Back-To-Work Schemes 'Legally Flawed'

[Jazzy]

The Government's back-to-work schemes, under which people on benefits work for free, are legally flawed, the Supreme Court has ruled.

Judges upheld an earlier Court of Appeal ruling which found that 2011 regulations underpinning the schemes, which have been criticised as "slave labour", were invalid.

However, the judges ruled that regulations did not constitute forced or compulsory labour, leaving both sides claiming victory.

The legal battle focused on several cases including graduate Cait Reilly who had been made to work for two weeks cleaning and stacking shelves in a Poundland store in Kings Heath, Birmingham.

The 24-year-old graduate said she gained nothing from the fortnight and felt as though she was simply giving her labour for free.

The other case was that of 40-year-old unemployed HGV driver Jamieson Wilson, from Nottingham, who had to do unpaid work cleaning furniture and was stripped of his jobseeker's allowance for six months.

The Supreme Court dismissed Secretary of State Iain Duncan Smith's appeal on the issue of the legality of the back-to-work schemes, holding that the regulations were "invalid" as they did not give sufficiently detailed "prescribed description" of the schemes.

It also held that the Secretary of State had failed to provide sufficient information about the schemes to Ms Reilly and Mr Wilson.

Following the judgment Miss Reilly, who said she had been unfairly labelled a 'job snob' for challenging the scheme, said: "I am really pleased with today's judgment, which I hope will serve to improve the current system and assist jobseekers who have been unfairly stripped of their benefits.

"I brought these proceedings because I knew that there was something wrong when I was stopped from doing voluntary work in a local museum and instead forced to work for Poundland for free.

"I have been fortunate enough to find work in a supermarket but I know how difficult it can be. It must be time for the Government to rethink its strategy and actually do something constructive to help lift people out of unemployment and poverty."

Rest of article

In your opinion, do you think the Government's back-to-work schemes amounted to nothing more than slave labor? Why/Why not?

 

[Nebulous's iconNebulous]

Why not just get a real job and get a real steady / reliable paycheck?

 

[Sinon]

Why not just get a real job and get a real steady / reliable paycheck?

When people say this, I want to legitimately stab them in the kidney. "Just get a job" is pretty hard to do. I've been on JSA for 11 months now, and in that time I've applied to approx. 500 jobs. I've had three interviews, and no call-backs. "Just get a job" is a stupid phrase.

 

[Nebulous's iconNebulous]

Why not just get a real job and get a real steady / reliable paycheck?

When people say this, I want to legitimately stab them in the kidney. "Just get a job" is pretty hard to do. I've been on JSA for 11 months now, and in that time I've applied to approx. 500 jobs. I've had three interviews, and no call-backs. "Just get a job" is a stupid phrase.

Stab away!
Of course I know it's easier said than done. I've had my job since 2006 and I don't really know what its like to look for a job in 2013