Work For benefits

Should people be expected to work for benefits?

  • Total voters
BBC News - Newsnight - Greggs suspends unpaid work placement scheme

My personal view is that people who are capable of working should be expected to work for any benefits they recieve although I believe the work should be for the community as opposed to working for companies who earn huge profit and are capable of employing people. There's obviously the issue of doing other people out of jobs which would have to be carefully considered but the fact that people see living on benefits as a way of life as opposed to something which should be done as a last resort is just wrong.
If they can work there should be encouragement to do so. The "work" should also be relevant and appropriate to their abilities where possible. If they cannot work (for whatever verfiable reason) then they should not be stopped from receiving benefits.

Of course the problem with a Black & White "either/or" survey of this type is that the answers, issues, considerations, concerns etc are far from Black & White and reality has a way of turning pretty much everything into a million shades of grey
Last edited:
I'd also like to see Child benefits limited to the first two kids (just like the old days..... ;) ) that might stop the claimants from overseas who seem to pop 'em out like the Monty Python skit !!
Don't get me started, this is is where I lose friends and disagree with at least 90% of R.R. oppos. I could fill a hundred pages but will just limit my rage and total loathing and contempt for this scumbag idea to this;- Forcing unemployed to work for their slimy paymasters under duress of stopping benefits is an evil scheme that only a Tory could come up with. If there is scope for unpaid work there is scope for paid work end of argument. They have not quite got round to marching them to sites in orange jump suits but give them time. I hate the scumbag trash.


War Hero
Book Reviewer
This scheme is absolutely abhorrent, and I am glad some companies - especially those that can afford to - are pulling out of it (although I reckon it's more to do with negative publicity, rather than their conscience being pricked...)

For example, large retailers (including Tesco, although Sainsbury has since pulled out of the scheme) have been placing adverts for full-time positions in their stores, with the salary listed as "...JSA plus expenses". Tesco is Britain's largest private employer, which made over £3.5bn in profit last April, and have said that it had taken on 1,400 such claimants in the last four months. This amounts to 168,000 hours of unpaid work if all participants in the 'work for benefits' scheme work for 30 hours a week - that's over £1M-worth of free labour and exploitation!

This has nothing to do with getting people back into employment; it's slave labour - the Government would make them wear orange boilersuits to work if they could get away with it... :oops:

People should be helped back in to REAL jobs so they are paying taxes which will help get us out of this recession mess we are in and not helping the likes of Tesco, with the taxpayer paying their wages!

(If the Government wants to promote this as a positive idea, I don't see why it can't be run in a way that benefits needier causes. Work experience in charitable organisations or small retailers who are struggling in the current climate would seem preferrable. I do fear for young people who are denied any introduction to the workplace, now that the Government has made it impossible for schoolchildren to do work experience, which is also beneficial. I always saw such a change in teenagers I have known after they did work experience; it was a very maturing thing for them and many were changed by it for the better.)
Looks good on paper doesn't it ... although I suspect that Jo Public see's the unemployed / benefit claimer as a drain on the taxpayer and the Headlines drum up pictures of chavs in shell suits hanging around the betting shop doing the sqaure root of stuff all and getting their GIRO to pay for the next bet/booze/drugs!

In reality there are fewer jobs around ... I recently advertised for a 37.5 hr (or part time equivilent) doing a low paid mundain job in a hospital ... I got 54 applicants in 2 days and a vast majority of them were degree holders including 2 Drs (medicine). OK half of them probably didn't read the advert and applied just to get a job in the Country ... but the remainder were all fairly highly qualified people (including one ex CPO).

Yes there is a minority that do not want to work and are a drain on the taxpayer ... if it was possible to weed them out and make them do something useful for society I'd probably be the first to hand out the oprange jumpsuits ... but in reality its just not possible to diferentiate between the "out of work" and the "workshy" and for some, benefits are the only way they survive.

So agree with SPB ... we need to help people to find work and not force them into slave labour.
So here is the problem.We have hundreds of thousands of young people chasing very few jobs.They,the young people,say we go for interviews and get rejected because we have no work experience on our CV and it is a Catch 22 situation.I know if I was in that situation I would jump at a placement to gain some experience and make myself a more appealling prospect on the job market place.Would I feel I'd been exploited.No!
By no means is money the be all and end reward for working.It really makes no odds whether the work provider is a highly profitable employer or the small business of modest means as long as the trainee gets some work experience.Back in the 80s when the Youth Opportunity scheme was doing the rounds I was in a position to give some of them a chance and very beneficial it was to both parties.Those I couldn't keep were snapped up by other employers in the same trade.
I'd also like to see Child benefits limited to the first two kids (just like the old days..... ;) ) that might stop the claimants from overseas who seem to pop 'em out like the Monty Python skit !!
Child benefit should stop. It was brought in to help repopulate the country and create a babyboom after WW2. We're now overpopulated, suffering from a mass immigration and have huge gaps in traditional industrial skills.
Working whilst on benefits ? Yes, if it means helping charities and communities.Not corporate business, that's just cheap labour.
Plus, people who are capable, made to train for something.


Lantern Swinger
OK I'll try to keep this short
Been unemployed since 31/01/2012
would rather be working than lining up with all the professional bums down at the JobCentre
Anything short of becoming a methodone addicts personal carer would be ok by me
I'm an Ex RNR tiff with an HND in Electronics and Telecoms Engineering(i've done greater things in civvy st but just to give you an idea of my capabilities) but I dont care anything is better than becoming a professional Bum

Sgt Pepper Band where did you study for your socioligy degree?

Similar threads

Latest Threads