General Chat

Top tip - using the Genes Reunited community

Welcome to the Genes Reunited community boards!

  • The Genes Reunited community is made up of millions of people with similar interests. Discover your family history and make life long friends along the way.
  • You will find a close knit but welcoming group of keen genealogists all prepared to offer advice and help to new members.
  • And it's not all serious business. The boards are often a place to relax and be entertained by all kinds of subjects.
  • The Genes community will go out of their way to help you, so don’t be shy about asking for help.

Quick Search

Single word search

The British Newspaper Archive

British Newspaper Archive

Read about historical events at the time they were happening. Perhaps you'll discover your ancestor in their local newspaper?

Start searching


  • New posts
  • No new posts
  • Thread closed
  • Stickied, new posts
  • Stickied, no new posts

Do you agree with The Court of Appeal

Page 0 + 1 of 2

  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. »
ProfilePosted byOptionsPost Date


OneFootInTheGrave Report 12 Feb 2013 11:02

Oh dear there will be some very unhappy people in the government today :-D

The Court of Appeal has ruled that a university graduates claim that requiring her to work for free at a Poundland discount store was unlawful.

Three judges in London ruled that the regulations under which most of the Government's back-to-work schemes were created are unlawful and quashed them.

Solicitors for the claimants said the ruling means all those people who have been sanctioned by having their jobseeker's allowance withdrawn for non-compliance with the back-to-work schemes affected will be entitled to reclaim their benefits.


Porkie_Pie Report 12 Feb 2013 11:29



DazedConfused Report 12 Feb 2013 11:45

Of course it was - especially as she was already working for free in a charity shop.

Rules & Regs gone mad......

I could understand if she did not want to work but this case is just plain ridculous


Porkie_Pie Report 12 Feb 2013 11:50

In this case i do agree,

1, whilst these companies enjoy free labour why would they employ staff that they have to pay?
2, whilst your working unpaid when would you have time to look for paid work?
3, in the case listed Miss Reilly who was already doing voluntary work had no time left to continue with her voluntary work (so she was already doing voluntary work)
4, She had to do 30 hours per week at poundland to keep her JSA in my book that mean the government is guilty of paying people below the minimum wage

JSA is abt just over £70 per week for 30 hours "do the maths"



DazedConfused Report 12 Feb 2013 11:55

Porkie Pie I totally agree with you about these companies using this as free labour - they get the staff and do not have to pay. If they have so many of these 'free' jobs advertise them and then employ and pay someone to do the job.

We are getting closer and closer to the old Victorian workhouse mentality in this goverment,

Doffs cap and curties to my 'betters' - Yeah right :-P


Porkie_Pie Report 12 Feb 2013 11:55

Business is already heavily subsidised at the tax payers expense,

Its called working Tax credits


♥†۩ Carol   Paine ۩†♥

♥†۩ Carol Paine ۩†♥ Report 12 Feb 2013 11:55

Looking at this from another perspective, why should the tax payer s money be used to allow her to ‘play’ in the Museum? She was not ‘unpaid’ the Government were paying her & probably more than basic wage for the amount of hours she was doing. (not just JSA )
Experience in the work place wherever or whatever it may be is just that. It would not hurt for many senior work professionals to spend some time at the lowers levels to get a true idea of what it is like.
If asked at a future interview what you had been doing since your last job/education, it is surely better to be able to say that you took any job you could get whilst looking for one that used the qualifications you had.
You can be sure that no-one actually says “I looked in the papers, on line & in the job centre to see what jobs where going, then went down the pub with my mates, watched daytime tv & chatted/played on Facebook”.
IMHO the Department for Work and Pensions had the right idea but had not worked on it thoroughly enough before implementing it.


Muffyxx Report 12 Feb 2013 12:01

Can see both sides of this tbh.

I suppose if i put my *mum* hat on I'd want my daughters to be seen to be trying to work and gain experience that may give them a better chance of a job...any job, even unpaid to start with, so they get a foot on the ladder...establishing a work ethic early on is vital I feel....ok this girl was already doing voluntary work already but I'm guessing that's rarely the case....I'm a *don't know* on this one when I look at the bigger picture though.


DazedConfused Report 12 Feb 2013 12:12

The 'work' she was doing related to the degree she had taken - what relevance would working in Poundland or any of the other places where this scheme was operating have had.

If she was a lazy, stay at home, do not want to work type of person then yes she should have been forced to take the job at Poundland, but she was not.

This is a case where the 'one size fits all' does not work

Rambling Rose

Rambling Rose Report 12 Feb 2013 12:18

D's perspective, it's a really good idea to take on a job that isn't in your field of expertise rather than be on the dole, because it will give you experience working with and for people and show you're willing to work BUT that job should at least pay the same rate as an apprenticeship job ( which I think is about £2.50 for his age group? or minimum wage for older person)..

Also, my opinion , if someone IS doing voluntary work in the career they have just qualified in ( eg an architect working on building a community project,) to gain practical experience in that area to add to their CV WHILE they are actively looking for a permanent post, that seems fair ( for a limited period).


Porkie_Pie Report 12 Feb 2013 12:19

Carol, "Government were paying her & probably more than basic wage for the amount of hours she was doing. (not just JSA )"

Where is the relevant info "source" to qualify your statement

The only people who get extra benefit on the back-to-work schemes to my knowledge are those with disabilities



supercrutch Report 12 Feb 2013 12:20

Agrees with PigletsPal.

DWP do not have a clue how to appy this scheme appropriately.

In fact DWP do not have a clue about most aspects of the job market in 2013.


OneFootInTheGrave Report 12 Feb 2013 12:50

I totally agree with any initiative to encourage people into work, however we abolished slavery in the 1800's and I do not believe that these schemes which make people work for free is the way to do encourage them.

In my book this is nothing but cheap labour, I would go as far as to say forced labour as a threat is present if they refuse.

By all means make it a condition that if a person who is in good health refuses to take a job which is one they are capable of doing, then unless there are extenuating circumstances, they will lose their benefits.

However, they must at least be paid what is called a "Living Wage" a wage which is enough to cover what they need to be able to provide their family with the basic daily essentials of life.

Our Government's past and present are always very quick to level criticism at other countries for using cheap labour.


AnninGlos Report 12 Feb 2013 13:03

It is a pity this was not thought through more, as an incentive to go and do some work/any work when drawing benefit is good. However, in this case she was doing voluntary work in the area in which she was qualified and searching for jobs. That should have been seen as fulfilling the terms of the scheme. Not knowing others' problems, experiences with the scheme I can't comment.

My Grandson who has a degree has tried and failed to get a job in his particular sphere and has been working since leaving uni as a pizza delivery driver. A very lowly job, yet he is earning money and paying his way and gaining experience of working in a team, handling money and sometimes even balancing the day's takings now he has been there 2 years. One day he and we hope this will stand him in good stead.

But like Muffy, in a wider context I am a don't know.

♥†۩ Carol   Paine ۩†♥

♥†۩ Carol Paine ۩†♥ Report 12 Feb 2013 13:22

Roy it has not been stated whether or not she was claiming housing benefit etc, hence me saying 'probably'.


OneFootInTheGrave Report 12 Feb 2013 13:30

Sadly, governments of all shades have tended to make policies on the hoof and many people suffer as a result.

But there again, and I admit to being a cynic, not everyone suffers as many benefit from such polices, mainly those who are paid to implement them ;-)


eRRolSheep Report 12 Feb 2013 13:31

Housing Benefit is a seperate issue because it is paid to people on low incomes rather than the unemployed - if you see the distinction.

Work experience is one thing and I think it is commendable in this instance that the person in question willingly carried out voluntary work. In fact, many unemployed people do just that. But "forced" work experience is not the way forward. Instead of pushing people into unsuitable work, look at the pre-existing skillset and tap into that. Making people do a job that they have no interest or experience in (particularly older people) merely results in an utterly disengaged workforce.


OneFootInTheGrave Report 12 Feb 2013 13:37


You have a grandson to be very proud of, I wish him well and hope that sooner rather than later he will find a suitable career and one in which he can put his degree to good use :-)


supercrutch Report 12 Feb 2013 13:39

It's rather like having school children in their work experience week being sent to a placement that bears absolutely no similarity to their job expectations.

Had a few of those over the years and although some were fantastic (and I paid them at the end of their week) others would either not turn up or watch the clock all day.


Porkie_Pie Report 12 Feb 2013 13:52

Carol, as Errol says people in full time work claim housing benefit, in fact 60% of benefit claimants are in low paid work according to officials