Statistics on Jobseeeker's Allowance sanctions are available from http://research.dwp.gov.uk/asd/index.php?page=tabtool. They have National Statistics status.
They show that in the year to April 2010 inclusive there were 22,450 decisions adverse to the claimant for refusal of employment (varied length sanctions).
The number increased over the months prior to the election - from around 1,000 a month to around 3,000. This probably relates to the Labour introduction of Future Jobs Fund jobs (now terminated) with jobs offered that were in effect mandatory because of the benefit rules (but paid as jobs rather than working for benefit).
There are separate figures for individuals sanctioned rather than referrals (the above figures) that might give some sense of the numbers of multiply sanctioned individuals.
The DWP figures are much higher and seem to apply to all sanctions not just refusal of employment.
---------------------------------------------------------
Paul Bivand
Head of Analysis and Statistics
Direct Line: 020 7840 8335
Inclusion
3rd floor, 89 Albert Embankment, London SE1 7TP
Tel: 020 7582 7221
Fax: 020 7582 6391
Inclusion website: http://www.cesi.org.uk/
Consider the environment - do you really need to print this email?
The contents of this e-mail and any attachment(s) are intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient please return the e-mail to the sender and delete from your mailbox.
The Centre for Economic & Social Inclusion is a company limited by guarantee. Registered in England & Wales number 2458694. Registered address: 89 Albert Embankment, London SE1 7TP
-----Original Message-----
From: email list for Radical Statistics [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Martin Rathfelder
Sent: 12 November 2010 22:53
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: "Benefits reform"
There have been sanctions against people who refuse offers of jobs since the 1911 National Insurance Act. They are of little effect if there are no jobs. Anyone who doesn't want a particular jon and has any sense at all can arrange not to get appointed to it. The DWP seem to be claiming that "Between April 2009 and March 2010 about 97,000 fixed-length about
59,000 sanctions of variable lengths were imposed." Those figures seem
surprisingly high. I doubt if many of those sanctions relate to people refusing jobs. They are probably about people who didn't "take steps"
which the DWP wanted them to take.
On 11/11/10 18:06, Ted Harding wrote:
> Greetings All.
>
> The details of the planned reforms to benefits, and in particular the
> "sanctions" to be applied to people who do not take jobs which are
> available, remain obscure.
>
> I read: 'There will be tougher penalties for people fit to work but
> unwilling to do so. A sliding scale of sanctions will see those
> refusing work on three occasions having their benefits taken away for
> three months.'
> ( http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11728546 )
>
> It has struck me that, by imposing penalties when work is available
> but is not taken up, without any apparent restraints on what work is
> offered, and how, opens the door for employers to offer demanding work
> at minimal wages, taking advantage of the sanctions that would be
> imposed on those who turn it down.
>
> In other words, opening the door to a "gangmaster"
> society (with, perhaps, the Government being Chief Gangmaster).
>
> I also read (same URL):
> '"In prosperous times this dependency culture
> would be unsustainable but today it's a national
> crisis," said Mr Duncan Smith.
>
> He said 70% of the four million new jobs created
> during one of the longest economic booms in
> history had gone to foreign workers, while 4.5
> million British people continued a life on benefits.
>
> "Businesses had to bring people in from overseas
> because our welfare system did not encourage or
> even assist people to take those jobs," said
> the minister.'
>
> I think this is probably a mis-representation of the reasons why
> businesses "brought in" people from overseas.
> Surely one of the main reasons is two-fold:
>
> a) Many people from impoverished communites in countries
> newly admitted to the EU sought to come to the UK
> where jobs were avialble;
> b) They were willing to work for a pittance (by UK standards),
> and live in poor conditions, in order to be able to send
> money home.
>
> And employers were thus able to employ them at much less than it would
> cost to employ UK nationals. And the gangmasters nicely organised it
> all.
>
> The above is probably a partially-informed opinion, and I would be
> obliged for any better-informed comment.
>
> Ted.
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> E-Mail: (Ted Harding)<[log in to unmask]>
> Fax-to-email: +44 (0)870 094 0861
> Date: 11-Nov-10 Time: 18:06:28
> ------------------------------ XFMail ------------------------------
>
> ******************************************************
> Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your message will go
> only to the sender of this message.
> If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's
> 'Reply-to-All' button to send your message automatically to
> [log in to unmask]
> Disclaimer: The messages sent to this list are the views of the sender and cannot be assumed to be representative of the range of views held by subscribers to the Radical Statistics Group. To find out more about Radical Statistics and its aims and activities and read current and past issues of our newsletter you are invited to visit our web site www.radstats.org.uk.
> *******************************************************
>
--
Martin Rathfelder
Director
Socialist Health Association
22 Blair Road
Manchester
M16 8NS
0161 286 1926
www.sochealth.co.uk
If you do not wish to be on our mailing list please let us know and we will remove you
******************************************************
Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your message will go only to the sender of this message.
If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's 'Reply-to-All' button to send your message automatically to [log in to unmask]
Disclaimer: The messages sent to this list are the views of the sender and cannot be assumed to be representative of the range of views held by subscribers to the Radical Statistics Group. To find out more about Radical Statistics and its aims and activities and read current and past issues of our newsletter you are invited to visit our web site www.radstats.org.uk.
*******************************************************
******************************************************
Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your
message will go only to the sender of this message.
If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's
'Reply-to-All' button to send your message automatically
to [log in to unmask]
Disclaimer: The messages sent to this list are the views of the sender and cannot be assumed to be representative of the range of views held by subscribers to the Radical Statistics Group. To find out more about Radical Statistics and its aims and activities and read current and past issues of our newsletter you are invited to visit our web site www.radstats.org.uk.
*******************************************************
|
