JSA Restart 3 way call and sanctions

We all have the right to get the DWP to follow correct processes and the law when the DWP mandates us onto a scheme or order us to take an action under threat of a sanction if we do not comply.

Where Restart is concerned Job Centre staff appear to believe that they are fully entitled to mandate JSA claimants into participating in a 3 way "warm handover" interview with a Restart provider prior to a start date on the scheme, a start date which is arranged during the "warm handover" imposed 3 way call where neither the DWP or the provider can sanction a JSA claimant for refusing to comply. They appear to believe that their decision to refer a claimant to Restart is the start date of Restart for the claimant. It is not.

From the provider documents:

3.12. Following the completion of the Initial Face to Face Meeting you must record the date of the meeting in the PRaP system, as the Start Date on the Restart Scheme. You must ensure that the start date is recorded accurately as the earnings interest data marker is set based upon this date. Please note, mistakes cannot be rectified by the PRaP support team on the PRaP system.

the date of the referral is counted as day zero

Once you have completed the Initial Meeting, this will count as day 1 of the 365 calendar days that you have to work with your Participant, to achieve an employed or self-employed outcome.

Chapter 34 JSA Sanctions last updated 26.5.22:

34866 Claimants who are selected to participate in a relevant scheme have to be notified of this in a written notice1 which specifies
1. that the claimant is required to participate in the scheme2
2. the day on which the claimant’s participation will start3
3. the details of what the claimant is required to do by way of participation4
4. that the claimant is required to participate until
4.1 notice is given by the Secretary of State that participation is no longer required or
4.2 the award of JSA ends
whichever is earlier5
5. information about the consequences of failing to participate in the relevant scheme6.

A sanction for failing to take part in an interview with a Restart provider can only come after the claimant has been mandated onto the scheme via a written notification with a start date on it. The day on which the claimant's participation will start is no 2 on the required notification, which must be handed to the claimant before any provider contacts them about the provision.

As the scheme is mandatory then there is no need for the "warm hand on your parts" call. They decided to insert JSA into a scheme that was only meant for UC claimants. They can mandate and likely will but that doesn't mean we can't make them do it properly.

2.70. Any persistent non-compliance by Jobcentre Plus work coaches in attending three-way conversations (including Warm Handovers) should be raised with your Single Point of Contact (for either the Jobcentre Plus District or individual Jobcentre Plus site, depending upon the arrangements that you have in place) in the first instance. Should the situation not be resolved, then you will need to discuss this with your Employment Account Division Performance Manager so that it can be addressed.

Non-compliance of the roach? Who does the provider go running off to when the claimant tells the provider there is no law that allows them to impose a 3 way call to a claimant's phone? In the 3 way conference calls the DWP and the provider are assuming they have every right to impose conference calls on a claimant. Is the refusal of a 3 way call to a claimant's phone a sanctionable offence now?

I wonder what a tribunal judge would make of all this after Coffey assured the social security committee that sick and disabled people weren't eligible for Restart and then she completely reversed that.

To make it as clear as possible, a roach has the power to mandate a claimant into participating in an interview and if we fail to do so we can have our claim closed down. However, there is a caveat to the phrase "participating in an interview":

34831 does not apply to failures to participate in any other type of interview as part of participation in a SAPOE scheme

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2022/154/pdfs/uksiem_20220154_en.pdf

Letters of empowerment will authorise providers, under regulation 17 of The Jobseeker’s Allowance (Schemes for Assisting Persons to Obtain Employment) Regulations 20136 the power to exercise any of the functions of the Secretary of State specified at Regulation 5 and Regulation 6(3)(a). Providers are given a legal right to refer claimants for a low-level sanction by Jobseeker’s Allowance Regulations 1996 Part V9.

SAPOE Regulations 2013 make it clear that the provider has no power to ring up a JSA claimant before that claimant has been correctly notified that they are to participate in the Restart scheme and they have been given a start date. The referral (warm handover) "appointment" is not the start date.  

Even though the ‘prior information requirement’ means claimants should have the relevant information about a scheme prior to referral to a scheme, there is no obligation to allow claimants to negotiate and decide which scheme they participate in. 1 JSA (SAPOE) Regs, reg 4(1) & reg 3(1); 2 reg 2(1);3 SSWP v Reilly and Hewstone and SSWP v Jeffrey and Bevan [2016] EWCA Civ 41

If there is no obligation to allow sick and disabled JSA claimants to negotiate and decide which SAPOE scheme they participate in (and there is not) then there is no obligation for sick and disabled claimants to support the DWP's specious referral appointment.

When the providers agreed to the contracts they asked certain questions and one of them was to do with the referral to Restart. Bear in mind that this was at a time when Restart was for UC claimants only and a referral to a scheme is not participation in a scheme. They are 2 different things.

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/cy/request/788258/response/1885389/attach/3/Table%20for%20issue.pdf?cookie_passthrough=1

Will JCP work coaches be informing participants about the mandation element of the Restart Scheme? if so at what point?

Claimants that meet the eligibility and suitability criteria will be advised that referral to the Restart programme is mandatory and this should be done at the initial work search review when completing the ‘Restart Pre-referral’ to-do, and again at the specific ‘Restart Referral and Handover’ appointment. While participating on the Restart programme the provider will only mandate a participant to an activity or appointment where it is appropriate to do so and where attempts to engage the participant voluntarily have failed.

A mandatory referral appointment with a provider does not exist under SAPOE regs or the JSA Act.

Will participants be mandated by  their Work Coach to attend Warm Handovers and Initial Face to Face meetings if needed?

Work coaches can mandate claimants to attend warm handovers, but should only consider mandating when attempts at voluntary participation have been unsuccessful. The work coach will not mandate potential participants to attend the initial face-to-face meeting with the Restart provider. The Restart provider can choose to mandate the potential participant to the
initial face-to-face meeting, but only where non-mandatory attempts have been unsuccessful.

A mandatory referral appointment with a provider does not exist under SAPOE regs or the JSA Act.

Once a JSA claimant gets work of sufficient hours their JSA claim is closed. There is no going back to JSA. When JSA ends, Restart ends. I am looking into what happens with the job outcome payment after that. What I can see happening is JSA claimants being bullied into low hour, low paid temp jobs that then suddenly end after a week, forcing a claim to UC, which is exactly what the DWP is after as far as I'm concerned so that they don't have to bother with managed migration.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2022/154/pdfs/uksiem_20220154_en.pdf

The change will allow Restart Scheme providers to legally require JSA IB claimants (residing in England and Wales) to undertake Work Search and work preparation activities.

Which they get via an unsolicited phone call outside the regs.

Absolut wrote:https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2022/154/pdfs/uksiem_20220154_en.pdf

The change will allow Restart Scheme providers to legally require JSA IB claimants (residing in England and Wales) to undertake Work Search and work preparation activities.

Which they get via an unsolicited phone call outside the regs.

'Work Search & work preparation' . Sound like Supervisored Job Search and ' sat on the mat/ Dead Horse Courses'...

Absolut wrote:We all have the right to get the DWP to follow correct processes and the law when the DWP mandates us onto a scheme or order us to take an action under threat of a sanction if we do not comply.

Where Restart is concerned Job Centre staff appear to believe that they are fully entitled to mandate JSA claimants into participating in a 3 way "warm handover" interview with a Restart provider prior to a start date on the scheme, a start date which is arranged during the "warm handover" imposed 3 way call where neither the DWP or the provider can sanction a JSA claimant for refusing to comply. They appear to believe that their decision to refer a claimant to Restart is the start date of Restart for the claimant. It is not. .

Have you got the FOI/legislation about this #Absolut, about Refusing to comply on the Threesome call...

Have you got the FOI/legislation about this #Absolut, about Refusing to comply on the Threesome call...

There is no legislation for the DWP and a provider to be able to impose a 3 way call before a claimant has been mandated onto the scheme. After mandation is dubious as well.

The warm handover was created for UC claimants who are already mandated to participate in schemes. JSA claimants are not mandated to participate in a SAPOE scheme until after they are sent a written notification as laid out in the JSA (SAPOE) Regulations 2013 Section 5. They can argue the toss about it, but Regulation 5 exists for a reason.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1078940/dmgch34.pdf

34831 DMG Chapter 20 gives guidance on the way in which the claimant, including each member of a joint-claim couple, are required to participate in an interview. Legislation1 amended the requirement from 22.10.12 to require the claimant (or in the case of a joint-claim couple, each member of the couple) to participate in an interview and not to just attend an interview.

Note: This applies only to an interview to provide information and such evidence as prescribed as to the claimant's circumstances, availability for employment and the extent to which they are actively seeking employment2 ( i.e. their normal fortnightly work-search review) and does not apply to failures to participate in any other type of interview as part of participation in a SAPOE scheme, the MWA scheme, failures in relation to employment or training schemes or job seeker’s directions. See the relevant guidance within this chapter on failures to participate in other types of interviews under the relevant headings.
1 JS Act 95, s 8(1)(a) & (1A)(a); JSA Regs, regs 23 & 23A; 2 JS Act , sec 8(1

In other words, a work search review does not include a claimant being directed by a roach to take a call from a SAPOE provider when that claimant has not been mandated onto the Scheme. The "warm handover" is a phone call that breaches Section 5 of the SAPOE Regulations where the claimant has the right to be given a written notification before a provider contacts them to set up an initial meeting.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2013/276/made

(2) The notice must specify—
(a) that the claimant is required to participate in the Scheme;
(b) the day on which the claimant’s participation will start;
(c) details of what the claimant is required to do by way of participation in the Scheme;
(d) that the requirement to participate in the Scheme will continue until the claimant is given
notice by the Secretary of State that the claimant’s participation is no longer required, or
the claimant’s award of jobseeker’s allowance terminates, whichever is earlier; and
(e) information about the consequences of failing to participate in the Scheme.
(3) Any changes made to the requirements mentioned in paragraph (2)(c) after the date on which the claimant’s participation starts must be notified to the claimant in writing.

I think what they are trying to do is shove Restart under "I will do all I reasonably can, each week, to give myself the best prospects of securing employment". Is Restart offering paid work? I've no idea. All I know is that once on the scheme Maximus can legally force me to undertake job search activities which I am already doing and which they can't get a sanction for if I've taken as many steps as are reasonable anyway, which might be zero. Once again JSA is not UC and they are used to having 35 hour per week work search parameters imposed on claimants and lots and lots of sanctions to be able to dish out.

Btw work preparation activities are not mandatory, it has to be on a JSD under JSA, so I'm not sure why it is included for JSA claimants on Restart. They left in "UC journal" in one of the Restart JSA provider documents that is how totally useless they are.

Intrusive overt surveillance

The "warm handover" is a three way call in which the roach listens in to the conversation between the claimant and the provider. Why? To hear the start date, which they will then use as the mandation date. At the point of the warm handover the provider has no authority to speak to the JSA claimant, never mind set up an initial meeting.

The DWP does not have the power to conduct overt intrusive surveillance of a conversation to a claimant's phone. If the conversation is via the DWP's phone they are still listening in and I do not see any genuine reason for it other than for them to hear the start date and stick it on the notification they are supposed to give you before the call.

[quote="Absolut"]

Intrusive overt surveillance

The "warm handover" is a three way call in which the roach listens in to the conversation between the claimant and the provider. Why? To hear the start date, which they will then use as the mandation date. At the point of the warm handover the provider has no authority to speak to the JSA claimant, never mind set up an initial meeting.

The DWP does not have the power to conduct overt intrusive surveillance of a conversation to a claimant's phone. If the conversation is via the DWP's phone they are still listening in and I do not see any genuine reason for it other than for them to hear the start date and stick it on the notification they are supposed to give you before the call.

Just because th DWP'does not have the power to conduct overt intrusive surveillance'.
Doesn't mean that they might do some 'data mining' of your personal phone (for fraud investigations no doubt?). If they can access bank account details of claimants, I dare say the phone network provider, will hand over any information the ask for, whether legal or not?

To continue with what the DWP can and can't do in regard to a Referral to Restart for JSA claimants (and the 3 way call nonsense), a good idea is to simply switch out Work Programme for Restart as they have switched out UC for JSA. Then take Covid-19 restrictions out of the equation.

I think 3 ways calls were created because of Covid. They left the 3 way warm handover call in place for JSA claimants in error. As stated, there is no legislation under JSA that covers the DWP imposing any sort of 3 way warm handover pre-referral call.

The DWP isn't under any obligation to claimants to make sure any job a JSA claimant gets lasts for 6 months. Any job a JSA claimant is pushed or bullied into via Restart might end a week later. The end of JSA is the end of Restart. I don't see how the provider or the DWP can legally track an ex-JSA claimant via HMRC when there is no possible return to JSA once JSA has ended. I doubt that the provider even gets an outcome payment for JSA claimants. The DWP may have given the provider an incentive to get JSA claimants off JSA separately and outside a job outcome payment.

The job outcome payment model is 16 hours per week x minimum wage. That does not pay anyone's rent unless their rent is only £75 per week. The outcome payment model is for UC, not JSA. When the WP started claimant's were still able to claim rent via the council. That is no longer the case and that is why Restart is not fit for JSA claimants with that outcome model in place. UC claimants can go in and out of jobs and still get their rent paid, but JSA claimants get NOTHING but a gate slamming shut behind them and an ushering into the "UC field" if they fall out work.  

The same rule about notification applies to Restart as it applied to the WP. They both fall under the same regulations.

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/226715/response/555205/attach/8/3%20Employment%20Programmes.pdf

Referrals to the Work Programme
31. JSA claimants are required to participate in the Work Programme (WP) when they are issued with a written notice which must specify:
 that the claimant is required to participate in the Scheme;
 the day on which their participation will start;
 details of what they are required to do by way of participation;
 that they are required to participate until told otherwise or until their JSA terminates, whichever is earlier; and
 the consequences of failing to participate.

The above rule has not changed. It does not get any clearer than what was written when the WP slithered into view.

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/cy/request/814568/response/1944696/attach/html/3/Response%20FOI2021%20100395.pdf.html

The regulation that covers mandation to Restart is the Welfare Reform Act 2012, Section 16.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/5/section/16/enacted

16 Work preparation requirement

(1) In this Part a “work preparation requirement” is a requirement that a claimant take particular action specified by the Secretary of State for the purpose of making it more likely in the opinion of the Secretary of State that the claimant will obtain paid work (or more paid work or better-paid work).

(2) The Secretary of State may under subsection (1) specify the time to be devoted to any particular action.

(3) Action which may be specified under subsection (1) includes in particular—

(d) participating in an employment programme

The mandation listed above is time bound. The above means Restart must have a start time and an end time. When a roach says "Restart is mandatory" it is to the above time-bound parameters to which they are referring. The time on Restart is 365 days. For there to be 365 days there has to be a start date.

If a JSA claimant can go to a face to face meeting with a provider and the roach knows that then neither the provider or the DWP has any excuse for not following the SAPOE regulations. After a claimant is mandated onto Restart the provider is supposed to contact the claimant by letter, telling the claimant how to contact them to set up a first meeting. That letter give the claimant the official address of the provider in writing.

The problem for Restart providers is the initial meeting (which is not the warm handover phone call) is the start date. That creates a problem where SAPOE regulations are concerned. It is not correct procedure under SAPOE for the provider to ring the claimant before the claimant has been notified that they are required to participate.  

The warm handover without a DWP notification is a self-referral. A self-referral to a scheme where sanctions are in force. Until the DWP hands out correct notices, all JSA claimants are being "encouraged" by the DWP to self-refer (i.e volunteer ) for a potential sanction situation in the future. No-one with any sense would do such a thing. It is not reasonable for the DWP to bully people into volunteering. It's what they did with the MWA.  

If, during a "Referral to Restart" meeting or interview or appointment or call (or whatever they think to name it) the roach does not hand the claimant the correct notification with a start date on before the provider contacts the claimant (in writing) then the entire exercise is voluntary.

3 way calls do not appear in the DM's Chapter 34 sanctions document. Is it an interview with a roach? Is it an interview with a provider? Is it both and under what circumstances can they take place? What are they for?  Are they for non-compliance?

This is what they wrote to the providers at the pre-contract stage when it was for UC and NS JSA only:

With regards to COVID-19 restrictions, DWP require that Face to Face meetings take place as expected unless and until advised otherwise, where the Parties will seek to agree reasonable changes to services to ensure that the Restart service continues to be delivered for the benefit of Participants and potential Participants. DWP will consider the position with regards to COVID-19 as summer approaches. In the event of COVID-19 disruption, DWP will take a range of measures to ensure the contracts are deliverable, potentially including full digital delivery. All changes will be made in consultation with Providers.

A roach is highly paid. Under JSA rules it is their job to send the referral to the provider. It is the provider's job to accept it and for that provider to give the DWP a start date, which the DWP can then put on a notification and hand to the JSA claimant stating that they are now required to "participate in the Restart scheme". After that it's up the provider to contact the claimant in the correct way. Once on Restart there is no getting off for a year unless JSA ends. If Restart is mandatory (and they are saying that it is) then they must mandate or explain why they are not following the SAPOE regulations.  

Pintel wrote:Just because th DWP'does not have the power to conduct overt intrusive surveillance'.
Doesn't mean that they might do some 'data mining' of your personal phone (for fraud investigations no doubt?). If they can access bank account details of claimants, I dare say the phone network provider, will hand over any information the ask for, whether legal or not?

They can and do engage in surveillance, but it is limited to suspicion of a criminal offence being committed. Is the UC or JSA claimant being suspected of a criminal offence during the 3 way call, or is the DWP simply snooping to get a start date to put on their notice?

Well done #Absolut. .

I still can't see the need for this 'Warm Hand Over ( fist). The JCP could just print a letter out with a start date, why waste everybody's time with these Threesome phone calls???

Pintel wrote:Well done #Absolut. .

I still can't see the need for this 'Warm Hand Over ( fist). The JCP could just print a letter out with a start date, why waste everybody's time with these Threesome phone calls???

Put a bit of paper in front of a roach with a "procedure" on it and they will not question that procedure, nor will they go "off script" once it's been put in front of them. They will follow exactly what it says, like a robot. The instructions say "do a warm handover", so that's what they do, until they are told to do something else (by management). The procedure says that in order to get claimants onto Restart they are to conduct a warm handover. They believe it's mandatory. They are to get a start date (first meeting) and the claimant is to go to that meeting or "they are refusing to go on Restart" not knowing that Restart has not started for them to refuse to "go on" it. That is all they know. They do not know about the SAPOE regulations, day 1 being the first meeting and day 1 needing to be before the meeting, as well as before the warm handover. They might find a way around it. We will see.

So how do we get out of this restart rubbish.?

The Catwoman wrote:So how do we get out of this restart rubbish.?

I don't know if we can, ultimately, get out of it. I will not speak to a provider over the phone without that correct notice in place first. They don't understand why. It's the law, that's why.

What happens next about the start date actually being the date of the first meeting (or first official contact) is anybody's guess. If they can find a way around it, I'm sure they will.

The Catwoman wrote:So how do we get out of this restart rubbish.?

As #Absolut commented, I can't really see a away to avoid this situation indefinitely . As it is a 'cash crop' for these companies. Even if they do scrap this Restart/Kickstand scheme, have you noticed that the just return under a new name/lick of paint.....

However, if these providers actually give some useful 'training' instead of an A1(paper size) poster presentation. Maybe there wouldn't be such a skills shortage in this country .

.#Cat woman, please see the link.


https://respectfulbenefits.forumotion.com/t4689-restart-programme-suggestions-for-strategies-to-avoid

Pintel wrote:As #Absolut commented, I can't really see a away to avoid this situation indefinitely .

I'm still working on it. I simply don't want to give anyone false hope or give them the wrong answer. I am the test case.

I  pulled the rug out from under their procedure (where the 3 way call is concerned) in order to make a point to them - it's not supposed to take place in a joke centre.

I maintain that the call is not meant to take place in front of a roach; it was created due to C19 when the roach, the claimant and the provider were all sitting in different locations. It helped the roach to explain to the claimant why they were being referred and they got to hear the start date at the time same. Lower level staff are too stupid to figure this out and simply do what they are told rather than questioning what they are told, which makes no sense to anyone who has 2 brain cells to rub together. They can get their own damn start date now straight off the provider, give that to the claimant (who already knows they are being referred) and cease with the 3 way calls, unless the claimant does not attend the joke centre. It's not rocket science.

What they are doing now in joke centres is assuming that they can order a claimant to provide one of the 3 legs of their 3 way call process which they claim is mandatory, in a joke centre. When I removed one of those legs (my mobile phone) the whole process fell over. I got a lot of sh*t for it. The roach went off his head. I was accused of doing it deliberately and he spent about 30 minutes ranting and raving, telling me how sh*t I am. That may be true, but that's not the point. The point is it's my phone and if they want to impose a call onto me in the joke centre to give me a start date I don't need to agree to then they'd better come up with a legal reason why they can use my phone to do so.

All I know is that they need to fix the major problem they have with that three way phone if they want to mandate JSA claimants into it when it's the claimant's mobile phone they are relying on to get their stupid idea to work. Remove the claimant's phone and it shows how absurd the whole thing is.

What if the claimant does not have a mobile phone?
What if the phone is stolen the night before?
What if the claimant can't afford the monthly fee this month?
What if the claimant drops it down the toilet the night before and it's bricked?
What if they can't charge it up?

The assumptions are these:

That the procedure for a referral to Restart for JSA claimants who can attend the joke centre is correct.
That the claimant will have no good reason not to have their mobile phone with them for the warm handover call to take place in a joke centre.
That following the call the date on the notification is rock solid and not subject to change.
That the start date isn't difficult for the provider to change if the claimant does not show up to the first meeting.
That the warm handover itself is the scheme and has, therefore, started for the claimant to be accused of "refusing to go on it".

When I asked for proof, in writing, that Restart was mandatory the roach became aggressive and evasive. When a roach behaves in such a manner, suddenly switching it from my reasonable request for evidence of his claim to assassinating my character it raises my suspicions that porkies are being told.

They do not have the facilities to conduct three way calls in a joke centre without the claimant's mobile phone. That proves the machine code returns an error when that phone is not there.

Also correct me if I am wrong here... Its a grey area to me of the 'luke warm handover', you have not officially be enrolled on the Restart scheme, yet it seems the JCP staff are acting like the 'claimant' has started?
Surely this not following procedures, of what is expected of the claimant and penalities if they don't attend. But at least we maybe able to remove the 'Luke warm handover' section within policy's and procedures? .

I see this pile of crap '3 way warm handover', nothing more than, another devious way for  roach ville to trap claimants.

Apply undue pressure to comply with something they havent got 1 jot of interest in and again, all about money. Bums on seats =£ .While we're in the classroom doing cat sat on the dog etc someones getting rich out of these shams/scams.

Its bloody stupid the whole thing. Good to see the great Dr & Co knows how to really solve the economic devistation. Many low paid vacancies in many temporary positions but 1.5 m can still sign on too and join the other 15m working for their 'benefits'.Wonderful, sounds like a real deal.Wonder if there wil be any real jobs again some day Only people who seem to have one, is in roach ville, and Provider City. And thats, all open for debate:wtf:


Far easier to add more misery to peoples already miserible lives. Give the Dr a badge Your the best!  .

Wondering how this game of a 3 way phone conversation will work for those with hearing difficulties. No doubt, they'd use their 'anticapatory reasonable adjustments' and just scream down the phone

Pintel wrote:Also correct me if I am wrong here... Its a grey area to me of the 'luke warm handover', you have not officially be enrolled on the Restart scheme, yet it seems the JCP staff are acting like the 'claimant' has started?
Surely this not following procedures, of what is expected of the claimant and penalities if they don't attend. But at least we maybe able to remove the 'Luke warm handover' section within policy's and procedures? .

Yes, they are treating the warm handover as the start date of the scheme without the required notice in place warning the claimant that the scheme is mandatory (from what point?).

No, they are not following the correct procedure to mandate a JSA claimant onto Restart as per SAPOE regs.

So far Restart is exactly like the self-referral to the Sector Based Work Academy which becomes mandatory after you attend the first meeting.  

That earnings tracker is a problem when it's a joint JSA claim and both claimants are referred but 1 gets a job and the other doesn't. There is the potential for them to be paid for a job the other claimant gets after JSA ends and which Restart had nothing to do with.

I have been issued another mandatory letter.

This letter is a 'JSA 596',( template letter) is more tailored for the Restart 3way call: "Your Restart Scheme 3way call".

"Dear Pintel 🦕, You recently talked about the Restart Scheme with your work coach and how ******(Provider) can support you.

During your next work search review meeting you will take part in a 3way call with your work coach and *******(Provide r) to discuss referral to the Restart Scheme"...
# Not sure I like the tone of 'will' take part!..
...


Next pg is the if you don't attend meeting, penalities section. Now here's a new piece of text Legal Notice (in Bold) : "The Restart Scheme is an employment scheme under the Jobseekers Act 1995 Section 17A and the job seekers allowance (schemes for assisting persons to obtain employment) Regulations 2013"... Next is 'Equalitys an calls charges' text. So a few alterations to the first letter I got.

The Restart Scheme is an employment scheme under the Jobseekers Act 1995 Section 17A and the job seekers allowance (schemes for assisting persons to obtain employment) Regulations 2013

Yes it is. Full marks to them for knowing the regulations exist. Shame they didn't pass them to the providers to read seeing as Restart for JSA claimants is a SAPOE scheme but providers are still following UC procedures.

17A.—(1) Regulations may make provision for or in connection with imposing on claimants in prescribed circumstances a requirement to participate in schemes of any prescribed description that are designed to assist them to obtain employment.

This means that persons claiming Jobseeker’s Allowance (JSA) who are selected under regulation 4 of the 2013 Regulations, which enables the selection of claimants for participation in a scheme, are required to participate in the Restart Scheme. By virtue of section 19A Jobseekers Act 1995 if a claimant fails without good reason to comply with such a requirement is liable to a benefit sanction i.e. the reduction or loss of JSA for a period of several weeks.

5.—(1) Subject to regulation 6, a claimant selected under regulation 4 is required to participate in the Scheme where the Secretary of State gives the claimant a notice in writing complying with paragraph (2).
(2) The notice must specify—
(a) that the claimant is required to participate in the Scheme;
(b) the day on which the claimant’s participation will start;
(c) details of what the claimant is required to do by way of participation in the Scheme
(d) that the requirement to participate in the Scheme will continue until the claimant is given
notice by the Secretary of State that the claimant’s participation is no longer required, or
the claimant’s award of jobseeker’s allowance terminates, whichever is earlier; and
(e) information about the consequences of failing to participate in the Scheme

Does your JSA 596 comply with paragraph (2) A to E above?

"to discuss referral to Restart" - is a referral to Restart someone who is ON Restart? No. A judge would take the ordinary meaning of the word referral and the ordinary meaning of Regulation 5 of the SAPOE Regs.

the process of sending someone to another person or place for help, information, or advice

The DWP has implied that you will be sanctioned if you do not help them send you onto Restart at your next WSR. They do not need your help. The providers can't reject any JSA referral from the DWP. They don't need us to refer ourselves under SAPOE.

P.S Only the DWP can do the selecting. Coffey did not pass that power to the providers where JSA is concerned.

During the three-way Warm Handover conversation (approx. 15-minutes), the JCP work coach will introduce the claimant to the Provider and the Provider will explain how the claimant can benefit from the provision. The claimant will be able to raise any issues or concerns they may have and discuss reasonable adjustments.

Such as the claimant not being contacted by phone because they have osteoarthritis in their hands? Those sort of reasonable adjustments?

The DWP is breaching the EA 2010 with that rigid and unyielding warm handover call procedure because they are refusing to make any RA for disabled JSA claimants. They are not even bothering to ask if the claimant can take the call.

Creating a JSA 596 and quoting the SAPOE Regs on it will not win them a EA 2010 disability discrimination case where that rigid and unyielding Restart "warm handover" phone call procedure is concerned. An Act trumps a Regulation every time.

Pintel wrote:
"The Restart Scheme is an employment scheme under the Jobseekers Act 1995 Section 17A and the job seekers allowance (schemes for assisting persons to obtain employment) Regulations 2013"...

I thought they might of added the Fraud Act 2006 - 'Obtaining Money under false pretences'.... To the letter.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/35

I think you said they put "equality" text on the JSA 596?

Is it possible for you to quote on here exactly what that text says in relation to the EA 2010?

Thanks.

Here we are #Absolut, if you need anything else dm me ️ .

JSA 596 (page 3 of 3):

"Treating people fairly" (In Bold type)


"We are committed to the Equality Act 2010 and treating people fairly. To find out more about this law, search 'Equality' on

www.gov.uk"

Also further down the page:


"Why DWP needs personal information and how we treat it" (In bold type)


"We treat personal information carefully. We may use it for any of our purposes. To learn more about information rights and how we use information, please see our DWP Personal Information Charter at

www.gov.uk/dwp/personal-information-charter
"