Restart latest guidance 19th April

Updated "Restart guidance" dated 19th April surely this isn't allowed read chapter 7.51, 7.54 and
7.56
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/restart-provider-guidance/restart-scheme-provider-guidance#chapter-7---data-and-information-sharing-with-dwp

The SAR or RAR stuff is a pain. Some information is the DWPs domain and they usually release it. Records of your Restart meetings etc are probably not in the DWPs system so the provider is responsible for those. What tends to happen is a provider and DWP will each say it's not their responsibility and send you backwards and forwards. I know very little about data protection law but these issues can be commonplace where there are different bodies managing/using their data. Hopefully someone who does understand data protection law will come along.

Ignatius wrote:The SAR or RAR stuff is a pain. Some information is the DWPs domain and they usually release it. Records of your Restart meetings etc are probably not in the DWPs system so the provider is responsible for those. What tends to happen is a provider and DWP will each say it's not their responsibility and send you backwards and forwards. I know very little about data protection law but these issues can be commonplace where there are different bodies managing/using their data. Hopefully someone who does understand data protection law will come along.

Some experts need to look into this latest guidance... DWP are making the rules up now Chapter 7.58 dwp cannot say yes or no if a participant's personal data is deleted from a third party company. This Goes the same with signing provider contract paperwork under GDPR.

On the link #designergas provided. Under 6:10 Unacceptable Behaviour:

Unacceptable Behaviour
6.10. Participants on the Restart Scheme have a responsibility to behave in an appropriate manner just as they would if they were in employment. You should explain what constitutes appropriate behaviour as part of the induction.
🥎

🥵. We consider the following as examples of unacceptable behaviour (this list is not exhaustive):

violence
verbal abuse, including that of a sexual or racist nature
threats, which are implied or otherwise;
intimidation
sexual innuendo
harassment
unwelcome attention
attempted or actual assaults
inappropriate use of the internet or provider’s IT system.

I wonder does the Retread staff also have a definitive list of Unacceptable Behaviours. As there doesn't seem to be any. A few suggestions: Bullying (Physical or Psychological), False Allegations of Behaviour/Conduct, Altering of Official records, etc etc..

I'm an "expert" on "Unacceptable Behaviours" against Restart if they need a consultant.

Like I said, I heard nothing back getting data erased under GDPR, all down to the PRaP earnings system for 547 days. 
Next, universal credit How on earth is DWP allowed to monitor your incoming wages with HMRC data sharing for an extra six months even though you signed off UC DWP has no fucking rights how much you earn if your not receiving any state benefits with JSA? Your claim will be shut down within 5 working days. I think all data sharing stops with HMRC.

DWP is just lawless, and we all wonder why they wanted everyone to universal credit systems this does really need looking into. With GDPR regulations etc

Pintel wrote:On the link #designergas provided. Under 6:10 Unacceptable Behaviour:

Unacceptable Behaviour
6.10. Participants on the Restart Scheme have a responsibility to behave in an appropriate manner just as they would if they were in employment. You should explain what constitutes appropriate behaviour as part of the induction.
🥎

🥵. We consider the following as examples of unacceptable behaviour (this list is not exhaustive):

violence
verbal abuse, including that of a sexual or racist nature
threats, which are implied or otherwise;
intimidation
sexual innuendo
harassment
unwelcome attention
attempted or actual assaults
inappropriate use of the internet or provider’s IT system.

I wonder does the Retread staff also have a definitive list of Unacceptable Behaviours. As there doesn't seem to be any. A few suggestions: Bullying (Physical or Psychological), False Allegations of Behaviour/Conduct, Altering of Official records, etc etc..

Only works one way they bully us; we cannot defend ourselves. This is why we record everything from phone calls to face-to-face appointments, gather as much evidence as possible. 

Not creating a new post will just post here dwp review of the restart isn't good about time something is getting done about this shitshow.

The 3 best part.

*Participants’ relationship with their Restart Employment Advisor was a key determinant in participant experience. Participants were more often positive about the relationship than not, but some felt their needs were not understood, or that their advisor did not have the skills needed to help them. Others reported that they had changed advisors several times and this had negatively impacted on the quality of support received.

*DWP should further review the effectiveness of Customer Service be Standards and performance management to ensure future programmes deliver a minimum service standard to all participants.

*Good practice in how to recruit, train, and retain Employment Advisors should be shared with providers.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-evaluation-of-the-restart-scheme/restart-scheme-evaluation-summary

From the link you supplied #designergas:

"Nearly two thirds (64%) of participants found the Restart Scheme useful at wave 1. Findings from the survey suggested that participants with higher qualifications, those who had worked more since leaving school and the self-employed were less likely to find the Restart Scheme useful."

I would of liked to what the other 1/3(36%) of participants had to say? I bet it wasn't 'Useful'🧻....🤨

Pintel wrote:From the link you supplied #designergas:

"Nearly two thirds (64%) of participants found the Restart Scheme useful at wave 1. Findings from the survey suggested that participants with higher qualifications, those who had worked more since leaving school and the self-employed were less likely to find the Restart Scheme useful."

I would of liked to what the other 1/3(36%) of participants had to say? I bet it wasn't 'Useful'🧻....🤨

It's fucked up reading that they claim to provide tailored support for every participant. Why do they pick and choose which participant to help? They have a bronze, silver, and gold list for each participant. They judge their participants by reading the CV sent over; in my case, my CV was sabotaged the whole process is flawed.

Maybe the 'picking & choosing' is part of the Tailored 🪡🧵 Support ( for the Provider's , at least)...🧐
If as you posted D-Gas, they have ; Gold, Silver, & Bronze lists. Can you find out which category, you have been assigned? In my area, the category's would most likely be: Ice, Stone, and Bronze.... Not saying it behind the curve here.. 🤨

Pintel wrote:Maybe the 'picking & choosing' is part of the Tailored 🪡🧵 Support ( for the Provider's , at least)...🧐
If as you posted D-Gas, they have ; Gold, Silver, & Bronze lists. Can you find out which category, you have been assigned? In my area, the category's would most likely be: Ice, Stone, and Bronze.... Not saying it behind the curve here.. 🤨

I knew I was on the bronze list. I was stone-cold-parked. In the first week, the advisor didn't even bother to email me back. Wasn't likely to obtain a job outcome no skills

This latest finding from the silly dwp making this public domain (should be kept ****confidential and private****) now participants know what to do next on the next scheme to park yourself and remove all your work experience, grades, etc. From your CV, make it so sh*t non employable be less transparent with them. 90% your parked on your first appointment they are more focus making money from the genuine participants with higher skillset.

It never worked that way for me ''focus making money from the genuine participants with higher skill set.'' Maybe it was my over keen attitude that shone through, and would have failed at the genuine part for certain.In that, I didn't want to work for rice grain pay and travel 100 mile there and back to it.

jobberpw wrote:It never worked that way for me  ''focus making money from the genuine participants with higher skill set.'' Maybe it was my over keen attitude that shone through, and would have failed at the genuine part for certain.In that, I didn't want to work for rice grain pay and travel 100 mile there and back to it.

This is why I could never become a restart advisor. 6–8 weeks kick someone into work to obtain the job outcome. Some customers have a hidden talent that takes months to notice and lastly time not 3x(30 minutes appointments) or some sabotages their CV. The whole process is flawed. This is why participants fight with their advisors.

Totally with you desinergas, some of us still have integrity, self respect, and empathy for humanity. All attributes roach vile and the other crew dont hold in my experience.

jobberpw wrote:Totally with you desinergas, some of us still have integrity, self respect, and empathy for humanity. All attributes roach vile and the other crew dont hold in my experience.

Sadly, they pick on all ages. The approach is vile boardline abuse. Fuck knows how these people sleep at night. During my last day of attending the office, I sat next to a single mother who said, Where is my advisor going give her a piece of my mind and an elderly lady said,I cannot believe they sent me over to this. I'm 61 years old, not some fresh lady out of work. I also heard it's getting far worse with the scheme; now claimants are getting sent less than 6 months after claiming universal credit. Work coach said she held back referring people over due to the horror stories extending this to 2026 is the worse thing give these abuser more ammo to abuse more claimants.

While these morons and the incoming persu their non working idealistic mentality about all work is good for EVERYONE their shooting themselves in firmly in the foot as ALL employers' will be aware to their fun and games at interview stage. But there are a few Tory jobsworths out there who will offer jobs to the most inappropriate candidate as they truly get off on just being in control knowing the applicant darent refouse what's been offered due to fear of a sanction.Another reason why roachville like to send as many sheep to wherever, and whenever they can



I did many interviews and they knew then.It's obvious that employers will look at younger people for the obvious reasons.Shelf life being the number one factor.

So Strider and the like can keep on with their dream's of ALL WORK IS GOOD FOR YOU, NEVER MIND THE WAGES all they like! it's not going to change things one jot.

why on earth have some of you given these muppets your CV?

i refused to even show them a copy of any of mine without being mandated to do so :-)

Looks like this guidance has been withdrawn from the Gov website, sounds like Restart is going to be scrapped by Labour very soon and probably replaced with another useless scheme which will be announced in October's Budget that's what i'm thinking.

Maybe it was temporarily taken down, the provider guidance is certainly available on gov.uk just now 🤮. It's only funded until 2026 so they will probably let it limp on.

As a result, the Canary identified that the DWP is paying the eight private outsourcing companies the following:

Serco: £175,481,723 (two contracts).
G4S Facilities Management: £71,191,756.
Reed and Partnership: £189,725,306 (two contracts).
Ingeus UK: £217,076,769 (two contracts).
Maximus UK Services: £213,872,634 (two contracts).
Jobs 22: £90,815,873.
Fedcap Employment: £73,311,553.
Seetec Pluss: £61,085,447.


https://www.thecanary.co/uk/analysis/2024/08/21/dwp-restart-scheme/

Its not surprising the Welfare bill is so high. Maybe instead of focusing on the Sick & Disabled. They could start here?🧐 Forget the 'Workless' how's about focusing on the 'Worthless'...