Labour’s Minimum Wage and Work Trials
So what to make of the government programme of Work Trials? I only learned about them on Friday while at the local Jobcentre. Councidentally Lenin with the Tomb posted about them as well, on Friday, and he seems very down on the whole thing.
Largely I agree with Lenin, but I think there a few other significant details which were not evinced to full effect. In all the triumphalism on the part of Labour about the minimum wage, that this Work Trials programme awards less than the minimum wage seems to have escaped everyone’s notice.
Through the scheme, people claiming JSA can go to work for private employers for up to thirty days. Instead of being paid by the employer, they continue to claim JSA, plus a lunch and travel allowance for the thirty days. The JSA (and the allowances) divided by the number of hours worked is less than the current minimum wage, to say nothing of the living wage that the Left is campaigning for.
In essence, the programme is a direct subsidy to business from the government, advertised to employers as “Try Before You Buy”, with no obligation whatsoever to buy. The only advantage it carries is that it gives people up to thirty days experience of a given job, though the companies involved generally employ unskilled labour from the jobcentre so the advantage is fairly negligible.
The other thing is that it doesn’t address the ratio of people to jobs, it simply allows for the private sector to absorb what it wishes to and ignore the rest. Theoretically an employer on unskilled labour could repeatedly allow individuals to fill a space the employer might otherwise have to pay for. The programme is thus not a solution or a way to decrease unemployment, short term or long term.
To do that, the government might have to get (got forbid) structurally involved in the economy through a series of public works programmes, where different skill sets could be employed doing what they have been trained to do, in a way that benefits our social and public services.
Employed so, the opportunities for unionisation would exist, and the insecurity that prevents people campaigning against the sub-minimum wage levels would not. Reading over some TUC guidance notes, it appears that the government actually changed the NMW laws in 2008 so that work trials could be exempt.
These programmes, and associated ideas, were the work of David Freud, the investment banker who was employed by the government (not a Work Trial!) to do a review of the welfare system. They were then stewarded by James Purnell and then Yvette Cooper, the former having supervised as Secretary of State for Work and Pensions the changing of the 1999 NMW laws to the benefit of employers.
Chris Grayling, Purnell’s shadow at the time, enthusastically backed the plans (and several bloggers said the plans were outright nicked from the Tories), which should truthfully be a warning all of its own. But it seems Labour couldn’t even wait for the Tories to get in before undermining what they continually spout as one of their major achievements.
Yeah it’s disgusting and it’s gonna get a lot worse under the tories as they are talking of stopping peoples benefits for 3 years for refusing to participate in these slave labour schemes!
A4e is the worst of these slave drivers pocketing millions at the tax-payers expense by exploiting the downtrodden poor!
Only one party has vowed to smash this corrupt system and I don’t think you’d like their name mentioned on this blog LOL!
A good article even if I don’t agree with your politics!
Well actually Davey, there are several socialist parties which have pledged to end the programme and in fact run a Benefits not JSA! campaign to reinstate the old system of benefits rather than the new attempts at workfare.
Well I’ve worked for free before when I should’ve been getting paid, but I did get a job out of it then. So there’s nothing intrinsically wrong with giving jobseekers a chance to show what they can do – some of us just won’t get the break otherwise. But the extension to a month sucks. Any employer who claims they can’t decide on a prospective recruit after a few days of seeing them at work needs a bullet through the head – after all, they’ll happily recruit strangers to higher-paid posts after half an hour of mostly dumb interview questioning.
So I’ve a better idea: sack incompetent recruiters who need a month to make their mind up, and give me their job. Then they can work for me for free for a month: not because I can’t decide on employing them, but just because I feel like it.
Thanks for this… It’s cleared up quite a few points for me (such as the below-minimum wage element…)
I was very recently put forward for interview – and offered the role – for a job that starts next week. Without my prior knowledge or consent, the Job Centre have told my prospective employer that I (along with all the other candidates put forward to interview) have not only agreed to one week’s Work Trials, but signed a form to that effect! This is completely untrue and has put me in a very awkward position… I’ve only been claiming JSA for just over 3 months and I’m hardly a ‘disadvantaged’ candidate.
My contact at the job centre told me that Work Trials are ‘completely voluntary’, but I strongly feel that if my new employer has been promised I’d agreed to work for nothing, they may think they made the wrong decision if I refuse. It’s the principal that bothers me – how dare the Job Centre not only agree to something without even mentioning it to me, let alone tell a prospective employer that I’d signed a form to that effect! My employer and I have reached a compromise, but the Job Centre have yet to respond to my email telling them how angry I am about all this…
Patsy, why on earth haven’t you visited your job centre and demanded to speak to someone about this? Don’t query this via email alone, just get down there. Get some free legal advice about this incident from Citizens Advice (CAB) too: if you didn’t agree to let your employment situation be communicated to a potential employer your job centre has broken its ‘charter’ but more importantly, statutory confidentiality agreements under various acts (i.e. the Law) they would be liable in court and you would be entitled to and deserving of, some form of compensation
Work Trials enable job seekers to try out ANY occupation without loosing their benefits. They can apply for ANY job and turn it into a work trial. This means that job seekers are more likely to try many occupations, and find something they actually enjoy. It means that employers are more likely to give people a trial because they have nothing to loose. So they will allow people to try many occupations. Anyway, why should an employer just employ someone because they have a well written CV. It is far better that they see what they are paying for.
In practical terms, work trials are brilliant.
If it works for the job seeker, as it does, then good
If it works for the employer, as it does, then good
Patsy, why are you complaining, they said it was voluntary, that means voluntary. What do you want them to do – write it in blood for you. Anyway you are not “working for nothing” – you are getting £13 extra per day + full benefits + work experience. If all that adds to nothing, then some of you need to go away and study maths.
Have you not heard of the minimum wage craig? an extra £13 a day is not minimum wage is it craig? now craig i suggest a maths course a.s.a.p
Craig, are you blind or stupid? It has to be one of the two as Patsy’s reply clearly lays out that she did not agree to turn this particular job into a work trial and that it was a decision taken on her behalf (rightly or wrongly) by the Jobcentre.
As for the rest of your comment, have you thought about reading the articles you’re commenting on? The point of this article was to illustrate that work trials are essentially employment for below the minimum wage. You aren’t one of those cretins that believes that the NMW is harmful to workers because it stops them competing for ever lower wages are you?
Plus, you’ve stated that work trials work for employers, and work for job seekers, and have provided no evidence whatsoever.
Subtext: fuck off please.
Follow up to this… The Job Centre refused to acknowledge my claims that a member of staff there told my (now former) employer that I’d given my written consent to a work trial I knew NOTHING about (I saw the email she sent). In fact, they washed their hands of the whole fiasco.
Only after completing the work trial did I find out that they had carried out NO background research on this woman and the job was for a SEL-EMPLOYED postition (which was not made clear to me by the Job Centre OR at my interview) that no longer existed after I’d completed the free work trial… My understanding is, you may only do work trials for employed positions?
Thankfully,I was able to find part-time paid work elsewhere straight away, but my experiences have made me VERY dubious about Job Centre practices.
I am currently doing a 2 week work trial with up to 45 hours a week, have been told i am not entitled to anything else but JSA which works out at £1.11 an hour working 10 hour shifts then having to be up 4 hours later for another 10 hour shift, i have been told that i could not get any help buying clothes to wear so i have NO money to live on because it was spent on my clothes and i got the cheapest option