Getting people into work is “sinister”

July 28th, 2013 at 12:00 pm by David Farrar

Stuff reports:

Thousands of beneficiaries will be managed into work by private employment agencies in a new nationwide pilot programme some are labelling “sinister”.

The Ministry of Social Development has been seeking tenders from community and private employment agencies to put beneficiaries into paid work.

Annually, 2000 beneficiaries will be involved nationwide and the agencies will earn up to $12,000 for placing a client into a job.

They will earn more for placing higher classified patients, such as those with “entrenched mental health issues” and those with serious barriers preventing them returning to work.

Overseas, similar welfare-to-work programmes have been criticised as ineffective and costly. Some groups are worried the same thing could happen here, and that there’ll be too much focus on “bonus payments”.

But Social Development Minister Paula Bennett said the Government was willing to pay more to help those who are likely to find it harder to get into work and be independent.

This is what Labour and allies are calling sinister?

10 Responses to “Getting people into work is “sinister””

  1. Yoza (3,035 comments) says:

    Getting people into work is “sinister”

    Arbeit macht frei

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 14 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Grendel (1,064 comments) says:

    Well done Yoza, Godwinned on the first comment.

    So just to clarify, you don’t think people should be given all the assistance to get work and get off living off other taxpayers?

    dont worry, they will find a job even you can do. Someone is going to earn a massive placement bonus when they find someone willing to employ you.

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. jims_whare (497 comments) says:

    I wonder if WINZ paid for Yoza’s laptop – to help assist him finding work after being made redundant from his long held paper run?

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. Harriet (7,523 comments) says:

    In aussie you have to register with an ’employment provider’ if you are unemployed, but if you then get a job through the news paper, word of mouth ect – they still get a payment from the government!

    Kevin Rudd’s wife earn’t her cool $150+,000,000.00 by owning one of those companies!

    Cameron in the UK contracted her company about 4 years ago to ‘get people into work’ but as was said at the time “She’ll have every unemployed person in the UK on her books – and when the economy picks up – she’ll get a payment for each and everyone of them for having done nothing, as they will be naturally absorbed into the workforce – at the moment there are no jobs to place them into!”

    In Australia it is also mostly just a scam, with the agency also sending people on ‘courses’ which are decided by the input of local industry and council in the local area.
    The ’employment agencies’ then also get a payment for ‘sending’ people on these courses – but if you don’t go to them you get your benefit cut anyway!
    The problem is that in places such as where I live in QLD – the only courses available for the unemployed is in retail, front of staff hospitality, and aged care as they are the biggest ‘industries’. Those kids who are living at home and want to learn something else so that they can move to Brisbane, miss out on more ‘serious’ courses.
    The other thing is that local empolyers then have ‘demand’ satisfied, and wages then stay low for everyone else in the industry who got of their arses and got a job.

    It’s a waste of time.

    It’s better to cut ‘low skilled’ and ‘no skilled’ immigration for the time being.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. Michael (1,065 comments) says:

    Labour needs to entrench dependency for votes. You know, because if people become independent and build self-worth they might start realising the dependency helps no one in the long run…

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. mandk (2,002 comments) says:

    Hold on a minute! You’re not allowed to use the word “sinister” any more: it’s offensive to left-handed people 🙂

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. @nzrec (1 comment) says:

    Their is no issue with the overall idea here, however the structure of the systems means that it does not work effectively, often in New Zealand these contracts are awarded to community groups with little experience in this area, or to business that are focused on maximizing profit. In each case the providers do not invest in staff with the experience required to maximize outcomes.

    In both cases (contracting community organisations and businesses) they pay their staff the minimum amount possible and the government contributions are too high, reducing outcomes and increasing costs – with the difference being used for the other goals of the community groups or profits in the above kevin rudd’s wife example.

    In this case the goal should be to get the best possible people working directly with high needs unemployed and youth, it would save millions and drive outcomes if the government through MSD and MYD hired and trained experts in this area and employed them directly. In the current system (staff employed by contract service providers) these roles pay between 40-55k so they do not attract career development professionals or those skilled in recruitment, sales, writing and professional development – only people with the vague idea that it would be nice to work with youth and “help them” . However to place 20 youth into work could cost a quarter of a million dollars – there are many people in New Zealand with the skills required to help 2-3 hundred youth into work each year that would look at doing this if the roles were attractive, possibly paying between 60-80K.

    There would not be issues around providers being paid when the unemployed gain their own employment which happens incredibly frequently – it would be easy to improve outcomes in this area and cut costs, as a libertarian I don’t generally advocate for increased govt employment, but when it is obvious that the outcomes would be better and govt expenditure drastically reduced – combined with the belief that investing in the future of our youth is a core function of government it seems the smarter option.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. Redbaiter (11,656 comments) says:

    No problem with the scheme, but like to eventually see some reports on its success or otherwise.

    Many employment agencies are just scam artists.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. artemisia (523 comments) says:

    Relations in Melbourne tell me that in order to get the dole they have to do 15 hours voluntary work a week. One rellie has worked more than once in between jobs at a local plant nursery run by the council. The nursery starts them off on simple repetitive tasks and moves them onto more complex tasks if they are suitable. Some of them are challenged in various ways, and not perhaps readily employable. I’d guess the unions here would have something to say about such a scheme, though.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. Black with a Vengeance (2,196 comments) says:

    Should get John Key to give those skilled in youth work placement a quick phonecall then eh Nzrec?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote