoning those idiots to get details that should be
> >> provided in the first place.
>
> > And hopefully then the JC can't be arsked to pay benefit to you......
>
> Its the law, they have to pay :)
And you haven't made any agreement about what you will do in return
for that benefit?
Contracts are legal too. :)
>
>
>
> > At least when you ring them they can log down that you've rung about a
> > job...
>
> They can do that when I sign on, still no excuse for wasting claimants very
> limited resources.
And your lack of time available too.....
Martin <><
date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 05:25:41 -0800 (PST)
author: unknown
|
Re: Jobseeker Direct, please do not say fuck or bugger.
wrote in message
news:f2a103b4-2042-4fc3-a417-0241a27f99ea@k2g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> On 10 Jan, 12:49, "Niteawk" wrote:
>> wrote in message
>>
>> news:2255b307-cbcb-424c-ab5c-480a4fe7871b@i7g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> > On 10 Jan, 12:14, "Niteawk" wrote:
>> >> Why are the JC and JD asking claimants to phone them at their expense
>> >> for
>> >> job details? details that should be included in a job ad so people can
>> >> apply.
>>
>> >> If they cant be bothered to advertise jobs properly then I cant be
>> >> arsked
>> >> to
>> >> waste time and money phoning those idiots to get details that should
>> >> be
>> >> provided in the first place.
>>
>> > And hopefully then the JC can't be arsked to pay benefit to you......
>>
>> Its the law, they have to pay :)
>
> And you haven't made any agreement about what you will do in return
> for that benefit?
> Contracts are legal too. :)
Thats correct, I have not made any agreement full stop.
>
>>
>>
>>
>> > At least when you ring them they can log down that you've rung about a
>> > job...
>>
>> They can do that when I sign on, still no excuse for wasting claimants
>> very
>> limited resources.
>
> And your lack of time available too.....
>
Darts is on, cant go out in pissing rain and gale force winds, new NHS rules
say you must look after yourself.
date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 13:41:01 -0000
author: Niteawk
|
Re: Jobseeker Direct, please do not say fuck or bugger.
On 10 Jan, 12:43, "mart2...@hotmail.com" wrote:
> On 10 Jan, 12:14, "Niteawk" wrote:
>
> > Why are the JC and JD asking claimants to phone them at their expense for
> > job details? details that should be included in a job ad so people can
> > apply.
>
> > If they cant be bothered to advertise jobs properly then I cant be arsked to
> > waste time and money phoning those idiots to get details that should be
> > provided in the first place.
>
> And hopefully then the JC can't be arsked to pay benefit to you......
>
> At least when you ring them they can log down that you've rung about a
> job...
>
> Martin <><
It's just an educated guess but you may have hit the nail on the head
there, sucess of the JC & the helplines is based on the number of
people who they find work for.
If you get all all the details from the website, get the job and just
sign off they get no points as there's no link between you, them and
the job. They take down your details, point you towards the job and
you get it the JC can demonstrate they've helped you into work and so
justify their existence.
It's part of the target driven culture of the gov., if it's not a
target you don't need to bother, if it's a target you'd better get it
by hook or by crook.
Mike
date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 11:03:57 -0800 (PST)
author: Mike
|
Re: Jobseeker Direct, please do not say fuck or bugger.
"Mike" wrote in message
news:f7681c92-0815-498f-b222-db212c9c04a8@z17g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
On 10 Jan, 12:43, "mart2...@hotmail.com" wrote:
> On 10 Jan, 12:14, "Niteawk" wrote:
>
> > Why are the JC and JD asking claimants to phone them at their expense
> > for
> > job details? details that should be included in a job ad so people can
> > apply.
>
> > If they cant be bothered to advertise jobs properly then I cant be
> > arsked to
> > waste time and money phoning those idiots to get details that should be
> > provided in the first place.
>
> And hopefully then the JC can't be arsked to pay benefit to you......
>
> At least when you ring them they can log down that you've rung about a
> job...
>
> Martin <><
It's just an educated guess but you may have hit the nail on the head
there, sucess of the JC & the helplines is based on the number of
people who they find work for.
If you get all all the details from the website, get the job and just
sign off they get no points as there's no link between you, them and
the job. They take down your details, point you towards the job and
you get it the JC can demonstrate they've helped you into work and so
justify their existence.
It's part of the target driven culture of the gov., if it's not a
target you don't need to bother, if it's a target you'd better get it
by hook or by crook.
Crook being the operative word, they are a bunch of crooks if they think
they can get away with making claimants pay for job details.
date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 20:37:32 -0000
author: Niteawk
|
Re: Jobseeker Direct, please do not say fuck or bugger.
Niteawk wrote:
>
> "Mike" wrote in message
> news:f7681c92-0815-498f-b222-db212c9c04a8@z17g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> On 10 Jan, 12:43, "mart2...@hotmail.com" wrote:
>> On 10 Jan, 12:14, "Niteawk" wrote:
>>
>> > Why are the JC and JD asking claimants to phone them at their
>> expense > for
>> > job details? details that should be included in a job ad so people can
>> > apply.
>>
>> > If they cant be bothered to advertise jobs properly then I cant be >
>> arsked to
>> > waste time and money phoning those idiots to get details that should be
>> > provided in the first place.
>>
>> And hopefully then the JC can't be arsked to pay benefit to you......
>>
>> At least when you ring them they can log down that you've rung about a
>> job...
>>
>> Martin <><
>
> It's just an educated guess but you may have hit the nail on the head
> there, sucess of the JC & the helplines is based on the number of
> people who they find work for.
>
> If you get all all the details from the website, get the job and just
> sign off they get no points as there's no link between you, them and
> the job. They take down your details, point you towards the job and
> you get it the JC can demonstrate they've helped you into work and so
> justify their existence.
>
> It's part of the target driven culture of the gov., if it's not a
> target you don't need to bother, if it's a target you'd better get it
> by hook or by crook.
>
>
>
> Crook being the operative word, they are a bunch of crooks if they think
> they can get away with making claimants pay for job details.
Many people who use JS Direct aren't JSA claimants. Nor does every job
advertised require that you contact the JC for details. Some have the
employers contact number.
Job adverts for other agencies never seem to include full details, why
should it be any different for JS Direct? They do have to make an
attempt to log interest and I would have thought it was in your interest
to have the call logged anyway. You'd moan even more if there was no
proof you'd shown any interest in anything.
--
Robbie
date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 21:06:09 +0000
author: Robbie
|
Re: Jobseeker Direct, please do not say fuck or bugger.
"Robbie" wrote in message
news:5unflvF1g2794U1@mid.individual.net...
> Niteawk wrote:
>>
>> "Mike" wrote in message
>> news:f7681c92-0815-498f-b222-db212c9c04a8@z17g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>> On 10 Jan, 12:43, "mart2...@hotmail.com" wrote:
>>> On 10 Jan, 12:14, "Niteawk" wrote:
>>>
>>> > Why are the JC and JD asking claimants to phone them at their
>>> expense > for
>>> > job details? details that should be included in a job ad so people can
>>> > apply.
>>>
>>> > If they cant be bothered to advertise jobs properly then I cant be >
>>> arsked to
>>> > waste time and money phoning those idiots to get details that should
>>> > be
>>> > provided in the first place.
>>>
>>> And hopefully then the JC can't be arsked to pay benefit to you......
>>>
>>> At least when you ring them they can log down that you've rung about a
>>> job...
>>>
>>> Martin <><
>>
>> It's just an educated guess but you may have hit the nail on the head
>> there, sucess of the JC & the helplines is based on the number of
>> people who they find work for.
>>
>> If you get all all the details from the website, get the job and just
>> sign off they get no points as there's no link between you, them and
>> the job. They take down your details, point you towards the job and
>> you get it the JC can demonstrate they've helped you into work and so
>> justify their existence.
>>
>> It's part of the target driven culture of the gov., if it's not a
>> target you don't need to bother, if it's a target you'd better get it
>> by hook or by crook.
>>
>>
>>
>> Crook being the operative word, they are a bunch of crooks if they think
>> they can get away with making claimants pay for job details.
>
> Many people who use JS Direct aren't JSA claimants.
Makes no difference.
Nor does every job
> advertised require that you contact the JC for details. Some have the
> employers contact number.
Some of them show the correct details, thats what makes this situation so
ridiculous.
>
> Job adverts for other agencies never seem to include full details, why
> should it be any different for JS Direct? They do have to make an attempt
> to log interest and I would have thought it was in your interest to have
> the call logged anyway. You'd moan even more if there was no proof you'd
> shown any interest in anything.
>
What proof do I need when I can show that they do not list jobs properly, I
cant apply for jobs with incomplete details.
date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 22:20:56 -0000
author: Niteawk
|
Re: Jobseeker Direct, please do not say fuck or bugger.
Niteawk wrote:
>
> "Robbie" wrote in message
> news:5unflvF1g2794U1@mid.individual.net...
>> Niteawk wrote:
>>>
>>> "Mike" wrote in message
>>> news:f7681c92-0815-498f-b222-db212c9c04a8@z17g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>>>
>>> On 10 Jan, 12:43, "mart2...@hotmail.com" wrote:
>>>> On 10 Jan, 12:14, "Niteawk" wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > Why are the JC and JD asking claimants to phone them at their
>>>> expense > for
>>>> > job details? details that should be included in a job ad so people
>>>> can
>>>> > apply.
>>>>
>>>> > If they cant be bothered to advertise jobs properly then I cant be >
>>>> arsked to
>>>> > waste time and money phoning those idiots to get details that
>>>> should > be
>>>> > provided in the first place.
>>>>
>>>> And hopefully then the JC can't be arsked to pay benefit to you......
>>>>
>>>> At least when you ring them they can log down that you've rung about a
>>>> job...
>>>>
>>>> Martin <><
>>>
>>> It's just an educated guess but you may have hit the nail on the head
>>> there, sucess of the JC & the helplines is based on the number of
>>> people who they find work for.
>>>
>>> If you get all all the details from the website, get the job and just
>>> sign off they get no points as there's no link between you, them and
>>> the job. They take down your details, point you towards the job and
>>> you get it the JC can demonstrate they've helped you into work and so
>>> justify their existence.
>>>
>>> It's part of the target driven culture of the gov., if it's not a
>>> target you don't need to bother, if it's a target you'd better get it
>>> by hook or by crook.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Crook being the operative word, they are a bunch of crooks if they
>>> think they can get away with making claimants pay for job details.
>>
>> Many people who use JS Direct aren't JSA claimants.
>
> Makes no difference.
They can't operate a dual system, once for JSA claimants and one for
everyone else...
>
>
> Nor does every job
>> advertised require that you contact the JC for details. Some have the
>> employers contact number.
>
> Some of them show the correct details, thats what makes this situation
> so ridiculous.
Depends - see my question below
>
>
>
>>
>> Job adverts for other agencies never seem to include full details, why
>> should it be any different for JS Direct? They do have to make an
>> attempt to log interest and I would have thought it was in your
>> interest to have the call logged anyway. You'd moan even more if there
>> was no proof you'd shown any interest in anything.
>>
>
> What proof do I need when I can show that they do not list jobs
> properly, I cant apply for jobs with incomplete details.
Then you can obtain the details like everyone else has to.
However, I sometimes do wonder if the jobs without full details are
either jobs that the JC have agreed to handle all initial application
sifts for (hence why you have to phone), or are perhaps agency jobs. I
can't remember if agencies can advertise at the jobcentre - I know they
couldn't at one time but that was years ago.
--
Robbie
date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 23:37:46 +0000
author: Robbie
|
Re: Jobseeker Direct, please do not say fuck or bugger.
> can't remember if agencies can advertise at the jobcentre - I know
> they couldn't at one time but that was years ago.
>
Yes they can - but what bugs me is, often the jobs they advertise aren't
really real, just something to get you to register.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
date: 11 Jan 2008 08:53:33 GMT
author: tdh270 ve
|
Re: Jobseeker Direct, please do not say fuck or bugger.
"Robbie" wrote in message
news:5unoi8F1ijvjaU1@mid.individual.net...
> Niteawk wrote:
>>
>> "Robbie" wrote in message
>> news:5unflvF1g2794U1@mid.individual.net...
>>> Niteawk wrote:
>>>>
>>>> "Mike" wrote in message
>>>> news:f7681c92-0815-498f-b222-db212c9c04a8@z17g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>>>> On 10 Jan, 12:43, "mart2...@hotmail.com" wrote:
>>>>> On 10 Jan, 12:14, "Niteawk" wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> > Why are the JC and JD asking claimants to phone them at their
>>>>> expense > for
>>>>> > job details? details that should be included in a job ad so people
>>>>> can
>>>>> > apply.
>>>>>
>>>>> > If they cant be bothered to advertise jobs properly then I cant be >
>>>>> arsked to
>>>>> > waste time and money phoning those idiots to get details that
>>>>> should > be
>>>>> > provided in the first place.
>>>>>
>>>>> And hopefully then the JC can't be arsked to pay benefit to you......
>>>>>
>>>>> At least when you ring them they can log down that you've rung about a
>>>>> job...
>>>>>
>>>>> Martin <><
>>>>
>>>> It's just an educated guess but you may have hit the nail on the head
>>>> there, sucess of the JC & the helplines is based on the number of
>>>> people who they find work for.
>>>>
>>>> If you get all all the details from the website, get the job and just
>>>> sign off they get no points as there's no link between you, them and
>>>> the job. They take down your details, point you towards the job and
>>>> you get it the JC can demonstrate they've helped you into work and so
>>>> justify their existence.
>>>>
>>>> It's part of the target driven culture of the gov., if it's not a
>>>> target you don't need to bother, if it's a target you'd better get it
>>>> by hook or by crook.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Crook being the operative word, they are a bunch of crooks if they
>>>> think they can get away with making claimants pay for job details.
>>>
>>> Many people who use JS Direct aren't JSA claimants.
>>
>> Makes no difference.
>
> They can't operate a dual system, once for JSA claimants and one for
> everyone else...
>
>>
>>
>> Nor does every job
>>> advertised require that you contact the JC for details. Some have the
>>> employers contact number.
>>
>> Some of them show the correct details, thats what makes this situation so
>> ridiculous.
>
> Depends - see my question below
>
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Job adverts for other agencies never seem to include full details, why
>>> should it be any different for JS Direct? They do have to make an
>>> attempt to log interest and I would have thought it was in your interest
>>> to have the call logged anyway. You'd moan even more if there was no
>>> proof you'd shown any interest in anything.
>>>
>>
>> What proof do I need when I can show that they do not list jobs properly,
>> I cant apply for jobs with incomplete details.
>
> Then you can obtain the details like everyone else has to.
Nonsense, they expect people to find work, the least they can do is provide
the correct details.
>
> However, I sometimes do wonder if the jobs without full details are either
> jobs that the JC have agreed to handle all initial application sifts for
> (hence why you have to phone), or are perhaps agency jobs. I can't
> remember if agencies can advertise at the jobcentre - I know they couldn't
> at one time but that was years ago.
>
If the JC is taking applications then it usually states that in the ad, as
for agency, if they state a job is temporary then I do not apply.
date: Fri, 11 Jan 2008 11:32:27 -0000
author: Niteawk
|
Re: Jobseeker Direct, please do not say fuck or bugger.
On 11 Jan, 11:32, "Niteawk" wrote:
> "Robbie" wrote in message
>
> news:5unoi8F1ijvjaU1@mid.individual.net...
>
>
>
>
>
> > Niteawk wrote:
>
> >> "Robbie" wrote in message
> >>news:5unflvF1g2794U1@mid.individual.net...
> >>> Niteawk wrote:
>
> >>>> "Mike" wrote in message
> >>>>news:f7681c92-0815-498f-b222-db212c9c04a8@z17g2000hsg.googlegroups.com> >>>> On 10 Jan, 12:43, "mart2...@hotmail.com" wrote> >>>>> On 10 Jan, 12:14, "Niteawk" wrote:
>
> >>>>> > Why are the JC and JD asking claimants to phone them at their
> >>>>> expense > for
> >>>>> > job details? details that should be included in a job ad so people> >>>>> can
> >>>>> > apply.
>
> >>>>> > If they cant be bothered to advertise jobs properly then I cant be> >>>>> arsked to
> >>>>> > waste time and money phoning those idiots to get details that
> >>>>> should > be
> >>>>> > provided in the first place.
>
> >>>>> And hopefully then the JC can't be arsked to pay benefit to you.....> >>>>> At least when you ring them they can log down that you've rung about a
> >>>>> job...
>
> >>>>> Martin <><
>
> >>>> It's just an educated guess but you may have hit the nail on the head> >>>> there, sucess of the JC & the helplines is based on the number of
> >>>> people who they find work for.
>
> >>>> If you get all all the details from the website, get the job and just> >>>> sign off they get no points as there's no link between you, them and
> >>>> the job. They take down your details, point you towards the job and
> >>>> you get it the JC can demonstrate they've helped you into work and so> >>>> justify their existence.
>
> >>>> It's part of the target driven culture of the gov., if it's not a
> >>>> target you don't need to bother, if it's a target you'd better get it> >>>> by hook or by crook.
>
> >>>> Crook being the operative word, they are a bunch of crooks if they
> >>>> think they can get away with making claimants pay for job details.
>
> >>> Many people who use JS Direct aren't JSA claimants.
>
> >> Makes no difference.
>
> > They can't operate a dual system, once for JSA claimants and one for
> > everyone else...
>
> >> Nor does every job
> >>> advertised require that you contact the JC for details. Some have the
> >>> employers contact number.
>
> >> Some of them show the correct details, thats what makes this situation so
> >> ridiculous.
>
> > Depends - see my question below
>
> >>> Job adverts for other agencies never seem to include full details, why> >>> should it be any different for JS Direct? They do have to make an
> >>> attempt to log interest and I would have thought it was in your interest
> >>> to have the call logged anyway. You'd moan even more if there was no
> >>> proof you'd shown any interest in anything.
>
> >> What proof do I need when I can show that they do not list jobs properly,
> >> I cant apply for jobs with incomplete details.
>
> > Then you can obtain the details like everyone else has to.
>
> Nonsense, they expect people to find work, the least they can do is provide
> the correct details.
>
>
>
> > However, I sometimes do wonder if the jobs without full details are either
> > jobs that the JC have agreed to handle all initial application sifts for> > (hence why you have to phone), or are perhaps agency jobs. I can't
> > remember if agencies can advertise at the jobcentre - I know they couldn't
> > at one time but that was years ago.
>
> If the JC is taking applications then it usually states that in the ad, as> for agency, if they state a job is temporary then I do not apply.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Two of the previous jobs I've had were advertised as temporary. Both
led to being permanent with the organisation.
Whereas my current job was advertised as permanent but is in effect
temporary due to its nature, with only 1 year contracts being possible
at a time and a job end date sometime in the next few years regardless
(could be 6 months away).
There are temporary jobs for a few weeks and there are temporary to
permanent jobs that mean the employer sees how you work before
deciding to take you on.
More expensive for the employer but better quality of permanent staff.
Martin <><
date: Fri, 11 Jan 2008 03:50:40 -0800 (PST)
author: unknown
|
Re: Jobseeker Direct, please do not say fuck or bugger.
there really is no excuse for not providing jobseekers with complete
details for jobs the JC advertises. What employers do privately is
another matter, but making people dance through hoops needlessly is
just a waste of everyone's time.
date: Sat, 12 Jan 2008 03:07:02 -0800 (PST)
author: unknown
|
|
|
