Brixton's Jobcentre Plus on Brixton Road to close

[editor]

This really concerns me., Apart from the inconvenience of forcing people to travel further afield to access their services, it could well put young men at risk as they're compelled to move into a 'hostile' postcode.

I've been told that there's plans in place to turn the Jobcentre into a hotel, which seems pretty much par for the course these days in Brixton.

Brixton Job Centre set to close in ‘reckless’ welfare cuts plan

 

[StoneRoad]

That sort of thing is just weird and unfair - dole is a pittance to start with, and unless they've changed the rules, you don't get travel expenses for "normal" signing-on.

E2A - my local job centre is over 20 miles away and with an uneven "hourly" bus / rail service, neither of which are cheap. Parking, and fuel etc is not the cheap alternative. One of the benefits of living in a "rural" area.

 

[Pickman's model]

Tbh when I've signed on I've always had a trek - I used to sign in the angel and that was more than a mile from where I lived. Yeh it's crap but there've always been people in London with short journeys to sign and people with long ones.

E2A has there been any evidence since the closure of the josephine ave esj of gang attacks on people travelling to/from signing?

 

[editor]

Tbh when I've signed on I've always had a trek - I used to sign in the angel and that was more than a mile from where I lived. Yeh it's crap but there've always been people in London with short journeys to sign and people with long ones.

E2A has there been any evidence since the closure of the josephine ave esj of gang attacks on people travelling to/from signing?

I think it's going to be hard to find direct evidence, but forcing young kids to go into another inner city area doesn't seem the greatest idea. There's been no shortage of violence happening around my estate based around this postcode/area bollocks.

 

[Pickman's model]

I think it's going to be hard to find direct evidence, but forcing young kids to go into another inner city area doesn't seem the greatest idea. There's been no shortage of violence happening around my estate based around this postcode/area bollocks.

Of course this might be a thing to unite them...

 

[bi0boy]

Not sure the best way of tackling postcode beef is providing the means for people to remain within their postcode areas.

 

[editor]

Not sure the best way of tackling postcode beef is providing the means for people to remain within their postcode areas.

Sure sounds better than closing down local facilities and forcing them to travel into other areas.

 

[Pickman's model]

Sure sounds better than closing down local facilities and forcing them to travel into other areas.

Travel broadens the mind, and if lots of people forced to do it, it might lead to beefs being set aside.

 

[editor]

Travel broadens the mind, and if lots of people forced to do it, it might lead to beefs being set aside.

Not sure if you quite understand how this gang stuff works.

 

[bi0boy]

Sure sounds better than closing down local facilities and forcing them to travel into other areas.

Not really. The money saved by closing down a local job centre could be spent on measures that actually tackled the causes of such crime.

 

[bi0boy]

Anyway, attendance at a job centre in person to sign on is a rather crude way of assessing availability for work or finding jobs. You'd think they'd have some more innovative things in the pipeline.

 

[editor]

Not really. The money saved by closing down a local job centre could be spent on measures that actually tackled the causes of such crime.

You actually think that the money saved from this is going to go towards helping inner city youth? What kind of bizarre parallel universe are you occupying?

 

[editor]

Anyway, attendance at a job centre in person to sign on is a rather crude way of assessing availability for work or finding jobs. You'd think they'd have some more innovative things in the pipeline.

Oh, please share. I love to hear about innovation.

 

[bi0boy]

You actually think that the money saved from this is going to go towards helping inner city youth? What kind of bizarre parallel universe are you occupying?

I merely said keeping job centres open isn't the best way of tackling postcode beef. Not sure which bit of that you disagree with.

If someone wants to put their energies into campaigning for gang crime to be tackled, expending it on keeping job centres open is unlikely to be the best use of time.

 

[bi0boy]

Oh, please share. I love to hear about innovation.

You think forcing people to sign on in person is preferable to say, telephone appointments? Especially for those with difficulties getting about.

 

[lefteri]

Is this part of that programme to combine jobcentres with mental health services?

 

[editor]

You think forcing people to sign on in person is preferable to say, telephone appointments? Especially for those with difficulties getting about.

Ever tried to call up a job centre? Do you think it's a good idea to get rid of all human contact if possible and make people use the phone instead? Is that the kind of innovation you like?

 

[editor]

I merely said keeping job centres open isn't the best way of tackling postcode beef. Not sure which bit of that you disagree with.

If someone wants to put their energies into campaigning for gang crime to be tackled, expending it on keeping job centres open is unlikely to be the best use of time.

But closing them is likely to make things worse.

This notion of yours that the money saved by shutting down will somehow be channelled into helping inner city kids is sheer fantasy.

 

[Celyn]

You think forcing people to sign on in person is preferable to say, telephone appointments? Especially for those with difficulties getting about.

I don't think Jobcentres tend to care very much about what difficulties their clients or victims might have in getting about.

 

[bi0boy]

I don't think Jobcentres tend to care very much about what difficulties their clients or victims might have in getting about.

Exactly, that's why attendance at them should no longer be required.

 

[editor]

Exactly, that's why attendance at them should no longer be required.

So you think that people never benefit from face to face contact with trained staff? Just close down the Jobcentres and make them ring up with their problems, yes?

 

[Orang Utan]

So you think that people never benefit from face to face contact with trained staff? Just close down the Jobcentres and make them ring up with their problems, yes?

People shouldn't be forced to go in for face to face conversations, esp if they have to travel far

 

[StoneRoad]

You think forcing people to sign on in person is preferable to say, telephone appointments? Especially for those with difficulties getting about.

And what about the cost of being on hold - or passed around various extns - for the phone bill payer.

Some people find talking on the phone - because you can't see the body language of the other person - very difficult.

 

[bi0boy]

So you think that people never benefit from face to face contact with trained staff? Just close down the Jobcentres and make them ring up with their problems, yes?

I don't they people benefit from compulsory attendance of which the main purpose is to stop the benefits of non-attenders.

Some people will benefit from face-to-face contact with staff, but I don't this would be best delivered through keeping open so many job centres. They could have staff in local council offices that deal with council tax for example, or in libraries.

 

[bi0boy]

And what about the cost of being on hold - or passed around various extns - for the phone bill payer.

Some people find talking on the phone - because you can't see the body language of the other person - very difficult.

The idea would be the job centre would phone you at a specified time instead of you having to go there in person. It would be optional, and I can't see how it would be worse than forcing people to attend in person.

 

[Orang Utan]

I don't they people benefit from compulsory attendance of which the main purpose is to stop the benefits of non-attenders.

Some people will benefit from face-to-face contact with staff, but I don't this would be best delivered through keeping open so many job centres. They could have staff in local council offices that deal with council tax for example, or in libraries.

There are certainly better uses of my time.
Proving you are looking for work to the satisfaction of the DWP in fact gets in the way of the actual looking for work.

 

[Pickman's model]

Not sure if you quite understand how this gang stuff works.

Please let me know when you reach a conclusion

 

[editor]

And what about the cost of being on hold - or passed around various extns - for the phone bill payer.

Some people find talking on the phone - because you can't see the body language of the other person - very difficult.

Yep. And not everyone has unlimited credit to spend being kept on hold for ages and ages. In fact, any people at the bottom of the pile struggle to pay their mobile bills.

 

[editor]

Please let me know when you reach a conclusion

Can't be arsed with your smartarse flippancy today.

 

[Pickman's model]

I don't they people benefit from compulsory attendance of which the main purpose is to stop the benefits of non-attenders.

Some people will benefit from face-to-face contact with staff, but I don't this would be best delivered through keeping open so many job centres. They could have staff in local council offices that deal with council tax for example, or in libraries.

Yes, a grand use of library space and most conducive to readers' study