House Of Commons
I was sat watching the House Of Commons debate with Stephen Crabb where he was discussing the issues affecting disabled people, ESA and getting people back into work.
I have to say how utterly shocked I am that the MP’s think they are succeeding in making it easier and giving access to more jobs for disabled people and those on benefits like ESA. Stephen was saying how happy he was that there is still going to be £50 million in payments for disabled people to get back to work.
How much if you add up each of the MP’s salary for the handfull of people who were there for the debate, add up their expense accounts, their second homes and allowances, does that scratch the surface of the payments for disabled staff?
One of the rebuttal’s from another MP was how many disabled people are looking for work, and the answer was 1 in 6. The honest to goodness and common sense answer is there are jobs for which a disabled person may not be the best candidate. However when the company hiring is offered incentives, that disadvantages the able bodied jobseekers.
ESA or Employment Support Allowance was a scheme introduced by the previous government to help people get back into work and off benefits. However it didn’t succeed in its purpose and from next year is due to be stopped, and replaced by who knows what. Possibly bundling it in with Universal Credit.
ESA was mismanaged like all other benefits and thus made those on it, dependent upon it. It’s the same nonsensical approach that has jobseekers at the Jobcentre applying for jobs they have already applied for to fill their jobsearch log.
ESA and the likes of Back to Work Schemes only show the divide between how things should be solved and how the government plans to solve them. Putting jobseekers into a room 4 days per week and then fudging the figures so they no longer show on the Jobcentres books. Hence figures go down and everyone gets a pat on the back.
My question is how many MP’s are there legitimately with disabilities? After all, if the government isn’t actively hiring disabled people, how can they make companies do the same.
The politicians making the rules and regulations are so far removed from the issues affecting disabled people, it’s laughable that they are the ones making the rules.
Getting into Work
Getting into employment is difficult enough as it is, with 100 people for every 1 job role out there. We shouldn’t be offering incentives for companies to be seen to get their quota of disabled staff. If a disabled person can do the job, even if it’s with a bit of change, maybe a new chair etc then so be it. That should be ingrained in corporate responsibility, taking responsibility of getting a grounded and well rounded workforce.
If you offer something extra, benefit, tax relief etc for one segment of society then you distance the rest of society against them. It’s a fair market economy where most of the time, the best candidate for the role is overlooked in favor of an on paper exercise.
Why hire candidate 1, when the government will give you £1000 after 6 months and a further £1000 after 12 months if candidate 2 is chosen?
My Two Cents
I would class myself as disabled to some extent, I have tremors in my hands and arms. Sometimes my hands shake so terribly I can’t hold a cup of coffee. Yet I make no claim for any benefits.
I get the same standard wage as everyone else, I don’t milk the system or try to get things I am not entitled to. I got the job I currently have by being a strong candidate and having years of experience in the job field.
If you give someone extra, when they don’t really need it, you are just encouraging that person to be dependent upon the handout. Whether that’s the extra £30 for ESA or giving them free prescriptions, or incentives for travel costs; you are giving that person a reason in the future to depend upon it. When it gets taken away you have in effect made that person worse off.
It would have been better off not ever giving that handout, if they never received it they will never miss it. For example, where I work certain staff get a bursary for travel, they get their petrol or bus costs back. It’s a layover from their previous contract. The only issue is that when the bursary stops and the people take up the same contract as everyone else 1 in 3 leave the role.
So you have made it financially impossible for them to continue in the role, as they are now down £200 a month or more.