Ah yes. Project Work. Back in the olden days when the AF supported the harrassment of benefit staff. Lovely.
Instant Muscle - Workfare racketeers - gone gone gone
The point of 3 strikes was that benefits workers did not stand up to introduction of JSA and claimants had to protect themselves. Has it got better for claimants since JSA, Job Club, cuts or removal of dole for younger people? Employed workers needed and still need solidarity from other workers.
But anyway, much worse is coming for benefits/training workers (and more will get to see the other side) ... 12,000 jobs cut in Whitehall dept
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7267521.stm
This will include an effective privatisation of Job Club, so we'll have more private companies involved not less.
So the interesting question is why Instant Muscle directors would throw in the towel now? Did they fall prey to competition? Or did they think that privatisation would mean less direct government cash in future? Or (maybe even) directors were thinking of moving to bigger things and folded one company to start another? Very hard to say at the moment.
From claimants' perpective, it'll remain to be seen whether a privatised Job Club would mean more or less cuddly treatment from staff.
little_brother wrote:
The point of 3 strikes was that benefits workers did not stand up to introduction of JSA and claimants had to protect themselves.
Quite. I remember how helpful the Three Strikes leaflets were in building opposition to Project Work among JobCentre staff. Hats off to Groundswell for producing such effective propaganda though -- it's the only anarchist material I've ever seen being distributed at the taxpayer's expense by civil service senior management. A real coup.
the button wrote:
little_brother wrote:
The point of 3 strikes was that benefits workers did not stand up to introduction of JSA and claimants had to protect themselves.Quite. I remember how helpful the Three Strikes leaflets were in building opposition to Project Work among JobCentre staff. Hats off to Groundswell for producing such effective propaganda though -- it's the only anarchist material I've ever seen being distributed at the taxpayer's expense by civil service senior management. A real coup.
Well this is hardly the point and I am pretty sure the only circulation by managers of 3 Strikes stuff was to their lawyers! There was no effective opposition to JSA in Nottingham in spite of much effort done to express solidarity in leaflets by the nottingham campaign against JSA/claimants action group actually supporting the workers on their pay claim! Three strikes came later after the Edinburgh experiences, and it was only ever about giving 'over zealous' staff who gave claimants a hard time at restart interviews.
Anyway this post is about a private outfit milking vast amounts of government money and giving claimants just an extra tenner a week on top of dole plus lost hours. Those who perhaps couldn't see it at the time, can now see what kind of beast these training providers really are. Reading the comments to the article in the Nottingham Evening Post, it's a bit sad to see the ones by sacked IM staff actually defending the ethos of their wonderful company, after being sold down the river by their managers - who presumably knew what was happening in order to have the termination letters ready. Plus I bet there were most than a few claimants who were happy to go home rather than carry on with a pointless course they'd been directed to go to by Job Centre, as well as the ones who might say they benefitted from training. Just look at their motivational publicity - makes you want to puke.
little_brother wrote:
the button wrote:
little_brother wrote:
The point of 3 strikes was that benefits workers did not stand up to introduction of JSA and claimants had to protect themselves.Quite. I remember how helpful the Three Strikes leaflets were in building opposition to Project Work among JobCentre staff. Hats off to Groundswell for producing such effective propaganda though -- it's the only anarchist material I've ever seen being distributed at the taxpayer's expense by civil service senior management. A real coup.
Well this is hardly the point and I am pretty sure the only circulation by managers of 3 Strikes stuff was to their lawyers!
Nope. I was working in a dole office at the time of the three strikes campaign, and I can confirm that (in Hull at least, which was a pilot area for Project Work), three strikes material was distributed to staff by Employment Service management. It kind of cut across my efforts to get my co-workers along to a demo organised by Hull TUC & claimants groups against Project Work, tbh.
Quote:
three strikes material was distributed to staff by Employment Service management.
To what end? And was it 'three strikes material' or a management letter warning offices about 3 strikes (which was known to exist). If it was 3 strikes material was it being handed out by a claimants group in Hull? Couldn't your co-workers not see that certain staff implementing sanctions of JSA with zeal (cutting peoples money off by stopping their claim) would incur wrath of claimants and so see the need to make links with claimants? A lot of work was done, even by 3 strikes proponents, to engage with dole office staff, as I said.
little_brother wrote:
Anyway this post is about a private outfit milking vast amounts of government money and giving claimants just an extra tenner a week on top of dole plus lost hours. Those who perhaps couldn't see it at the time, can now see what kind of beast these training providers really are. Reading the comments to the article in the Nottingham Evening Post, it's a bit sad to see the ones by sacked IM staff actually defending the ethos of their wonderful company, after being sold down the river by their managers - who presumably knew what was happening in order to have the termination letters ready. Plus I bet there were most than a few claimants who were happy to go home rather than carry on with a pointless course they'd been directed to go to by Job Centre, as well as the ones who might say they benefitted from training. Just look at their motivational publicity - makes you want to puke.
I can also add that the NEP readers' online comments have now been removed, so it must have got a bit personal between those of the IM team who had been duped by the loveliness of the job "Winners never quit, and quitters never win!" and those who are more a bit pissed off with being handed a termination letter as they arrived for work, at the end of the month a day before they were due to be paid.
little_brother wrote:
[me]three strikes material was distributed to staff by Employment Service management.
Quote:
To what end?
Possibly to make it clear who workers were getting into bed with if they took action to oppose the JSA.
Quote:
And was it 'three strikes material' or a management letter warning offices about 3 strikes (which was known to exist).
Both
Quote:
If it was 3 strikes material was it being handed out by a claimants group in Hull?
Never saw a leaflet. There were some stickers though, so possibly. The claimants' groups involoved in organising the demo were mostly from West & South Yorkshire, IIRC.
Quote:
Couldn't your co-workers not see that certain staff implementing sanctions of JSA with zeal (cutting peoples money off by stopping their claim) would incur wrath of claimants and so see the need to make links with claimants?
Of course -- not being thick or owt. Unfortunately, the three strikes stuff made them feel unwelcome for some reason, and somehow less willing to make the kind of links you're talking about.
Quote:
A lot of work was done, even by 3 strikes proponents, to engage with dole office staff, as I said.
You may be right. I didn't see it myself. It was a great joy being heckled by antisocials whenever it was announced at meetings what I did for a living though. 
(Apols for quotes fuckedness at top of post -- can't be arsed to sort it out, but I think the meaning is clear.
Yes, you (button) have captured the tension that existed at the time. It was most certainly not a straightforward struggle having two types of worker involved, some oppressing others.
But back to the point, this is likely to be big. Instant Muscle was a Job Centre 'New Deal Prime' provider, farming out cash to smaller training providers, some who have have already been affected - Protos staff have received similar termination letters. Sacked staff on the Nottingham Evening Post article 'readers' comments' (now deleted) were questioning how Instant Muscle could have ended up in receivership after just winning a massive £11m contract for 'Pathways to Work' in Surrey and Sussex in November and a big one in Notts too. Some were blaming the new board of directors, some looking for answers from 'tony and pete', if not revenge (seems like one director might also also be a director of Nottingham Rugby Club). Many many others said things like "I loved working at Instant Muscle. I didn't realise how much until I arrived at work on Wednesday to find it was all over. Therefore I find it really hard to be angry. I am just gutted and shocked...". Obviously sadly taken in by their own propaganda: e.g. http://www.instantmuscle.org.uk/im_news/publications/17.pdf
IM muscle are national, and some workers from other branches commented to Nottingham Evening Post article, e.g. from NDDP South West/Wales. They are saying the outcry needs to go national (especially as head office is not answering the phone). It looks like 250 sackings in IM countrywide, and more in the sister or second tier organisations.
Whatever replaces them is likely to be even worse, looking at Ed Balls' sermons to Fabian Society. I am still holding my breath to see if some of the IM directors bounce back with a new initiative to cash in on this new gravy train.
the button wrote:
Unfortunately, the three strikes stuff made them feel unwelcome for some reason, and somehow less willing to make the kind of links you're talking about.little_brother wrote:
A lot of work was done, even by 3 strikes proponents, to engage with dole office staff, as I said.You may be right. I didn't see it myself. It was a great joy being heckled by antisocials whenever it was announced at meetings what I did for a living though.
Many claimants groups around UK produced leaflets and distributed those supporting workers, as well as those explaining three strikes. Important to note the 3 strikes idea was explicitly against 'first floor' managers and Restart advisors who had (and were known to be using punatively) power to cut off dole money or who were administering quotas of getting so many claimants off the register, not front line desk staff.
These advisors/'case workers' still have the same role now - sending you on pointless 13 week courses for an extra tenner. If they don't push you too hard, or threaten you with getting cut off if you don't comply, fine, but otherwise these 'workers' are on the wrong side of the line.
The various Anti-JSA strategies were well debated in various issues of the old SUBVERSION journal, most of which can be found on the AF -North Web site. Whilst that particular struggle is over some of the issues about how class struggle can be advanced through tactics of both solidarity and confrontation are still relevant.
Steven. wrote:
what was the Three Strikes strategy?
This gives something of a flavour: -
Quote:
The underlying idea is that this should be part of building a claimants' counter power in all areas of social life, to counter oppression and exploitation (see previous recent issues of Organise!, and issue 19 of Subversion). The first warning letters were given out in 1996. The information received from claimants showed the same names of bullying Benefit Office officials kept recurring, e.g.[name], client adviser at [workplace] in Edinburgh. This slimebag forced claimants onto Jobplan and Restart courses, showed political bias during a restart interview (quoting Michael Portillo), emotionally abusing claimants, sometimes reducing them to tears. Following 2 warnings there was a 3 Strike demonstration against him. Fifteen people took over the Benefit Office, went to his desk and photographed him. [name] responded by running away. The demonstrators left the office before the police arrived. [name] 's photo was flyposted throughout the city with a list of his sins, the posters urged people to refuse to be interviewed by him. The campaign has received quite a lot of coverage in the local press over the years. It has not been sympathetic, but claimants can read between the lines, and contact addresses and phone numbers have been quoted at times.
Link not given, as it has the guy's name & workplace in it.
(I'm not suggesting that the adviser in this case wasn't acting like a prick, btw).
Admin, name removed
Steven. wrote:
what was the Three Strikes strategy?on this current issue, i am concerned by LB's apparent glee at the IM staff being sacked and left unpaid...
Read the initial post, and see that Instant Muscle were a notorious company feeding motivational bullshit in the guise of training to claimants, on contract from the Job Centre. Whilst some claimants will say they have benefited from this 'training' if they atually wanted to do it, this was just another form of harassment for many others (basically do it, and do it for 13 weeks, or get you benefits cut). Whilst I can sympathise with those who turned up to work and were given a termination letter and were left unpaid for a month - probably to be sorted out in a month or so once the receivers sort the accounts out - the degree of employee buy-in to IM's rhetoric about 'getting your attitude right to get a job' is appalling to read about and I can only feel sorry for claimants who had to get this, and other nonsense, shoved down their throats. It's a kind of irony that it's all ended so horribly for them, and they are now feeling so powerless. Maybe, extreme self-belief just isn't enough in the face of bastard bosses who suddenly turn out not to be the same team-players (to be be addressed in first name terms) that they'd made themselves out to be?
'3 strikes and you're out' was from the 1990's, one tactic of the excellent Groundswell claimants' action network, and this has been well documented, as mentioned above (and much mispresented by trade union leftists)
Spikymike wrote:
The various Anti-JSA strategies were well debated in various issues of the old SUBVERSION journal, most of which can be found on the AF -North Web site. Whilst that particular struggle is over some of the issues about how class struggle can be advanced through tactics of both solidarity and confrontation are still relevant.
Yes, a flavour of this can be found in the last two links of Subversion issue 23:
http://www.af-north.org/Subversion/subversion_23.htm
More links can be found to stuff written from various perpectives (Subversion, ACF, Aufheben) here:
http://www.geocities.com/ncajsa/ (though and ideas section).
The problem is one of tactics. Clearly, any effective action against the JSA needed to involve both benefit workers and claimants -- this is (just about) acknowledged in the AF materials at the time. The Three Strikes approach -- even though it was used highly selectively -- cut across this. Employment Service management did their best to publicise the Three Strikes campaign -- as I said earlier, there were national communications about it to all staff, and in Hull (one of the Project Work pilot areas) they went as far as distributing Groundswell materials to all staff. Why did they do this? My guess is that it was an attempt to discredit the movement against the JSA as a campaign of intimidation against benefit staff.
At the time, I was Secretary of the CPSA Branch that covered Hull, trying to implement & maintain support for the union's position of opposition to the JSA. Contrary to what the first article that I linked to on this thread says, this was principled opposition, rather than being restricted to concern about health & safety (I should know -- I was at the conference that passed the resolution). And at the same time, helping to organise a conference & demonstration against Project Work through my local Trades Council -- both of which were fairly successful: about 50 at the conference, a few hundred on the demo. All I can say is that workplace support for these initiatives kind of dried up in the light of the Groundswell material. Only a handful of my coworkers turned out for the demo, and none for the conference. Although a senior manager did travel over especially from Leeds to have a look at the demo, and listen very carefully to what I said at the rally in case I said anything that was outwith union policy, with a view to taking disciplinary action.
It's worth pointing out that when JSA implementation was put back by 6 months, this was down to sabotage by benefit workers (leaking documents, etc) rather than opposition from claimants' groups.
little_brother wrote:
Steven. wrote:
what was the Three Strikes strategy?on this current issue, i am concerned by LB's apparent glee at the IM staff being sacked and left unpaid...
Read the initial post, and see that Instant Muscle were a notorious company feeding motivational bullshit in the guise of training to claimants, on contract from the Job Centre. Whilst some claimants will say they have benefited from this 'training' if they atually wanted to do it, this was just another form of harassment for many others (basically do it, and do it for 13 weeks, or get you benefits cut). Whilst I can sympathise with those who turned up to work and were given a termination letter and were left unpaid for a month - probably to be sorted out in a month or so once the receivers sort the accounts out - the degree of employee buy-in to IM's rhetoric about 'getting your attitude right to get a job' is appalling to read about and I can only feel sorry for claimants who had to get this, and other nonsense, shoved down their throats. It's a kind of irony that it's all ended so horribly for them, and they are now feeling so powerless. Maybe, extreme self-belief just isn't enough in the face of bastard bosses who suddenly turn out not to be the same team-players (to be be addressed in first name terms) that they'd made themselves out to be?
This sounds like the same sort of anti-worker stuff those indymedia morons who slag off BP workers or arms workers come out with. A lot of jobs involve doing fucked up stuff, it doesn't mean you support their bosses attacking them. You're in the AF ffs.
Quote:
'3 strikes and you're out' was from the 1990's, one tactic of the excellent Groundswell claimants' action network, and this has been well documented, as mentioned above (and much mispresented by trade union leftists)
From what button posted, it sounds like pretty stupid crap, from the kinds of anarchoids who rant on about not supporting DWP strikes because they don't like their dole worker.
From what I've read about it, the point of three strikes wasn't to go after dole workers, but after those dole workers who deliberately made things as hard as possible for claimants. Which is fair enough if you ask me, in the same way that it'd be reasonable to (for instance) make things difficult for a worker who was giving Polish workers shit in their own workplace, or give the cold shoulder to somebody who crossed a picket line during an otherwise solid strike.
What is the problem with giving shit to people who make a virtue/vocation/evangelism of harassing/disciplining/punishing the unemployed? You can't deny the compromised nature of some jobs and the necessity of fighting back against their imposed repressions. Otherwise the category of 'worker' becomes a worthless political abstraction with no useful application in the real world of class relationships. You can't reduce a state policy of increased pressure on the unemployed to an individual relationship between dole worker and claimant. The wider policy manifests in that relationship - but it can't be reduced to that one on one encounter. So Instant Muscle workers lost a pay packet - who cares? Their whole role was to intimidate the unemployed into shit low-wage jobs. Fuck 'em. Trying to amalgamate opposition to it with anarcho-leftist crap is crap itself.
Ret Marut wrote:
So Instant Muscle workers lost a pay packet - who cares? Their whole role was to intimidate the unemployed into shit low-wage jobs. Fuck 'em. Trying to amalgamate opposition to it with anarcho-leftist crap is crap itself.
I agree with most of what you're saying, but I think you take this bit a little far, and I have to deal with these guys. The role of dole workers can't just be reduced to intimidating the unemployed, as you point out yourself, they only implement a wider policy of intimidating the unemployed, some resist this policy, whether it be through active, collective resistance or through "creative" interpretations of existing policy.
Edited for clarity
Well I wouldn't call a private agency like IM 'dole workers' - while there are punitive aspects to some Job Centre staff roles that can be more or less enthusiastically acted on by workers, IM-type operations are where people are sent to have the screws tightened and to make long term unemployment/work avoidance as unattractive and uncomfortable as possible - ie, an aspect of maintaining a low wage economy.
At least someone got the idea of the original news article!* Cheers. Whatever the reason for Instant Msucle's demise (which will be an interesting story I suspect), New Labour is determined to continue with using these kinds of private contractors**, especially as it moves towards privatisation of Job Centres, which is obviously going to impact very badly on both public sector workers and claimants.
*which is now in Resistance 101: http://www.afed.org.uk/res/
** http://www.dwp.gov.uk/mediacentre/pressreleases/2007/dec/drc061-201207.asp
And now the demise of Instant Muscle is starting to make more sense - seems like they lost out in Notts to an outfit called Work Directions Ltd who are one of the biggest 'pathways to work' providers - http://www.workdirections.co.uk/default.aspx?SectionID=2&PagesID=3
Work Directions got 6 contracts in Phase I including Notts. the other Phase 1 contractors appointed in September 2007 were A4e, Seetec Ltd, Shaw Trust, TNG Ltd and Triage Central Ltd. According to DWP these contractors have been delivering Pathways in 15 Jobcentre Plus Districts since 3 December.
The organisations awarded the Phase II contracts in Dec 2007 were Carter & Carter Group plc, Instant Muscle Enterprise Limited, Reed in Partnership, Remploy, Royal British Legion Industries, Shaw Trust, TNG and Working Links, to deliver Pathways in the remaining 16 Jobcentre Plus districts from April 2008, completing the national rollout across Great Britain.
So perhaps this means IM went into administration in order to downsize for this much reduced contract in Surrey and Sussex??
See just how bad it's got for claimants from this example of Brighton's Job Centres,
JOB CENTRE - CLAIMANT: ONE SIDED RELATIONSHIP: http://www.dolescroungers.org.uk/archive.htm
(Note the words 'over zealous' have cropped up yet again with respect to advisors).
In contrast: December 14th, 2007
TUC welcomes minister’s decision to drop ‘workfare’ from welfare reform package
http://www.tuc.org.uk/em_research/tuc-14093-f0.cfm
Thanks TUC, I feel better already.
See also the DWP press release in my last post and note the following:
"Peter Hain announced a new medical test to assess work capability on 19 November. The Work Capability Assessment will be introduced in October 2008 alongside the new Employment and Support Allowance for people claiming the new allowance. The Employment and Support Allowance replaces Incapacity Benefits from October 2008. "
little_brother wrote:
See just how bad it's got for claimants from this example of Brighton's Job Centres,
JOB CENTRE - CLAIMANT: ONE SIDED RELATIONSHIP: http://www.dolescroungers.org.uk/archive.htm
(Note the words 'over zealous' have cropped up yet again with respect to advisors).
And apparently they're not just ''over zealous'' but ''fascists'' aswell, and they earnt this moniker for the appalling crime of ..er..taking the piss out of customers behind closed doors.
Mind you i'd expect that kind of moralising claptrap from them, but to see it carried over into afed publications which are usually pretty sound with that article pretty much taking pleasure in instant muscle workers getting the sack is a bit of a dissapointment tbh.
cantdocartwheels wrote:
And apparently they're not just ''over zealous'' but ''fascists'' aswell, and they earnt this moniker for the appalling crime of ..er..taking the piss out of customers behind closed doors.
That Working Links article is almost as embarrassing as that website's colour scheme. That said, it wasn't the article little_brother was referring to, it just happened to be on the same page of the same site.
Recently, a mate of mine broke his arm, which meant he couldn't do his job and had to claim IB. One advisor tried to grab his injured arm in the hopes of proving that he could flex his wrist more than he claimed. My mate made a complaint against him. What would you suggest he should have done? Appealed to that nobheads sense of working class solidarity?
Quote:
Recently, a mate of mine broke his arm, which meant he couldn't do his job and had to claim IB. One advisor tried to grab his injured arm in the hopes of proving that he could flex his wrist more than he claimed. My mate made a complaint against him. What would you suggest he should have done? Appealed to that nobheads sense of working class solidarity?
Well obviously not, clearly you'd make a complaint about physical harrassment in that case coz the guy deserves whats coming to him.
Don't really see what thats got to do with any of this thread though, since the problem here is the moralising tone put out and the apparent pleasure taken by the article in seeing instant muscle employees out of a job. Its not the worst thing in the entire world or whatever but its not really a good attitude for an anarchist publication to take is it.
Training provider Instant Muscle have gone into administration, leaving their staff unpaid for February, and unemployed trainees turned away from the doorsteps of their training centres! Staff were given termination letters as they arrived at work on the 27th.
http://tinyurl.com/ypzavz
Instant Muscle were one of the organisations that jumped on the workfare gravy train when the Conservative Part introduced 'Project Work' in the 1990s, which became New Deal for the unemployed after the Labour Party got into power. The idea was that you would get work experience for 10 quid plus your dole. This is an example of so called Intermediate Labour Market still endorsed by the European Social Fund: http://www.esf.gov.uk/archive/2000_2006_esf_programme/case_studies/case_studies_-_east/instant_muscle.asp
As the Tories started up Project Work pilot schemes in various parts of the UK. Along with Grand Metropolitan, IM were identified early on by activists in Groundswell* as one of the main companies involved in this racket, http://archives.econ.utah.edu/archives/aut-op-sy/1997-03-23.192/msg00001.htm
Now the staff themselves are on the dole, having found out first hand about modern workplace practice after serving up motivational bullshit to claimants on behalf of Instant Muscle for more than 20 years. Whilst we can feel sorry for the hundreds of claimants who will have turned up for nothing, unemployed activists certainly won't shed any tears over the demise of this notorious workfare 'service provider'.
This should also be a warning of those who might get taken in by the paternalistic tripe coming out of the likes of Ed Balls, the Labour Party's 'Fabian Society' guru who now plans to force more employed people into training and voluntary-work-for-dole scheme run by companies like Instant Muscle.*2
*1) Groundswell was a anti-Job Seekers Allowance action network that many anarchists/libertarian communists were involved with - see http://www.geocities.com/ncajsa/#thought for more about this.
*2) See previous thread: http://libcom.org/forums/war-peace-freedom-slavery-etc-14112007?page=1