Current Affairs The Conservative Party

[ramacca]

There are bad apples in every office. I worked with a few people myself who were less than friendly on the phone but all did their jobs properly.

In terms of sanctioning, I don’t agree with it, or the way it’s implemented but this is not the fault of civil servants and is the fault of the government implementing their rules.

You are way off in laying the blame at the door of the staff and insinuating their taking orders from the government. Your example of office managers taking directions from the government is complete nonsense.

Also, why do you keep putting the phrase low level civil servants in inverted commas like am some how wrong in telling you who will be carrying out the work?

I appreciate it must be frustrating for you not to have any money you are entitled to, I just know your anger is misplaced.

On the PCS though, now that’s an organisation in cahoots with the government.

Again, where to start.

'Bad apples in every office but did there job properly'? What? 'I can't be bothered phoning', that resulted in a delayed payment is doing their 'job properly'?

'Bad apples in every office but did there job properly'? What? Devious tactics used by low level civil servants so people would get sanctioned over not signing on. Is doing 'their jobs properly? Sanctions is a government directive. But how low level civil servants go about that is up to them. For example, sending out a letters by second class post the day before an afternoon signing on time,(the most common used tactic) informing them it's changed to a morning. Which meant in no way they could fill that obligation because the post wouldn't arrive until the next day, - sanctioned without any money.

And when they phoned up, about the sanction, they were not told there was an emergency payment they could claim- which was an obligation the low level civil servant should have told them they were entitled to, resulting in the person having no money to buy food. Low level civil servants were, and still are carrying out the government's hostile environment against those claiming state benefits. Who comes up with such deviousness is beyond comprehension. But low level civil servants did and still are doing these things. What are the PCS union doing? Nothing. Why? Sometimes people have to stand up to such government diktat and being in a union allows you to do that. But silence.

Of course I'm angry. How would you feel if your employer said, 'sorry you're not getting paid for this moths work'? How would you feel as an ex DWP employee if the government said, 'sorry but you're not receiving your pension until further notice? Interesting that the PCS are in dispute with the government over pensions. What would be the response if the government just ignored the PCS and didn't pay any new pension claims? I think the PCS would kick up a stink and union members would be angry. Maybe, the PCS should kick up a stink, and tell us, about why new pension claimants are not receiving their legal entitlement.

 

[Kurt.]

Again, where to start.

'Bad apples in every office but did there job properly'? What? 'I can't be bothered phoning', that resulted in a delayed payment is doing their 'job properly'?

'Bad apples in every office but did there job properly'? What? Devious tactics used by low level civil servants so people would get sanctioned over not signing on. Is doing 'their jobs properly? Sanctions is a government directive. But how low level civil servants go about that is up to them. For example, sending out a letters by second class post the day before an afternoon signing on time,(the most common used tactic) informing them it's changed to a morning. Which meant in no way they could fill that obligation because the post wouldn't arrive until the next day, - sanctioned without any money.

And when they phoned up, about the sanction, they were not told there was an emergency payment they could claim- which was an obligation the low level civil servant should have told them they were entitled to, resulting in the person having no money to buy food. Low level civil servants were, and still are carrying out the government's hostile environment against those claiming state benefits. Who comes up with such deviousness is beyond comprehension. But low level civil servants did and still are doing these things. What are the PCS union doing? Nothing. Why? Sometimes people have to stand up to such government diktat and being in a union allows you to do that. But silence.

Of course I'm angry. How would you feel if your employer said, 'sorry you're not getting paid for this moths work'? How would you feel as an ex DWP employee if the government said, 'sorry but you're not receiving your pension until further notice? Interesting that the PCS are in dispute with the government over pensions. What would be the response if the government just ignored the PCS and didn't pay any new pension claims? I think the PCS would kick up a stink and union members would be angry. Maybe, the PCS should kick up a stink, and tell us, about why new pension claimants are not receiving their legal entitlement.

You need a hug mate ?

 

[ramacca]

You need a hug mate ?

Thanks, as long as it's with a smile and a pint of Guinness.

 

[NilSatisOptimum]

Again, where to start.

'Bad apples in every office but did there job properly'? What? 'I can't be bothered phoning', that resulted in a delayed payment is doing their 'job properly'?

'Bad apples in every office but did there job properly'? What? Devious tactics used by low level civil servants so people would get sanctioned over not signing on. Is doing 'their jobs properly? Sanctions is a government directive. But how low level civil servants go about that is up to them. For example, sending out a letters by second class post the day before an afternoon signing on time,(the most common used tactic) informing them it's changed to a morning. Which meant in no way they could fill that obligation because the post wouldn't arrive until the next day, - sanctioned without any money.

And when they phoned up, about the sanction, they were not told there was an emergency payment they could claim- which was an obligation the low level civil servant should have told them they were entitled to, resulting in the person having no money to buy food. Low level civil servants were, and still are carrying out the government's hostile environment against those claiming state benefits. Who comes up with such deviousness is beyond comprehension. But low level civil servants did and still are doing these things. What are the PCS union doing? Nothing. Why? Sometimes people have to stand up to such government diktat and being in a union allows you to do that. But silence.

Of course I'm angry. How would you feel if your employer said, 'sorry you're not getting paid for this moths work'? How would you feel as an ex DWP employee if the government said, 'sorry but you're not receiving your pension until further notice? Interesting that the PCS are in dispute with the government over pensions. What would be the response if the government just ignored the PCS and didn't pay any new pension claims? I think the PCS would kick up a stink and union members would be angry. Maybe, the PCS should kick up a stink, and tell us, about why new pension claimants are not receiving their legal entitlement.

Can seem that there is some ploy working against you, almost guarantee it will be because lack of staff with too much to do.

We get these accusations in the CMHT normally from family and friends of people requiring the service. From not seeing people in timely manner to dare go on leave.

All it takes is another media story about NHS/Local authority executive and their £50,000 pension and that's what we are all on and interested about.

And divide and conquer continues.

 

[Old Blue 2]

I’m fairly certain @Old Blue 2 worked in this department for many years and can provide greater insight than me.

Thanks for tagging me into this thread, Jimmy.
I've had to read back through some pages to catch the drift of all that has been discussed.
I retired 20 years ago last month from the Benefits Agency (as was). Previously it was the DHSS, and then DSS when Health was removed from the Minister's remit.
I suppose all I can do is go over certain points and try to clarify them for the benfit of ramacca, and anyone else who may be interested.
A little bit of background to my first point below: For about 3-4 years, I worked on what might be termed 'legal matters' - preparing documents for Tribunal and stating the Department's case at Tribunal. This involved working directly to Acts of Parliament and any amending Regulations, not to Departmental instructions. So, I built up a knowledge regarding claims, and the operation of them. Apologies if I get a little technical in what I say below. I believe it is as valid now as it was then.
1)
a) The Secretary of State states how a valid claim should be made. This is usually enshrined within the inital Act of Parliament, or reference is made to another Act upon which the enacting Act relies upon for validation of a claim.
b) Once the claim is accepted as valid, the first payday is the day upon which the claim is received, or the first prescribed payday following as set down for that benefit. Paydays can vary. A simple example is that my RP payday is Tuesday, based on my NI Number; my wife's RP payday is Monday, based on her NI Number.
c) It has been stated in one of the posts that backdating can go back as far as one year. Once a claim has been accepted as valid, that does not apply. The one year backdating would apply to a late application, for example, RP entitlement starts on 1st January 2021; individual claims initially on 1st June 2021 - payment would be backdated to 1st January. RP entitlement starts on 1st January 2021; individual claims initially on 1st June 2022 - the backdating could only go back 12 months from 1st June 2022. Now, IF the claim is made on 1st January 2021 and payment is finally made on 1st June 2021 with NO backdating, then I believe a successful legal claim could be made via a Tribunal or the court on the basis that the decision-making officer had acted 'ultra vires' - i.e. outside of the law as it stands.
Apologies for the long-winded explanation above, but that is how I see it.
2)
PCS. Again, my background. Going back to the previous iterations of the union, I was office rep and on the Merseyside Committee of the CPSA. I was also office rep and on the Merseyside Committee of the SCPS. I am currently a 'retired' associate member of PCS, since I never wanted to give up my links to my trade union.
The purpose of a trade union (in the civil service - I cannot speak for outside unions) is to represent the membership in matters that affect them personally, or matters that affect them collectively in their daily work. Personal matters came within the ambit of line Management; collective office matters came within the ambit of the 'Whitley' procedure. It was usually not the role of the union to actively campaign against actual policy. It would take on the Government of the day regarding the implementation of policy. A simple example: Government dictates that visiting officers in DHSS must do 15 visits per day. In rural areas, not possible. Union takes up the matter at National Whitley level.
I hope the above explains the role of the TU side as I see it.

Once again, thanks to @JimmyJeffers for pointing me in the direction of this thread.

 

[summerisle]

She's gone full James Bond villain the waste of space.

 

[Blue 1]

Yet again, Pritler?

Becoming a habit, this.

Labour accuses ‘reckless’ Priti Patel of serially breaching ministerial code

Home secretary reportedly brokered meeting between Tory donor and British Airways without officials present

www.theguardian.com

 

[anxiouswarrior]

More Confirmation from the spiv vermin today that they are dropping the 20 quid universal credit which was brought in to help people when the lockdowns started , it does look indeed that the lying bellend in downing street as no intention of his so called levelling up agenda being a serious promise , to the think again all The So called Red Wall voters you have been shafted up the rear by you tory friends once again

 

[Huyton Layne]

Gets me down reading the replies from people that are already struggling financially that are gonna be even worse off later this year. Serfs should work more I guess is the general thought of the Tories.

 

[Deckard2049]

This entire Twitter thread is golden.

 

[summerisle]

This entire Twitter thread is golden.

I'm not even remotely shocked.

 

[summerisle]

Been taking drugs again.

 

[big nev lookalike]

I sent a letter to my local Tory MP re the removal of the £20 from Universal Credit. I carefully explained that due to health reasons I am unable to work so rely on benefits. I am currently awaiting a transplant,to which there is no time scale. I pointed out that with food and energy prices rising the reduction will have an impact on my quality of life.
His reply was,to put it politely,insulting. He thought my wait for a transplant was far too long and that he would step in if I wanted him too!! He obviously has no idea how a transplant waiting list works.
He also stated that the average couple in Cheltenham would have to pay an extra £200 a year in tax to fund the £20 a week and he didn’t think that was fair due to rising food and energy costs!
Totally ignoring my statement on being unable to work,he then included the amazing news that there was a lot of help from the government for those who wanted to work.
He did offer to look into my position with the DSS,to ensure I am getting the correct benefits. I know that I am getting all I’m entitled to as I have applied for everything I can,pip,sickness element of uc,housing benefit etc.But I will send him my NI number just to see.

 

[ramacca]

I sent a letter to my local Tory MP re the removal of the £20 from Universal Credit. I carefully explained that due to health reasons I am unable to work so rely on benefits. I am currently awaiting a transplant,to which there is no time scale. I pointed out that with food and energy prices rising the reduction will have an impact on my quality of life.
His reply was,to put it politely,insulting. He thought my wait for a transplant was far too long and that he would step in if I wanted him too!! He obviously has no idea how a transplant waiting list works.
He also stated that the average couple in Cheltenham would have to pay an extra £200 a year in tax to fund the £20 a week and he didn’t think that was fair due to rising food and energy costs!
Totally ignoring my statement on being unable to work,he then included the amazing news that there was a lot of help from the government for those who wanted to work.
He did offer to look into my position with the DSS,to ensure I am getting the correct benefits. I know that I am getting all I’m entitled to as I have applied for everything I can,pip,sickness element of uc,housing benefit etc.But I will send him my NI number just to see.

Mate, they haven't a clue how the real world works or how their own policies work for that matter. Take Coffey yesterday, with her 'work two more hours' to make up for the £20 reduction. Obviously, there are those that aren't in work so how are they supposed to 'work two more hours', those that can't work due to illness, how are they going to 'work two more hours'. And if you are in work, for every extra pound you work they deduct 63 pence leaving you with 37 pence i.e 10 hours = £3.70 more, so to get £20 extra to compensate for the Universal Credit deduction - someone would have to work 50 hours more. It's not just her but they're just buffoons.

 

[ramacca]

Can seem that there is some ploy working against you, almost guarantee it will be because lack of staff with too much to do.

We get these accusations in the CMHT normally from family and friends of people requiring the service. From not seeing people in timely manner to dare go on leave.

All it takes is another media story about NHS/Local authority executive and their £50,000 pension and that's what we are all on and interested about.

And divide and conquer continues.

Mate, it's not just me there are others I know in the same boat and have had the same thing happen to them - 'bank security' issues. The government's response is 'the pandemic' as seen from this,

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-58519458

"The Department for Work and Pensions admitted that the pandemic and staffing issues had caused backlogs in payments to those reaching the age of 66".

But its' a lie there are no 'staffing issues' as I've rung and asked the PCS office in Newcastle. And if my sister's DWP Liverpool office is anything to go by - absenteeism is way down, compared to pre-pandemic. Because people are working from home as well as those that can go in. From her friends/colleagues at work they say they are putting more hours in not less.

It's the allocation of those workers by the DWP that has caused the 'backlog'.

Meet the secretive DWP 'hit squad' trawling through Universal ...​

https://www.thecanary.co › analysis › 2021/09/01 › me...

'1400 staff redeployed' from their current jobs to this 'hit squad'. This isn't extra staff taken on, but moved for one section to another. I would suggest it was from those dealing with pensions. 'Sod those new claimants' seems to be the mantra but now the avalanche of complaints has caught them out, so they are 're-deploying' (putting people back to do their original job) to get rid of the backlog. And there be far, far more than the 'low thousands' the government claim.

However, in my case, and others, underhand methods used to deny paying a legal entitlement is not on and should be exposed.