Category Archives: Uncategorized

Inflation Flat, Rents Soaring And Letting Agents Are Still Whining

chicago-rent-strike1On the same day it was reported that inflation had dropped to 0% a report from the Association of Residential Letting Agents (pdf) gleefully announced that rents are rising due to soaring demand for housing.
31% of letting agents reported rent increases between January and February with rises highest in the South East and “intense competition” for housing in London. Even the language used reveals a private rental sector that is broken beyond repair.

Tenants are customers, they should not be in competition for housing, landlords should be in competition for tenants. Even by the vile standards of a free market run rampant that is how it is supposed to work. No-one is in competition to shop at fucking Tesco. And yet even during this boom time for letting agents and landlords they can still find something to complain about.

The report warns that 70% of letting agents say landlords will pull out of the market if three year tenancies are introduced as Labour have vaguely promised to do if they win the election. They expect us to believe that buy-to-let landlords will all start paying their own mortgages in protest if they are no longer able to evict tenants at the drop of a hat.  They must think we are fucking idiots.

Millions of people are now living in private rented accommodation and can face eviction, for any reason, with just two months notice. As house prices soar and social housing disappears that means millions of people who will live their entire life without ever knowing what it is like to have a secure home. And all to prop up parasites in the private rented sector who are exploiting the fucked housing market to wring out every last possible penny from their tenants. Tenants who in many cases may already be living in desperate poverty.

Rent caps are needed urgently, but even that would only fix rents at their current astronomical levels. A huge expansion of social housing is the only real solution to the UK’s housing crisis. That means in London not one more yuppy flat should be built until there is no-one at all on housing waiting lists.   Alternatively we could all stop paying our rent and really give the bastards something to complain about.

The occupation of the Aylesbury Estate in Southwark is still going strong.   Follow them @Fight4Aylesbury or for the latest news visit their website.

This blog has no sources of funding so here’s a quick reminder that you can help ensure it continues by making a donation.

Join me on facebook or follow me on twitter @johnnyvoid

What A Fucking Shambles, Work Programme Still Worse Than Doing Nothing At All

esa-wp-graph

The dotted line represents the percentage of sick and disabled claimants who would have been expected to get jobs if the Work Programme didn’t exist.

It is astonishing that the ‘minimum expected level’ of people finding jobs on Iain Duncan Smith’s Work Programme is the same as would be expected had he done nothing at all.

What this means is that as long as the Work Programme isn’t making long term unemployment worse then both the DWP and the private sector parasites who run the scheme can claim it is a huge success when in fact it’s nothing of the sort.  It is just not doing any damage.  The problem is that in many cases the Work Programme is not meeting the ‘minimum expected levels’.  It is worse than doing nothing and from the latest figures appears to be creating, not curing long term unemployment amongst some groups.

This has left Iain Duncan Smith with nothing to shout about except for the huge numbers of people who have been forced to waste their time on the scheme.  And so that’s what he’s done today as the latest dismal performance figures are released with a jubilant press release declaring that the Work Programme has ‘helped’ more people than any previous employment scheme.  The truth is that the Work Programme has failed more people than any scheme before at a time when we are constantly being told how many jobs are now available.

Of the one million people who have been sent on the Work Programme over 700,000 were back at the Jobcentre after two years of expert help from companies like G4S, Maximus and A4e.  Only a quarter of those on the programme had a spell of 3-6 months in work – slightly below the ‘minimum expected level’.

This is less than the number of people who would have been expected to get jobs if the Work Programme had never existed.  Tax payers have forked out over a billion pounds for this fiasco.  The suffering of claimant’s sanctioned on the scheme is well documented.  The lives lost little more than human sacrifice – scapegoats for a failing economic system.  If there was any more proof needed that benefit sanction harm rather than help then today’s Work Programme statistics provide it.

For sick and disabled claimants the level of failure is shocking.  Just 3.4% of current claimants of sickness benefits (ESA/IB) who started on the scheme in December 2013 had a spell of at least three months in work a year later.  This is barely a third of the number who would have been expected to get a job under their own steam without any compulsory ‘help’.

Perhaps the most horrifying aspect of the Work Programme is what has happened to all those found ‘fit for work’ by Atos and told to frantically look for work or face their benefits being stopped.  Hundreds of millions has been spent harassing this group of claimants, who in many cases are not really well enough to work at all.  Just 1.5% of this group had found a job lasting over 3 months after completing a year on the scheme in December 2015.

Overall the Work Programme is only performing above minimum levels for mainstream Job Seekers Allowance (JSA) claimants who have been on the scheme a year, and then only by a couple of percent.  There is a dirty fucking trick being played here however.  The most successful group of claimants are ‘other JSA’ which represents around a third of unemployed people sent on the scheme.  Over 20% of this group found work after a year.

Other JSA is largely made up of Early Entrants, which means those referred onto the Work Programme before they had been unemployed for over 12 months.  These are often people who have recently left work and are therefore the most employable claimants.  They are not the people the Work Programme was designed for.  They are also by far the most likely to get jobs on the Work Programme.

Documents leaked onto the internet by bungling A4e showed how Work Programme companies can receive huge payments even when someone has found a job themselves and not even started on the scheme.  All they need to do is make sure the paperwork is filled out correctly.  Jobcentre staff are also under huge pressure to produce job outcomes.  By encouraging the most employable claimants to sign up for the Work Programme then Jobcentre staff get a pat on the head when they inevitably find a job and the company running the scheme gets a cheque in the post.  And Iain Duncan Smith can pretend the Work Programme is doing better than it is. Everybody wins.  Except the tax payer and all those sanctioned or forced into workfare and who were back in the Jobcentre after two years wasted on the disastrous Work Programme.

This blog has no sources of funding so here’s a quick reminder that you can help ensure it continues by making a donation.

Join me on facebook or follow me on twitter @johnnyvoid

DWP Attempts To Increase Welfare-to-Work Companies’ Power To Snoop On Claimants

careless-talkPrivate sector Work Programme busy-bodies like A4e and G4S are to be encouraged to snoop on agreements made between unemployed people and the Jobcentre.

From 23rd March 2015  the DWP sent out a memo declaring that: “it would be beneficial for Work Programme Providers to potentially have sight of the Claimant Commitment at the first point of contact.”

The companies running the Work Programme will be expected to encourage participants to share this document, whilst Jobcentre staff will “ensure they highlight to claimants the importance of sharing their Claimant Commitment with their provider at first contact.”

The Claimant Commitment is the agreement that everyone is now forced to sign as a condition of claiming the main out of work benefits.  It details the endless pointless activity that unemployed people are expected to carry out as punishment for being out of work.  Any breach of this commitment can result in benefits being sanctioned.  According to the DWP, allowing companies who run welfare-to-work schemes access to this agreement will provide them with “Information on messaging around a claimant’s non-compliance with work related requirements”.  In other words it will be easier for Work Programme providers to grass you up to the Jobcentre for not carrying out work-related activity.

There is no legal requirement to show your Claimant Commitment to your Work Programme provider however due to data protection laws.  You should not be sanctioned for refusing to let them see it.  The memo warns the providers that “If the claimant refuses to share their Claimant Commitment you should not take any further action to pursue.”

It is up to you.  Make sure everyone knows this.

For more information on what you can and can’t be forced to sign and what information you have to disclose to Work Programme companies visit: http://refuted.org.uk/donotsign/

This blog has no sources of funding so here’s a quick reminder that you can help ensure it continues by making a donation.

Join me on facebook or follow me on twitter @johnnyvoid

Boycott Workfare Week of Action 25 April – 2 May: No workfare! No sanctions! Whoever wins we will resist!

Boycott-Workfare-action

From Boycott Workfare

As the general election campaign gets underway we are already seeing politicians calling for more of the same policies. More workfare. More sanctions. Yet we know that these policies have been a total disaster. It is shameful that workfare and sanctions are supported by all the main political parties. This is why we are holding a week of action in the week before the election. We need your help to expose and challenge workfare and sanctions policies and the political lies that underpin them.

Workfare undermines paid jobs and wages and results in sanctions. It does nothing to improve the chances of people finding a job and exploits those forced to carry it out. Last year over half a million people had their benefits sanctioned. The number of benefit sanctions imposed by the DWP now exceeds the number of fines imposed by the courts. People are being left with nothing for up to three years. There is now overwhelming evidence of the harm being caused by sanctions. Sanctions are damaging the health of claimants and leading to hunger, homelessness and deaths.

Your actions have already had a huge impact in challenging these policies. Dozens of organisations have withdrawn from the schemes following public pressure. Over 500 voluntary sector organisations have now signed the Keep Volunteering Voluntary agreement to say they oppose workfare and sanctions and will not be involved. 25 councils have also said they will boycott the schemes. All this means it is getting harder and harder for the government’s private providers to find workfare placements. Hundreds of placements have been cancelled and your actions have made a real difference.

The week of action is a chance for everyone who opposes workfare and sanctions to demand an end to these cruel policies. However you can contribute join us to take action from 25 April – 2 May:

  • Join in with online actions throughout the week!
  • Ask charities you support to sign the Keep Volunteering Voluntary agreement!
  • Speak out! Tell those promoting workfare and sanctions what you think of their policies!
  • Hand out our know-your-rights leaflets at your local jobcentre!
  • Plan actions at a workfare exploiter near you!

Remember to let us know what you plan so we can help to publicise it!

Join me on facebook or follow me on twitter @johnnyvoid

The London Metropolitan Police Are The Biggest Fucking Wankers Of All

aylesbury-banner

The banner at the recent Aylesbury estate occupation

Class War have reported that at last night’s Poor Doors demonstration the police seized a political banner because of swearing and arrested a person standing next to it.

The banner had been a weekly feature at the boisterous protests outside an East London tower block where residents in affordable housing are forced to use a diffrent door to the rich.  Previously the police had threatened arrests due to claims the banner is offensive, although when coppers tried to find a member of the public who was offended they had been unable to.  It seems that most people agree, the leaders of the four main political parties are  all fucking wankers.

The move sets a chilling precedent.  Will protesters now have to pass a police board of censors before they can display banners and placards at demonstrations?  Will they send snatch squads into the crowd if someone uses a rude word?  Will chants at football grounds of  ‘the referee’s a wanker’ be met with mass arrests?  Or is it only when you call politicians wankers that the Met Police decides to take offence on their behalf?

Class War are predictably unrepentent.  Tomorrow (Saturday 14th March) they will march through Chingford where Lisa McKenzie, recently described as “the living embodiment of class hatred” by Melanie Phillips, will be standing in the election against Iain Duncan Smith.  Join them outside Chingford Station at 12.30pm.

The Poor Doors protest will be back, next week and every Thursday, 6pm, 1 Commercial Street, London E1.

This blog has no sources of funding so here’s a quick reminder that you can help ensure it continues by making a donation.

Join me on facebook or follow me on twitter @johnnyvoid

Workfare Is A Betrayal Of Our Children And We Will All Pay The Price In Time

wham-rap

Most of the UK’s successful creative people were probably once a NEET – meaning someone under 25 who is not in education, employment or training.  Tom Jones was famously revealed as workshy by his Jobcentre records before going on to become one of the most successful recording artists the UK has ever seen.  Top pop star George Michael even rapped about his experience of unemployment early in his career.  And he turned out all right.  Mostly.

There are just under one million NEETs in the UK, but most of them don’t stay that way for long.  Few make a perfectly seamless transition from education to work, so almost every 16-25 year old will have been a NEET at some point.  Around 15% of NEETs are currently unable to work due to sickness or disability.  Some of them will be in hospital.  Many NEETs are mothers with very young children or babies.  Others will be posh kids, dicking about on gap years or frittering away trust funds.  Prince Harry was a NEET for a while.  The term isn’t very helpful to describe an economic or social group. But it serves its real purpose, to smear the young as lazy or feckless.

Only around half of all NEETs are unemployed, meaning on unemployment benefits, or actively seeking work.  That’s still about half a million and the reason for this is because there are not enough jobs.  In a highly competitive labour market the young will always suffer as they are forced to compete with older, more skilled workers.

Employing anyone comes with a risk attached.  This is one of the costs of doing business.  Employers have sought to push this cost onto the tax payer and unemployed people themselves by operating government backed ‘try before you buy’ style workfare schemes.  It is not uncommon for young people to be expected to stack shelves in supermarkets for two months without pay.  This would have been unthinkable a couple of decades ago.  Now both of the main political parties support this kind of grotesque exploitation.

The reason this situation has emerged is the constant bleating from employers that the latest generation are so lazy they are virtually unemployable.  Yet young people are working longer for less money than they have in decades.  It is a transparent lie, as is the ludicrous slur that young people need teaching how to get out of bed in the mornings – kids have to do that almost every day of their life until they leave school.

Another advantage of bosses claiming the young are lazy and unskilled is that it also allows them to dump some of their training costs onto the tax payer via the education system.  McDonalds would have schools teaching kids how to fry their  fucking hamburgers if they thought they could get away with it.  The entire  education system, from primary schools to universities, is becoming based on the needs of business, not learning for its own sake.  And this too has happened because of endless whining from bosses that this generation is the worst yet.  Until the next one who they will tell us are even worse.

The truth, as Tom Jones and George Michael shows, is that NEETs are one of the most valuable assets that a society can possess.  Young people, left to their own devices and even on meagre resources, can do incredible things – and this does not just apply to the young.  From Harry Potter to Glastonbury Festival, great cultural institutions would almost certainly never have emerged without a functioning social security system.  Young unemployed people already carry out huge amounts of unpaid work, as genuine volunteers, looking after children or acting as carers for older relatives.  Many work on their own intiative, organising gigs, making music, fucking about with computer programmes or making youtube videos that hundreds of thousands of people enjoy.  This  form of unpaid work created the UK’s once thriving music industry.  In the age of user generated content, young people with time on their hands are now driving technology and online entertainment.

A society with any common sense would not just recognise this vital, energised and creative resource but cherish it.  It would accept that young people themselves are the best placed to decide their own destinies in the future they will create.  That they need and deserve time, space and opportunities to be able to plan their lives for themselves.

This would require a higher education system that is flexible and accessible, not one that forces young people to take on eye-watering debt.  It would mean providing genuine training, in real skills, not shoddy workfare schemes or so-called apprenticeships that are little more than an excuse for employers to dodge the minimum wage.  It means allowing young people the time to explore their creativity if they wish, and providing funding for them to do so.  A society like this would trust its young people, not fear them.  And it would pay them a fucking wage if they are working for an employer.

Instead the opposite is taking place.  The young are demonised as lazy who need to be punished with forced work and benefit sanctions.  What is fast emerging is a kind of state-planned employment market, where Jobcentres decide what work young people will do and if they refuse they are punished with poverty.  That work is almost always low paid and insecure, and as most normal people if not politicians know, it is easy to get trapped in a job that leaves you so exhausted and demotivated that you end up not looking for anything else.  Bogus Traineeships, Apprenticeships and workfare are de-skilling the young, the opposite of their claimed intention.

Of course not all young people are perfect.  There’s some proper little bastards out there, often as a result of broken or traumatic lives. But they are a tiny minority, and the very worst thing you can do to someone on the edge of a criminal lifestyle is stop their benefits.  These kinds of young people will not be incentivised by benefit sanctions to take up low paid work.  Not when there’s yuppies to be mugged.  Take away the social security system for this group and you create a small but ferocious outlaw class.  There is no shortage of predators who will fill the vacuum created by an absence of any support at all for the troubled, isolated and angry youth.

Both Labour and the Tories are now competing to show who can be tougher at bullying young people off benefits.  Both are proposing workfare schemes that are unworkable in practice, there already isn’t enough unpaid work to go round.  Both are committed to using brutal benefit sanctions to force the errant young into line.  But creating back of the envelope forced work schemes designed to pander to misinformed prejudices about the feckless youth is the politics of the gutter.  We will all pay the price in time of their betrayal of our children in the name of a pat on the head from the fucking Daily Mail.

Take part in a day of action at jobcentres across the UK on 25 February 2015 in support of the unemployed activist arrested for supporting a claimant at Arbroath Jobcentre.  Details on Boycott Workfare’s website, please spread the word.

This blog has no sources of funding so here’s a quick reminder that you can help ensure it continues by making a donation.

Follow me on twitter @johnnyvoid

Is Iain Duncan Smith Bullshitting About Universal Credit? Of Course He Fucking Is

uc-surveyIain Duncan Smith has been back to his bull-shitting best with a string of wildly optimistic claims about the wonders of Universal Credit.

Alongside the Secretary of State’s rare appearances in the media this week, the DWP released a gushing report claiming that Universal Credit was already a huge success.  This document was based on cherry-picked information from two recent evaluations of the pilot scheme currently running in the North West of England which looked at the impact of the roll out of Universal Credit.

The truth is that there is really nothing useful that can really be learned from how Universal Credit (UC) will work across the board from the tiny amount of data so far available.  Only around 50,000 people have claimed UC so far, and there were far fewer than that when these evaluations were carried out.  More importantly, they are based on new claims only from single unemployed people with no significant health conditions.

One of these evaluations was a survey which compared the views of 900 people who had claimed UC against the same number of claimants on mainstream Jobseeker’s Allowance (JSA).  In the DWP’s gushing summary of the evidence they declare that Universal Credit claimants were more likely to believe the benefits system is encouraging them to find work and that they were spending more time looking for work.  The DWP also claim huge support for the Claimant Commitment, the agreement unemployed people are now forced to sign which contains a list of largely pointless activities which people must carry out as part of their jobsearch.

As the table above shows, most claimants did believe that ‘some’ of the activities in their Claimant Commitment would help them find work.  But that’s just fucking obvious.  If it says in a Claimant Commitment that you must look for a job, then you are more likely to find work than if you don’t look for a job.  What is important is how the Claimant Commitment is viewed as a whole.  What the survey then shows it that 55% of people appear to have thought that some or all of the measures in the agreement were a waste of time, 59% of claimants thought that some or all of the measures did not take into account their personal circumstances and 46% of claimants thought that some or all of these actions were unachievable.  Disturbingly almost all of them, 76% of claimants, thought that Jobcentres would be checking up on whether they had carried out these pointless, unachievable activities.  What this suggests is that many claimants seem to have been concerned that they were being set up to be sanctioned.  95% of claimants were all too aware that their benefits could be stopped if they did not prove they were looking for work with 89% being aware they could lose benefits for being late to a meeting.

The DWP’s summary of the two reports, which was used for this week’s media offensive, failed to mention two other findings in the survey.  Claimants of UC were less confident that they would find work within three months, with only 76& agreeing compared to 78% of JSA claimants.  They were also significantly more likely to report that there were not enough jobs in the local area, with 36% of UC claimants agreeing this was the case compared to 30% of those on JSA.  This was not expected by the researchers who said it was “surprising as the JSA comparator areas were chosen on grounds that they have similar labour market conditions to the UC areas.”

Which brings us nicely on to the second evaluation which delved into the tax records of those who had been on Universal Credit as a means of finding out whether they had gained work or not after being on the benefit.

The problem facing researchers in carrying out these kinds of evaluations are finding two sets of claimants that are more or less the same in all areas except the one being examined – in this case whether they were claiming UC or JSA.  As noted above, the local labour market is important.  If one group is in an area of especially high unemployed compared to the other then this will skew the results.  Timing is also vital, unemployment goes up and down, so it is important to establish whether the claims were made at more or less the same time.  Another question is whether the claimants are the same – are they equally employable?  Perhaps most importantly is the experience they received.  Did Jobcentre advisors spend more time with UC claimants and provide more ‘help (stop laughing)?  Was the sanction and conditionality regime the same?  Was anyone put off claiming UC by the increased conditionality, such as someone with a health condition who may have decided to try and claim sickness benefits instead?

Sadly the researchers pretty much ignored the last few details, but there was an effort made to establish whether the claimants were roughly the same in terms of age, gender, histories of claiming benefits, sanctions applied etc.  Ethnicity was ignored, perhaps wrongly as the survey evidence showed that UC claimants were 10% more likely to be white.  Unemployment is around twice as high amongst people from ethnic minorities, this could be one small factor in why those on UC were more likely to get jobs.

And it’s fair to say that’s what this evaluation found.  Those who had claimed UC were a bit more likely to have found some work.  But this data is so noisy, with so many bodges, averages and assumptions, that this could be a fluke.  Or it could be down to a whole host of other factors which the researchers couldn’t control for, such as whether someone was pregnant – meaning they would be ineligible for UC, but would still be counted in the JSA group.

It could also mean that the fear of sanctions, as outlined in the survey evidence, might have led some claimants to take up jobs they would not otherwise have done.  This would no doubt please Iain Duncan Smith but it is a toxic scenario.  The people covered by these studies were largely the newly unemployed, and therefore the most employable.  Losing a job can be traumatic, and a recently sacked teacher or electrician does not usually run straight out to take a part time cleaning job on a zero hour contract.  People take a bit of time, not because they are workshy, but because they want a job they have studied or trained for.  If all Universal Credit is doing is bullying the most employable into low paid shitty jobs then it is failing everybody.  The tax payer doesn’t spend a fortune training nurses so they can stack shelves in Poundland.  This also means those who depend on those entry level jobs, who do not have large amounts of experience, stay long-term unemployed.

The results of these two evaluations suggest that Universal Credit could be the blueprint for a low waged, low skilled economy that we all feared.  But we don’t know that for sure.  Until people with kids, the self-employed, those working part time and people on sickness and disability benefits are brought into the mix we know nothing at all about how Universal Credit will function and that won’t be for years. The chances are that all it will do is shift unemploment around, with the most marginalised sanctioned and everyone else bullied into low paid work as soon as possible.  This whole reckless experiment could drag Iain Duncan Smith’s bungling legacy far into the future.  And to what end?  No-one knows.

You can read the survey evidence at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/universal-credit-claimant-survey-nov-to-dec-2014-interim-findings

The evaluation based on tax records is at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/universal-credit-estimating-the-early-labour-market-impacts

This blog has no sources of funding so here’s a quick reminder that you can help ensure it continues by making a donation.

Follow me on twitter @johnnyvoid