Welfare reform is a mess!

So I have just seen some more of the governments’ proposals for ESA work related activity group. http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/feb/16/disabled-unpaid-work-benefit-cuts 'Disabled people face unlimited unpaid work or cuts in benefit,' and also http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/terminally-ill-face-being-forced-690027 'Terminally ill face being forced to do work experience or lose their benefits', and I’m confused. I read the accompanying documents that the Guardian has also made available and all I can say is I’m astounded. http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/interactive/2012/feb/17/department-work-pensions-document-disability 'Department for Work and Pensions document. Civil service document that reveals the government's policy proposal to make disabled people work unpaid for an unlimited amount of time', it really doesn’t look like they have thought about it at all.

There are so many things in these reports that conflict I really am not sure which I think are worse than others. I feel inclined to remind people that ATOS who supposedly has trained the people administering their WCT started out two years ago getting on average 40% of people appeal their decisions and of them 40% were found to have been unfairly judge fit for work. Now two years on it can be said they have made great strides in reducing this. In the last year the appeal rate has fallen to an average of 27% for Dec 2009 to May 2010, however this is still 4583 (on average) people appealing a month, which is still rather a lot , and of these 33% are found in favour of 1850 (on average) people found unfairly fit for work a month. (tables can be found in this document http://research.dwp.gov.uk/asd/workingage/esa_wca/esa_wca_26072011.pdf )

At peak (Mar 2009) there were 10000 appeals and 4100 people found unfairly judged fit for work.

I therefore have little confidence that anyone in the job centre plus will be better equipped to make the decision about what I am capable of than ATOS were when they started and I feel that to trial the work placement regime without sanctions until they have ironed out the bugs would be the best thing they could do for all concerned. However that is assuming that the government forces the issue and insists that this goes ahead.

In it’s present format I would strongly suggest that it doesn’t. I do not believe that they have a clear idea about what they are trying to achieve. Although I am familiar in passing with workplace experience and its’ benefits for those on jobseekers allowance I find myself wondering if this is exactly what the government has in mind however it is completely inappropriate for those in the work related activity group. I say this because on page 4 of the slides that the guardian published it states

Placements would normally be short-term and need not be full time and must be appropriate in the individual circumstances.

They have said they will not put a maximum time on this but more importantly they consider that people who are unwell may be able to do a full time placement, which I find highly unlikely given that they are in the work related activities group.

On the one hand they make allowances for people who have care responsibilities, those with none school age children, and lone parents (see slide 2) however surely all parents are carers whether their children are of school age or not?

And what about their own treatment it doesn’t suggest that any consideration will be given to them for getting to this or for how long it will take or for how much the person may be drained from it. They blithely cover this with personal circumstances when I have no confidence that they have any idea what they may be.

And what is the perpose of the placement? Slide 3 has this point

The focus should be on new skills and gaining experience. It should increase both confidence and employability

I would be interested to know what they think the new skills will be because it sounds like education to me and to be honest the skills that many people require are not educational/ academic. The bigger problems are pain management, stress management, anxiety management, low self esteem, low self confidence...etc. And these are not necessarily going to be helped in the work place without significant input from other people, above and beyond the normal working relationships and I find it hard to believe that this will happen. And how is this different from the job seekers placements? Since people will either go back to work or onto job seekers how is this going to help the work related activity group directly?

Look at it this way, many people will find it difficult even to set foot in a work environment as many will be intimidated by people officialdom. They may feel the need for moral support a lot of the time; to know there’s someone close who they can talk to and that they trust. They would beable to do far more with this support than without it. So is this what the job centre will be working on with the work placements? I doubt it

 Now if the government was to come up with a service similar to this one http://www.bucksmind.org.uk/employment/ then I would whole heartedly back them. I have found the service informative, supportive, friendly and relaxed, and professional. They have attended first meetings with charities I have volunteered for, have run courses on getting back to work, have helped me write letters to DWP, calmed my nerves, have offered to come to my ATOS assessment if it occurs and have imbued me with confidence that I can achieve things.

From their testimonials section

Supported Employment has played a significant part in restoring my self-confidence, self-respect and self-worth, and has been an incredible support in assisting me to find permanent employment. I am indebted to them for their kindness and understanding.’

but somehow I doubt that this kind of service is what the government will achieve even if it is what they wish to.

It is things like the point on slide 5 under safeguards

Claimants are able to request that an adviser reconsider whether an activity is appropriate. There is also a complaints procedure in place.

That particularly worry me since it suggests that a claimant would not be considered or asked their opinion about whether what was suggested was appropriate.

Ummm Maybe they should have put

 an open discussion with the claimant about the suitability of the placement/ decision with the option of a second opinion plus a complaints procedure would not have jangled my nerves so much.

Largely though I feel it is the speed with which the discussions and implementation of these suggestions for welfare reform are occurring that really make me angry. I cannot see how they can possibly have considered the problems they may incur enough to make an informed decision. At the very least I would like to see some period of time for assessment of whether what they propose will achieve what they want it to before sanctions are used.