Pros and cons of group signing/Jobclub sessions etc.

I have helped a number of people avoid these sessions and I have been receiving some great feedback from on-line friends who have been successful dodging these events using other very clever tactics.  

My opinion on the pros and cons:

Pros
Less chance of sanctions due to the time constraints
An opportunity to help others who do not know their rights


Cons
No privacy
Unhelpful content
Poor facilities
Sessions too long a 'sign on' session is usually 10-20 minutes


Labour introduced a 1 hour Back to Work Session when the unemployment numbers soared and there were insufficient staff.

The groups sessions are being used now, due to JSA staff moving across to UC.

Legals
You have to be issued with a Jobseeker Direction to be lawfully notified to attend a group session and the session must be tailored to your needs.

You can object to being dealt within a group.  

A sign on appointment has to be a one to one interview.

As always great information

I would also add to the list of cons:

The group session might involve 3rd party providers and attendees might feel pressured to sign up to courses.

Thanks dboy

dboy wrote:I had a period when each time I signed on they tried to refer to a GIS or 3rd party providers but I refused I had recently put in a SAR so I saw the notes they were leaving each other recommending they use a JSD after the 5th attempt they then unlawfully issued me with a jobseekers direction to attend.

I informed the manager at the time that not only was it unlawful to issue me with the direction and I should be offered alternative arrangements instead but I also had it on my notes that I been removed from a GIS as unsuitable previously by a work coach.Would not listen at all I had all the rules and regulations to hand to show them.

So as soon as I got home I put in a formal complaint to the CRT which they upheld and fully admitted maladministration they have now put a prominent note on my file not to refer me to group sessions or 3rd party providers to prevent any further occurrences.

35. Given this customers can object to being dealt with in a group

environment and this must be respected. Alternatives to the group session

should be available where requested for JSA customers only.

I have also asked for financial redress last time I got £25, not a huge sum but every little helps.

https://respectfulbenefits.forumotion.com/t2633p25-jsa-sanction-information

Well done you!

Non Deficere wrote:A sign on appointment has to be a one to one interview.

Because of the pressures of dealing with UC my JCP has instigated group sign-on sessions for all claimants except those who have made it known they have problems in groups. So, as one of those who genuinely does have problems in groups, I am still being seen one to one. Honestly it's worse in one to one because you get grilled more I think so for signing on at least, not my preferred option. The upside is I don't get forced to go on these pointless other group information sessions.

So come UC, can everyone be mandated to group sessions, even if they have problems with them?

ABC wrote:Honestly it's worse in one to one because you get grilled more I think so for signing on at least, not my preferred option.

This is exactly what a one-to-one feels like for me also, a grilling. If you've ever seen 'The Apprentice' its similiar to when they do the final interviews with the 'intimidating' people who try and pick apart everything you've done.

Are the days officially gone where you could walk into a Job Centre, "sign on" in less than a couple of minutes hardly any hassle and be on your way? I've only been in a few times under UC, but it seems like everytime not only is it the grilling they are actively looking for bullshit courses/jobfairs/jobs for you. I don't really know how much of it I can tolerate because I know one day I'm going to be sent on some absoloute rubbish and I can't be doing with it.

Still don't know whether I'd take a group session over it though, the positives don't outweigh the negatives for me.

Through my years of signing on alone with a work coach, I had my fair share of attempts of being put on courses and schemes. So when it comes to that, it won't be any different to me.

Perhaps I would feel more pressured to accept these courses if everyone else in the group happily accept them, but I don't think it will be a problem. My partner will also be signing in with me at these group sessions starting in a couple of weeks, so we can support each other if needed.

ABC wrote:

Non Deficere wrote:A sign on appointment has to be a one to one interview.

Because of the pressures of dealing with UC my JCP has instigated group sign-on sessions for all claimants except those who have made it known they have problems in groups. So, as one of those who genuinely does have problems in groups, I am still being seen one to one. Honestly it's worse in one to one because you get grilled more I think so for signing on at least, not my preferred option. The upside is I don't get forced to go on these pointless other group information sessions.

So come UC, can everyone be mandated to group sessions, even if they have problems with them?

ABC,

Change from one-on-one sessions to Group Meetings for Universal Credit
https://www.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/comments/45ww3w/change_from_oneonone_sessions_to_group_meetings/

When a agreeing a work related activity within your UCCC, the work coach MUST consider all your circumstances as well as the the Equality Act 2010 at all times.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/contents

So ND can I take it from that that not being able to cope in group scenarios is a disability as defined in the Equalities Act 2010 and therefore I can't be made to participate in group sessions even under full service UC?

ABC wrote:So ND can I take it from that that not being able to cope in group scenarios is a disability as defined in the Equalities Act 2010 and therefore I can't be made to participate in group sessions even under full service UC?

Yes!

I just been to my first group sign on and I thought I'd share the experience.

Me and my partner entered the second floor and in the middle of the office area there was a bunch of chairs in front of a TV.

A work roach asked people to tell him their names for attendance. Then he played a short video about Universal Credit, what it was and some of the changes.

After this short video he went through a short Power Point presentation, about taper rate and job search evidence. Now he really stressed that people couldn't provide written job search evidence any more. All job search evidence have to be us showing them our job search accounts (UC journal? Indeed?) and our email receipts of job search applications. They wouldn't accept anything else.

Then he quickly signed everyone one to one with a paper signature. I was one of the first to sign on and then I was free to go.

Jara wrote:I just been to my first group sign on and I thought I'd share the experience.

After this short video he went through a short Power Point presentation, about taper rate and job search evidence. Now he really stressed that people couldn't provide written job search evidence any more. All job search evidence have to be us showing them our job search accounts (UC journal? Indeed?) and our email receipts of job search applications. They wouldn't accept anything else.

Jara, it sounds like the same old argument for using the "Universal Jobmatch Account"   . Heres some links for the work-coach thou....

"The DWP has made it clear that there is no legal requirement for Universal Credit (UC) claimants to use the UC journal to provide evidence of their work search. However some UC claimants can have a requirement set, to provide information and evidence as part of their work-related requirement for claiming universal credit. This requirement can be set by a work coach under Section 23 of the Welfare Reforms Act 2012, Chapter 2 but it does not compel this evidence to be supplied in a particular way, only that it must be supplied if and when requested."

FOI2018/03637


https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/519373/response/1247649/attach/2/FOI%203637%20response.pdf?cookie_passthrough=1

https://mrfrankzola.wordpress.com/2017/09/19/you-must-use-a-universal-credit-journal-to-provide-your-cv-or-jobsearch-record/

Friends of mine have received notifications via their UC accounts that they must provide their work search evidence via their UC Journal in future, but there has been no mention of sanctions if they fail to do so.


26Higher-level sanctions

(1)The amount of an award of universal credit is to be reduced in accordance with this section in the event of a failure by a claimant which is sanctionable under this section.
(2)It is a failure sanctionable under this section if a claimant falling within section 22—
(a)fails for no good reason to comply with a requirement imposed by the Secretary of State under a work preparation requirement to undertake a work placement of a prescribed description;
(b)fails for no good reason to comply with a requirement imposed by the Secretary of State under a work search requirement to apply for a particular vacancy for paid work;
(c)fails for no good reason to comply with a work availability requirement by not taking up an offer of paid work;
(d)by reason of misconduct, or voluntarily and for no good reason, ceases paid work or loses pay.
(3)It is a failure sanctionable under this section if by reason of misconduct, or voluntarily and for no good reason, a claimant falling within section 19 by virtue of subsection (3) of that section ceases paid work or loses pay so as to cease to fall within that section and to fall within section 22 instead.
(4)It is a failure sanctionable under this section if, at any time before making the claim by reference to which the award is made, the claimant—
(a)for no good reason failed to take up an offer of paid work, or
(b)by reason of misconduct, or voluntarily and for no good reason, ceased paid work or lost pay,and at the time the award is made the claimant falls within section 22.
(5)For the purposes of subsections (2) to (4) regulations may provide—
(a)for circumstances in which ceasing to work or losing pay is to be treated as occurring or not occurring by reason of misconduct or voluntarily;
(b)for loss of pay below a prescribed level to be disregarded.
(6)Regulations are to provide for—
(a)the amount of a reduction under this section;
(b)the period for which such a reduction has effect, not exceeding three years in relation to any failure sanctionable under this section.
(7)Regulations under subsection (6)(b) may in particular provide for the period of a reduction to depend on either or both of the following—
(a)the number of failures by the claimant sanctionable under this section;
(b)the period between such failures.
(8)Regulations may provide—
(a)for cases in which no reduction is to be made under this section;
(b)for a reduction under this section made in relation to an award that is terminated to be applied to any new award made within a prescribed period of the termination;
(c)for the termination or suspension of a reduction under this section.

27Other sanctions

(1)The amount of an award of universal credit is to be reduced in accordance with this section in the event of a failure by a claimant which is sanctionable under this section.
(2)It is a failure sanctionable under this section if a claimant—
(a)fails for no good reason to comply with a work-related requirement;
(b)fails for no good reason to comply with a requirement under section 23.
(3)But a failure by a claimant is not sanctionable under this section if it is also a failure sanctionable under section 26.
(4)Regulations are to provide for—
(a)the amount of a reduction under this section, and
(b)the period for which such a reduction has effect.
(5)Regulations under subsection (4)(b) may provide that a reduction under this section in relation to any failure is to have effect for—
(a)a period continuing until the claimant meets a compliance condition specified by the Secretary of State,
(b)a fixed period not exceeding 26 weeks which is—
(i)specified in the regulations, or
(ii)determined in any case by the Secretary of State, or
(c)a combination of both.
(6)In subsection (5)(a) “compliance condition” means—
(a)a condition that the failure ceases, or
(b)a condition relating to future compliance with a work-related requirement or a requirement under section 23.
(7)A compliance condition specified under subsection (5)(a) may be—
(a)revoked or varied by the Secretary of State;
(b)notified to the claimant in such manner as the Secretary of State may determine.
(8)A period fixed under subsection (5)(b) may in particular depend on either or both the following—
(a)the number of failures by the claimant sanctionable under this section;
(b)the period between such failures.
(9)Regulations may provide—
(a)for cases in which no reduction is to be made under this section;
(b)for a reduction under this section made in relation to an award that is terminated to be applied to any new award made within a prescribed period of the termination;
(c)for the termination or suspension of a reduction under this section.
28Hardship payments

(1)Regulations may make provision for the making of additional payments by way of universal credit to a claimant (“hardship payments”) where—
(a)the amount of the claimant's award is reduced under section 26 or 27, and
(b)the claimant is or will be in hardship.
(2)Regulations under this section may in particular make provision as to—
(a)circumstances in which a claimant is to be treated as being or not being in hardship;
(b)matters to be taken into account in determining whether a claimant is or will be in hardship;
(c)requirements or conditions to be met by a claimant in order to receive hardship payments;
(d)the amount or rate of hardship payments;
(e)the period for which hardship payments may be made;
(f)whether hardship payments are recoverable.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/5/part/1/chapter/2/crossheading/reduction-of-benefit

23Connected requirements
(1)The Secretary of State may require a claimant to participate in an interview for any purpose relating to—
(a)the imposition of a work-related requirement on the claimant;
(b)verifying the claimant's compliance with a work-related requirement;
(c)assisting the claimant to comply with a work-related requirement.
(2)The Secretary of State may specify how, when and where such an interview is to take place.
(3)The Secretary of State may, for the purpose of verifying the claimant's compliance with a work-related requirement, require a claimant to—
(a)provide to the Secretary of State information and evidence specified by the Secretary of State in a manner so specified;
(b)confirm compliance in a manner so specified.
(4)The Secretary of State may require a claimant to report to the Secretary of State any specified changes in their circumstances which are relevant to—
(a)the imposition of work-related requirements on the claimant;
(b)the claimant's compliance with a work-related requirement.

24Imposition of requirements
(1)Regulations may make provision—
(a)where the Secretary of State may impose a requirement under this Part, as to when the requirement must or must not be imposed;
(b)where the Secretary of State may specify any action to be taken in relation to a requirement under this Part, as to what action must or must not be specified;
(c)where the Secretary of State may specify any other matter in relation to a requirement under this Part, as to what must or must not be specified in respect of that matter.
(2)Where the Secretary of State may impose a work-focused interview requirement, or specify a particular action under section 16(1) or 17(1)(b), the Secretary of State must have regard to such matters as may be prescribed.
(3)Where the Secretary of State may impose a requirement under this Part, or specify any action to be taken in relation to such a requirement, the Secretary of State may revoke or change what has been imposed or specified.
(4)Notification of a requirement imposed under this Part (or any change to or revocation of such a requirement) is, if not included in the claimant commitment, to be in such manner as the Secretary of State may determine.
(5)Regulations must make provision to secure that, in prescribed circumstances, where a claimant has recently been a victim of domestic violence—
(a)a requirement imposed on that claimant under this Part ceases to have effect for a period of 13 weeks, and
(b)the Secretary of State may not impose any other requirement under this Part on that claimant during that period.
(6)For the purposes of subsection (5)—
(a)“domestic violence” has such meaning as may be prescribed;
(b)“victim of domestic violence“ means a person on or against whom domestic violence is inflicted or threatened (and regulations under subsection (5) may prescribe circumstances in which a person is to be treated as being or not being a victim of domestic violence);
(c)a person has recently been a victim of domestic violence if a prescribed period has not expired since the violence was inflicted or threatened.
25Compliance with requirements
Regulations may make provision as to circumstances in which a claimant is to be treated as having—
(a)complied with or not complied with any requirement imposed under this Part or any aspect of such a requirement, or
(b)taken or not taken any particular action specified by the Secretary of State in relation to such a requirement.
26Higher-level sanctions
(1)The amount of an award of universal credit is to be reduced in accordance with this section in the event of a failure by a claimant which is sanctionable under this section.
(2)It is a failure sanctionable under this section if a claimant falling within section 22—
(a)fails for no good reason to comply with a requirement imposed by the Secretary of State under a work preparation requirement to undertake a work placement of a prescribed description;
(b)fails for no good reason to comply with a requirement imposed by the Secretary of State under a work search requirement to apply for a particular vacancy for paid work;
(c)fails for no good reason to comply with a work availability requirement by not taking up an offer of paid work;
(d)by reason of misconduct, or voluntarily and for no good reason, ceases paid work or loses pay.
(3)It is a failure sanctionable under this section if by reason of misconduct, or voluntarily and for no good reason, a claimant falling within section 19 by virtue of subsection (3) of that section ceases paid work or loses pay so as to cease to fall within that section and to fall within section 22 instead.
(4)It is a failure sanctionable under this section if, at any time before making the claim by reference to which the award is made, the claimant—
(a)for no good reason failed to take up an offer of paid work, or
(b)by reason of misconduct, or voluntarily and for no good reason, ceased paid work or lost pay,
and at the time the award is made the claimant falls within section 22.
(5)For the purposes of subsections (2) to (4) regulations may provide—
(a)for circumstances in which ceasing to work or losing pay is to be treated as occurring or not occurring by reason of misconduct or voluntarily;
(b)for loss of pay below a prescribed level to be disregarded.
(6)Regulations are to provide for—
(a)the amount of a reduction under this section;
(b)the period for which such a reduction has effect, not exceeding three years in relation to any failure sanctionable under this section.
(7)Regulations under subsection (6)(b) may in particular provide for the period of a reduction to depend on either or both of the following—
(a)the number of failures by the claimant sanctionable under this section;
(b)the period between such failures.
(8)Regulations may provide—
(a)for cases in which no reduction is to be made under this section;
(b)for a reduction under this section made in relation to an award that is terminated to be applied to any new award made within a prescribed period of the termination;
(c)for the termination or suspension of a reduction under this section.
27Other sanctions
(1)The amount of an award of universal credit is to be reduced in accordance with this section in the event of a failure by a claimant which is sanctionable under this section.
(2)It is a failure sanctionable under this section if a claimant—
(a)fails for no good reason to comply with a work-related requirement;
(b)fails for no good reason to comply with a requirement under section 23.
(3)But a failure by a claimant is not sanctionable under this section if it is also a failure sanctionable under section 26.
(4)Regulations are to provide for—
(a)the amount of a reduction under this section, and
(b)the period for which such a reduction has effect.
(5)Regulations under subsection (4)(b) may provide that a reduction under this section in relation to any failure is to have effect for—
(a)a period continuing until the claimant meets a compliance condition specified by the Secretary of State,
(b)a fixed period not exceeding 26 weeks which is—
(i)specified in the regulations, or
(ii)determined in any case by the Secretary of State, or
(c)a combination of both.
(6)In subsection (5)(a) “compliance condition” means—
(a)a condition that the failure ceases, or
(b)a condition relating to future compliance with a work-related requirement or a requirement under section 23.
(7)A compliance condition specified under subsection (5)(a) may be—
(a)revoked or varied by the Secretary of State;
(b)notified to the claimant in such manner as the Secretary of State may determine.
(8)A period fixed under subsection (5)(b) may in particular depend on either or both the following—
(a)the number of failures by the claimant sanctionable under this section;
(b)the period between such failures.
(9)Regulations may provide—
(a)for cases in which no reduction is to be made under this section;
(b)for a reduction under this section made in relation to an award that is terminated to be applied to any new award made within a prescribed period of the termination;
(c)for the termination or suspension of a reduction under this section.
28Hardship payments
(1)Regulations may make provision for the making of additional payments by way of universal credit to a claimant (“hardship payments”) where—
(a)the amount of the claimant's award is reduced under section 26 or 27, and
(b)the claimant is or will be in hardship.
(2)Regulations under this section may in particular make provision as to—
(a)circumstances in which a claimant is to be treated as being or not being in hardship;
(b)matters to be taken into account in determining whether a claimant is or will be in hardship;
(c)requirements or conditions to be met by a claimant in order to receive hardship payments;
(d)the amount or rate of hardship payments;
(e)the period for which hardship payments may be made;
(f)whether hardship payments are recoverable.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/5/part/1/chapter/2/crossheading/reduction-of-benefit

I would suggest at this stage, that DWP policy is not sufficiently clear or defined.

JSA claimants were excempt from registering with UJM if they fell into a particular group.  However, a few savvy claimants provided other reasons to refute the requirement to create an account or to use UJM.

Relevant case in connection with a requirement to submit information on-line:

The groundbreaking judgment that meant three taxpayers did not have to follow the requirement to file VAT returns online
https://www.taxation.co.uk/Articles/2013/10/23/315371/digital-mayhem

https://respectfulbenefits.forumotion.com/t782-dwp-says-universal-credit-journal-not-mandatory-for-your-work-search-records-or-cv#7730

23Connected requirements
(3)The Secretary of State may, for the purpose of verifying the claimant's compliance with a work-related requirement, require a claimant to—
(a)provide to the Secretary of State information and evidence specified by the Secretary of State in a manner so specified;
(b)confirm compliance in a manner so specified.

To me that says the work coach can insist, via the CC, that the journal is used and have the full weight of the law on their side, which contradicts what's been said in some FoI responses.

Today I had my second group sign on.

It was a power point slide and then a short video about Gov.uk Verify.

After that was done, they "signed on" everyone in the group one to one.

In each of those "private" sign ons they asked each one in the group if they had a photo ID. If not, they were told to sort one out. If they had one or more, they were told to get Gov.uk Verify up and running as soon as possible.

What they didn't tell anyone is that you can only register for Gov.uk Verify when you start using one of the services that uses Gov.uk Verifiy. So this seems like a sneaky way of getting people to sign up for Universal Credit by themselves, as they think Gov.uk is now needed for their next appointment.

ABC wrote:

23Connected requirements
(3)The Secretary of State may, for the purpose of verifying the claimant's compliance with a work-related requirement, require a claimant to—
(a)provide to the Secretary of State information and evidence specified by the Secretary of State in a manner so specified;
(b)confirm compliance in a manner so specified.

To me that says the work coach can insist, via the CC, that the journal is used and have the full weight of the law on their side, which contradicts what's been said in some FoI responses.

ADM:
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/525846/response/1256171/attach/3/Find%20a%20Job%20or%20other%20jobsites%20and%20Work%20Services%20Platform.pdf?cookie_passthrough=1

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/acceptable_uc_evidence#incoming-1256171

The WC may ask the claimant to provide evidence of their work search on Find a job or if more appropriate, another jobsite. Universal Credit does not specify how evidence is provided. This could by multiple means, for example by email, smartphone, clerical record or a screen print brought in or printed-off using the IAD.

The WC may ask the claimant to provide evidence of their work search on Find a job or if more appropriate, another jobsite. Universal Credit does not specify how evidence is provided. This could by multiple means, for example by email, smartphone, clerical record or a screen print brought in or printed-off using the IAD.

True, but that doesn't mean the part of section 23 I quoted is not true, quite the opposite in fact. Stating "Universal Credit does not specify how evidence is provided." is not the same as saying the claimant can choose how they show evidence. So I still believe the WC can mandate the use of the UC Journal. No?

ABC wrote:

The WC may ask the claimant to provide evidence of their work search on Find a job or if more appropriate, another jobsite. Universal Credit does not specify how evidence is provided. This could by multiple means, for example by email, smartphone, clerical record or a screen print brought in or printed-off using the IAD.

True, but that doesn't mean the part of section 23 I quoted is not true, quite the opposite in fact. Stating "Universal Credit does not specify how evidence is provided." is not the same as saying the claimant can choose how they show evidence. So I still believe the WC can mandate the use of the UC Journal. No?

I hope this helps ABC:

Which work-related requirement failures are subject to low-level sanctions
K5015 Low-level sanctions apply where the claimant fails for no good reason to comply with1
1. a WfI requirement2 or
2. a work preparation requirement3 or
3. a work search requirement – but only in relation to a requirement to take particular action specified by the Secretary of State4 or
4. a requirement to
1. 4.1  take part in an interview about the imposition of or compliance with a
work-related requirement5 or
2. 4.2  provide information or evidence of compliance with a work-related
requirement6 or
3. 4.3  report changes of circumstances relevant to the imposition of or compliance with a work-related requirement7 (see further guidance at K5151).
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/754956/admk5.pdf

Regular work search requirements
Using Find a job or other jobsites to look for and apply for work should be considered when setting requirements and in most cases should become one of the claimant’s regular work search activities.
The WC has a conversation with the claimant to ensure they are able to use these sites to search for and apply for jobs. The WC must record this conversation in WSP notes to provide evidence that job search requirements are reasonable.
The WC may ask the claimant to provide evidence of their work search on Find a job or if more appropriate, another jobsite. Universal Credit does not specify how evidence is provided. This could by multiple means, for example by email, smartphone, clerical record or a screen print brought in or printed-off using the IAD.
The WC must base their assessment on the evidence the claimant has provided. If this is insufficient and the WC is not completely satisfied the claimant has met their work search requirements, a labour market doubt is raised in the usual way.

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/525846/response/1256171/attach/3/Find%20a%20Job%20or%20other%20jobsites%20and%20Work%20Services%20Platform.pdf?cookie_passthrough=1

continued....

ForgetMeNot wrote:A hope this helps ABC:

Well that depends on what you mean by help!  

The WC may ask the claimant to provide evidence of their work search on Find a job or if more appropriate, another jobsite. Universal Credit does not specify how evidence is provided. This could by multiple means, for example by email, smartphone, clerical record or a screen print brought in or printed-off using the IAD.

The above just confirms to me that the WC can specify the means by which the claimant has to show their evidence (assuming the claimant has the means to). My interpretation is that it does not give the claimant the right to choose how to show evidence whether that be by,

email, smartphone, clerical record or a screen print brought in or printed-off using the IAD

which are merely suggested options.

I go back to:

23Connected requirements
(3)The Secretary of State may, for the purpose of verifying the claimant's compliance with a work-related requirement, require a claimant to—
(a)provide to the Secretary of State information and evidence specified by the Secretary of State in a manner so specified;
(b)confirm compliance in a manner so specified.

Get it ... in a manner so specified   i.e. the SoS (the WC) can mandate the way the evidence is to be provided (again assuming the claimant is able to do it in that manner).

So either I'm right or I'm misinterpreting the legislation.

There are several examples where the legislation does not match DWP policy intent, for example:

JSA, Jobseeker Directions can lawfully be issued verbally but DWP policy requires a written notification. Interestingly, no written notification is required when mandating a person to apply for a notified vacancy!

Work experience appears to be mandatory in UC regs, but DWP policy is clear that 'work experience' is entirely voluntary.  

In relation to the first part of your request the information is not held. In Chapter K5 of Advice for decision making: staff guide, paragraph K5121 makes it clear that participation in a work experience opportunity is on a purely voluntary basis. Low-level sanctions cannot be imposed where a claimant fails to comply for no good reason, unless the claimant is dismissed for gross misconduct.
While the Welfare Reform Act 2012 gives the Secretary of State powers to make undertaking work experience a work-related requirement, current DWP policy is that work experience should be entirely voluntary as per K5121. We recognise that subsequent guidance in paragraph K5123 does not make this difference between legal powers and government policy clear. We are looking again at Chapter K5 to ensure it accurately reflects DWP policy.

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/508457/response/1257540/attach/2/IR%20416%20FOI%203442%20Reply.pdf?cookie_passthrough=1

SWBA is a mandatory scheme within JSA regs, the training and interview elements are mandatory, but only if a person agrees to start the scheme.  The WE element is voluntary.

Further, it is a fundamental legal principle that all evidence must be accepted and considered. However, some evidence has to be provided in a specified manner, for example, showing a CV can only be provided in writing.

Can you see the hidden section in my post above?

I can see the hidden section, thanks.

So, imagine the situation where a claimant has failed to use the UC journal despite being verbally (or otherwise)  mandated to do so by the WC and has cited DWP policy as evidence that it is not mandatory to use the journal. Inevitably it goes to tribunal ... how does the judge rule? Well, s/he ignores the policy because, well, it's policy, not law and s/he instead cites section 23 "provide to the Secretary of State information and evidence specified by the Secretary of State in a manner so specified" of the legislation (the law on this matter). The claimant gets a whopping sanction!

Basically what I'm saying is that the claimant nor the DWP can pick and choose between legislation and policy just when it suits them because legislation will always trump policy when push comes to shove.

I think I'm right...am I?

ABC wrote:I can see the hidden section, thanks.

So, imagine the situation where a claimant has failed to use the UC journal despite being verbally (or otherwise)  mandated to do so by the WC and has cited DWP policy as evidence that it is not mandatory to use the journal. Inevitably it goes to tribunal ... how does the judge rule? Well, s/he ignores the policy because, well, it's policy, not law and s/he instead cites section 23 "provide to the Secretary of State information and evidence specified by the Secretary of State in a manner so specified" of the legislation (the law on this matter). The claimant gets a whopping sanction!

Basically what I'm saying is that the claimant nor the DWP can pick and choose between legislation and policy just when it suits them because legislation will always trump policy when push comes to shove.

I think I'm right...am I?

In this case, if a claimant showed DWP policy/the ADM guidance to JCP the case would not escalate to Tribunal.

ArggggH!!!  

Right, I'm having great difficulty getting this into my head.

This is what I'm questioning (only this and nothing else as I realise this discussion is off-topic for this thread). Can the WC mandate a claimant to use the UC journal to show evidence of their job search even when other ways of doing that task are available?

I concluded (see my posts above) that they can.

If this is not the case and in fact they can't mandate the use of UC journal will someone really succinctly explain why, referencing only that legislation which would support their argument? I realise we may be going over ground already covered but it's just not making sense to me at the moment. Thanks.