Turning welfare into work

Richard

The truth about benefits; They are too small and given for too long.
Increase JSA to 120.00 pw payable for only 12 weeks then reduce by 5.00 a week until it reaches zero. Anyone still unemployed should then go onto a community work programme looking after projects that would otherwise get not attention. They should then be paid the minimum wage untaxed for a further 12 weeks This should include single mothers with children over 5 years old.
Anyone still not working should be exported to any countries in the EU that needs immigrant workers. Anyone refusing to go should then be shot. Harsh I know but its cheaper in the long run......within 5 years there will be a balance where jobs and seekers are equal on way or another.
Yes This is tongue firmly in cheek.
Why not force people who earn more than 100K a year to sponser someone who is unemployed and pay their benefits from their own pockets. This would discourage some from seeing mass redundancies as a good way to balance the books.

Fergus Pickering

Of course you could always give them less dole money. Aaaaargh! Come on, do a bit of work on your own account. What does somebody out of work get in various EU counties? Say France, for a start.

GeoffH

Step 1) Restrict the total benefits any claimant receives to 75% of the sum he/she would receive in work at the minimum wage with the appropriate tax credits.

Step 2) Introduce an element of workfare with the incentive of 100% of benefits.

Step 3) Restrict the period on benefits to a maximum total number of years and months throughout an individual's working life. Use the years up in early life, lose them as you get older. Work at the beginning and save the time for claims, should they become necessary through ill health, redundancy etc for later in life.

Step 4) Introduce an element of compulsion; an extension of workfare.

Step 5) Abolish Tax credits, reintroduce tax allowances, raise the starting point for income tax to 125% of the minimum wage for a normal working week.

Step 6) Abolish all benefits and replace them with a taxable Citizens Basic Income payable to everyone in work, retired and out of work.

Step 7) Abolish the minimum wage.

Step 8) Restrict short-stay immigration for casual work

Step 9) Abolish National Insurance

Work through the changes in benefits in stages until the CBI and Income tax changes can be introduced.

Job done.

James D

This attitude is re-enforced by Job Centres insisting on applicants specifying three types of work, rather than conducting a skill-based assessment to pull in relevant vacancies. This is fundamentally an issue with the fitness for purpose of the Ministry of Employment's (or whatever they called this week) expensive computer system. The other problem is that no-one will discuss this sensibly: you inevitably get a people with views that would be unprintable in the Daily Mail and people who are parodies of 1970s trades union leaders shouting at each other and drowning out the middle ground.

lawrence greek

There is a simple solution - raise the tax threshold to £10,000. It's a no brainer. It reduces the welfare bill, raises tax take and creates an incentive to work. Couple that with a cut in the rate of benefits and the dole-scum would be taking any and every job available. Win win win.

Chuck Unsworth

Sure, they want to work. Most of them want to be brain-surgeons, nuclear physicists, movie stars, pop idols, professional footballers, darts and snooker champions, racing drivers, gangsters etc.

Any chance of that? Well in the absence of those career choices maybe they could all go into industry - if we had any, of course.

OK then, how about burger-flipping?

steve

The Spanish system of benefits works very well indeed.

You cannot claim unemployment benefit until you have worked at least 6 months. At that point, if you were to made redundant, you could claim a maximum of 6 months dole. You do not have to 'sign on' biweekly and can thereby retain a bit of dignity.

You can draw out of the system exactly what you have put into it. If you work for 40 years and get made redundant, then you get 40 years support back from the community.

Unsurprisingly the unemployed will take any job and retrain as and when required.

It is a 'furure fair for all' of them, and one which I would love to see used in Britain. Unemployment support is absolutely essential in society, but it has to be correctly managed for it to work properly.

salieri

Well they would say that, wouldn't they?

Jim

Introduce a minimum wage mark 2: a standard employment contract that basically pays well (probably £15/hr) but has no employee rights at all. Can be laid off with say a weeks notice and pay, no redundancy, no sick pay, no holiday pay, no maternity pay, no unfair dismissal etc etc. No employer NI contributions either, very simple paperwork.

There are lots of people who would take on employees, but are put off by the paperwork and impossiblity of getting rid of them if it doesn't work out. Employee swaps 'social protection' for a higher wage. I reckon a lot of people would be happy with that.

TomTom

Keith Joseph used to talk about this in the 1970s and here we are 30 years later looking at the Poverty Trap. This reveals the full futility of politics - going around in circles.

Income Tax is the key. Impose it on benefits and make Claimants file taxes then give a Working Tax Allowance that allows transport costs to work, a clothing deduction, and tax deductibility of National Insurance and Council Tax.

At present we have politicians want to tax us to change behaviour - taxing Work and subsidising Idleness - is classic decadence

John Richardson

My goodness Mr Kay, what total rubbish.

'Policy Exchange Economics Unit' ?
Why not get a job yourself ?

That looks hostile in text but it's an honest question. Have you ever actually had a real job ?
The above honestly sounds like one of those cosy, meaningless bodies spewed out by a organised system of robing the wealth creators.
Government funded ?
Union funded ?
Funded by a 'body' that is State supported ?

Have you, or any other members of the 'unit' ever been paid based upon what they have actually done/produced/sold/made ?
Not what they have said or written ?

Regarding funding; I'll wager no-one ever put their hand in THEIR OWN POCKET and said,
"Here's a five for you 'unit', I know you'll spend it wisely."
If I am wrong I will happily apologise. If I'm wrong.

As for it being hard to find unemployed people who actually do not want to work, that is beyond parody.

You go on to explain that 'they' want to do jobs they cannot actually do. So they live off others instead.
I'd have to be in your 'unit' for a few years to NOT still be angry at this attitude. Like you.

You fail to explain what happens to the honest, decent working poor who, stuck on the minimum wage, would not have the advantages of 'keeping the first £92' and staying in bed 3 days a week whilst working part time.

It's all so simple.
The Welfare State takes money from those who earn and create it.
The Welfare State then gives this money to it's functionaries and to almost anyone else it deems fit.

The rest is self deceit and lies.

Whatever the 'unit' or 'working group' or 'foundation' or 'committee' may say.

Get a job and leave other people's money alone.
My cousin Dave is looking for a plasterer.
Interested ?

Richard

@Jim
At least my effort was tongue in cheek but your idea is pure ecstasy....why not just bring back slavery and the work houses.
Don't pay in money why not pay in vouchers that you can only spend at the company shop.
Or legalise brothels and solve the jobs shortage at a stroke for women over 16 and under 35. Brand the sick and infirmed with big triangle on their forehead.
Now you wonder why you are the nasty party always will be to your core.

stereodog

I have been out of work for some time now and whilst I entirely resent some of the more unpleasant comments about job seekers on this forum I do believe that the job centre system is hugely inefficient.
Firstly it does nothing to encourage you to top up your job seekers allowance in any way. I started to sell books for some academic friends of mine on commission. This had the potential to earn me about £40 a week but I was told at the job centre that my payments would be reduced by the same amount. I could understand it if I were earning hundreds of pounds but I think it a bit unfair that I am not allowed to keep a bit of extra pocket money from my own enterprise.
Secondly the job centre (and particularly it's privatised contractors) do nothing to encourage people to take useful voluntary jobs. I was told by the job centre that I would have to come in 3 days a week and sit for 4 hours each day applying for jobs which meant that I had to cancel a sermon I was due to preach and a visit to an elderly friend. Of course the unemployed need to spend a lot of time applying for jobs but I hugely resent the implication that we have nothing else useful to do with our time.

Gosh sorry for the rant folks!

Verity

When the company I worked for in Texas was taken over, they closed down duplicate departments. I was in one of those duplicated, and the day after the news, about seven or eight of us were down at the unemployment office registering.

To all of our dismay, total time on unemployment benefits in Texas is 13 weeks. I was fairly senior and knew I wouldn't be able to find a job within 13 weeks, and asked the man behind the desk, "Well, what if 13 weeks comes and I haven't found a job?" and he shrugged and said, "Well, most people can turn their hand to something."

Thirteen weeks, then you're on your own. And he was right. I managed.

Some states don't allow people to claim until they've been in work paying into the system for five years. I think some other states put a cap on what you can claim for unemployment over your entire working life.

All these British socialist practices, where the door to the national exchequer is always open, sap initiative. If you have to go out and get a job to get money to live on while you're looking for a permanent job, you do it.

Jim

@Richard: £15/hour is £30K per year. If that's not enough for you make it £20/hr. Whatever. Why not monetise the 'social protection' legislation and let the worker decide - £5-80/hr and all the employment benefits, or £15-20/hr and no rights? You might be surprised how many would take the cash..............I know I would.

Beer Moth

Richard.

Thought I had found a soul-mate and then you have to go and start with all that 'tongue firmly in cheek' stuff.

Richard

@Beer moth,

Oh don't worry I am Not really a socialist just pretend, it amuses me. I have three sweat shops in the East end of London and a Recycling business in Lahore. Highest paid employee is only on 20$US a month so don't worry feel free to chat anytime.

Fergus Pickering

But Richard, whoever you are, do you really, in your socialist soul, think wer've got it right as we are? My daughter works as a waitress in Pizza Hut. There are plenty of jobs as waitresses. And waiters. Do you think such a job beneath the British worker? Do you think there is something wrong with it? I really would like to know. I mean how you think. When you do. If you do.

2trueblue

It is such a complicated system that once you are on benefits getting yourslef back into a job and not getting into financial difficulties is very hard. There should be a transition period designed to help people transfer from one to the other so that they do not fall into debt during this period. Going to work is more expensive than staying at home.

Raising the tax treshold is an intelligent move that has been resisted by this government. They promised they would revise the benefits system and simplify it, they just made it worse. It is madness to make people worse off if they work. It is also madness to make people worse off if they live together.

Lady Amelia

what's really depressing about this article is that this problem existed in exactly the same form in the early 1980's. I was unemployed and on benefit, but if I worked less than 16 hours a week I lost in benefit exactly what I got paid - 100% tax. If I got a "proper" job I lost my housing allowance so again I was punitively taxed. I was very, very lucky - I was able to go back to college and then university, get a vocational degree and have been in continuous employment since. There is no ladder out of the pit of unemployment and benefits that people fall into - mainly because unemployment is in fact an industry in its own right with this government.....

BrianSJ

This is a pathetic article.
Where are the jobs? Who creates jobs and why?
That is where to start.
Employing people now is an act of insanity.
Starting a business is completely without incentive.
Cut out all the dithering well-meaning folk like yourself. Provide clear tax incentives for starting a business. Simplify employment legislation. Then and only then will the jobs come.

Keith O'Reilly

Some jobseekers are being unrealistic regarding the wages available. Too many want a job that pays the same as they got before, working 9.00am - 5.00pm within 100yds of where they work.

HFC

# Keith.

Or get a job with the local council. I passed the offices of my local district council at 4.25pm yesterday and was astounded to see hordes of people leaving. They had clearly finished for the day (week?) as they were streaming towards their free car park and not forming up as they would had it been a fire practice.

Clearly overmanned and under-employed in my view.

Richard

@ Fergus Pickering
You make a serious point and what you say deserves a proper answer. I will try my best.
The problem is very complex and there are many influences not just government but social and the media.
Its not the gov that derides these jobs as Macjobs its the media. Its not the Gov that laughs at people at the bus stop for being social failures because they can't afford to drive a car.
On the issue of jobs and the unemployed, sure there are some areas where anyone who can do basic maths and stand up for 4 hours at a time without collapsing can do. But how to you persuade a skilled worker, one with maybe a degree in surveying to give up the search for a job to take on working in Pizzahut.
I give you an example a true one as it involved a member of my family.
A graduate 1:2 in Electrical Engineering.
made redundant Dec 2009. Unable to claim any benefit due to a 6 week redundancy. This person decided to take a job as a bus driver, took the test passed and drove double and single decker buses for 6 months in London. While working continued to look for work. He was open and honest in his CV explaining he was in temp work and bus driving was not his new aim in life.
Agencies rejected his applications in a sole destroying frequency, he kept looking and didn't give up.
After 12 months of looking he got his first interview for a large company in Bristol.
Cut to the chase....he didn't get the job..why?
He was told the reasons by the girl at the agency. The employer could nt understand why he was driving a bus. They did not think he would be able to relocate. They were not happy to assist in relocation costs or give an advance of salary as it would be unfair on other applicants who lived closer.
He is still driving and as every month goes by he is less marketable than someone who has just qualified because he (a) is not going to come with a gov job bribe of 1500 quid. He is not under 24.
He is getting to the point where in another 18 months he will have worked longer as a bus driver than an engineer.
Yes he did the right thing and took a numpty job but it is possibly going to cost him dear with regard his career.
The other point is while he was working he was not as flexible to go to interviews.
Its not black and white its not easy. NOT ALL CLAIMANTS ARE SCROUNGERS.
Low skilled jobs are available but not many jobs for ex department managers or Health and safety officers on construction projects. Its the professional unemplyed that are really being hit hard.
Tell the Podiatrist she has to work in beauty parlour trimming nails and massaging bunnions for 5.00 and hour, then convince her is a good move.
Lastly lets remember why we are in this mess. A few men (less then 200) decided to play Russian roulette with the worlds finacial markets and when it went tits up backed away with millionaire pay offs and are now as we speak surfing the not for bargain holiday villas to steal of strapped owners forced to sell cheaply to get their finacial liabilites down to a safer level.
Those losing homes to speculators now hoovering up the auctions for cheap bargain homes. People selling their wedding rings to put a tenner in their kids birthday cards.
People like Ashcroft and yes Paul earning more on the interest of the tax free assets than you or I could even WIN ON THE LOTTERY.
Now tell me how are you going to fix the welfare state?

General Zod

Richard,

those of us on higher earnings already sponsor people by employing nannies and other staff. We would employ more people if the government were not so graspingly greedy as to make us pay their PAYE out of our income that has already been taxed at 50% (as it will be from next month).

Right On

Surely Richard the point is intrinsic in what you say. There are terrible examples of people who want to find work and can't - which to me is pretty much proof positive that the state will never be able to offer a 100% catch all solution.

I don't think there is a simple answer (certainly not one that can be summarised in a couple of hundred words on a blog!) but to me the state should offer a basic level of protection, it should be impossible for people who are capable of work to stay on benefits (if there are jobs available) for more than six months. In linking back to your previous point nothing makes people less marketable than being completely out of work - I'd recruit a guy who went and drove a bus in a heartbeat before someone who stayed on benefits.

The point has been made only briefly on here, but spending more time freeing entrepreuners and small business men to create jobs would be a much greater help to reducing unemployment than any amount of welfare provision.

Jenni Summers

I just wanted to congratulate Lawrence Kay for the common sense running through this piece. I am actually a Lib Dem but have found a number of Coffee House blog posts, including this one, to be far more balanced and thoughtful than appear on many other Conservative-leaning blogs.

Richard

@General Zod.
Like you I am a high earner too....might surprise you?
However I do noy think employing a nanny or not it makes much difference if you then take your spare cash and invest it off shore or place it in assets or ventures that do not benefit the wider UK.
As globalisation benefits those who are better off it penalises those who are not able to ride the train.

AngloWelshDragon

In answer to Richard and his sad tale of hisqualified engineer relative, he has inadvertently highlighted one of the problems with the unemployed. We have disproportionately more graduates than there are graduate jobs. Perhaps his relative would have been better off giving the degree a body swerve and going on an apprenticeship or getting NVQs and being a contented bus driver rather than an unhappy one?

I would guess most working people are not doing the jobs they imagined for themselves in their teens, and many, like me, end up pursuing successful careers totally unrelated to the subject of their degrees.

Our education system fails our young in multiple ways yet is extremely successful in giving them ambitions that far exceed their grasp plus an overweening sense of entitlement.

We need a welfare system that makes the unemployed take any job they are offered and can reasonably undertake. No one says they must do it forever, they can change tack when the economic climate changes and in the meantime enjoy the self respect, camaraderie, and money, that comes from being in a job. Some may find they like the work and the best will rise to the top of these professions regardless.

I also find it hard to believe a company would penalise someone for taking alternative employment when made redundant during a recession. In my own role I am currently recruiting for a graduate assistant and am full of admiration for the many applicants who have done all sorts of so-called menial jobs since their graduation just to keep busy.

It is the socialists who sneer at the so called “Mc Jobs” and “Mc Apprenticeships” not those of us on the right. I would be proud for any of my kids to work for McDonalds – more so than for any of them to acquire a pointless degree from the University of Nowhere then sit around on the dole with their thumb up their a**e complaining they couldn’t find their perfect job!

General Zod

Richard, please try to write coherently. I don't express you to address the matter at issue any more than I expect it from your masters, but it would be polite if you could take the time at least to try to obfuscate in a coherent manner.

From next month, I will have to earn approximately £3 to put £1 in the pocket of our nanny (£3 x 50% = £1.50 x 67% = £1). That is confiscatory taxation and discourages employment.

TomTom

AngloWelshDragon seems to have missed the point completely. Richard mentions a Graduate Electrical Engineer and A-W-D makes out this is a useless qualification, whereas the country is short of them and ME graduates.

It is just that Unemployment needs to be more common especially among HR executives so they don't make stupid comments about driving buses. In fact, I think t is essential that ALL employment contracts are fixed at 6 months so everyone gets a taste of unemployment.

Too many incompetents get to stay for years with the same employer while the dynamic ones leave or are fired. Organisations are social institutions and punish innovators and screen out applicants who do not conform to slavish inertia. It is the bureaucratisation of socity and why the USSR is the paradigm which has shaped Western society into its conformist morass

John Richardson

Unlike 'TomTom'
I'd say
'AngloWelshDragon'
is correct.
Those on 'the right' never sneer at menial jobs.
Indeed, if you look above, you will see some one 'the right' sneering instead at privileged 'positions' within 'influential units'.
--------------------------------------------

Richard 10:00am

I understand that you are simply repeating what you have been told, however, I feel sure that the 'girl at the employment agency' you cite is wrong.
Just wrong. For instance, prospective employers may see that a man is driving a bus, but the job application in 'their' hand demonstrates he is looking to move on.

Beer Moth

Part of the problem surely, is the way that our economic system has come to be expected to support 'the professions' to an impossible degree?

We have to face the fact that the workforce is pyramid shaped and it needs a very wide base for stability. For every worker operating in the upper layers, there needs to be many who have to get by on relatively low wages.

Due to reasons too many and complex to mention here, our pyramid has developed a bulbous ugliness towards the top - too many professional well paid people, all with mortgages and high end lifestyles. At the same time, the base has shrunk as those who formerly contributed on the shopfloors have been decimated. (Nothing wrong with professional well paid people - plenty wrong with there being too many of them)

Outside and pulling on the structure, are those who have been discarded - most tragically, those under 30 years of age, grown up in a system which allowed only visions of dream careers, and which impressed upon them, that 'old-fashioned trades' were beneath them; a thing of the past in a hightec world.

Our economy is fat and out of condition: a push over, as many competitors have found out - and as many more will.

AngloWelshDragon

TomTom don't jump to conclusions. I am not an HR executive. I am a qualified surveyor and now a senior (female) manager in the construction industry. Patronising prat!

AngloWelshDragon

Also TomTom, I didn't actually say Electrical Engineering is a useless degree. The country does need M&E qualified individuals. It is, however, fair to say that having one has obviously not benefited this individual very much. We actually need more plumbers and sparkies than M&E engineers. Perhaps Richard's relative would have been better off becoming an electrician!

AngloWelshDragon

TomTom you have really rubbed me up the wrong way. Having graduated in the eighties I have tasted unemployment all be it briefly. Guess what I did? Got a Class I HGV licence. My parents were a bit stunned but, as I stated above, any sort of work beats no work in my book.