Estate where only one person has a job. Enjoy

[Bing o]

dmulally said:

Do you guys have work for the dole? Pretty sure over here in Australia you can get newstart allowance for a month or two then you have a choice of joining the Defence Force, studying full time or doing work for the dole. If you dont do it or prove that you have been for a certain amount of interviews per week, they cut you off.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Work_for_the_Dole

Work for the dole isnt a bad thing. Its usually landscaping or helping out the council workers with jobs that have to get done anyway. I cant say it would put me off as an employer to see that on a resume.

We''l send you a couple of million chavs with buckets if Queensland wants them?

[cazzer]

Must admit I've always been an advocate of working for the dole.
Always thought they could do basic council work (road sweeping, verge cleaning etc).

I do have a slight issue with it at the moment though.
Manchester council laying off 2000 workers. Would be a real kick in the teeth to get laid off as groundstaff then have to do your job for 60 quid a week when the council takes you back on to work for your dole.

Might be legal issues too about making someone "redundant" and then using an unemployed person to do the job, hence the role wasn't "redundant".

[renrut]

Kermit power said:

renrut said:

I always thought the Victorian concept of a workhouse was essentially right even though the implementation was so wrong. No one should be getting money for doing nothing.

Even if its just a requirement to sweep their street or keep their garden tidy or keep an eye out for trouble. I know this sort of thing usually gets accused of stealing jobs from hard working people but personally I can't see it. The councils are often claiming they don't have enough people to do jobs (repair roads, empty bins etc) yet they also have a large group of people on the books who don't appear to have any jobs to do (those on JSA)...

Was the implementation of workhouses really so wrong? Sure, it might be today, but put it against the background of Victorian standards of living for hardworking people at the bottom of the ladder....

I would like to see a workhouse mentality return today. If you can't afford your own individual housing, then the State provides communal housing. You could have a central canteen, childcare facilities and the like. Residents could work in the kitchens and nursery, thus training them for productive employment, removing childcare barriers to work for themselves and other residents, helping keep healthcare costs down by providing decent nutrition and making the whole thing cost effective.

Agreed there probably wasn't much wrong with it in context with the standard of living at the time. After all if you've been made redundant you can't expect to be living in a mansion although it seems some people do. Plus it might put a stop to a large number of teenage pregnancies that seem to revolve around getting their own place. Or stop the other current trend which seems to be a buy-to-let type buys a house then rents it out to cousin or other relation who then claims benefits for it therefore getting the mortgage paid for by the state. Thus driving up property prices in the area and making them more difficult to afford for working people.

I guess it would solve a lot of social housing problems too. But then think about the outcry when they suggested a maximum council house payment and that it should be at the local going rate meaning a potential exodus from London. Won't happen until someone in power grows a pair...