Back-To-Work Schemes 'Legally Flawed'

[Del]

The Government's back-to-work schemes, under which people on benefits work for free, are legally flawed, the Supreme Court has ruled.

Judges upheld an earlier Court of Appeal ruling which found that 2011 regulations underpinning the schemes, which have been criticised as "slave labour", were invalid.

However, the judges ruled that regulations did not constitute forced or compulsory labour, leaving both sides claiming victory.

The legal battle focused on several cases including graduate Cait Reilly who had been made to work for two weeks cleaning and stacking shelves in a Poundland store in Kings Heath, Birmingham.

The 24-year-old graduate said she gained nothing from the fortnight and felt as though she was simply giving her labour for free.

The other case was that of 40-year-old unemployed HGV driver Jamieson Wilson, from Nottingham, who had to do unpaid work cleaning furniture and was stripped of his jobseeker's allowance for six months.

The Supreme Court dismissed Secretary of State Iain Duncan Smith's appeal on the issue of the legality of the back-to-work schemes, holding that the regulations were "invalid" as they did not give sufficiently detailed "prescribed description" of the schemes.

http://news.sky.com/story/1161527/back-to-work-schemes-legally-flawed

 

[Fensta]

Absolute arses the lot of em. I know they need to cut down on the amount of scammers claiming cash they don't deserve but to hassle the genuine people is immoral. A friend of mine who is highly skilled in 3d and programming was in a similar situation as the people mentioned in the article, he found it so embarassing that he signed off rather than be forced into menial labour that he wouldn't even be paid for. Slave labour indeed.