Tags
(not satire)
UPDATE: Charlotte has now sadly passed away. She has left a beautiful message on Facebook which can be seen by clicking here.
RIP Lotte
.
From Charlotte Ryan:
“I have terminal cancer, my prognosis is 0-3 years and I was diagnosed in March 2014 with my brain stem glioma. In April 2014 I was placed in the support group* for 3 years and I have gone from being able-bodied to hopelessly disabled. I have many neurological deficits including diploplia, dyspraxia, dysarthria and dysphagia. To save you googling, this means that I have double vision and am going blind, I’m very clumsy and most days I drop everything I pick up, my speech is failing and one day I won’t be able to communicate verbally at all and I have such difficulty swallowing that I now have a feeding tube. I cannot leave the house alone and I’m at risk of choking and need 24 hour care. They speak of me going into residential care, but they hope to keep me in my own home for as long as possible. The trouble is degenerative, nothing will get better, only worse, the cancer can’t be cured. I’m 37.
Now. I can deal with all that. I’m alive! And I can still do stuff!! What I cannot deal with is that I am on the work programme! I received this letter today (too late to ring the WP) demanding I attend an appointment with the Work Programme on Tuesday or they’ll stop my benefits. HOW SICK DOES A PERSON HAVE TO BE BEFORE THE HARASSMENT STOPS?”
* The support group is supposed to be for claimants who the DWP consider to have such severe health problems that there is no current prospect of their being able to undertake work or work-related activities.
.
Charlotte’s isn’t just an isolated case. Here’s lots more proof that sick people – including cancer patients – are now regarded by this government as malingerers:
Thousands of Cancer Patients Wait For Six Months or More For Disability Benefits
Cancer patients to lose up to £94 a week
DWP blames cancer patient for her illness
Mother’s plea for son who lost benefits after missing signing on because of cancer operation
Throat cancer victim – “this is not the England they fought and died for!”
Let’s be clear – Tory and Lib Dem MPs have decided terminally ill patients should work or starve
40% of cancer patients can’t afford to heat their home properly
Man living on flour and water and woman forced to stop chemotherapy
Life in the PIP queue: One year and counting for claimant with cancer
Cancer sufferer left penniless after waiting six months for vital financial help
Cancer sufferer loses disabilty benefits appeal
Benefits office ‘treating me like a liar’, says Dundee cancer sufferer
.
Please feel free to share. And comment.
Pride's Purge 
NINA SIMONE: FOR ALL WE KNOW:
http://youtu.be/A0P0Qc2YSQs via @YouTube
LikeLike
Tom, where is the original to this. Has this lady written to you. I need the original source if at all possible? Thank you.
[You can contact Charlotte via Facebook here: https://www.facebook.com/nerdbrain ] -TOM
LikeLike
Reblogged this on sdbast.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I put a quote on my wall earlier tonight: “I saw a man half starved and used him because it suited me, because he was nothing more than an acceptable loss, as long as I got what I needed.” I think it is so appropriate! They meet their targets and the Ministers get their gold stars. I personally think Iain Duncan Smith gets far more out of this, I think he really loves his job. I have copied Charlotte’s words and downloaded her letter. I need her to know that I for one am thinking of her and the appalling treatment she is receiving and that it stops matters greatly to me.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Reblogged this on Ned Hamson Second Line View of the News.
LikeLike
Pingback: Terminal cancer patients now expected to attend work interviews or lose welfare support | Alternative News Network
I can’t comment on all of Ms Ryan’s ‘ailments’, although diminishing sight certianly rings a few bells. OUCH! My own experience, with Atos, was being told that my eplipsy can (not *should*, but can) be controlled by medication. I said it never has been and I doubted that it could. The Atos interrogator looked at me blankly. “I don’t know anything about epilepsy but there’s a job here for a library assistant at [large corporate organisation] with an office in Leicester. You could have a ‘fit’ there and I’m sure no-one would mind.”
“Have you looked at my CV?” “No. It’s probably no different from any of the others.” “I see … I realise I’m just a kid from a comprehensive but I do have a double-first from Manchester University and a Phd. “Do you have any GCSE’s?” “No. I took ‘O’ Levels. You do know my date of birth don’t you?” “I have it here somewhere …” (SOMEWHERE!) Do you think if I get a job as library assistant at ‘Mega-bucks & Mega-bucks’ it is going to help me or help you reach your ‘targets’?”
“We don’t have ‘targets’.” “Yes you do; it’s in Atos’ latest annual report.” “How do you know that?” “I’m an award-winning investigative journalist …” “Oh … Mr Wood … Could you leave. I’ll recommend that you remain in the ‘support group’.”
I’m not recommending this as a strategy/tactic for anybody in situations such as Ms Ryan’s; unless that is you can genuinely, or feel confident enough to pull it off. Nonetheless, it’s amazing to explain how getting your legs sewn (and I mean that almost literally) back together by doctors/clinicians from Médecines Sans Frontiéres/Doctors Without Borders because you were working as a foreign correspondent for Reuters in a ‘nasty’ ‘conflict-zone’.
End of rant … Time to go to bed … I don’t usually do this but if readers/vistors to Prides Purge want more of me try http://www.storyboard4.com
LikeLiked by 3 people
If any HP told me my epilepsy could be controlled by medication I would be straight round the table to lay into them. My next ESA50 is going to say as much because I am sick of been placed in WRAG then when asked to attend a WFI been told I should be in the support group.
The way I see it is fraud is fraud and a personal assistant at the JC+ telling you you should be in the support group 3 times constitutes fraud by the JC+/ DWP
LikeLiked by 2 people
Reblogged this on markcatlin3695's Blog.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on markcatlin3695's Blog.
LikeLike
This letter is notification of a telephone interview, not one which must be attended in person. Miss Ryan clearly misread it and jumped to some conclusions, which is understandable given her condition. No doubt this would have been clarified when she or her carer called the Prospects office. I agree that the letter could have been better worded for the avoidance of doubt.
Tom, your whole business is discerning information and misinformation, so I would expect you to read such things properly before making them public.
How did you receive this story? If you had direct contact with Miss Ryan and you had read the letter properly, you could have reassured her immediately that she didn’t need to attend and maybe saved her considerable stress.
LikeLike
Tom – Do you stand by your headline “Terminal cancer patients now expected to attend work interviews or lose welfare support”, even when you are clearly wrong in this case and in others you have written?
You could respond, or you could continue to peddle false assumptions and half-truths in your fundamentally mistaken, absurd and naive idea that unsubstantiated or false ‘alternatives’ will counter very real false establishment narratives and appalling injustices.
Do you remember my post?:
“I get it, I just don’t agree with it. Do you think it’s not the site for me because I think objectivity IS the best way to counter false establishment narratives? Do you only want readers who agree with your philosophy, or would you like discussion about it?”
Would you like that discussion?
[Yet again FinkFurst – you are making this discussion too much about me. Stop it.]-TOM
LikeLike
FinkFurst. I noticed this, but it matters not really as the lady has now to worry all weekend as to what is to come of her. Whether it be face to face or on the phone she is expected to engage in a work related programme, a programme designed to getting her back to work. They must have medical evidence and should not in any way be bothering this lady. As my gran would say: “she has enough on her plate”. Give the lady some peace at the end of her life, or have we become so inhuman we care not! I for one admire Tom’s passion and drive.
LikeLiked by 3 people
If this were just a mere letter of concern why so official? Why have they not just telephoned the lady to see how she is and request an update from her doctors? In my opinion (not that it will matter), I think it is designed to cause stress and worry and probably even to drive those to such despair they just give in. Hopefully we can support Charlotte and prevent another tragic statistic!
LikeLiked by 2 people
lauretalottie – Here’s a question for you – Does Tom (or anybody else who actively tries to set themselves in a position of influence over matters which fundamentally affect real people) need only passion and drive, or should they first do their best to be objectively right, and also admit when they are wrong?
LikeLike
it’s dreadful that anyone with severe health problems should be forced to attend a telephone interview; 1 the person is in a wrag or sg..2 that the person’s must prepare and put aside their personal needs and requirements, too attend the telephone @ a specific time not of the sick persons choosing..3 that there is an implication by others that this person is fit for work…4 that they must be be alert to manipulations when they are unwell, and try to counter them whilst being unwell…5 the sick and disabled person may/might tell the interviewer anything just to appease them @ that given time, because they feel unwell…6 the demand on the time of the sick and disabled person is designed to put pressure on that person, it’s is not a matter of choice it is not a social event or a shopping trip that can be put off, what happens @ this appointment could have serious financial consequences, health consequences due to the pressure of it and/or loss of benefits…
LikeLiked by 5 people
laurettalottie – “Why have they not just telephoned the lady to see how she is” – Isn’t the letter exactly for that reason? – to make an appointment so they could talk to her on the ‘phone about her problems.
As for getting an update from her doctors rather than using a contracted-out assessment company, perhaps you should ask those responsible in the last Labour government who started it, and those in the current government who are continuing it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
OBD – ” too [sic] attend the telephone @ a specific time not of the sick persons choosing”
The letter specifically says that she CAN call the office. Perhaps you need to learn to read too.
LikeLike
FinkFurst – Yes, I also noticed, by the end of the letter, that it was indeed a telephone interview the lady was being asked to undertake. BUT, why in that case in the section which gives details of where the interview is to take place, do they give an office address on the 4th floor? This is surely irrelevant and confusing. Why not say “you have been asked to take part in a telephone interview”?
Because they haven’t got the sense to alter a standard letter so that it makes sense!
Jobsworths.
LikeLike
f f
i will reply to you only once and this is it…the person phones the office if they can get through and will speak to an adviser who will pressure the person to comply..stop ignoring the facts, this person is sick and disabled…also read their nonsense ‘if you haven’t got a phone ring the office’
LikeLiked by 3 people
groovmistress – Yes, you’re right. It’s a perfectly valid and rational criticism to say it was a badly worded letter, but which headline did Tom decide to write (irrespective of the truth)?…
1) “Government contractor sends badly worded letter.”
2) “Terminal cancer patients now expected to attend work interviews or lose welfare support.”
LikeLike
OBD – ‘if you haven’t got a phone ring the office’
The letter doesn’t say that. Making silly things up doesn’t help, when there are real criticisms of government to be made… which is exactly my point.
LikeLiked by 1 person
[Yet again FinkFurst – you are making this discussion to much about me. Stop it.]-TOM
I will when you do!
LikeLike
FinkFurst (which is obviously NOT your real name), I agree, you should be objective, however I think we have answered your first question. This woman is being forced to attend an interview, whether it be via telephone or face to face. Did you not read my comments? You accuse Tom of not reading what he has posted, yet you do the same. Please tell me you are not an apologist for the DWP or Government?!
LikeLike
laurettalottie – “This woman is being forced to attend an interview, whether it be via telephone or face to face”
What force was used, or even implied?
“Please tell me you are not an apologist for the DWP or Government?!”
I can confidently tell you that!
LikeLike
Or are you just heartless? You see FinkFurst, you are now making things up, exactly what you are accusing Tom of doing. How on earth can you come to the conclusion that the letter is just to ask how she is? It’s a private company who’s interest in Charlotte is to get her back to work,is that NOT what they get paid for? Or is the Government now employing companies to phone poorly people to make sure they are okay? If only the latter were true. I absolutely mean this FinkFurst, I hope you NEVER have to go through what Charlotte is going through. Who will you turn to if the only people out there to help you are people with opinions like yours?
LikeLiked by 4 people
Man ‘bit dog’ before shop death http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-30513026
MAN BITES DOG
o/t and very sorry but could not resist this
LikeLike
FinkFurst
1 whats it to you ?
2 you are a twat
3 you are a twat
LikeLiked by 1 person
“You see FinkFurst, you are now making things up, exactly what you are accusing Tom of doing. How on earth can you come to the conclusion that the letter is just to ask how she is?”
I didn’t say that, so who is actually making things up?
“It’s a private company who’s interest in Charlotte is to get her back to work,is that NOT what they get paid for?”
Do you have any evidence for that? If so, you’ve got the makings of a really serious criticism. Do you have any such evidence?
LikeLike
Finkfurst is a twat.
Discuss..
LikeLike
bobchewie – The answer to your first question is that I want to return to a fair and caring welfare system, and false narratives won’t help to get us there. Your second two ‘points’ say more about you than about me.
LikeLike
Finkfurst is that bloke who peeks from behind curtains and complains about nieghbours hedges being trimmed all wrong
LikeLike
You see in JCP DWP IDS land
Unemployed are criminals who should be punished using sanctions and non paid work
in order to ” teach them a lesson”
LikeLiked by 1 person
@FinkFurst
“diploplia, dyspraxia, dysarthria and dysphagia.”
Try looking up both dyspraxia and dysarthria – both result in badly impaired speech which can means the sufferer CAN’T USE THE TELEPHONE. Should you wish to argue with me, I suffer from APHASIA (look it up), consequence of stroke, and my speech is so badly impaired THAT I CANNOT USE THE TELEPHONE.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@laurettalottiepearson
Government agencies have learned that that I can only be contacted by letter or email. My landline is only used to furnish broadband and should anybody call my number all they’ll get ringing tone – the only thing plugged into my landline is my router, no telephone. Likewise corporate interests intent on “spam-phoning” me are on a hiding to nowhere. Anybody who needs to contact me know my carefully concealed mobile no. in order to text me in an emergency.
LikeLiked by 2 people
bobchewie … or instead of peeking from behind curtains yourself, you could email Prospects and ask them to modify their letter to make it less worrying for recipients. Their Bristol office email address can easily be found using Google.
LikeLike
wildswimmerpete – …which is precisely why I said “she or her carer”.
LikeLike
FinkFest, does she actually have a carer? Despite being single I don’t have a carer, nor was I afforded one immediately after my stroke as I should have. The “system” left me to fend for myself, as I still do. Look at my previous posts, sometimes my grammar can still be ropey as aphasia didn’t just trash my speech but my grammar, vocabulary, spelling, numeracy, writing and reading. Fortunately I have recovered most of my faculties but for my bloody speech.
LikeLiked by 1 person
finky why dont you email them and demand PROOF
and show them this blog and then walk away accepting everything they say after all they are guvmint and superior beings to us minions
LikeLike
wildswimmerpete – She says she requires 24 hour care, which implies that she does have a carer who could call on her behalf. Also plainly (just like you) she can email and use the Internet very effectively, even if she is unable to use the telephone very well herself.
Any more questions?
LikeLike
bobchewie – “finky why dont you email them and demand PROOF”
Proof of what?
LikeLike
The letter isn’t simply ‘badly worded’. Setting aside the coldhearted tone (and okay maybe that’s just me being sentimental), it’s thoughtlessly drafted so that it implies one thing when it means another and, since it’s a standard template, presumably versions of it regularly go out to others in similar circumstances. At the very least the failure to draft a non-misleading template is totally unprofessional, more importantly it indicates a complete lack of respect and compassion for the recipients. They are all badly disabled and/or suffering a terminal illness, coping with the draining physical and mental effects as well as in many cases, unpleasant side effects from their treatment.
In any case the letter is only a symptom of a nasty malaise and degeneration in our society. My granddad who was born in 1903 told me that at the age of 8 he’d seen his best friend’s family separated and destroyed because the father had been badly injured at work. He said one of the reasons his generation welcomed the welfare state after the war was that ‘people who’d drawn the short straw in life wouldn’t be punished even more’. In the context of 2014, I’m sickened that despite Charlotte’s condition and prognosis, the state won’t simply accept that she can’t be expected to seek work and that they continue to harass her in this way, whether via a phone interview or in person. Even the most hardened hater of ‘benefit scrounger’, told the straightforward facts about her case, would surely accept that a civilised country would support her without question.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Maria – You seem to have jumped to the same false conclusion which Tom’s headline states – that the intention of the letter is to force a terminally ill person to seek work or lose benefits. The letter says no such thing.
Your last sentence is absolutely crucial. Should a civilised society support all claimants “without question”? How do you know what are “straightforward facts” and what are not without asking?
I agree that the letter was thoughtlessly worded. You could email Prospects Bristol to say so. The email address is easy to find…
LikeLike
well that’s me i’m off…
LikeLike
Here’s a simple solution which New Labour decided couldn’t work (or maybe for some other reason!) and the Tories have since agreed:
The DWP phones the GP and asks “does Miss Charlotte Ryan have terminal brain stem cancer and is unable to work”. The GP says “Yes”. Benefits are paid without question and the patient is not put under any additional stress. What’s wrong with that idea? Perhaps some of you foolish Labour supporters should ask yourselves some questions…
LikeLike
Finkfurst: if Charlotte’s continuing benefits don’t depend on this interview, then it’s simply superfluous and it’s heartless to force these continuing contacts on her. If she might lose benefits by not being available, then that is inhumane and unsupportable. Of course the DWP must be sure that a person is justified in claiming but sometimes there comes a point when the prognosis indicates that he or she will never be able to work. Charlotte received her prognosis in March, 9 months ago. Why can’t they just desist and take away one burden from her.
If they really need to check up, I agree with you that they should be able to get the information from the doctor and I’d be interested to know why that’s considered unworkable or undesirable.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Finky ..you still here ? why ?
why not ask Iain Drunken Shit why are the corps running DWP now and using disabled and unemployed as scapegoats to blame to justify pissing millions up the wall by sending that money to corps on govt payroll that they stash away in their offshore accounts
LikeLiked by 1 person
Maria – The means of getting an objective medical opinion via the GP was removed by the last Labour government. This leaves only asking the patient themselves, via a company which is more interested in profits than in facts or patient care. Even if the company was doing its best (which I severely doubt) the patient is not a medical expert, may be confused, or may be lying.
In this particular case and within the existing contracted-out system (which I fundamentally disagree agree with) the letter seems reasonable, if rather badly worded. Basically Tom and everyone who has posted so far is missing the real point. I doubt that Charlotte’s continuing benefits do depend on this interview, but none of us actually know what it is they want to ask her about.
I come back to Tom’s deliberately false headline which is all that most of his undiscerning supporters will understand – “Terminal cancer patients now expected to attend work interviews or lose welfare support”.
LikeLike
Finkless: As bob chewie has told you, you are a total twat many times over and nobody likes your aggressive shill behaviour on this TP site. You have already been banned, and you have been instructed to look for another site. If you are such an expert on Health Care I suggest politely that you get a job with the DWP or NHS.
LikeLike
tomfooltony – I seldom do as instructed and I’m not interested in being liked, so feel free to tell me anything your UKIP prejudices compel you to.
LikeLike
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/306630/medical-reports-completion-apr-14.pdf however GP’s did sign a clause not to interfere with govt policy under labour, in return for a large pay rise…that’s i’m gone…
LikeLike
OBD – I hope you’re not gone yet! What clause about government policy did GPs sign under Labour? I may have missed the point, because the link you gave is from 2014, so not under Labour.
LikeLike
f f
tell me the last time that you were given a sick note from gp saying not fit for work applied for e&sa, attended endless medical appointments, attended a WCA, submitted evidence for an MR, a 1st tier or UT tribunal in relation to an appeal or filled in an esa50 or gl24 or spoke to a jsa pa or have been referred to a WP?
LikeLike
OBD – If you have non-rhetorical question, then please ask it and I’ll try to answer.
I’ll try my question to you again – What clause about government policy did GPs sign under Labour? I’m afraid I may have missed your point.
LikeLike
f f
check for your self…apparently this is so…and the dwp can request info from the GP in fact one signs esa50 to give consent to this, and the GP is contractually obligued to provide it…one is always referring to the dwp no matter who is contracted to do it’s work…
sorry i am unable to clarify, i have not the slightest idea what you have missed…and i likely never will….
but imo you have no idea what you are talking about nor how to socially engage/communicate with people, without being adversarial… i cannot change that nor will i go through this tiresome process with you…i hope you don’t find my reply rhetorical ie as if i’m talking to self cos i have actually sent this post perhaps a question mark will make it more obvious that my last post was a post questioning YOUR actual experience of the process…and i will take it from your reply that you have NONE, 0, ZERO, ZILCH, NOT A BIT, NOTHING…if you don’t understand me myself and i there is no point in posting to you @ all so therefore i will not post to you unless i feel that we are able to have meaningful communication in the conveyance of cognition’s….
LikeLike
ps i could be wrong and you meant in saying rhetorical that you have had direct experience of the esa process…
LikeLike
OBD – It’s a little difficult to follow what you’re saying. You first said that under Labour GPs signed a clause not to interfere with government policy. That isn’t something I have ever heard before. Now you’re saying that patients have to sign a clause in ESA50 to allow GPs to disclose their information to the DWP, which I think is correct, but it’s a completely different issue. Are you saying both are true, or just the latter?
To answer your question – I’m in reasonably good health and I’m not claiming benefits. That doesn’t mean I don’t have a valid opinion about the system. That’s an infantile argument.
LikeLike
f f
read your own posts; ‘Maria – The means of getting an objective medical opinion via the GP was removed by the last Labour government. This leaves only asking the patient themselves, via a company which ‘ both are true, providing medical info is NOT interfering with govt policy…saying the WCA that labour introduced, to bully people into ‘health’, is…yes you have a valid opinion but not as learned as someone who has had to endure the system emotionally (emotionally includes physically and in fact is the emotional driver ie having to move self/making every effort to endure system)…
LikeLike
OBD – Yes, the means of getting a medical assessment via the GP was removed by the last Labour government and contracted out, but as far as I know GPs did not sign any ‘clause’ about it, so I have no idea what contract you’re talking about. Can you tell me what the contract was called? As far as I know they simply had no say in the matter.
LikeLike
f f
i’ve had enough of this now…but it is clear that you have no idea of how the esa/wca system works…a GP CAN AND DOES PROVIDE MEDICAL EVIDENCE @ ANY STAGE OF THE ESA CLAIM PERIOD…so i fact meaning that prospect/dwp could have asked the persons GP how they are doing, and prospect/dwp has no valid reasons to ask this person how they are doing….
LikeLiked by 1 person
(Sigh) Yes, I already said that when patients sign ESA50 they allow GPs or other health care professionals to disclose information to the DWP. However, you said the following, which is something completely different……
“GP’s did sign a clause not to interfere with govt policy under labour, in return for a large pay rise”
What was the contract GPs signed which said that? I’ve never heard of it.
LikeLike
Overburdened donkey: I’ve just read through the leaflet that you gave a link for (DWP’s guide to GPs)and it certainly indicates that GPs are required to provide information to the DWP if requested, which seems sensible and also contradicts Finkfurst’s claim (which s/he made so confidently). As the leaflet is dated April 2014, it shows that – regardless of what the last Labour government did or didn’t do – the situation now is that Prospects (on behalf of the DWP) can get up-to-date information about Charlotte directly from her doctors. I wish they would just do so and leave her in peace.
LikeLiked by 2 people
It’s quite simple Maria and OBD. GPs can be asked to provide patient information, but it goes via a commercial company (with targets etc.) so the information is not objective or first-hand, and in fact GPs are usually never even asked.
LikeLike
Finkfurst. It isn’t ‘quite simple’ to me and you seem to be contradicting what you said before. What is clear to me is that in March Charlotte was diagnosed with an incurable disease and told she had a very limited life expectancy. At that point it was clear that she couldn’t be expected to seek work and for the state to pretend there’s even a chance of her doing so is cruel. If they need to confirm every so often that she hasn’t had a miraculous recovery, they should do so via her GP.
LikeLiked by 2 people
maria
just to say, this is my final post….
[No need for that. I’ve put FF in moderation again.] -TOM
LikeLike
phew!
LikeLike
I never read every single post so if I’m repeating something that’s already been said then I apologize. I just wanted to point out that yes her benefits do depend on if she takes this phone consultation. It clearly says in two separate sentences in the letter that it is mandatory, which means that she HAS to be available for the phone call at the time specified. Now although this is NOT specified in the above letter, this does actually mean if she doesn’t make herself available she will loose her benefits through a sanction. She obviously could phone to rearrange the appointment time or possibly just speak to them about whatever it is they want when she phones, but either way this letter defiantly means she needs to speak to the at some point or risk a sanction. Also it is VERY badly worded.
LikeLiked by 2 people
At NO point in the letter does it say or even imply that they just want an update in how she is doing/if she is still ill… The letter is a template sent out to everyone and it says the phone appointment is part of a work programme, with her being terminally ill she shouldn’t have any thing to do with any work programmes no matter what they want to ask her. She should be receiving income support/sick pay and DLA so why they feel the need to write to her at all is beyond me. Yes at some point they should have confirmed that she was actually terminally and as prying as that could be to Charlotte there is no avoiding the need for this, unless as some of you have said they could contact her gp directly but once finding out that she is in fact ill she should be left alone to live the rest of her life in peace. As far as I’m concerned this letter is a disgrace and the job center are a joke!
LikeLiked by 2 people
this link shows how typical abuse is…
http://disabilitynewsservice.com/2014/10/no-dwp-apology-for-work-programme-discrimination-and-punishment/
i’m also very disappointed @ yesterdays dreadful distractions, when an attempt to clarify was met with outright goading, hostility, contempt, and disdain….i personally missed the opp to research and express in which group the wrag and sg is it mandatory to attend WP interview and discuss a whole range of practical problems regarding attending telephone interview’s etc, and/or @ what is the point that is crossed/threshold to become mandatory..ie as in the workfare scheme once in/accepted by one, it becomes mandatory…what is the process that leads to mandatory?
imexp with wrag, the process is voluntary until one has agreed to go onto the WP and only then does continuous attendance become mandatory, and yes i know the pressures that are put on one to become a bread provider for these companies..
my understanding is that in sg one is not even asked to attend?…which begs the question which group was this person in….i do know of one person who is in the wrag and shouldn’t be, she loses some of her former sg benefits, but i also know that the distinction between wrag and jsa is slowly but surely being eroded and there is even talk of lowering the payment to that of just above (50p), jsa….
LikeLike
they could of said ‘when you’re well give us ring’…please explore the reasons why they didn’t say/ask this…and then you will discover the whole thing is a baited hook to gain power/get in/rudely intrude/meddle/profitize in/over the lives of others….
LikeLike
Reblogged this on loopeyange and commented:
Absolutely disgraceful!
LikeLike
Typical crap from DWP …only interested in number crunching, at the cost of people.
LikeLike
Pingback: The Cloudies! 2014 – 2015 | Sonmi's Cloud