Workfare in the UK - good or bad idea?

[nnmartin]

I am currently on a short holiday in the UK and have just noticed after having been abroad for the last 3 years that the Conservatives have now introduced a Workfare type scheme.

This is basically where the unemployed can be mandated to work for no salary in order to receive their Welfare benefits. (this would work out to a significantly lower wage than the minimum whilst providing healthy profits to the companies employing them)

There seems to be a lot of protesting going on about this right now and the government is possibly going to have to backtrack on the deal - although it has been in place for around 2 years already.

anyone have any views on this - is it good or bad?

Personally I find it to be a form of exploitation of the poor.

[freethinker44]

Agreed. There are better ways to help people in need than mandated work.

When I first met my wife, she was doing something similar to this. It was a slave labor program. I think we figured that at the end of the day, she made around 2 dollars an hour for her work.

[Enlighten]

I agree it is just encouraging large companies to use this scheme rather than pay people minimum wage so in effect it is slave labour. Many people who are working under this mandate are walking away with almost £0 after travel costs are taken into account so pointless them working in the first place. The sooner the government back out on this the better IMO.

[Flankerl]

Its about the same in germany. People get taken out of the statistics since they have a real "job" for which they basically get no money and still need welfare.

Its awesome for unemployment statistics.

[Panda]

I'm undecided on the matter. I think that minimum wage should still be reached, but I see no problem in people who are fit to work being told then need to work to continue to revive benefits. I think the companies should have to make up the difference (if there is any) between the amount the government gives people and the amount the pay their staff.

I do agree with people that refuse to work having their benefits cut though. (Again all this provided that the person is fit to work)

[nnmartin]

if they were getting the min. wage and being pushed into a job that would be ok, but this is not the case.

They now have to work for welfare only which comes to around half the min wage.

now regular workers are being sqeezed out of some sections of the job market and losing overtime - because the companies can just get the umemployed to do it for free. (thus the government is losing out on income tax revenue)

also , at the end of the 'placement' there is no guaranteed job - it's just back to the usual benefits.

The only people that seem to gain here are the companies.

so the whole scheme seems rather pointless whichever way you look at it.

[Enlighten]

Originally Posted by Panda

I'm undecided on the matter. I think that minimum wage should still be reached, but I see no problem in people who are fit to work being told then need to work to continue to revive benefits. I think the companies should have to make up the difference (if there is any) between the amount the government gives people and the amount the pay their staff.

I do agree with people that refuse to work having their benefits cut though. (Again all this provided that the person is fit to work)

Yes I would agree with it 100% if they at least paid minimum wage however this is not the case and is spiralling many according to what I have heard further into poverty. These companies are just using it to reduce their salary bills.

I agree that those who refuse point blank to work as they are better off on benefits should have their benefits cut too, if there is no valid reason.

[Panda]

Originally Posted by Enlighten

Yes I would agree with it 100% if they at least paid minimum wage however this is not the case and is spiralling many according to what I have heard further into poverty. These companies are just using it to reduce their salary bills.

Yup, though with tweaking the system could be made to work

Originally Posted by Enlighten

I agree that those who refuse point blank to work as they are better off on benefits should have their benefits cut too, if there is no valid reason.

The situation should never occur where one is better off not working than working.

[nnmartin]

yes, the system is a farce.

in my younger days I fell into this trap a couple of times.

it really was true, I was better off doing nothing (by about £20/wk) than working full time when you factored everything in.

as far as I know, it is still virtually the same system today.