The Work Thread 2 - Get back to work!

[Green Gecko]

What pisses me off is I spent days completing an application and was told on the phone by them to apply even if I'm self employed. Despite it telling it would be 2-3 weeks max for a reply it took over two months. Only then did they bother telling me there was a "minimum turnover threshold".

This means someone just starting a new job who has earned nothing or is just getting support for a job interview e.g. sign interpreter will get that but if you're self employed and trading for 5 years and don't make enough money you get nothing.

Even when I was earning 16k they did nothing unless the company paid for the assessment first, something I had no power to make happen.

Even if Access to Work WON'T grant funding for in-work disability support, most private funding won't be accepted unless the supplier has a go-ahead from Access to Work. Which you can't get unless they will fund an application, because a successful AtW application/grant via a workplace assessment is treated as evidence that you need support, wherever it comes from or however it is paid for. This creates an impasse where you can't qualify for anything. Why? Because you're poor and don't work hard enough and are not successful enough. Possibly partly in due to the fact you are quite severely disabled. Which is the entire point of the scheme;- to prevent this.

So if you earn below a certain amount in self-employment in any given year - this could be due to a million different factors - you get no help such as a workplace mentoring/coaching if you could qualify for that. But someone who is employed by a company earning just £400 a month or £0 per month (e.g. voluntary work or apprenticeship scheme) would qualify as there is no such threshold for companies. This is only if you are self-employed because nobody else will employ you, job application processes consistently fail to accommodate whatever your needs are (for example extra interview time or written interview questions), or previous employers have failed to fulfil their obligations under the equality act in the past. Which naturally leads you down the road of doing it all yourself by literally creating your own job from thin air. That fundamentally undermines the entire strawberry floating point of supporting disabled people into work under the same law and it also locks disabled people out from starting businesses with the support they would otherwise get.

It's very easy for rich people to overcome this too: simply get your family or a friend to pay you for a bullshit invoice, say £5000 for "consultation". Put that on your profit/loss - there you go, you've increased your net worth by X amount and now you can get government funding to assess whatever support you need to put you on an equal footing with similar professional. And you can do all this while actually making a loss in the business (perhaps to, for example, claim an allowable loss against other earned income to generate a tax rebate) - all they care about is turnover.

Let me be clear, this isn't even asking for any kind of help or support services, equipment or anything like that. It's just asking for an assessment to be carried out so that other organisations (or the business itself) can provide whatever is recommended - even if DWP won't pay for it via a grant. For example, the DWP may carry out a workplace assessment but then require that the company pay for this because their profits are above a certain threshold (I think it's £100,000 per year with over 10 employees).

The idea that you need to already be successful enough on your own despite your disability to then qualify for a simple document that specifies what help doing the job you already do you could be eligible for is strawberry floating ridiculous and obviously unethical. When the strawberry float was that introduced? I'm pissed off that my time has been wasted. 2 strawberry floating months it took to get that response from the government when it could easily be built into the application process.

[Green Gecko]

Seem to have pissed off a DWP manager with my email essentially saying this is classist (it is), so what do they do? Phone me, and leave a rushed, pretty angry sounding voicemail requesting that I phone them. When my application specifically states I am only able to communicate in writing because of my disability.

Yup, the entire point of a disability-centred service is that they use the communication platform that you are able to use effectively. Forget all of that, you're a manager so just phone the guy who can't talk on the phone effectively to whinge at them and get a good bit of schooling in. Amazing. And bonus points, they won't be able to remember anything you've said, keep a record of the conversation, understand things like tone of voice or vague terminology with multiple interpretations so you can make the process even harder for them than just... Replying to the email. That's like phoning a deaf person and leaving them voicemails expecting a reply. In fact it's literally the same problem.

As everyone knows by now, it pisses me off when people phone to reply to an email rather than just replying to the email. But when a disability-focused service does that knowing what your capacity is? What the strawberry float is that about?

[Memento Mori]

Client wants to arrange a phone call.

I set it up for 2:30 today.

Client dials in five minutes late.

After being on the call for two minutes at best, client gets a call on another line. I've been on mute for eight minutes.

[Drumstick]

Client wants to arrange a phone call.

I set it up for 2:30 today.

Client dials in five minutes late.

After being on the call for two minutes at best, client gets a call on another line. I've been on mute for eight minutes.

How tempted to hang up are you on a scale of 1-10?

[Memento Mori]

Client wants to arrange a phone call.

I set it up for 2:30 today.

Client dials in five minutes late.

After being on the call for two minutes at best, client gets a call on another line. I've been on mute for eight minutes.

How tempted to hang up are you on a scale of 1-10?

I was waiting in silence for 13 minutes total and then he bursts with a "SORRY!" and took my eardrums off.

[Lime]

Finally after nearly 2 years of work nightmare, I've been made redundant. The company I worked 15 years for was bought out by an 'entrepreneur' who proceeded to not pay salaries, suppliers, stole pension contributions and basically shafted us. I ended up being signed off for 6 months last year for stress. I went back to work and couldn't even get a response from the company (I work from home). I had to go through ACAS, and an employment tribunal to be formally made redundant so I can claim statutory redundancy pay. I was awarded notice pay and unpaid wages too but there's no way to claim that apart from the company, which I can't get a response from. It seems there's no way to stop someone like this, he just ignored all communication from ACAS, tribunal etc, you end up with an award claim, and he just ignores that too.

Now I'm unemployed in the middle of a pandemic. I will at least have some redundancy money in about 6 weeks time that'll help, assuming the claim goes through ok. Such a pile of crap which stresses me out typing it. I'm out of pocket by thousands.

And breathe.

[That's not a growth]

strawberry floating hell, that sounds awful. At least you're away from that situation, but I can see it being bitter sweet for you. Good luck as things progress, and try not to dwell on the crap things you can't control - even if that is easier said than done.

[Errkal]

Finally after nearly 2 years of work nightmare, I've been made redundant. The company I worked 15 years for was bought out by an 'entrepreneur' who proceeded to not pay salaries, suppliers, stole pension contributions and basically shafted us. I ended up being signed off for 6 months last year for stress. I went back to work and couldn't even get a response from the company (I work from home). I had to go through ACAS, and an employment tribunal to be formally made redundant so I can claim statutory redundancy pay. I was awarded notice pay and unpaid wages too but there's no way to claim that apart from the company, which I can't get a response from. It seems there's no way to stop someone like this, he just ignored all communication from ACAS, tribunal etc, you end up with an award claim, and he just ignores that too.

Now I'm unemployed in the middle of a pandemic. I will at least have some redundancy money in about 6 weeks time that'll help, assuming the claim goes through ok. Such a pile of crap which stresses me out typing it. I'm out of pocket by thousands.

And breathe.

Can you not take the claim to a court and get an high court rit or whatever, then the can’t pay well take it away guys will be on the bastard and we can all watch it on channel 5.

[Lime]

Can you not take the claim to a court and get an high court rit or whatever, then the can’t pay well take it away guys will be on the bastard and we can all watch it on channel 5.

Sadly not, it's the company (which has been cleverly asset stripped) that would be liable, rather than him, so there's nothing to claim. Plus it costs serious money to do much more that send an enforcement officer round. There's a lot more to this than I can say on the forum, but suffice to say he is certainly a devious twat and this isn't the first time he's done it, from what I can find.

At 49, I'm pretty concerned about starting a new career, I have to say.

[Errkal]

Can you not take the claim to a court and get an high court rit or whatever, then the can’t pay well take it away guys will be on the bastard and we can all watch it on channel 5.

Sadly not, it's the company (which has been cleverly asset stripped) that would be liable, rather than him, so there's nothing to claim. Plus it costs serious money to do much more that send an enforcement officer round. There's a lot more to this than I can say on the forum, but suffice to say he is certainly a devious twat and this isn't the first time he's done it, from what I can find.

At 49, I'm pretty concerned about starting a new career, I have to say.

Well that’s gooseberry fool. Although start career again as such it’s not like skills are gone but yeah that must proper suck.

[Green Gecko]

Can you not take the claim to a court and get an high court rit or whatever, then the can’t pay well take it away guys will be on the bastard and we can all watch it on channel 5.

Sadly not, it's the company (which has been cleverly asset stripped) that would be liable, rather than him, so there's nothing to claim. Plus it costs serious money to do much more that send an enforcement officer round. There's a lot more to this than I can say on the forum, but suffice to say he is certainly a devious twat and this isn't the first time he's done it, from what I can find.

At 49, I'm pretty concerned about starting a new career, I have to say.

That's not always true actually, things changed recently where if a limited company can't pay its debts then its directors can be liable for up to 50% or something of the business' debts if they can't be recovered any way. If they refuse to pay then they can be banned from directing a company for at least 6 years or for life. Especially if you can demonstrate willful negligence of the duties of a company director. Limited liability isn't actually limited liability anymore - well it is, but it's, well, limited. It doesn't mean they can get away with paying nothing if they go and strawberry float the business up on purpose.

[Lime]

Can you not take the claim to a court and get an high court rit or whatever, then the can’t pay well take it away guys will be on the bastard and we can all watch it on channel 5.

Sadly not, it's the company (which has been cleverly asset stripped) that would be liable, rather than him, so there's nothing to claim. Plus it costs serious money to do much more that send an enforcement officer round. There's a lot more to this than I can say on the forum, but suffice to say he is certainly a devious twat and this isn't the first time he's done it, from what I can find.

At 49, I'm pretty concerned about starting a new career, I have to say.

That's not always true actually, things changed recently where if a limited company can't pay its debts then its directors can be liable for up to 50% or something of the business' debts if they can't be recovered any way. If they refuse to pay then they can be banned from directing a company for at least 6 years or for life. Especially if you can demonstrate willful negligence of the duties of a company director. Limited liability isn't actually limited liability anymore - well it is, but it's, well, limited. It doesn't mean they can get away with paying nothing if they go and strawberry float the business up on purpose.

Hey GG, I appreciate you might give me a glimmer of hope, but this case is so, so devious that I've just got to walk away now. I've had to get solicitors to help me through 2 tribunals even to get to this point. I'll have to leave it to people that aren't as destroyed as me to take him down now. I might be able to get some of the unpaid wages from a liquidation of one of the many companies he owns (it's complicated), and the Pension Regulator (who had to investigate the pension fraud) has indicated that I might get my some of my pension contributions back through the same route. It's the best I can hope for now.

[Green Gecko]

Can you not take the claim to a court and get an high court rit or whatever, then the can’t pay well take it away guys will be on the bastard and we can all watch it on channel 5.

Sadly not, it's the company (which has been cleverly asset stripped) that would be liable, rather than him, so there's nothing to claim. Plus it costs serious money to do much more that send an enforcement officer round. There's a lot more to this than I can say on the forum, but suffice to say he is certainly a devious twat and this isn't the first time he's done it, from what I can find.

At 49, I'm pretty concerned about starting a new career, I have to say.

That's not always true actually, things changed recently where if a limited company can't pay its debts then its directors can be liable for up to 50% or something of the business' debts if they can't be recovered any way. If they refuse to pay then they can be banned from directing a company for at least 6 years or for life. Especially if you can demonstrate willful negligence of the duties of a company director. Limited liability isn't actually limited liability anymore - well it is, but it's, well, limited. It doesn't mean they can get away with paying nothing if they go and strawberry float the business up on purpose.

Hey GG, I appreciate you might give me a glimmer of hope, but this case is so, so devious that I've just got to walk away now. I've had to get solicitors to help me through 2 tribunals even to get to this point. I'll have to leave it to people that aren't as destroyed as me to take him down now. I might be able to get some of the unpaid wages from a liquidation of one of the many companies he owns (it's complicated), and the Pension Regulator (who had to investigate the pension fraud) has indicated that I might get my some of my pension contributions back through the same route. It's the best I can hope for now.

You're 100% thinking on the right lines, with these things it's a toss up between your wellbeing and energy available to deal with such cretins and the financial cost/reward, sometimes it isn't always about only that. Totally understand that oftentimes it's simply healthier to accept banana splits exist and move on with your life. Glad to hear you did what you could give the circumstances to fight back, I only fear that with such unscrupulous people in business there are many others who are exploited. It's wrong how easy it is to be screwed over by an employer and how expensive it is to get help.

[That's not a growth]

I've got something I want to discuss, and I think this forum is a good place to do so due to the range of posters we have. But at the same time, with this being public I don't want to go into too much detail.

There's two things I'd generally like to get people's thoughts on.

How you personally draw the line in working for a company that is creating/selling something you have an 'ethical' problem with.

Companies closely tracking employees movements, and use this data in large AI data platforms - for example what I believe is currently happening in Amazon warehouses.

[Drumstick]

With regard to your first point, is it something that the company has started doing recently or has always done? Is it something that you've just learnt about or something you've known about for years?

Generally speaking, without knowing the above, I think as long as I wasn't being asked to be involved with whatever the product is directly (i.e. sales, advertising or manufacting) I would probably not make a fuss about it.

[That's not a growth]

It's in an early planning phase.

It would be my department running it, and I would likely be involved, potentially heavily.

[Qikz]

I would personally not work on something that I was ethically and morally opposed to, but then I suppose it's never happened to me and finding a job especially now is much harder.

[Dual]

It's in an early planning phase.

It would be my department running it, and I would likely be involved, potentially heavily.

Just go for it. You might enjoy it!

[Errkal]

It's in an early planning phase.

It would be my department running it, and I would likely be involved, potentially heavily.

It depends, tracking movement etc. isn’t inherently bad so it isn’t really issue “unless” bad gooseberry fool is being done with the result of the data if that makes sense.

[Zilnad]

When I was out of work, I could've gotten a job working finance in the meat industry. I didn't even apply because it wasn't worth selling my morals. But then I also had savings to see me through a little longer so I suppose the ethics question really comes down to the individual circumstance. I do feel that mental health is far more important than money though and doing something morally wrong for a living would eventually destroy me.