Making people on benefits stack shelves

In theory this is a good thing as it does help the individual gain the experience of working and working as part of a team.  It should also give an insight into other possibilities and give a warning that if you don’t actually do something about your life then this sort of job or poverty on the dole is all you will get out of life.

However, if the project is just a trick to get people off benefits, by putting them into impossible situations, eg a single parent unable to get into a job as they have no child care or someone mentally ill, who needs treatment to get them out of the house.

I’m suspicious of this type of scheme:

•  as the government does not have a good track record
• it could be replacing existing jobs
• it could be used to keep wages down below a living wage
• it could be subsidising big corporations, which are the ones avoiding paying tax.

Shelf stacking

Having worked as a shelf stacker I had three hours induction – which consisted of sitting around for two hours – drinking a cup of coffee and being told by someone who did not want to do the job – what a great company we were working for.

We were also advised on health and safety – ie don’t stab yourself with a knife, don’t carry things that are too heavy and don’t climb on the shelves as they may fall down – I’m sure the latter was more concern with protecting the shop’s property – than my safety.

Then one hour working with a stacker – where I learnt to be careful with a knife – so as not to damage the product, stacking new products behind the existing stuff on the shelf and roughly learning where things went.

It’s a job you can learn in about half a day and the layout of the store’s products in maybe three days.

The positive points of the job:

• is that you work as part of team
• in the old days you were allowed to take home food that was going to be thrown away
• easy to learn
• physical – so keeping you fit
• no office politics
• as a night stacker I was allowed to go home after the team had finished the work. (So the team worked efficiently)
• its an encouragement to think about your career.

What concerns me about the scheme

What concerns me about the scheme is:

Are those on the scheme going to replace existing shelf stackers – ie cause a loss of jobs.

In that case  the scheme is wrong:

- as it would be causing unemployment
- it is effectively giving large companies a subsidy
- it will help keep wages below a liveable rate.

If the scheme is legitimate

That is that it is not replacing workers, but giving people an experience of work then it is a good thing. I think that someone demonstrating that they have and can work should be rewarded by some one to one counselling and helping the individual focus on a career.

However, my experience in the past – as a provider, rather than actually on the scheme myself is that funding gets removed at the wrong time.   So that you’ve got a kid working for 8 weeks and then he’s dumped back on benefits until the next scheme comes along.

A little follow up work encouragement would dramatically repay the money spent as getting someone into long term work – is good for the individual as well as the government.

What the UK really needs

What is needed for the long term unemployed is proper training which countries, such as Germany and Holland seem to be do  much better than us.

Decisions are made in the local town and state.  Funding is given to business to take on the unemployed, but with subsidised training.

Small businesses are far better integrated with local initiatives and they receive their fair share of the subsidy, rather than over here, where only companies with a lot of resources can bid for these grants.