FREEPOST Plus RRJY-JRUX-LHCT
JobCentre Plus
TUNBRIDGE WELLS JobCentre
James Watt Way
CRAWLEY
RH77 1AR
Wednesday, 29/2/2012
National Insurance number: WP 15 81 33 D
Official Complaint
PRODUCING SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE OF JOBSEEKING
I have received no written explanation as to why my JSA was stopped on 31 January 2012 – for the period 18/1/2012-31/1/2012 - so here is mine:
1. You have altered your definition of what 'Actively seeking work' means without telling Jobseekers - in order to meet quotas for paying-out less benefits;
2. You believe you are above the English common law principle of reasonableness in relation to contractual relationships - in order to meet quotas for paying-out less benefits;
3. You are Institutionally Racist - in order to meet quotas for paying-out less benefits;
4. You try blaming the victim for a declining economy which is outside the victim's control - in order to meet quotas for paying-out less benefits;
5. You believe Jobseekers must prove they are not guilty of breaking agreements, not that you must prove they are guilty; violating the English common law principle that one is innocent before being proven guilty - in order to meet quotas for paying-out less benefits.
I shall deal with above points, one-by-one.
1. Nowhere in my JobSeekers' Agreement does it say that not being able to find work is not 'Actively seeking work'. If there are no jobs, it is hardly the fault of the JobSeeker. When I have claimed in the past that there were no jobs to be applied for (the fortnight immediately before the one in question, for example), it was never mentioned to me that this was a violation of my Jobseekers' Agreement. In particular, I was never given form ES4LFW to warn me that I was in violation of that agreement, so could not reasonably know that I was.
I have always been an active JobSeeker. In my three years of unemployment (during which time I have never been told I was not looking for work hard enough, even when having no jobs to apply for), I taken up temporary and part-time work whenever it was offered. Despite being promised help - in writing - regarding the fact that I have a criminal record and, therefore, cannot apply for many kinds of jobs – especially those requiring a Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) check – none has ever been offered. Even Avanta in Tonbridge do not offer this because, at the very least, they are far more realistic about the real job situation in Britain at the present time. This is also why I am not registered with any employment agency because none take those with criminal pasts. Even menial work is not often subject to CRB clearance, et al. It would be simpler to just admit that Advisors are not advisors but mere signature takers, then let JobSeekers get on with the difficult task of finding work in difficult times.
2. The necessary corollary of Point 1 is that it is you who are in violation of the common law principle of reasonableness in believing that these issues should never be discussed with clients because of your view that clients are contemptible; hence, the lacklustre service offered and the genuine inability – born of incompetence, inadequacy and incivility – to actually help your customers with their problems. This, despite your repeated propagandist claim that JobCentres are here to help. I have been lied to in the past regarding monies I could claim for funding to help me get back to work (I had to turn down a managerial position because of this) and so now realise that the JobCentres offer nothing but their own sense of despair at not really being able to help those who wish to help themselves.
3. Telling a Black man that his Benefit is to be suspended without good reason (in writing) is classic White supremacism. The desire here is to conceal the lack of reasonableness in your decision and pretend that Jobseekers have no legal nor moral rights JobCentres are obliged to respect.
(FYI: One of the few advantages for Blacks in living in a White supremacist country like the UK is that no White can make a similar claim of racist abuse since Blacks cannot be institutionally-racist since they control no British institutions. This simple fact is the source of much resentment on the part of White supremacists since it disadvantages them while benefiting Blacks. They usually refer to this in racist expressions like "Playing the race card". But such a card is also being played by the person who says it is being played, since he benefits racially from making the implicit claim that any complaint of racism is fraudulent when made by Blacks.)
4. Blaming-the-victim means never having to deal with clients as individuals nor of having to face the fact that JobSeekers' are not in a position to be responsible for the state of the economy. The stereotyping behaviour of Advisors mirrors that of sexists who claim rape-victims deserve to be raped and thus are solely to blame for the sexual misconduct of men. It is hardly surprising therefore that JobSeekers can see quite clearly that Benefits' system is now designed to prevent benefit rather than to offer it - and that banks (for example) will be bailed out but not those who suffer most from their greed.
5. Show evidence – in writing - that a breach of an agreement has taken place, do not merely assume it because of the above four Points. You would get far more from both your work and from your clients if you did so. That you seek neither job satisfaction nor efficaciousness speaks negative volumes for the benefits' service as a whole as well as the poor quality governments that created them.
Conclusion:
The letter Canterbury BC wrote me was dated one day before I was told my Benefit would be temporarily suspended ("Sanctioned"). One wonders how it could have been ascertained that I had violated my Jobseekers' Agreement before the event! Clearly its author (Sarah Stephenson) is gifted with second sight and I should, therefore, be grateful if her remarkable prescience could be used to tell me what next week's Lottery numbers will be so that I can retire to the Cayman Islands with the winnings.
Ultimately, the problem here is that the fact that you people are public servants has been forgotten and you now believe that the public exists to serve you. This explains the poor quality of the service the both DWP and JCP provides to the public who come to each for help.
Again, all that I require from you is a written explanation as to why you suspended my JSA for the first two weeks in February, this year – if you have the necessary moral courage to do so.
Regards,
cc: Canterbury BC
TUNBRIDGE WELLS JCP Office
MP: Rt Hon Greg CLARK
