Variation/Revocation of a UC/JSA Claimant Commitment

The Claimant Commitment is at the heart of a JSA/UC claim.

I am aware that many members here are DWP veterans and may not need any assistance.

Do we need to discuss this topic in light of the 'Find A Job' service/other reasons?

The UC in-work conditionality groups (which affects what is on the CC) are very confusing, but I found a pdf that contains a chart that explains it to me a lot better than any document I've seen so far, particularly for in-work claimants. However, it's still misleading in that Household CET levels can be different and they don't make that clear.  

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/ssac-occasional-paper-19-in-work-progression-and-universal-credit

Page 23 of the document has the relevant chart.

If household earnings are below Household CET, individual earnings are also considered. If one member of the couple earns above the Individual CET then they will be placed in the working enough group. But the other member of the couple – who must be earning less than Individual CET – will be subject to conditionality. Communicating this to claimants is likely to be difficult and almost certainly present some challenges for work coaches.

The above makes it look like both members of the couple have to work full time without making it clear that for a couple with no children their Household CET is 1 x 35hrs x NMW so there wouldn't be any conditionality on any other member of the household once that figure is reached because UC would be nil. This sort of misleading information is typical and I'm not surprised that people find UC unfathomable, particularly regarding which group they should be in and when the DWP are going to back off and leave them alone.

I have searched high and low for any data on Claimant Commitments and sanctions on in-work claimants for failing to follow it. I would like to see the data on in-work claimants sanctions for not doing job search this month because they increased their hours and were still being held to last month's CC conditions. The DWP appear to be very reluctant to release such data.

Absolut,

In work progression/conditionality is to be evaluated this year!

workingfamilies.org wrote:And of course the DWP’s in-work progression pilot will be evaluated in 2018. The good news is the government’s stated evaluation objectives are to identify the most effective method and level of support for claimants and understand how employers can best support progression – as well as the extent to which claimants have increased their earnings

.
https://www.workingfamilies.org.uk/news/in-work-progression-in-universal-credit-will-only-succeed-if-barriers-to-work-broken-down/

Further madness:

rightsnet wrote:A client who is part of a couple where husband looks after 2 year old has been told she has to work 51 hours per week - 35 for her conditionality plus 16 for her husband’s in order to have no work requirements. My understanding would be that she would have to work 35 hours x NMW to have no work requirements and husband would have only to comply with work preparation requirements?

https://www.rightsnet.org.uk/forums/viewthread/12969/

Edit:
Further info:

Crucial advice for working claimants: claiming compensation
IN-WORK CONDITIONALITY
http://www.boycottworkfare.org/crucial-advice-for-working-claimants-claiming-compensation/

Suggestions to ensure you get the best updated claimant commitment for your circumstances:

Be proactive and prepare a CC that suits you.  

Take a friend/representative with you.

JSA/CC
The work coach has to provide written reasons why your proposals are unreasonable as well as how their proposals give you a better prospect of securing employment.

Have a pre-prepared statement/letter explaining why you think your proposals are reasonable and achievable in light of all your circumstances. The proposed actions/steps must meet the requirement of being available and actively seek work.

Provide supporting evidence of the best job sites (example http://www.careerexperts.co.uk/job-searching/top-10-job-sites-uk) for your employment goals as well as the availability of work in your travel to work area.

UC/CC
Disputed UC/CC’s are reviewed by a second work coach and there is no right of appeal until your claim is closed.  You can, of course, make a new claim immediately, accepting the UC/CC proposed and then wait the outcome of the appeal process.

I would suggest writing a letter after agreeing the disputed UC/CC.

Example:
https://respectfulbenefits.forumotion.com/t43-revocation-variation-of-uc-claimant-commitment-reference-group-information-session-gis

References:

Old style JSA procedure
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/349687/response/873859/attach/html/2/IR%20380%20Failure%20to%20agree%20a%20Claimant%20Commitment%20following%20review.pdf.html

UC procedure
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/universal_credit_claimant_commit#incoming-781571

Variation of a Jobseeker’s Agreement
Applies to new and old style JSA claimant commitments

Jobseeker Act - Sections 7 & 10
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1995/18/contents

Jobseeker’s Allowance Regulations - Chapter 3, section 18 (only applies to old style JSA)
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1996/207/pdfs/uksi_19960207_280218_en.pdf

Never say you refuse to sign a JSACC on principle.  You have the right to take advice:

http://administrativeappeals.decisions.tribunals.gov.uk//Aspx/view.aspx?id=4795

Acceptance of a UC claimant commitment

Chapter 2, sections 14, 16, 17, 18
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/5/section/14

Revocation of a UC claimant commitment

Chapter 2, section 24, (3)
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/5/section/24

If necessary, take professional advice quickly with Citizens Advice or a local welfare agency.

https://advicelocal.uk/

Edit: Further letters can be found in the 'Jobseeker Help letters' section

Thanks so much for the links. I will take a good look at the UC CC pdf.

A client who is part of a couple where husband looks after 2 year old has been told she has to work 51 hours per week - 35 for her conditionality plus 16 for her husband’s in order to have no work requirements. My understanding would be that she would have to work 35 hours x NMW to have no work requirements and husband would have only to comply with work preparation requirements?

This is exactly the sort of 'failure to compute" errors that I knew would slither its way out of the UC woodwork lol. How can DWP staff get it so wrong or fail to explain it in simple enough terms for every claimant to understand? If they work for 35 hours per week nothing else is expected of them no matter who they live with. There is no conditionality for a person who works the equivalent of 35 hrs x NMW under UC. Yes, in order to get the family off UC they can work another 16 hours if they feel like it, but there is no compulsion that can make them do so.

As an example - I have a restricted CC where I can only work 25 hours per week. Once in a 25 hour per week job I go straight into the working enough group. No more can be expected of me. My 35 hours are covered. My husband will then have his own CC but once I'm working 25 hours his expected hours will reduce from 35 to 10 as that would be all that is required to take us both off UC. He would be in the light touch regime because my income would taken into account.