Donate SIGN UP

Reading Fibifooz's question below.. Do you think that...?

Avatar Image
Bob A Job | 19:17 Sat 14th May 2005 | Jobs & Education
5 Answers

... anyone who cannot find a job, and who has been on 'Job Seekers Allowance' for 8 weeks should be forced to work for the service of the public part time i.e. - street cleaning, public library work, council office's. For minimum wage or there abouts.

Surely it would benefit the individual and the country.

(with the exception of the genuinely unable to work)

Gravatar

Answers

1 to 5 of 5rss feed

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by Bob A Job. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Yes I have always thought this. There are plent of things they could do, picking up litter, clean graffiti etc. This could be done on a part time basis with a minimum number of hours per week. They would be free to go to interviews when necessary.
It sounds great in theory, if not a little oppressive.  Perhaps it's a tax problem.  That we'd have to pay higher taxes to give these people jobs.  I'm sure that genuine job seekers would be happy for some sort of job in the public sector, even if only temporary.  Paris is a wonderfully clean city because they have LOADS of people cleaning the streets.  We could have the same in our cities IF we paid higher taxes for it.  This, i suspect, is why Bob A Job's perfectly sensible idea is not in practice in this country. 
what A great idea. Something I noticed When I was in China was that (apart from in some areas) most of it was very well kept - and the cities were incredibly clean. Along the roadsides etc. I really noticed this when I came back to niottingham where the sides of the roadds are strewn with litter...its disgusting. In China they have quite a class difference and there are still peasants that are ghappy to do these jobs for barely anything. In fact, the 'tramps' or 'homeless' can raise enought money from recycling plastic bottles to live - so there are none left lying around (unlike the parks and streets of the UK). The only thing I would say is that would the council be able to afford to pay people minimum wage to do thhius? It all adds up - the peasants in China probably got paid relitively alot less. I stil thinkits a good Idea

Not sure it is such a great idea. In principle - yes I can see what you're getting at but I would have some reservations.

If there is the money for a full time role cleaning / litter clearing etc then surely the obvious thing to do is to advertise this as a job and take someone off job seekers allowance that way. Public investment in this way was at the centre of FDR's New Deal in 1930s America and was very effective.

There is a danger that this scheme you describe would provide a loophole for using people unable to find full time employment as cheap labour and at the same time reducing the possibility of permanent jobs becoming available.  

If there isn't enough money for all people who have been looking for a job for over 8 weeks then how do you pick those who MUST take these jobs and those whom there isn't the money to pay.

Also how about those for whom such work would be a massive change from their usual jobs and for whom such work would not provide any valuable experience. Where I work at the minute there has recently been a merger and loads of middle / senior management have been let go. Some have worked here their entire lives and are utterly devastated. To then be told after 2 months of job hunting that they had now been approved for litter picking duty could only errode self confidence, and with it the possibility of doing well at interview, still further.

A fair few of these people have enrolled at the adult education centre, where I teach part time, to use some of their (small) redundancy payments to train further for jobs they are interested in. Some are on benefits while they do this. For them, and in the long term the economy which can benefit from their skills once they find employment, this is a more productive use of their time than litter picking....

Surely the point here is that they would not be paid wages and therefore there is no additional money to find.  If after 8 weeks they refuse to do this community work then their benefits should be stopped.  You don't get anything for nothing.  THere are too many people in this country who are not prepared to work to support themselves and their families.

1 to 5 of 5rss feed

Do you know the answer?

Reading Fibifooz's question below.. Do you think that...?

Answer Question >>

Related Questions

Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.