Should you have to work for the dole?

petergfiffin

Do people think your dole (or part of it) should be dependent on you doing x number of hours work for the community each week? I won't say "community service" as that has different connotations.

The way I see it society is all about contributing and everybody has something they can contribute. If skilled e.g. a plumber or electrician it might mean doing work on old people's houses, if you're not "skilled" there's always something of benefit you can contribute. Obviously you'd have to be careful that any work doesn't compete with work somebody is currently getting paid for.



The main advantages as I see it are:

• Big advantage to society as these jobs are largely being left undone at the moment.
• The individual benefits from being given meaningful work, also very often as they're out and about they may hear of job openings or might pick up paid work through referrals.
• Those who are on the dole because they're lazy (and there's a few of them) might decide their time would be better spent in paid employment.

yoshytoshy

What I think is important in the current situation ,is that there is leeway for people who were recently made unemployed. That they can partake in x amount of work if available ,without being chased up about it.

If they alienate people who are newly unemployed by enforcing the no work rule ,then people won't bother.

P. Breathnach

You have identified the biggest problem: displacing paid work. Given that jobs openings will be scarce, there is a need to be particularly careful about this. That reduces the scope for a programme of this type.

You end up re-inventing the CE scheme.

petergfiffin

yoshytoshy wrote: »

What I think is important in the current situation ,is that there is leeway for people who were recently made unemployed. That they can partake in x amount of work if available ,without being chased up about it.

Personally I wouldn't have an objection if people were working to a certain level and getting paid (like the current system), for me the important thing is that people aren't just sitting around.

yoshytoshy

petergfiffin wrote: »

Personally I wouldn't have an objection if people were working to a certain level and getting paid (like the current system), for me the important thing is that people aren't just sitting around.

It's a tough game to get involved in ,providing any schemes for temporary work costs a lot of money.
It could actually cost more to service things like this and then you've got more things to worry about.

Coming from a trade backround ,both myself and family. I think it's important to keep good communication with people and have things as open as possible ,have a process of learning from all of this.

Zynks

I always thought something in that line should be done. A good example is schools that are in bad state of repair and the government doesn't seem to have the money to do something about. That would be one good use and also it would make people feel productive. I doubt anyone with a bit of self respect can claim the dole and not feel bad about it and about themselves.

Latchy

Back in the 80s there was a 12 month scheme in Ireland were people worked 4 day's a week , then off the following week .This allowed them some dignity with work while applying / looking for other employment and also earned them a little more money whilst doing so .Everybody benefited ,the community and the individual .Maybe a type of socialism but it worked .

yoshytoshy

Is it fair to expect people to paint railings ,if they were previously working for 40-50K a year ?
How would you distinguish one person from another?

I know people who would do work for nothing for family ,just to keep themselve occupied. It's a hard system to implement mandatory labour on people.

petergfiffin

yoshytoshy wrote: »

Is it fair to expect people to paint railings ,if they were previously working for 40-50K a year ?

Yes I think it is, however if a person was earning that much money chances are they have some skills that can be put to use.

yoshytoshy wrote: »

How would you distinguish one person from another?

The dole doesn't at the moment, the only thing I would use to distinguish people is their skills

yoshytoshy wrote: »

It's a hard system to implement mandatory labour on people.

I agree, I wouldn't want this to be mandatory, if you don't want to do anything for your dole then you'll only get half. If you can't live on half your dole then either start earning the other half or find a job.

I know a lot of this might sound a bit harsh but really it's about taking away any stigma about being on the dole because firstly it helps people feel they are doing something useful (which they are) and secondly nobody can call you a "scrounger" because everybody knows you're earning your crust.

yoshytoshy

What you've got at the moment though is no jobs for people who have trades. I know loads of lads that are finding it hard to get work at the moment.
Soon some of them will be on the dole and to be honest ,I can't see them working for €200 a week. Regardless of what the government brings in.

It would be better for them to tell the dole office ,what they are doing during the week. Try and figure out how to put things right.

P. Breathnach

petergfiffin wrote: »

Yes I think it is [fair to expect people to paint railings], however if a person was earning that much money chances are they have some skills that can be put to use.

Suppose the skill was auctioneering, or architecture, or assembling PCs, or aircraft maintenance? You're skirting with the idea of robbing people of their dignity.

I agree, I wouldn't want this to be mandatory, if you don't want to do anything for your dole then you'll only get half. If you can't live on half your dole then either start earning the other half or find a job.

The dole is, in theory, the minimum you need to keep you going. Taking half away is nonsense.

I know a lot of this might sound a bit harsh but really it's about taking away any stigma about being on the dole because firstly it helps people feel they are doing something useful (which they are) and secondly nobody can call you a "scrounger" because everybody knows you're earning your crust.

"Some of my best friends are on the dole."

Ironbars

I dont think working for the dole is economically viable. All the admin that needs to be put in place would have to be done by paid staff. Probably outstripping the cost of payments.

petergfiffin

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Suppose the skill was auctioneering, or architecture, or assembling PCs, or aircraft maintenance? You're skirting with the idea of robbing people of their dignity.

Any more than telling them to stay at home and do nothing?

P. Breathnach wrote: »

"Some of my best friends are on the dole."

Me too....and nothing to say I won't be joining them!!

P. Breathnach

Ironbars wrote: »

I dont think working for the dole is economically viable. All the admin that needs to be put in place would have to be done by paid staff. Probably outstripping the cost of payments.

That could be done by administrators who are on the dole.

iseethelight

I see a number of problems

1-As has been stated it would be costly

2-Using peoples existing skills may not work.We allready have an allegedly overstaffed public service with tradesmen IT specialists etc are we just going to be adding to it.

3-The work would take place when people would be looking for work doing up CV's hopefully attending interviews etc.

It would be much better to look at re-training through FAS etc. and giving people money on top of the dole to attend. Also helping people with interview skills and office services like doing up their CV and photocopying.

There was a great place in Coolock who helped me bout 10 years ago when Iwas looking for a job.

Lastly there is no stigma with being on the dole now(2 or 3 years ago yes).
We are in a very bad recession its terrible but good honest hard working people have and will loose their jobs.They have no reason to feel ashamed or embarassed about it.

mumhaabu

In my early twenties and late teens I was on the dole and I can honestly say it was the most unfullfilling and boring period of my life. I was nearly depressed with boredom. I would say that people should be made work for the dole only give them say €300 a week and this work should be upskilling the individuals involved. FAS and CE schemes have really helped make men out of some people who would imagine would never amount to nothing. I'd have loved to have been working but could not get it at the time.

There is many jobs we could do now with social employment and I am fan of it as it helps private enterprise and helps employees. What I think we need to introduce immediately to save jobs is subvention of the workplace ie. The factory up the road can't run due to labour costs and might close, why not allow those workers to get like €150 or €200 a week and have the employer pay the rest. This would save jobs and help businesses stay in business with the direct effect of increased spending from the staff and it would create confidence in the workplace. Doling out money for nothing is not the answer putting the money to good use is. There would be many more jobs only for the minimum wage sub-venting this and helping businesses to stay afloat and saving jobs all in one is the way forward. I think Germany have a system like this where the gov pays a percentage of the workers salaries. Either this or negative income tax.

Hillel

yoshytoshy wrote: »

What you've got at the moment though is no jobs for people who have trades. I know loads of lads that are finding it hard to get work at the moment.

During the "good times" tradespeople got used to charging extremely high prices, often for mundane work. There is still (some) work out there, only not at inflated prices.

yoshytoshy

Hillel wrote: »

During the "good times" tradespeople got used to charging extremely high prices, often for mundane work. There is still (some) work out there, only not at inflated prices.

I fail to see what that has got to do with the current situation ,most lads who loose their jobs are employees. They have no history of going out and finding work ,so your comments help no one.

Gone West

yoshytoshy wrote: »

Is it fair to expect people to paint railings ,if they were previously working for 40-50K a year ?
How would you distinguish one person from another?

You're only as good as your last paycheck, and if your last paycheck was the dole, you're in the same boat as anyone else.
If such a scheme were introduced, the guys on big money who were sacked and are now on the dole would be treated the same as anyone.

Dannyboy83

P. Breathnach wrote: »

You have identified the biggest problem: displacing paid work. Given that jobs openings will be scarce, there is a need to be particularly careful about this. That reduces the scope for a programme of this type.

You end up re-inventing the CE scheme.

Very good point.

yoshytoshy

FuzzyLogic wrote: »

You're only as good as your last paycheck

If only that were true ,we'd all be in a completely different place;)

Húrin

I like that working for the dole might discourage career welfarism. However, it might also have the effect of depressing the wages in the private sector (which is a problem with prison labour).

dvpower

Whatever about the merits of this approach in boom times, introducing it in a recession seems a bit like kicking people when they are down.

The displacement aspect of it is especially unfair in recessionary times.

Paddy Samurai

petergfiffin wrote: »

Do people think your dole (or part of it) should be dependent on you doing x number of hours work for the community each week? I won't say "community service" as that has different connotations.

The way I see it society is all about contributing and everybody has something they can contribute. If skilled e.g. a plumber or electrician it might mean doing work on old people's houses, if you're not "skilled" there's always something of benefit you can contribute. Obviously you'd have to be careful that any work doesn't compete with work somebody is currently getting paid for.





The main advantages as I see it are:

• Big advantage to society as these jobs are largely being left undone at the moment.
• The individual benefits from being given meaningful work, also very often as they're out and about they may hear of job openings or might pick up paid work through referrals.
• Those who are on the dole because they're lazy (and there's a few of them) might decide their time would be better spent in paid employment.

Definitely people who are on the dole for over a year should have to work on community improvement projects or similar jobs.I think the 1 euro job scheme they have in germany is something this country should follow.I know when it first started in germany they were unable to cope with the demand for these jobs.I wonder was this a cultural thing.(http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,1564,1416143,00.html). I think since it started the rules have now changed in germany about it been voluntary and that the social welfare payments have been reduced to encourage participation.A good idea for the long term unemployed not just for themselves but also for their communities.

stepbar

If you were living up in Northern Ireland the dole is £84.50p a week. It's gone to rediculus stage where someone on the minimum wage is only very slightly better off than someone who is collecting dole; rent, fuel etc allowance, a medical card etc. There's surely something wrong when a system like that exists. I don't think 20 hrs a week work wouldn't be an onorus ask.

Joey the lips

petergfiffin wrote: »

Do people think your dole (or part of it) should be dependent on you doing x number of hours work for the community each week? I won't say "community service" as that has different connotations.

The way I see it society is all about contributing and everybody has something they can contribute. If skilled e.g. a plumber or electrician it might mean doing work on old people's houses, if you're not "skilled" there's always something of benefit you can contribute. Obviously you'd have to be careful that any work doesn't compete with work somebody is currently getting paid for.




The main advantages as I see it are:

• Big advantage to society as these jobs are largely being left undone at the moment.
• The individual benefits from being given meaningful work, also very often as they're out and about they may hear of job openings or might pick up paid work through referrals.
• Those who are on the dole because they're lazy (and there's a few of them) might decide their time would be better spent in paid employment.

Hi Peter,

Been following your thread. Its a daft notion and I would be happy to explain why but because you list so many reasons I dont want to ruin your research. I will say this though you make the assumption that those on the dole are lazy. Tell that to a meeting in the canteen of the sr tech workers ( All skilled people)

But more importantly and the goverment know this through there CE Scheme. When you transfere labour across like this it becomes a free lunch for employers and they dont bother employing anybody.

What I suggest we do it "Train" these people on the dole to educate others thus giving them a job while upskilling others.

Lastly you would realise how insensitive you post is if you had been on the dole

L.R. Weizel

I agree, I wouldn't want this to be mandatory, if you don't want to do anything for your dole then you'll only get half. If you can't live on half your dole then either start earning the other half or find a job.

But you CAN'T live on half your dole, so it's a pointless thing to say.

There's enough wage slavery as is. If people can't get a job, they can't get a job. Forcing them to do ****ty jobs is ridiculous especially in this economic climate where a lot of skilled people are going to be recieving the dole.