Work Search Reviews and Evidence

Much the same as for JSA claimants..

All available Work Search evidence should be considered, including :
 the claimant's Universal Jobmatch account
 any Claimant Commitment Pack 'My work plan'
stencils, diary or record the claimant has kept of
their activities
 print-outs of jobs they have applied for
 letters from employers
 updated CVs
Where the claimant needs more copies of the 'My work plan' or any other part of the Claimant
Commitment Pack, see Creating a claimant commitment pack.

If the claimant has completed all activities set out in their Claimant Commitment, they have met
their requirements and their WSP record should be updated.
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/427386/response/1035443/attach/html/5/Annex%202.pdf.html

One point thou Non-Def   , from the link. It mentions about hours, while on the JSA regs it was 'steps' taken. So my question is on the new U-C regime is it now the focus upon time taken from the claimant, rather than 'step/actions' that the work search review is based upon?

"The claimant must take all reasonable action for the purpose of obtaining paid work and will be expected to undertake the same number of hours of work search and work preparation activity each week as the number of hours they are available for work (up to a maximum of 35 hours a
week). "

El-D,

This should not be a numerical exercise in adding up the individual hours spent on each activity,
as this will not provide an assessment of the quality of the activities undertaken or the capabilities
of individual claimants.

Where a claimant has done all that could reasonably be expected of them – for example they
have applied for all suitable jobs and undertaken all the activities set out in their Claimant
Commitment - this will be considered sufficient even if the time taken was less than their
expected hours.

If the claimant has not completed all work search activities, consider whether the claimant has
done all that they reasonably could to find paid work in that week.
The claimant may not need to complete each and every work search activity each week. In some
weeks they may be considered to have done everything that was possible even though this may
not have filled the total amount of time expected.  
For example. they may not have been checking Universal Jobmatch every day as they were
concentrating on preparing for a specific job interview by gathering references and re-tailoring
their CV.  
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/427386/response/1035443/attach/html/5/Annex%202.pdf.html

The Claimant Commitment activities/steps should meet the "expected" number of hours or work search each week.  The JSA regulations specify "best" steps, UC is the same.  See the example above, preparing for an interview is better than checking UJ every day.

I think this FOi is a useful if a JCPWC raises a doubt on your UC claim or the way you show your job/work search.

Thanks for the reply Non-Def , you can see my confusion as I have been interviewed by work-roaches  at the JCP that have seemed to be ticking of the boxes of my 'claimant commitment' when doing my work search review. So you can see why I wish to cover myself.

Also the FOI mentions ‘conduct work search for their expected hours’: "This means that the claimant must conduct work search for their expected hours (this is the number of hours that the claimant is available for work or 35 hours, whichever is the lower figure) less the total amount of time they spend undertaking agreed work preparation activities, voluntary work and paid work."
So I wondering about the need for some week to pad out my job search to make sure I have searched for enough time that is ‘expected/reasonable’(Where a claimant has done all that could reasonably be expected of them)?. As it does feel like walking on egg shells in the JCP at the moment, rather than just getting on with my job search.

El-dudeareno wrote:Thanks for the reply Non-Def , you can see my confusion as I have been interviewed by work-roaches  at the JCP that have seemed to be ticking of the boxes of my 'claimant commitment' when doing my work search review. So you can see why I wish to cover myself.

Also the FOI mentions ‘conduct work search for their expected hours’: "This means that the claimant must conduct work search for their expected hours (this is the number of hours that the claimant is available for work or 35 hours, whichever is the lower figure) less the total amount of time they spend undertaking agreed work preparation activities, voluntary work and paid work."
So I wondering about the need for some week to pad out my job search to make sure I have searched for enough time that is ‘expected/reasonable’(Where a claimant has done all that could reasonably be expected of them)?. As it does feel like walking on egg shells in the JCP at the moment, rather than just getting on with my job search.

If you're completing the steps/activities within your UCCC and applying for the jobs you can do, there is nothing more expected of you. You do not have to meet the "expected" hours within your CC if you have taken the steps I have described.

If you have good reason for not completing the activities within your CC or, you have take other steps/activities you have still met the work search requirement if you have taken reasonable steps taking into account all your circumstances as well as the prevailing labour market conditions.

Reference:

https://respectfulbenefits.forumotion.com/t1507-transition-to-universal-credit-legislation-and-case-law

Muchas gracias Non Def, you can see my confusion with the FOI mentioning : 'Conduct work search for their expected hours’.

It was just a few years ago some chap was 'sanctioned' for not doing enough job search one week in a two week signing cycle. Even thou the week before he had applied for 40 x jobs.

You might say   :

I understand El-D!

The decision making process is more onerous for the UC claimant. The FOI in the link above will help many people to avoid a work search sanction.

This FOI is beneficial too!

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/benefit_sanctions_hub#incoming-1050592

Non Deficere wrote:Where a claimant has done all that could reasonably be expected of them – for example they
have applied for all suitable jobs and undertaken all the activities set out in their Claimant
Commitment - this will be considered sufficient even if the time taken was less than their
expected hours.

If the claimant has not completed all work search activities, consider whether the claimant has
done all that they reasonably could to find paid work in that week.
The claimant may not need to complete each and every work search activity each week. In some
weeks they may be considered to have done everything that was possible even though this may
not have filled the total amount of time expected.  
For example. they may not have been checking Universal Jobmatch every day as they were
concentrating on preparing for a specific job interview by gathering references and re-tailoring
their CV.  
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/427386/response/1035443/attach/html/5/Annex%202.pdf.html

However, from that FOI and in direct contradiction to the above:

"The claimant must take all reasonable action for the purpose of obtaining paid work and will be
expected to undertake the same number of hours of work search and work preparation activity
each week as the number of hours they are available for work (up to a maximum of 35 hours a
week). "

Talk about mixed messaging!

The expected number of hours is read by JCP officials as a requirement.

The UCC is also misleading...
My work search and preparation plan
I’ll spend 35 hours each week looking and preparing for work. This will include all the
activities and actions in this plan.

https://brianwernham.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/claimant-commitment.pdf

From: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKUT/AAC/2017/459.pdf

All reasonable work search action - Universal Credit

44. Secondly, it is unfortunate (putting it mildly) that the Secretary of State’s original
response to the appeal, as submitted to the First-tier Tribunal, was less than
comprehensive in terms of its coverage of the relevant law. The response included a
somewhat garbled version of the text of regulation 95(1), but no reference to the
possibility that the “expected number of hours” might be subject to a deduction on
account of any of the specific mitigating circumstances set out in regulation 95(2)(b).
Similarly there was a passing but unparticularised reference to regulation 99 as
listing “circumstances in which a work search requirement no longer applies” followed
by the bald statement that “none of those circumstances apply in this case”.
http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKUT/AAC/2017/459.pdf