Should people on long term unemployment benifit be made to work for the money?

Question

If someone has been claiming unemployment benefit for more than three months why not make it obligatory for them to do some community service work each week. Nothing too taxing, just picking up litter in parks, removing graffiti and other menial task two or three days a week (with time off for interviews etc). This way they are giving something back to the community and keeping up the habit of working for a living. Refusal to work would result in no payment. Exceptions would be made for people not working due to health problems and the like. What say you?

I knew this would be a crowd splitter!

Just to re-iterate, as people don't seem to be grasping this, I said there would be time off for interview etc. Also, the people claiming benifits would only be working 2-3 days a week. These could even be weekend days. I have been unemployed before and even going to the job center, looking up jobs in newspapers, internet etc AND going to interviews is NOT a full time task. Also, people are looking at this as some kind of punishment for being unemployed. It is not. It gives people who are out of work a chance to give something back to the community at the same time a keeping them is touch with what it is like to get up and go to work. People who on long term unemployed can find this very intimadating.

Answer 1

Remember that people pay into unemployment benefits for the possibility that they may become unemployed. So really it's not free money. I think the ones on welfare should have to go out and do something instead of sitting around milking the system (not everyone) but the majority. So many people choose welfare as a lifestyle. Unemployment though I feel for these people. Must be horrible not to be able to find a job. If your speaking of chronic unemployment benefit seeker's then yes! Make them do SOMETHING. '-)

Answer 2

Definetly it will soon weed out those who want to work and those who are to afraid to work.
If someone is claiming benefits for an illness then they should of course be given every opportunity i mean if the illness is for real not the old back problems etc or those who only need that wheelchair for the days they sign.
People who refuse to show or dont show without a doctors line should be docked that days benefit those who are out and about but still shirking manual labour should be docked a days benefit too
Im sick of those who claim benefit and there is no reason for it other than their laziness those who cant get a job but wont one are the ones who should benefit more from the system with the aid of going to college for a day or two a week an being able to keep their self respect and not turn into the lazy person who thinks watching daytime tv and scrounging off family and friends is a job

Answer 3

It has always struck me that there are those people 'in work' who really would rather be doing something else, and those who are 'looking for work' and are not able to get into work. So....

Why not let them trade places, then those who like the fulfilment of work would feel better for it and industry as a whole would likely be more productive ~ while those no longer employed would feel the consequences ~ whilst basically not getting in the way of industry itself.

I've worked with those who 'didn't want to be there,' and have had to share their workload amongst others. The emotional consequences was not good in any sense at all.

You cannot 'make' anyone do anything they do not want to do, and have no right to try. On the other hand, could you stand by and let someone and their families 'suffer' the results of their behaviour?

It's an 'Old' question.
Sash.

Answer 4

The work you describe is currently done by convicted offenders as an alterrnative to inprisonment. How about Mr Hilter's idea of the unemployed constructing roads and other capital projects, it kick started the German economy in 1934. Then again, road build is specialist work but some of our A and B roads are in a pretty bad state of repair and they could be repaired by the unemployed. How do you assess someone as being fit to do this sort of work and would you include those on long term Incapacity Benefit? Would you re-introduce Means Testing as was done in my parents generation in the 20's and 30's?

Answer 5

Yes,
The problem would then be liability insurance, as to avoid work some people would injure themselves to sue the government, so they would have to look into this. You would also have the human rights issues and a whole minefield of litigation.
It would open a can of worms, but those who are genuinely seeking work should not be lumped with those who have made a profession out of 7 day lie in's.
In its favour it would stop the fiddlers and dole cheats, as it would minimise the hours that they were available, as it should be a 37 hour working week that they are performing these tasks for - so that they gain experience of a working week.

Answer 6

see your point, but if you became unemployed how would you like to be 'tagged' is it not bad enough you don't have much money and could be made to do some sort of whatever job to comply with benefits (not forgetting WHY we pay are taxes!!) the bones of your idea are good but actually getting meat on them is another thing, don't forget we do have training and courses for the unemployed, but there is a small minority of people that are just not interested in giving anything only taking what they can get but it does not apply to all unemployed!
I think the people that want to work will find something to do constructive if they are unemployed and the opposite for those who don't want to give anything.

Answer 7

YES YES YES, there are far too many people unemployed who are more than able to take up employment but are happy living of the state. I am not saying all unemployed are in the above category but a hell of a high percentage are, I personally know some who brag about it and how they would require a job which pays well above the minimum wage before they would even think of coming off benefits. Perhaps if less "able bodied" people on benefits then we could afford to pay pensions that would keep pensioners in a better lifestyle than a present (do I eat or do I heat)

Answer 8

Agreed. There's plenty of work to be done. Some people just don't want to do it e.g picking up litter, cleaning graffitti/public toilets etc.
Yes, I would make people work for benefits, however you cannot impede that persons ability to actively seek long term employment.
Some people moan and complain about not being able to find "suitable" employment. What I would say to them is go and get a "stop-gap" job somewhere like McDonalds (or is that beneath you?) and stop sponging my tax money because you're too pretentious to do menial work.

Answer 9

yes i agree, i work in mental health and i can asure u most of the clients do voluntary work and would love a job, where as those lazy shits do bugger all and get grants and loans, and easy access to housing. while the rest of us r struggling to keep up morgage payments and school contributions

Answer 10

No because if they're doing all that community service work they will have no time to go out proper job hunting (which can sometimes be a full-time job in itself). I think that if they can't find a job after a certain amount of time, then they should be sent to college to learn a new trade, so they can increase their chances of getting decent employment.

Nobody seems to want to hire people without any experience these days. And finding a full-time job without any skills is pretty much near to impossible. I've been there. :-/

Answer 11

Perhaps if we creamed off some of the vast salaries that MPs and rich taxdogers profit from, we could afford to help the poor and unemployed without continually accusing them of sponging or faking illness. Putting them to work in the way you suggest would take jobs from other employed people. We used to have a caring society. Now we have a society based upon greed where ultimately the poor and unemployed will be the permanent underdogs of our declining society.