Although they can mandate someone to register with Universal Jobmatch, it is illegal to order someone to give the DWP access to jobsearch activity. Even if someone agrees to allow them to have access, it seems ridiculous to assume that all 6 jobs the claimant is required to apply for per fortnight should come from jobs on Universal Jobmatch rather than on other job websites (where there could well be a better selection of jobs).
I have done a bit of research on this recently…..
Go to the above link.
If you hover over the date “Update” i.e. 3rd June 2013, you will see a question mark. Click on the date and you will open a note box with an addition that says:
“Added to end of paragraph starting ‘Every Work Programme’ — ‘should the claimant give permission’. 3 June 2013 14:12”
The new phrase has been added so, from 3rd of June 2013 at 14:12 it now reads:
“Every Work Programme returner will also be required to register with Universal Jobmatch to aid work search and job matching. This will allow their adviser to check their work search activity online should the claimant give permission.”
Freedom of information request
Here is direct quite from the response (dated 12th June 2013) to a freedom of Information Request made by Glen Marden (full text available at the above link)
“2. Does a Jobseeker on Benefits have to enable, tick the online account boxes, to allow a Jobcentre Adviser to see all their personal jobseeking activity?”
Claimants can choose to allow DWP access to their account on a purely voluntary basis by ticking a box within their UJ profile.
“3. Can the Jobseeker register but not consent to let the Adviser view activity leave box unticked?
Access to your Universal Jobmatch account is only available to DWP staff once you have given your consent; this is on a voluntary basis.
So there you have it in black and white. Registering on the UJM site is mandatory. Ticking the box to give Jobcentre staff access is VOLUNTARY !!
Pass it on.
I was given a similar letter today, can be viewed at aftertheworkprogramme.wordpress.com , my one is only about giving them permission to access my account.
Ref: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/151933/response/371913/attach/4/Universal%20Jobmatch%20Toolkit.pdf Please read chapter 3, para 53.
Quote: “You [the JCP+ adviser] cannot issue a Jobseeker’s Direction to mandate a claimant to give us access to their account – This is their decision not ours.”
On that basis alone, the above JSD is void and null – On being referred for a sanction, a DM should throw it out without the claimant having to appeal (although in the current climate, the DM may well rely on the ignorance of the claimant).
I have used the Universal Jobsmatch and I can tell you this.. Most (and I mean MOST) of the vacancies on that site link to the usual sites like cv-library.co.uk and careerbuilder.co.uk.
In other words the Universal Jobmatch site acts as a bottle neck and slows you right down as it does not present the vacancies (i.e. other sites’ vacancies) in a useful nor practical way. I have spent ages trying to search jobs only to find that I’ve already applied for them either on the UJ site or, more usually, elsewhere.
The UJ site TRACKS YOUR EVERY MOVE. Duration you’ve been on the site, times, dates, external sites visited AND your IP address.
There is a requirement to log all jobs details NOT found through the UJ site on a part of the UJ site called “Comments” I have yet to find this “comments” section.
By the way (in London certainly) you are now required to apply for 50 – 100 jobs per fortnight.
How can that be practical? How can you find that mnay jobs when they aren’t there?
Same way people with spare room have to find a smaller dwelling, although there aren’t any, or pay bedroom tax.
its not just you applying, its thousands of others as well will these companies have time to actually read through every cv, if they had to they would have no time to do their jobs. This is all about sanctions.
If i am mandated i will apply for every job i cant do spam them all over and over and if they ask why am i i will say i am under job seekers direction to apply under pain of sanction. its not fair for you but i have to do it under orders to do it
Presumably, telling DWP to sod off & get the info from GCHQ’s cable taps will incur a sanction.
Do know when you have a gas boiler installed, the Fitter has to be CORGI registered, wear a badge, have a CORGI Number ect.
Well could we have the same for frontline JCP staff, you know the ones who actually know the rules and limitations of their position and know what they’re fucking talking about.
It is such a blatantly a BS statement from that JCP office it only could have been issued to intimate the uninitiated and generated phone revenue from the people who challenged them on their BS with the 0845 the contact prefix.
Department for Work and Pensions
123 West Street
Sheffield S1 4ER
24 June 2013
[FoI ref No 2822]
Thank you for your Freedom of Information request dated 21 June which has been copied below along with our response.
I know it is mandated for people claiming JSA to create a Profile and Public C.V in Universal Jobmatch, however from what I can see it is not mandated that people claiming JSA have to use Universal Jobmatch to search for a job.
Can you please confirm this in plain english (i.e. Yes or No)
It is not mandatory for JSA claimants to use Universal Jobmatch to search for a job.
However, JSA claimants are expected to do all that is reasonably expected of them to actively seek work. As part of this, we would expect them to look for work through as many different sources as possible. This may include using Universal Jobmatch if it is reasonable, taking into account their circumstances, including whether they have suitable access to the internet.
If a JSA claimant refuses to use Universal Jobmatch to search for a job and as a result, they are unable to demonstrate they have taken all the number of steps to look for work on their Jobseeker’s Agreement without good reason, then benefit may be affected.
Additionally, JSA claimants who have a Universal Jobmatch account (either through their own choosing or through being directed to create one by an adviser by issuing a Jobseeker’s Direction) can be required to apply for any jobs advertised on Universal Jobmatch that the adviser thinks the claimant is capable of doing. If the claimant fails to apply for any of these jobs without good reason, then benefit may be affected.
There is no requirement to use UJM if you can prove that you can find suitable jobs elsewhere.
Most of the jobs on UJM are aggregated from other sites and are duplicated elsewhere.
Employers also forget to close their vacancies so Jobseekers spend hours applying for jobs that no longer exist and often there is insufficient information to determine suitability.
The site was purchased for £17m. A competent site builder could have produced a more functional and user friendly board for around £50k!
The requirement to sign up to it will be part of the new UC, claimants won’t be allowed to sign on after their 7 days starvation till they’ve agreed to sign up to UJM. I understand this will be by Jobseekers Direction, I don’t know if this will involve them signing to allow the JC+ access to their accounts as there’d be no lawful basis for the DWP to do that. These questions and more have yet to be answered.
Hi Big Bill
I cannot find that in the UC legislation.
It would be in breach of the Wednesbury principles, forcing people to do something that is irrational or unreasonable for their particular circumstances. UJM is not a suitable method of looking for work for all jobseekers.
Universal Jobs Match (UJM) – “It’s useless. Utterly, utterly useless”
One competent IT user said: “It’s actually so bad that I refuse to use it if I don’t have to, but that’s because I have other, better job sites available to me to use. What about the people who’ve been told that they MUST use the site, and don’t have the skills to know where else to look, or how else to do things? The site is so bad it’s almost certainly losing people the chance of employment, rather than helping them to find it.”
Best and Worst sites for Job hunting! Not surprisingly Monster is the on the list of worst sites.
Monster operates the UJM site! http://busterandellie.com/the-best-and-the-worst-websites-for-job-hunting/
I cannot see anything in the legislation about UJM being a mandatory part of UC.
It would unreasonable to force people to use UJM when there are better alternatives.
Yes, there are many questions.
Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:
You are commenting using your WordPress.com account.
( Log Out /
You are commenting using your Google+ account.
( Log Out /
You are commenting using your Twitter account.
( Log Out /
You are commenting using your Facebook account.
( Log Out /
Connecting to %s
Notify me of new comments via email.
Notify me of new posts via email.
Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.
RSS - Posts
RSS - Comments