Avoid the Work & Health programme

ForgetMeNot wrote:See page 13 of the assessment tool
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/461555/response/1118126/attach/4/6.WC%20actions%20DCAMS.PDF.pdf?cookie_passthrough=1

You are not eliglible to take part in the W&HP because:

You are not committed to accepting a job via the WHP

ABC wrote:

ForgetMeNot wrote:See page 13 of the assessment tool
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/461555/response/1118126/attach/4/6.WC%20actions%20DCAMS.PDF.pdf?cookie_passthrough=1

You are not eliglible to take part in the W&HP because:

You are not committed to accepting a job via the WHP

That opens up a whole can of worms. How would you convince them that you're not commited to accepting a job? How would you avoid an ASE sanction because if you're not committed to accepting a job you're not ASE.

I need to know the answer to this one as it was an avenue to avoiding the WHP I had already considered. It's the potential repercussions that worry me.

ForgetMeNot wrote:ABC, this is not a ticky box exercise where you have to meet all the critieria.

Has the claimant signed up to the objective of finding work in the next 12 months

individual is not committed to accepting a job offer via the Work and Health Programme

ABC wrote:

ForgetMeNot wrote:ABC, this is not a ticky box exercise where you have to meet all the critieria.

Well, to be pedantic, a "ticky box" exercise is precisely what it is as that is what the DCAMS form is.

That aside however, what exactly are they considering to determine if the claimant is "not committed to accepting a job via the WHP"?

The DCAMS form is strange in this respect because it asks (page 12):

Has the claimant signed up to the objective of finding work in the next 12 months

the reason for that being asked is because (page 13):

individual is not committed to accepting a job offer via the Work and Health Programme

I find that very strange as I can't think of any circumstance where "individual is not committed to accepting a job offer via the Work and Health Programme" would not lead to an ASE doubt being raised. We know that to get a welfare payment the claimant must be available and ASE which, by definition, means the claimant implicitly MUST be "signed up to the objective of finding work in the next 12 months". So why is it a question at all? I find it all very odd.

And how is the claimant "signed up to the objective of finding work in the next 12 months"? There's no form to sign to say you will agree to that, so how are they judging it?