-
Posts
-
A friend who is currently unemployed was referred to H-PACK in Llay by the jobcentre to undertake a two week unpaid work placement. This would have been a total of 80 hours work. Apparently, there was no guarantee of being offered an actual paid full-time position at the end of the placement. My friend nevertheless, attended the initial interview at H-PACK and quite reasonably, asked to be paid at least the national minimum wage for the duration of the work trial, but H-PACK refused this request. My friend then politly made his excuses and then left.
Surely you have the right to be paid at least the national minimum wage, even on a work trial? If it had been a one or at a push two day unpaid work trial, it might have been more acceptable and my friend would have agreed to do it, but two weeks of unpaid factory shift work seems very exploitive.
-
This topic was modified 10 months, 1 week ago by
Wrexham1.
I assume he’s on £65 pw JSA. So, the Jobcentre’s asking him to work for £1.63 on hour ?
That’s pretty much it yes. They say that he’s not working for free as he will still receive his benefit money, but that works out at £320 a month, whereas two weeks work being paid the national minimum wage would earn him at least £500.
This is not only exploiting the workers, it’s exploiting all of us. This is a huge company with it’s HQ in Dubai. As taxpayers we are paying JSA to their trainees. Training is an ongoing cost to companies and as such can be set against tax.
Had he accepted the position and then bailed out after a few shifts presumably he would be sanctioned by the very same organisation that allowed him to be exploited in the first place.
Ken Skates enjoyed a photo opportunity there in November 17, with his white teeth glowing. Perhaps your friend could write to him personally and ask for his thoughts.
Under the Tories who would love to bring back the workhouse for the poor, they think this is fair game. They had them all in Poundland shelf stacking last year.
If a company is making a profit from these individuals then the very least they can do is pay them minimum wage to stop themselves from starving and keep a roof over their head – plus remove the financial burden from the state. Money is the incentive to work and for people to get off benefits. Why would anyone want to slog away for corporate shareholders and get paid nothing, when they could just sit at home for the same pittance.
He is worried about what the jobcentre will say at his next appointment in a couple of weeks, when he has to admit that he turned the work down. Wether or not the jobcentre will accept that not being offered a wage is grounds for turning work down is debatable.
You can be sanctioned for turning down work set by the job centre, which could lead to him having no money to live on for a lengthy period of time, so I hope this rule doesn’t apply to work that isn’t paid at least the NMW; it ought to.
There’s rightly a lot of fuss about ‘modern slavery,’ so why does it not extend to these cynical attempts to get around the NMW?
-
This topic was modified 10 months, 1 week ago by
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
