The PCS union, which represents DWP staff, has condemned the changes to sanctions announced in the Spring budget as a ‘massive attack on claimants’ which will usher in a ‘computer says no’ culture.

In the budget, the government announced that they would:

“. . . strengthen the way the UC sanctions regime is applied in Great Britain by automating parts of the process to reduce error rates, and additional training for Work Coaches to apply sanctions more effectively, including for claimants who do not look for or take up employment.”

In response, the PCS argue that:

“This is a massive attack on claimants that suggests there will be a huge increase in sanctioning activity unnecessarily forcing many already desperate claimants into deeper poverty to serve the failed and discredited idea that sanctioning people helps get them into work.”

The union goes on to say that:

“The automation of decision making for sanctions suggests a “computer says no” culture, which means that the individual circumstances of claimants will be ignored.”

DWP staff are particularly worried that it appears that work coaches are to be asked to apply sanctions. They argue that at the moment sanctions decisions are made by ‘remote decision makers’ who are trained to make complex decisions.

Making work coaches responsible for sanctions will destroy their relationships with claimants and potentially lead to more violent incidents in Jobcentres, the union claims.

PCS says that they will fight for a massive increase in staff to allow their members to support and not punish claimants.

You can read the full PCS statement on sanctions here.

Comments

Write comments...
or post as a guest
People in conversation:
Loading comment... The comment will be refreshed after 00:00.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Sharon K · 3 months ago
    I work but my son claims UC. Moved to new address in August 2023 & meant moving to another JC. My son has a brain tumour & has regular tests etc plus a hospital stay where he was SANCTIONED because he couldn’t make an appointment!! They keep sanctioning him for stupid things all the time & it’s now got to a point where I’m in process of filing a report to the minister for DWP about the actions of this job centre whose done everything but victimise my son. It’s not his fault he has a brain tumour & now a possible 2nd one too 😡. This job centre ( Pembrokeshire) needs retraining instead of punishing claimants that are unable to attend. My son is 24 & shares a tenancy with myself & for over 2/3 months resulted in myself being solely responsible for the rent of our bungalow due to my son having a pittance paid which results in going into debt. My sons work coach is a nasty piece of work & she obviously has a problem with him, makes his life a living hell!😡
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Arthur · 1 years ago
    While I would like to believe that DWP staff are genuinely appalled by the coming changes I can't help but think that their new found worries over how claimants are to be treated is more a case of anxiety over losing their jobs to a computer system.
    Afterall they are the people who carry out the present role of processing peoples claims seemingly without any concerns.
    This will include decisions over claims and sanctions so why the sudden concerns over claimants welfare. How many times have claimants like us been treated  with utter indifference or worse when we seek assistance just to survive.

  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Rapidrabbit · 1 years ago
    DWP managers in Jobcentres will be walking around telling Work Coaches that sanctions of 6% are 'the only target they had to it', exactly as happened en masse though managers were threatened with punishment for doing it. The idea that Work Coaches are subject to the implied threat of not doing enough sanctions is harassing because there's always a roundabout way to get back at staff. And it happens often. 
    Sanctions rob customers of benefit and force them to food banks and money lenders. How can that be an incentive?
    This negative, destructive tool is soul destroying for everyone involved. 
    What matters is the ability of Work Coaches to half open doors to opportunity and skills. Genuine opportunity and skills. DWP managers are wooden, lacking empathy, motivation and magnetism and often intellectual sideways thinking. These Work Coaches work in an emotionally sterile background. Deaths of claimants occur in mental health cases with customers because DWP employees have little training in DWP, law, statutory instruments and personal skills that kick in to stop suicides. That wooden head banging is an instrumental factor in it. 
    If you can't inspire someone to work by persuasion you shouldn't be doing the Coach job. And customer feedback is that the qualities of Work Coach energy and enthusiasm is dire, often leaving claimants feeling desperately trapped.
    And there are many reports of cruel staff, prejudiced and toxic, spotting this opportunity to bully and big themselves up for better reports. With one defined characteristic. Sociopathic harassment borne of sterile personality and traits. 
    Within this scenario, and there are hundreds of thousands of staff and customers who will recognise the truth I write now, what chance do customers down on their luck have? 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Jan · 1 years ago
      @Rapidrabbit Rappidrabbit, Thank you, for your obvious insight and intelligence.  You appear to be a very decent person.  The DWP and their vile, counter intuitive - cruel and destructive policies NEVER EVER achieve their aims.  As a now, early retired Teacher who, has had several 'temporary' contracts, I have been subject to their vitriol and disrespect.  It doesn't matter what your experience or education: they treat everyone as 'ner-do'wells' who have no interest in working.  Presently, my son, who is unable to gain work as a post-grad, is now working a zero hours PT only job, at a local WS hostlery.  He continues to look for more sustainable, appropriate work.  His UC 'top-up' was CLOSED in January.  No proper warning - not sanctioned but CLOSED.  He was unfortunate enough to be working silly shifts at said job, and his laptop was in our repair shop (his phone is old and pre internet).  The mear fact that he had taken this dreadful PT zero - job, apparently meant that he ought to have signed his 'NEW COMMITMENTS', on his log.  Ordinarily, the UC people had always sent an email message, along with a text message so there could be no discrepancy.  On this occasion however, at New Year, they sent only an email which, he didn't recieve in time.  His MR(mandatory reconsideration) was sent to them challenging his closed UC account on 19th January - he is still waiting for a reply!  Fortunately for him, he remains living with me (he sleeps on my floor cushions) and so shall not become homeless or without food etc, but if he had lived alone, paid rent and claimed Housing Benefit, doubtless, his Landlord would have run out of patience by now.  Cutting off his UC without being consistent in contacting him is unacceptable.  It is counter productive to his situation and to his many efforts.  It is plain nasty.  We will pursure this to the end as I'm sure he will enventually have to appeal (the MR, only put in place to deter people appealling).  Meanwhile, he does his utmost to secure more suitable, and sustainable employment whereby, he could leave home - at 29 - and begin his independence in the adult world.  What - has - the UK - come to, that the Government treats it's young, old, and disabelled in such a disrespectful - barbaric way?  It is disgraceful.  And very sad.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Caiti · 1 years ago
    Think the Govt. want all people who can work to get back to work with help and support, especially as there are now jobs where you can work from home.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Carol Hall · 1 years ago
      @Caiti What support? After being made redundant in the pandemic and Before being put into lawcra. I asked my local job centre that due to ill health and having to work until I was 67(now62) I needed upskilling, as it would now be impossible for me to do the retail work I'd been employed in. I wanted them to pay for the European computer driving licence (the nationally accredited computer program) which would massively improve my chances of getting a homeworking job. I was told that I might be able to have it funded but only if I wrote them a letter explaining why I wanted to do it, and that it would guarantee me getting a job. I told my work coach that I'm not grovelling, how can I guarantee getting a job, and you know the reason I want to do it. I told her I will find myself a free course online. I did a Microsoft course and learned about Word. excel and Power Point.  Boris Johnson said he would upskill older people who still need to work, what a joke. Jeremy Hunt wants retired and older adults to work but they won't upskill them and employers discriminate against us. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    A. Reid · 1 years ago
    Even those who find it better at first will soon find the algorithms are changed after enough accept it.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Borkwe · 1 years ago
    Jobcentre staff actually care about claimants? That's a novel development.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    John Earle · 1 years ago
    Or, DWP staff are going to lose their jobs to AI, so are now concerned about claimants
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Shabob · 1 years ago
      @John Earle That's what I thought the minute I started reading it, John Earle. They have never ever been concerned about the welfare of claimant's and the minute I realised it, this report made sense. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    dch · 1 years ago
    but some wc get off on the power so this will increase that.

    if it must be done have your wc still be the one to refer sanction. but the deciding  force for if you get sanctioned should be another wc who doesn't know the claiment.

    this wiill make things arkward for appeal or Mr. as wouldn't it be same wc who decides so it would just get upheld.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Big bird · 1 years ago
      @dch dch... as far as I am aware from reading on rights net (welfare rights advisors etc) decisions made by work coaches are not challengable.... no Mr or appeal rights. 
      Hence why currently they
      We don't know, maybe this changes in the future.  Maybe it doesn't.

       Maybe any automatic sanction is applied because no evidence is uploaded onto computer and if valid evidence is subsequently supplied an automatic reinstatement happens.? 




  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Geoff vernau · 1 years ago
    This is just another disgraceful punishment for people who are already struggling. We need a change of government that will look after the vulnerable rather than make life harder.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Magbot · 1 years ago
    Isn't it amazing that in the current challenging economic times the rich need a carrot in the form of tax incentives but the poor disabled need a stick in the form of benefit sanctions?
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Stephen mc ginty · 1 years ago
    If the PCS Union and their members were Genuinely upset about this then they would include a demand to drop this whole idea in their STRIKE action !!
    Stand up for the poor , that's what unions are SUPPOSED to do !
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Survival71 · 1 years ago
      @UnnaK
      I would have thought could strike on conditions if staff are told to carry out unlawful practices 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Geoff vernau · 1 years ago
      @UnnaK You could simply have civil disobedience. The staff should simply refuse to implement these sanctions. They can't sack them all.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      UnnaK · 1 years ago
      @Stephen mc ginty As far as I am aware trade unions are only allowed to take strike action on pay and conditions. Strikes addressing political issues were outlawed by Thatcher decades ago.
      We need an alliance between claimants and PCS members to find a way to stop these new measures. 

  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Big bird · 1 years ago
    I don't think it's wise to put the responsibility on work coaches to instruct a sanction, in particular to those meeting the equality act for disability. Failure to assess a disabled person appropriately could lead to equality act claims of discrimination directly against the work coaches. 
     There needs to be a health care professional per job centre (ideally from occupational health) who can work with job coaches to assess  disabled claimants for a tailored commitment and then assess  mandatory requirements as appropriate, appropriate with reasonable adjustments, or inappropriate.  
We use cookies

We use cookies on our website. Some of them are essential for the operation of the site, while others help us to improve this site and the user experience (tracking cookies). You can decide for yourself whether you want to allow cookies or not. Please note that if you reject them, you may not be able to use all the functionalities of the site.