Flexible New Deal Scandal:
Flexible New Deal

Some Flexible New Deal interesting links…

View the rest on Flexible New Deal Scandal

Flexible New Deal Open to Abuse

Whereas there were initial concerns about the financial profits of providers with the New New Deal (called Flexible New Deal) due to a greater emphasis on pay for results – that is paid for actual job outcomes (both short and sustained). This is largely conditional on the economy and job market which is likely to improve.

Previously New Deal providers had only a chance of claiming Job Outcome bonuses for the 13 week course plus up to 3 months (started off at 6 weeks) afterwards; this has all changed under Flexible New Deal.

New Deal providers also committed a New Deal Fraud technique of leeching – that is entering the New Deal participant into an agreement that gives permission for them to contact any future employer (subject to timescales) to claim a Job Outcome Bonus although the provider hasn’t got the participant the job, even months after the course ended, also tying in the responsibility for the New Deal participant to contact their old provider to make them aware of the job although they shouldn’t be holding their details anymore.

View the rest on Flexible New Deal Scandal

Today I have received an email from a New Deal Scandal blog reader and ex-New Deal participant who is upset at his mistreatment of this New Deal farce:

I know its a diabolical situation & I am so glad I found your website because I was beginning to think it was just me who thought the New Deal Programme was such a farce & I was being forced to sign off just to get the unemployment figures down.

Here is a copy of the still yet unanswered letter that has been sent to the manager of the Jobcentre Plus office in Lewisham, all the major tabloids, Yvette Cooper (Secretary of State for Work and Pensions Work & Prisons W*nkers and Pillocks), Darra Singh CEO of Jobcentre Plus and Gordon Brown! (Read on) View the rest on Flexible New Deal Scandal

D is for Demotivation

New Deal without a doubt is very demotivating for participants. People generally on New Deal have a one week honeymoon period. This is called Induction. This is the best week of the course although some people criticise it for being stretched out for activities that could be completed in 2 days maximum.

This typically consists of everything done in Gateway 2 Work and job search. It gets worse for the following weeks after induction. View the rest on Flexible New Deal Scandal

An entire record of email communication between a New Deal participant and Emma Harrison A4e chair. Slightly modified for easier reading and correcting spelling mistakes etc. View the rest on Flexible New Deal Scandal

Ipswich Unemployed Action and New Deal Scandal has confirmed that Ipswich Borough Council has granted YMCA Training full planning consent for Dencora House.

Dencora House is a detention centre located on Whitehouse Industrial Estate – isolating New Deal participants from society. Even in an industrial estate, the property has a perimeter fence, the entrance is a vast distance from the main road and towards the opposite side the place is shielded from an even busier road by trees – it is good to see trees but I can’t help thinking that this place was chosen to keep the unemployed away from the town centre where most of the towns jobs actually are: funny that …and also where all the recruitment agencies are and the Jobcentre. They think the unemployed goes around creating crime such as stealing so sticking a large group of them in an industrial estate seems a way of solving that problem.

View the rest on Flexible New Deal Scandal

C is for Cherry picking!

Government contractors (those that deliver welfare schemes such as New Deal) are well known to “Cherry pick” (Also known as “creaming“) and to “park” clients. “Cherry picking” (or “creaming”) means selecting those that are easier to help (in the case of New Deal; those that are deemed closer to the labour market or simply put “job ready” – as highlighted by Benefit Busters Episode 2 where New Deal participants were segregated into rooms).

“Parking” is when clients are deemed too difficult to help (such as not being “job ready”; regardless of being paid to do so) and receive little or none help at all. View the rest on Flexible New Deal Scandal

An Article posted by a blog visitor on our wordpress website.

NEW DEAL OR BUM DEAL? By Alfred Doolittle.

This report is reprinted, by kind permission of the editor, from issue no. 10 of Northern Voices, c/o 52, Todmorden Road, Burnley, Lancashire, BB10 4AH, E-mail : northernvoices@hotmail.com

I’VE just finished a 10-month sentence. Although I wasn’t an inmate in a prison or a mental institution, at times it certainly felt like it. I am one of the many thousands of undeserving poor who each year are coerced into attending one of New Labour’s spurious training schemes aimed at motivating the so-called work-shy.As a middle-aged unemployed man living in Greater Manchester, I was put on the government’s New Deal scheme at the beginning of 2008.

Having a university degree, I initially saw it as an opportunity to take up the government’s offer of training and retraining to improve my job prospects. But any ideas that I may have had about training were soon dispelled after my first meeting with my New Deal advisor.  View the rest on Flexible New Deal Scandal

B is for Boredom

Whether you are 18, 30 or 60 you will find the disorganised 13 Week New Deal courses very boring. Episode 2 of Benefit Busters clearly highlights sticking a pool of people into overcrowded rooms without a timetable doing 30 hours a week of “intensive job search”. View the rest on Flexible New Deal Scandal

A is for Abuse

Jobseekers are in receipt of continuous abuse, harassment and defamation from New Deal Providers and even Jobcentre Plus staff.

As highlighted on the Benefit Busters series, in particular the second Episode, not only is the environment for jobseekers extremely bad natured but the treatment by staff is. View the rest on Flexible New Deal Scandal

Articles and Discussion on A4e/Studio Lambert Benefit Busters Series 1: Episodes 1 & 2. View the rest on Flexible New Deal Scandal

New Deal Scandal can reveal that the Department for Work and Pensions has no intention for making any prosecutions for prime contractors deliberately defrauding the system. The Department for Work and Pensions currently has no plans of stopping Flexible New Deal contracts being awarded to prime contractors who have previously defrauded the system on numerous occassions for the New Deal contracts. View the rest on Flexible New Deal Scandal

New Deal Scandal can reveal that as of the end of July 2009 there are 4 ongoing fraud investigations regarding New Deal and 1 regarding Pathways to Work. View the rest on Flexible New Deal Scandal

YMCA Training had been using 517 London Road since April 2003. Ipswich Unemployed Action has reported that over 6 years later they have submitted a retrospective planning application to gain D1 consent.

This came long after a year when they had enforcement action taken against them for not having D1 consent for Dencora House.  They are also applying for permanent consent after receiving a year trial of D1 consent lasting a year had expired.

Use of Building for D1 purposes, 517 London Road, Ipswich

1. This statement relates to a retrospective planning application for the change of use of a former business premises involving elements of warehousing, manufacturing and office use, at 517 London Road. The site forms part of a small cluster of employment and commercial uses. To the east of the site are extensive residential areas.

2. Planning permission is sought for the use of the premises to a non-residential training centre (Use Class D1) operated by YMCA Training, a major training provided in the town, providing variety of training programmes for the state sector, public sector and private companies. The use has been operating from the site since April 2003.

Documents to download from New Deal Scandal for inspection:

• Application Form for YMCA Training 517 London Road (D1 consent)
• Statement for YMCA Training 517 London Road (D1 consent)

So Welfare Reforms plans are out and so is Flexible New Deal… they plan to make us work for below that National Minimum Wage; but surely aren’t we getting worked up about nothing? View the rest on Flexible New Deal Scandal

If you have been on New Deal the chances are you had £4 unlawfully deducted weekly from travel reimbursements and expected to cover that from your training allowance.

New Deal Scandal and Ipswich Unemployed Action has confirmed this is in fact unlawful and New Deal participants may take action to recover the £52 deduction for the 13 weeks they attended. If participants have attended New Deal in the past they can still claim £52 for each 13 weeks they completed on New Deal. This could be £156 for some people.

Under 13 weeks? You can claim £4 per week for each deduction that occured.

You can also claim interest on outstanding amounts.

After some extensive research into UK Unemployment Benefit (Jobseekers Allowance) and New Deal related legislation, New Deal Scandal can inform you, confirmed by DWP, that the £4 weekly travel deductions are unlawful.  This means New Deal participants past and present are entitled to be reimbursed. View the rest on Flexible New Deal Scandal

After the second A4e attempt to censor this blog we are back. Lets presume it wont be long before they try something else. The post in dispute is back again.

Just a brief overall of recent content on ”New Deal Scandal & Welfare Reform” blog. This might be easier to some then using WordPress pages as some sticky posts make normal ones difficult to see sometimes. View the rest on Flexible New Deal Scandal

Call it another scandal if you wish, it seems that New Deal providers are exempt from planning legislation.

Banbury based YMCA Training, who have recently viewed this site today (leave a comment and say hello)  manages to deliver New Deal training courses without first acquiring the required D1 planning consent.

• YMCA Training     Ipswich      Wolsey House
• YMCA Training     Ipswich      517 London Road
• YMCA Training     Ipswich      Dencora House
• YMCA Training     Southend   Baryta House
• YMCA Training     Romford    Lambourne House

If you know of any others let me know.

Update: Added “Lambourne House” – Havering has responded to me stating they don’t have D1 consent and they should apply for retrospective planning permission costing around £335 for an application if they still use the building.

This is criticism against A4e and how they manage their business. This is relevant because they are the largest New Deal provider receiving money from, (guess who?) you, the taxpayer!

I couldn’t resist but to disclose how strange A4e operates being such a large company and all. I don’t know of anything like it. Please feel to continue reading (no its got nothing to do with the fraud investigation) View the rest on Flexible New Deal Scandal

Just a brief overall of recent content on ”New Deal Scandal & Welfare Reform” and “Ipswich Unemployed Action” blogs.  This might be easier to some then using Wordpress pages as some sticky posts make normal ones difficult to see sometimes.  View the rest on Flexible New Deal Scandal

We are hearing reports that YMCA Training, a New Deal provider that managed a Job Outcome rate of 16.24%, has had its contract terminated. View the rest on Flexible New Deal Scandal

Statistics published on New Deal for Young People (NDYP) up to November 2008, shows a worrying trend with almost a third (31.27%) of New Deal participants not securing employment and not reclaiming benefit.

Previously published articles such as Dencora House detention centre and various news articles on “jobseekers being treated like cattle”  showing the poor under resourced and mistreatment of participants comes to no surprise how so many people (411,190 to be exact) have decided to plunge deeper into poverty to have their Human Rights respected.  I am sure a few people would have won some money on the horses or on the lottery but in the majority of cases will be strictly relying on friends and family to survive. View the rest on Flexible New Deal Scandal

New Deal wasn’t designed for those with higher skills: why not? View the rest on Flexible New Deal Scandal

New Deal Scandal recently reported that New Deal Provider Reed in Partnership was under investigation for multi-million pound fraud in 2001; we now can disclose that just two years later the Department for Work and Pensions was involved in a multi agency investigation of a fraud estimated at £3 million involving them finding jobs for illegal immigrants including failed asylum seekers.

DESPITE THESE TWO PREVIOUS MULTI-MILLION POUND FRAUDS:

Reed in Partnership still holds Government Contracts (including New Deal Prime Contractor, Employment Zone, Pathways to Work Phase 2).   Where is the logic in that?

View the rest on Flexible New Deal Scandal

I have absolute no idea why the Government gets Ofsted (famous for schools) to do reports on New Deal providers.  The problem is, whereas with schools, each school is individually assessed; with New Deal each contract region is assessed in just one annual report. View the rest on Flexible New Deal Scandal

The illegal act of:

1. Forcing the New Deal participant to sign a disclaimer giving them permission to contact any future employers, by threatening dismissal if they decline (see “exiting” fraud technique)
2. Contacting the participant’s New Deal Personal Adviser enquiring if they have found employment and with what employer. (NDPA’s are only too happy to disclose such information even when the term of your New Deal course has far been exceeded – i.e. Data Protection Act 1998 violation)
3. Approaching the employer and making them fill in the paperwork required
4. Claiming Job Outcome bonuses, intended as an incentive to find New Deal participants work, NOT to be abused like in this manner where work was found by the ex-New Deal participant after the course ended.

… is known as “leeching“. View the rest on Flexible New Deal Scandal

The illegal act of:

1. Bidding for a contract to a high specification in order to win the contract (this becomes part of the New Deal contract outlined in Part 3 (“The services”), Section 3 (“Provider obligations”) subsections 3.1.1 and 3.1.5, Schedule 2 (and applicable Annexes) and other applicable sections), Or
2. Failing to follow Provider Guidance (breach of subsection 3.1.3 of New Deal contract)

   and

3. Deliberately providing the service different to that promised at tender stage, where the standard is less, where financial cut backs are made to the delivery, understaffed, under resourced and overcrowded premises.

… is known as “misrepresentation“. View the rest on Flexible New Deal Scandal

The illegal act of:

1. Acknowledging that regardless of the actual period of time the New Deal participant spends on the course they will get the full amount for the entire 13 weeks, unless they exceed their absence limit where they wont
2. Short listing those who appear not to be able to make the entire 13 weeks or those who are close to exceeding permitted absence limits to be dismissed – those who seem likely to “drop out” will not award provider with Job Outcome bonuses thus are surplus to requirements and those that are close to the limit regardless of being in their rights and not committing an offence are likely to become a liability to limit the amount projected to be received.
3. Acknowledging that the Jobseeker cannot appeal or prevent being dismissed, has no rights to find out the reason for dismissal or have a chance to put right/get a second chance,  and that it takes immediate effect.
4. Short listing random people for dismissal to ease overcrowding of training centres
5. Making false declarations under oath of a disclaimer claiming reasons for dismissals as rather severe (misconduct, Health and safety concerns etc.) all being lies, knowing that the Dismissal Form has a sole purpose of helping a Decision Maker impose sanctions on a jobseeker, who doesn’t get to see such a form.
6. Tell the Jobseeker verbally an entire  different story (such as due to attitude, not contributing enough etc.) consisting of rather mild reasons, so when he or she becomes required to give reasons why the training course ended or appeals to a decision of benefit sanctions,  the jobseeker merely complains about something irrelevant to the actual stated reason and becomes sanctioned as a result.
7. When a Decision Maker writes to the Training Provider, the training provider delays the reply so when the Decision Maker writes to the Jobseeker, he or she doesn’t get a copy of the answers provided as the system is intended to do.
8. Now that the people were exited – the training providers profit margins further reach the projections.

… is known as “exiting“. View the rest on Flexible New Deal Scandal

The illegal act of:

1. Filling in a document with pencil
2. Getting the client to sign (either in pencil or pen)
3. Later go over the pencil lines in pen to make a few modifications or rewriting the entire agreement
4. Erase the pencil lines (if client signs with pencil go over it with a pen first)

Or

1. Filling in a document with pencil
   
2. Getting the client to sign
3. Erasing certain words, sentences or paragraphs and filling in the gaps with other words or sentences.

… is known as “Penciling“.

If your New Deal provider ever wrote reviews and such like in pencil I would recommend you use the Data Protection Act 1998 to retrieve all the documents they hold on you (failing that if they say they no longer have it, try the Jobcentre) and see whether the content changed

The illegal forging act of:

1. Creating a photocopy of a document with the signature you wish to use (thus to prevent marks created from the top of the pen making an impression on the original sheet which enables detection of fraud easier)
2. Placing the photocopy against a window (hence where the name comes from) or a light box/overhead projector (which gives artificial light if not enough light from a window is available)
3. Cover the photocopy with the document you wish to have the signature on (the light enables the content of the photocopy to be seen through that document)
4. Trace the signature (and if you have a steady hand you have a good copy, doesn’t have to be perfect: signatures typically vary slightly)

… is known as “Windowing“. View the rest on Flexible New Deal Scandal

All New Deal training providers, past and present should be subject to an investigation by the Serious Fraud Office.  The fraud investigation can’t be conducted by the Department for Work and Pensions as they also fall under the suspicion of fraudulent activity and other acts of unlawful misconduct and requires an outside independent investigation. View the rest on Flexible New Deal Scandal

Is it Flexible New Deal or flexible New Deal? (notice the lowercase f in flexible)

I have noticed different providers and news sources have displayed Flexible New Deal differently, have I said it wrong saying Flexible New Deal instead of flexible New Deal?

I am aware that its basically is New Deal 2.0 but I have reported it as Flexible New Deal because it is the name of a new programme rather than being a new type under an existing New Deal such as flexible New Deal or inflexible New Deal.

Anyone with the official properly written way of saying it?

Since Monday, in half the country there will be no new referrals to New Deal. This could be due to implementing the Flexible New Deal or due to revelations of New Deal fraud we recently reported, as the Flexible New Deal (if contracts are signed on time) are not due to begin until October allowing a 13 week programme to commence this week.

At only 19:55 BST the record number of unique visitors on this blog today has beaten the previous record a week ago (22nd June 2009) by 2 times and has tripled the daily average number of unique visitors. It seems everyone is very interested in the A4E fraud so we will bring more revelations on Action 4 Employment in the future.

Several years ago Reed in Partnership were investigated over 13 employees who has forged placements for those who had signed off to gain bonuses and also used the Employment Services data of New Deal candidates that found work outside of Reed to top up missed targets, totalling an expected multi-million pound fraud.

This was back in 2001, what have the Department for Work and Pensions learned since then?

It appears that the Government is still very slow in picking up on fraud – with the departments executive agency Jobcentre Plus ignoring complaints from Jobseekers and New Deal participants, and generally having a very laid back attitude, turning a blind eye approach to working in partnership with these external providers it can’t be surprising the failings of these fraud investigation teams they have.

For one, Ipswich Unemployed Action have reported that YMCA Training, a New Deal training provider, didn’t have planning consent for providing their services – the New Deal contract team that are supposed to monitor service delivery of contracts are, yes you guessed it, a Jobcentre Plus department and NOT Department for Work and Pensions who award the contracts. Before signing the contract training providers have to submit plans and details of the proposed premises for approval – it appears they couldn’t be bothered to do a 5 minute online planning permission check on the property (or alternatively ring Ipswich Borough Council direct).

Even though Jobcentre Plus is an executive agency of the Department for Work and Pensions (sorry for any confusion above) and that the DWP is reportedly corrupt, it seems like one team inside the DWP are checking via audits etc. the forms and such like for suspicious signatures and information for alleged fraud, while all along Jobcentre Plus staff such as New Deal Personal Advisers are even aware and support the acts of fraud happening in the system.

When will the Department for Work and Pensions learn?

Reed article source: http://www.recruiter.co.uk/

The Department for Work and Pensions has been investigating Action 4 Employment and at least 2 other undisclosed training providers for fraud over the last 13 months – this comes after Maatwerk had their contract terminated for fraud.

This means that even though they weren’t restricted or blacklisted from bidding for Flexible New Deal contracts: they will now lose the Flexible New Deal contracts after at least 20 cases of fraud have been discovered in May 2008 at A4e in Hull where two staff members falsified forms meant for the employer and also forged signatures on the forms in order to receive job outcome bonuses from DWP.

Action 4 Employment was also involved in a temporary job recruitment agency scam – thus forcing New Deal participants into temporary work which resulted in more job outcome bonuses from DWP.

Another New Deal provider has been forced to repay £48,000 for fraud – the name of the provider hasn’t been disclosed.

The DWP was happy to pay Pertemps PDG over 2 million when a report clearly stated fraud – in this instance no concerns other than as a report were raised.

Also, so far all fraud cases were consisting of forged signatures on forms and such like – the DWP have not yet picked up on timesheet abuses (paid to be there for x hours, as shown on timesheets, but participants are there for significantly less i.e. 10 hours instead of 30), dismissal abuses (dismissing participants for false or trivial reasons to receive full 13 weeks amount without them being there for even half that time), guaranteed jobs bonuses abuse (some participants have received a job offer before having to do the course starting 2-6 weeks after the course starts, providers still get job outcome payments intended as a bonus if they get the participant work, even if they had nothing to do with it) and future job outcome bonuses abuse (getting participants to enter an agreement where the provider has “permission” to contact any future employer after the course has ended to get job outcome bonus even though you got the job after the course unaided by them) to name a few.

This is a quick guide on the Department for Work and Pensions‘ Decision Makers Guide… View the rest on Flexible New Deal Scandal

It has came to our attention that the Department for Work and Pensions’ Executive Agency Jobcentre Plus is trying to push as many people in to the New Deal courses before it ends and become replaced with Flexible New Deal.

This is NOT legit and you CAN get out of it. Read on. View the rest on Flexible New Deal Scandal

Well, not any more…

(former) Secretary of State: James Purnell MP

View the rest on Flexible New Deal Scandal

£187,500

This is the amount it cost Taxpayers to get a single Jobseeker of the dole.

This is the bombshell that stuck the final nail in the coffin of New Deal. A scheme setup by Gordon Brown for New Labour aiming to get less people claiming unemployment benefits and stop living a “life on benefits” lifestyle.

How did we come across this figure? Well…   The New Deal scheme costs Taxpayers £75 billion and claimants have dropped by 400,000 people (this figure excludes the surge in new claimants due to the economical crisis) – this equates for each person who is not claiming benefit: £187,500!!

Of course, we shouldn’t presume that these 400,000 people have all obtained sustainable full time jobs, due to benefits being made more difficult to claim in this period. We also can’t presume or expect that these 400,000 less claims were a result from the New Deal courses.

What I can quite confidently state that with £75 Billion instead of the 13 week New Deal courses, the Government could have employed 9 times more people (assuming that those 400,000 people got full time jobs) – or 3.6 million people to stick it as a figure – full time on an annual salary of £20,000 for one year.

Alternatively, they could have employed over 360,000 people on a £20,000 annual salary for 10 years.

So on June 4th prior to when the election polls closed, Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: James Purnell MP cowardly stepped down, leaving Welfare Reform up in the air and Flexible New Deal future uncertain.

What is certain though, the official announcement for successful candidates winning the Flexible New Deal contracts are to be delayed until after the Elections and the highly disapproved Welfare Reform Bill is moving closer to be made law – both long after James Purnell had made a run for it.

A Press Release on the DWP website called “welfare reform is about putting families first” back in April, failed to answer and build confidence in parents about the proposed welfare reforms. All James Purnell went on about is partnering with Relate to help families who are “under stress” (open to all families regardless if married or not) and support for alcoholics, heroin and crack users.

That is all well and said for but the big drug and alcohol problems typically are those outside a family environment. Most benefit claimants with these issues are either single (without child caring responsibilities) or single parents (without both parents doesn’t really constitute a family regardless if a child(ren) is involved).

Another case of the Government neglecting the majority while capitalising on the smaller amount of people with greater needs in order to  solely claim that they are making a big impact on the needs of people who seriously require support.

This said there is likely extra ties involved – Relate counselling is likely to be offered only after a contractual agreement signed with the parents enabling the sharing of information with DWP and other Government bodies when it should actually be confidential.

It has been discovered that Dencora House in Ipswich, a training centre run and rented by YMCA Training didn’t have planning permission for over 6 months.  To run a training centre you require D1 planning consent. Dencora House and it’s 10 units all had B1 Offices planning consent.  When YMCA Training, one of the largest training providers with 31 years experience and over 40 locations, rented units  it was unaware of the law and therefore traded without permission.

Ipswich Borough Council took enforcement action when they discovered that they were illegally trading when they only had consent for offices. The council forced them to apply for planning permission.  After YMCA Training were responsible for a long list of problems including damage to cars, litter and noise disturbances – the neighbouring businesses downstairs of Dencora House and in the local area appealed against their application.

It wasn’t until July that year where they were granted full planning permission to change use from B1 offices to D1 non-residential training centre for a year trial period. It will expire July 31st 2009.

It is not known why DWP and Jobcentre Plus didn’t notice that they did not have planning permission when they did their checks to see if the training centre was up to a required standard to be used for New Deal.

Feel free to view the below posts about each attempt:

• YMCA Training’s first attempt for planning permission (appealed)
• YMCA Training’s second and successful attempt for planning permission (only granted for 1 year though)

YMCA Training who has dismissed a New Deal participant in just little over 30 minutes of the New Deal course Induction Week due to conflict of personal opinion (breach of the “Freedom of Expression”/”Freedom of Speech” and “Freedom of Thought”/”Freedom of Conscience” Human Rights) has justified their reason as such views were a “Health and Safety concern“.

This is obviously complete nonsense.  The Jobcentre however warranted their request for dismissal even though staff were said to be against their reasons.  The participant therefore is likely to be pending 26 week sanctions