[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/phpbb/session.php on line 585: sizeof(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/phpbb/session.php on line 641: sizeof(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable
ESA WRAG participants will have to do workfare - Carers UK Forum

ESA WRAG participants will have to do workfare

Discuss news stories and political issues that affect carers.
ESA WRAG participants to take part in mandatory community benefit work placements will be introduced from the 3rd December 2012
Sick and disabled claimants face being sent on unlimited workfare from the beginning of next month a memo issued by DWP to Work Programme providers has revealed. LINKS
http://johnnyvoid.wordpress.com/2012/11 ... port-them/
http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/work-programme-memo-082.pdf
So much depends on how they interpret "reasonable adjustments" and how they get round the "barriers to work". The DWP might find themselves quickly moving people out of the work related group when they realise the practicalities for disabled people!
So much depends on how they interpret "reasonable adjustments" and how they get round the "barriers to work". The DWP might find themselves quickly moving people out of the work related group when they realise the practicalities for disabled people!
I agree. As well as the quality of training and the practical support given. But there are already millions of people with all kinds of disabilities in the workforce, it really shouldn't be seen as exceptional, just routine, that all people out of work should be given the chance to learn new skills and show employers what they are capable of.
Its not about "training" or allowing disabled people to "show employers what they're made of" - its about free labour for large corporations as shown by the fact that they want to force disabled sacked Remploy workers to stack shelves in supermarkets. Its the old Nazi saying "Arbeit mach frei"!!!!

Eun
Funny expression that! Actually in the long run work experience makes you more valuable to an employer, and the more work experience you get, the higher a wage you can command. There is nothing intrinsically wrong with stacking supermarket shelves is there? Its no less useful than picking apples, or making clothes pegs on a production line: these are all useful jobs and somebody has to do them, usually, but not always, people who have failed to get useful academic or vocational qualifications. Greater solvency gives you more control over your life, more choices. So in some ways it is perfectly correct. Where this programme is wrong, to me, it that it is far too coercive and based on the largely wrong headed impression that disabled people dont want to work because benefits are a cushy option, and that puts peoples backs up: not unreasonably they are frightened that they wont make the grade and lose their benefits. However, the reason why I support a far greater extension of work opportunities is because there is a large pool of talent going to waste through failed (and similar) initiatives like this in the past, whilst funds like Access To Work were constantly running out of money. The problem is that Labour did b-all about this in the past so now we have the ugly Tories making a total hash of it. Hopefully, from this disaster, we will finally get some policies that actually make sense and get peope back to work, but they wont come from the smirking trio of Cameron, Clegg and Osborne.
My suggestion? Demand that all employers with more than 10 staff take on an extra 10% disabled or unemployed workers, paid for at State Expense on mimimum wage, for twelve months, or pay a fine if they fail to fulfil their social responsibility.
Scally, I agree with many of your comments BUT my son had such a really bad experience when with his former care provider. He'd learned to ride at 4 years old, with Riding for the Disabled, continued with them until he was 16, then went to a farm college at 19 and they got a £3,000 grant specially to buy a horse large enough for him (he's over 6ft). It was "his" horse for 3 years. When he'd completed the course, he went to live with another care provider. They arranged "work experience" at a local stables. The deal was that he cleaned out the stables, and in reward was allowed a ride - I found out later he never once rode any of the horses, and that the owner of this particular stables was renowned for this sort of thing. Anyhow, the end result was that M doesn't want to go riding any more, which is such a shame. At the time I was having life saving surgery, and wasn't told what was going on, obviously there hadn't been enough safeguards in place. And this is the dilemma. We know that whilst our children have learning difficulties, but are very capable as well. How can we keep them safe and protect them from exploitation?
We cant, and exploitation is part of the real world that we have all experienced. I'm not trying to protect my son, I'm hoping to expose him to all that life has to offer in the hope that this strengthens his ability to cope. For example, when we were in Egypt, he got ripped off by some river thieves through the window of our cabin whilst I was at the bar: now he still smarts with how gullible he was and it is far less likely that he will be ripped off again. Thats how we all learn, through these painful experiences: the crucial thing is that we teach our kids to avoid self-pity or passivity: they need to be thrown into the real world, kicking and screaming, just as we were, but with a little bit better safety net in place.
A lot depends on the degree of disability, insight and understanding. For example two people with learning difficulties may have very difficult levels of understanding, especially when brain damage is involved. What might be right for one person may not suit someone else, although they are both classed as having LD.
A lot depends on the degree of disability, insight and understanding. For example two people with learning difficulties may have very difficult levels of understanding, especially when brain damage is involved. What might be right for one person may not suit someone else, although they are both classed as having LD.
Primarily, children learn the most from their parents who may have very different approaches to risk: with all their children, disabled or not. I guess I was brought up in the parenting school of measured risk-taking, something I personally thrived on. For example, I had hitch-hiked all over the world by the time I was 25, with hardly a penny to my name, doing all kinds of hard manual jobs, and survived to tell the tale. That isnt about being born with a silver spoon in your mouth, that is about having boundless horizons and lots of imagination. Ultimately it is our imagination that either stimulates us onwards and upwards, or downwards in ever decreasing circles of defensive behaviour.
Scally, I certainly wasn't born with a silver spoon either. I've always thrived on adventure too, off to work in Switzerland on my own 2 days after leaving school, off to Australia 2 days after my 21st birthday. Even shipped steam engines round the world when only 23! My eldest son exceeded all his developmental milestones, but the second one didn't, because M had been born with the cord round his neck, suffered brain damage. Nevertheless, by the time he was 4 he could drive a scaled down steam engine before he could talk properly, at 6 he taught me how to use a petrol lawn mower, and now he can be trusted to drive a 12 ton steam roller, although he can't count properly or write his surname without a struggle. We always encouraged him to do whatever his brother did, but were always there to support him. I know many parents who do wrap their children in cotton wool, depriving them of any opportunity to achieve their full potential, but don't feel that describes me. Nevertheless, his brain damage means that however much we would like him to be totally normal, we have had to accept that he will never be able to achieve the same things as his brother. Many social workers and educationalists find M. difficult to understand because he is such a mix of ability and disability. We have often likened him to a delicate flower, encouraged and supported he can do very well, but treated poorly, he shuts down completely. Our sons may both have LD, but they may differ significantly.