The DWP like to create new names for targets that they want staff to reach. These names help the government to disassociate themselves from the heinous acts that they choose to inflict on claimants and their families.
I have it on good authority that a DWP Labour Market decision maker now has a new name for a target they have to reach.
A Labour Market decision maker is an employee of the DWP specifically employed to deal with Mandatory Reconsiderations. A Mandatory Reconsideration can be requested once a decision has been made to stop a claimants money for whatever reason given.
It’s supposed to be a fair process, but I’ve had good reason to doubt that this process is anything but fair. I’ve heard of a Mandatory Reconsideration being refused on the same day as the reconsideration was requested.
So yet again the evidence of target lead decisions is mounting up. Of course the DWP will deny this, they never say on paperwork that they have a target led system but of course we know different. Who remembers the Sheriffs stars?
Now I’m not saying that all DWP staff are happy about this. They have brought this issue up with their union the PCS but their complaints haven’t been listened to by the DWP. The Government have no intention of changing it because this system works too well for them. So the staff have to carry out orders. Failure to reach their aspiration targets will result in being seen as a poor performer with poor performance levels and they will receive a disciplinary. Can you imagine how stressful this can be if you really don’t want to do this, but are too scared of being targeted at work or loosing your job? They won’t want to be in the same position as a claimant. This does not excuse the DWP employees who don’t mind doing this. They really need to question their motives and their moral standards. Having to refuse a claimants money could quite literally result in that claimants death. There’s enough evidence of this.
Now the definition of the word aspiration is this. “A hope or ambition of achieving something” As in the needs and aspirations of the people” Words associated are desire, hope, longing, yearning, hankering, urge, wish. The list goes on.
It’s quite different than the governments retroric that states that people should “Aspire to work”
I really do think that the government have surpassed themselves here. Aspiration targets for refusing mandatory reconsiderations could be translated as a desire to refuse as many mandatory reconsiderations as possible.
The more exposure we have on target led decisions that we can expose the better. No one can challenge anything publicly unless the public actually know.
And I’m not supporting the DWP either. This system is cruel, it’s designed to fail a claimant and I will continue to challenge this for as long as humanely possible.
10 thoughts on “DWP staff told to reach Aspiration targets. ”
The last time I had problems with what was then the DSS (2000) I was up for working while claiming incapacity benefit (I was, but within the rules) and the decision re my benefit was made by an Adjudication Officer who was independent of the DSS. My benefit was restored but the neighbour who bubbled me was himself done for working on a building site while claiming IB for a “bad back”. Karma happens! It looks like what is now a Decision Maker isn’t at all independent. I suspect this might have happened when the DSS was merged with the Dept. for Pensions to form the DWP.
Yep they aren’t independent anymore sadly. They all joined up when the DWP was formed. Makes you realise how much easier it was in the days of the DSS
LikeLiked by 1 person
I might add that they have to leave the desk if they print anything out to give the claimant if you video all your signing on appointments and every visit then they have no comeback. Fine them for every error they do it to claimants! PAYBACK CAN BE A BITCH!
You can’t video but you can audio record.
There are ways to beat the DWP if they claim to have sent you a letter or handed you one at a previous meeting ask them for the proof
watermarked, COPY or DUPLICATE of the letter
Proof of postage
Proof of receipt
All they can provide of that is a non watermarked copy of the letter and a paragraph saying we posted it on DATE A and you should have received it on DATE B. Not one bit of this is the proof you requested so tell them that and you require exactly what was stated on your request or they will be a penalty charge against then.
HANDED A LETTER AT PREVIOUS APPOINTMENT
The date on which they claim to have handed you the letter
Video or photo evidence with a date and time stamp of them clearly showing them handing you the open letter
The best they will do is give you a photo of them handing you back your signing on book or possibly someone totally different being handed a letter. You will have to describe yourself and what you were wearing on the day, I did this by always wearing the same clothes blue showerproof coat, blue jeans and black trainers. If you give a good enough description of yourself they have no excuse.
NOT APPLYING FOR ENOUGH JOBS
Ask for a list of dates they claim you did not apply for enough jobs
A list of jobs that were available on those dates (so you can check that they were available to apply for)
The DWP/JCP ruling that says a claimant must apply for a specific number of jobs each week
How can they say you haven’t applied for enough jobs when the type of jobs available vary from day to day or week to week?
I know someone who was told he was sent a letter and they asked for the first one only to be told they where not sent a letter but it was handed to them in a previous appointment so he asked for the date and evidence. They gave a date, when he was still in employment, boy did they kick off, so much that they were told they were not allowed back in the place and had to send in his signature every fortnight, they demanded 50 prepaid envelopes and 50 forms to sign 3 month later they tried again saying he was handed a letter on a previous appointment so he went through it all again knowing they couldn’t provide what he asked for.
Reblogged this on Same Difference.
Reblogged this on glendrixglendenning1.
The inverse of the “aspiration” is also true. That to actually grant a MR is “anti Aspiration “, ie a desire to fail, to be a loser, to be like the claiment, who as we know from DWP policies are regarded as morally reprehensible, possibly with personality defects that require mandatory CBT treatment.
So to fail to Aspire is to be like the human detritus you are being paid to Incentivise to work, including the sick and disabled considered too ill to work be many forms of assessment, by forcing them into destitution. Hunger. Homelessness. Physical and mental punishment.
Where is this going? We already know that sanctions are causing harm and death. How many deaths will the PCS allow their members to cause? Because it doesn’t take an Aspiring sociopath to see that these refused MRs are a death sentence for some.
Absolutely correct and very well said. Thank you
LikeLiked by 1 person
Reblogged this on sdbast.