You don't know the name of the employer you've applied to - how do you explain that to the Jobcentre?

I'm pretty sure that most claimants will be in this position to some degree or other. I apply for pretty much the same types of job each week and as you know when you apply on websites like Monster and Reed etc., they don't normally say who the employer is. Now as I say, I apply for the same types of job so along with the brief job spec in the ad I can use that and my knowledge of past applications for similar jobs to put up a pretty good, targeted CV even not knowing who the actual employer is.

So what's the problem? Well, I'm expecting my work coach to give me a grilling soon and he'll no doubt be wanting to know the name of every employer I've applied to. If I say I don't know, I fully expect a doubt to be raised because that's the kind hearted sort of person he is.

So has anyone got any ideas how to convincingly explain that you don't necessarily need the employer's details to make a perfectly good job application?

I would tell them that you are applying through - insert name of agency / website here - and direct them to that resource so they can see perfectly well that the employer is not made known when the recruiting is outsourced to a 3rd party.

If they have an up to date knowledge of the labour market and current recruitment practices (and why wouldn't they   ) then they should not be in any doubt about what you are telling them.

I take it they are recruitment companies as they are the ones who don't name the employer? If that's so then put the name of the recruitment company.

Absolut wrote:I take it they are recruitment companies as they are the ones who don't name the employer? If that's so then put the name of the recruitment company.

That's exactly what I do but some time ago now I was issued with a form that asks for the actual name of the employer and I'm expecting my not providing it to become an issue soon as the wc is doing his best to raise a doubt. I suppose being able to prove I have applied for the job is the main thing but the issue is that I'm trying to head off any avenue of attack he has to raise an ASE doubt against me, no matter that it might not ultimately go anywhere.

Essentially, barring any other advice, I'll do what you and Caker suggest though and point them to the agency as I don't see any other option.

I think you could also tell them that there is nothing in law that requires you to disclose the name of any employer to which you have applied for a job. I am not even sure that you can be mandated to disclose details of private correspondence, as disclosure is not a labour market activity

Caker wrote:I think you could also tell them that there is nothing in law that requires you to disclose the name of any employer to which you have applied for a job. I am not even sure that you can be mandated to disclose details of private correspondence, as disclosure is not a labour market activity

I'm not sure about that Caker. The wc has the legal right to ask questions until s/he is satisfied that you are ASE. If I was sat on the other side of the desk and the claimant couldn't name the employer they've applied to a job for I'd be suspicious myself.

The truth is we do apply through agencies online where the employers are not named but I have the feeling that the wc's expectation will be that we'd go the extra mile and once we have a contact for that job we'd email them perhaps and ask who the employer is. Easier said than done mind you. I'm currently chasing two jobs through an agency and it's all I can do just to get them to tell me exactly where the employer is based! They're extremely cagey because they don't want any other agency edging in on their clients and understandably so. In fact that would form part of my "defence" if they do ask me about the employer.

Anyone has the legal right to ask. The point I am trying to make is that you don't have the legal obligation to give the information.

My understanding is that unless your evidence is contradictory or improbable, the roach has to accept it exactly as it is. If they want the employer's name then you simply do not have it - simple as that. It is fine to write on that form that you applied through an agency. Even decision makers must know how agencies work.

I have also done agency work in the past. I know that agencies are reluctant to tell you who the employer is until you actually need to turn up at their premises to either start the job (temping) or go to an interview (longer term temping).

Has a roach actually asked you to find out who the employer is after you declared that you applied via an agency?

I appreciate you want to keep yourself on the safe side, but I think trying to obtain information just to appease a roach is really taking the biscuit.

ABC wrote:I'm currently chasing two jobs through an agency and it's all I can do just to get them to tell me exactly where the employer is based! They're extremely cagey because they don't want any other agency edging in on their clients and understandably so. In fact that would form part of my "defence" if they do ask me about the employer.

I have noticed a few times when looking for work and applying through agencies that other agencies are also advertising for the exact same job for the same client. If any work roach enquires which employer the job is for I just tell them the name of the agency, that's more than good enough. It's also good enough for the decision manager, should you ever get an ASE doubt put in your claim. After all, if you're working for a certain company through a particular agency, it is the agency which pays you your wages so they are in effect the employer.

Not so. A roach raised a false and malicious ASE doubt against me. I had applied for 7 vacancies and I had the email receipts for them all. The DM asked for evidence and I sent printed copies of these emails. None of the emails revealed the employer. The ASE doubt was overturned on the email evidence and nothing else.

Like Caker, I received a similar ASE doubt which was false and malicious. I didn't even send to the decision maker email evidence, just made a list of the jobs I'd applied for relating to the period of my doubt, and if I had the name of the company I added that, otherwise I just put the name of the agency.

Next time I'll provide email evidence, should this situation ever occur again, as it's much easier!

That's interesting. So were you both not even issued with the form requiring name and address of employers, or did you just ignore that part?

No form given, ABC, wasn't even aware there was one. Or maybe this is something new they're bringing in?

Also, if they want the name and address of employers, it should be easy enough to find an address for any agency.

Edit: My doubt was made in late February so quite recently...

I've found recruitment agencies advertising jobs they weren't legally entitled to. I once emailed an employer directly to ask if they were also advertising their vacancy through a recruitment agency. The answer was no.

I've worked for a few recruitment agencies and they won't tell you the name of the employer or where they're based until you get an interview (or a start date if the work is temporary) because they don't want you to bypass them and send your CV directly to the employer.

Hidden:-

On the subject of agencies, they also advertise fake jobs. I did office temping in the past and this involved going to agency premises to do an IT test and to register, usually after enquiring about a 'job' I saw advertised. On one occasion, I was informed after doing this (before leaving the premises) that the 'job' had been taken now (they must have known that before making the appointment - I travelled to the city specially) and they would contact me when another was available. They also told me that they 'kindly' never charged applicants for registering with them . I replied 'that is because you can't, it is illegal, nothing to do with your generosity'. The person seemed shocked that I knew this

have you been issued something like this abc ?



as you dont have to use that version if you dont want as you can use the old es4jp

jobsearch evidence form within jobseeker help post

Yes gadily it's very similar to that with the section asking for employer name and address. I've no intention off using it because we can present our job search how we please but it does give the impression that they can ask (demand) all this extra detailed information. I think my wc is just trying it on hoping that I'll give up all that info no questions asked. Ha, some hope! A doubt hasn't been raised so they're getting as little as possible. By the way, do you know why that form was issued to whomever it was issued to? Was it issued following the wc raising a doubt?

There are alot of jobs on the UJM that have"Company Confidential". So just put that on the evidence, and take a few screenprints of the UJM showing that is alright for them to do on their website?





Also I have been spammed(data mined) from applying for what I found out later was a "fake job" on some jobs websites so it is two way street between applying for jobs and the DPA.

@Gadily
I have not seen one of those forms before. I presume this form is to do with an ASE doubt. I would not have seen one because ASE doubts have been raised in secret and not while I was in the JC.

The little shite of a roach I was dealing with had put me on daily signing after I didn't sign the CC he'd just drawn up, the one which stated I was available to work for 24 hours a week but not on weekdays or weekends (!), and told me in advance he was putting in an ASE doubt the next day. Maybe I didn't get that form because that evening with the help of Mary a letter was written to be sent to the decision maker stating the jobs I'd been searching for, which I presented to the roach the following day...

@TF
Well done!
And well done Mary, what a star

El-dudeareno wrote:There are alot of jobs on the UJM that have"Company Confidential". So just put that on the evidence

I honestly thought that was the name of the agency! I had no idea it meant the company name was confidential. Well, well.

Caker wrote:@Gadily
I have not seen one of those forms before. I presume this form is to do with an ASE doubt. I would not have seen one because ASE doubts have been raised in secret and not while I was in the JC.

id posted that on um as it was one of them that jcp had given us to fill out i refused to fill it out and kept asking for the es4jp form then they stated that they couldnt supply that form as it wasnt being printed anymore

i still refused to fill that one out and used the regs to make it clear that i didnt have to do so considered printing my own up instead or an edited version

it was also at the time where i was being pestered by the wp system as well as there forms was also similar as well

the es4jp is within the jobseeker help files

i was also offered another type but not got chance to upload it when i should have done so

my opinion is the less they have the better as they never needed it years ago so why do they need it now unless there tracking your jobsearches

it was also around the time when i was having the big argument with jcp staff about them wanting copys of my jobsearch i refused to give they didnt like it one bit i also got sanctioned for that as well
my argument was that our jobsearch evidence is for show only not for the jcp to have or take a copy of your jobsearch something that was well discussed on um before the outcome that i was right

many on here should remember the post rather well