>>13251
At least they have a job.

The ones at mine were proper jobsworths, who would ask you "do you have an appointment" if you were sat down waiting for longer than about three minutes, despite them usually being the same bloke who asked you that same question when you walked in the door.

I can understand why they'd be like that, their entire job is a constant reminder of the despair of being out of work and navigating the benefits system.

It also occurs to me that it probably depends on where you are how effective these lads are - they probably put the serious bouncer types in the dodgier areas. If there's a jobcentre in Knutsford, say, it's probably just one friendly chap .

>>13251
OP has been banned for this and a series of other eye-bleeding posts.

Please ensure your posts are correctly formatted before clicking submit, otherwise you will be banned.

There's too much going on on that lanyard.

>>13256

Yes, the letter "O"s are unnecessary.

>>13251
I've only ever seen one security guard at my jobcentre. Eleven? What kind of hellscape do you live in?

>>13258
The North.

The jobcentre is 100% mindfuck. It's there to punish the poor and rub their faces in the dirt. The ones that work there know this. The only thing that keeps them in line is the knowledge that they might end up on the other side of it.

>>13261
Dunno about that. When I signed on I don't think I met a truly vindictive advisor. In fact I did some work experience at a jobcentre and there were some union posters up in the corridors vehemently reminding people that there were no DWP-imposed quotas for sanctions and the like.

>>13262

Depends on your region, I'd imagine. As others have pointed out, in areas with more resources and available work, the tone and scope of the service is probably vastly different.

I can say from personal experiences, though, that in rougher places it absolutely has a more punitive function. As long as we still have the idea of the undeserving poor, we will continue to encourage (or at least tacitly support) what economists call "ordeal mechanisms" to put people off claiming.

>>13263

From my experiences it's basically a class thing. When I showed up there in smart casual, asking about civil service roles and even going as far as explaining I could get work any time in my old field but wanted to change, my advisor was all over it, we typically had 45 minute meetings, she researched shit for me, and seemed genuinely invested. Whereas the tracksuit chavs who didn't know what they could do or brought in their CV on a crumpled up napkin seemed to get talked to like a schoolchild being scolded, and their meetings lasted about five minutes.

I suppose though it wasn't really preconceptions that lead them to judge this way - they must learn pretty quickly who genuinely wants work and who doesn't, and will act accordingly.

>>13261
And it also invariably stinks.

>>13267
>explaining I could get work any time in my old field but wanted to change
Guess you're right about perceptions because technically you should have been sanctioned for refusing work as soon as you said that.

>>13269
Last time I was on the dole I had accepted a job offer and was waiting for some medical paperwork to clear so I could get a start date. I changed my focus to casual work to fill the time until I could start. I was sanctioned for not applying to enough advertised vacancies.

>>13269

I said it on my first meeting and they obviously never offered me work in my field, so I never technically (or literally) refused work.

>>13270

>I was sanctioned for not applying to enough advertised vacancies.

I would just log ten or fifteen applications a day before my appointment, regardless of what I'd actually applied for. It always seemed fine.

I'm aware I probably just got lucky with a good/shit (depending on your perspective) adviser, but it didn't seem that hard to extend the dole for as long as you wanted.

Immigrant that gets a job as a security guard and is proud of his job.

THIS IS WHY I VOTED IIIWW

You didn't hear it from me, but if you can wrestle one of them to the ground you actually get his job.

AFAIK if you're a gay black trans lesbian midget with aids and a robot wheelchair you can just turn up at any public sector job interview and get the job.

(A good day to you Sir!)

>>13275
>"It's illegal to be English, Stew."

Did someone hyperlink .gs on The Mail?

>>13277

Isn't it a direct updating of a quote from 'yes minister'?

>>13275
If you say you're English, these days, you'll be arrested and thrown in jail.

>>13279
Broken Britain m8.

>>13275 has let himself go.

>>13251
I work in one. We have 15 security guys, but then again we have two floors.

>>13282
Are you expecting to be attacked by Adam Jensen or do you just keep all the dole money in a pile out in the open?

>>13286
If they actually expect to be attacked by AJ, they're doing it wrong anyway.

>>13282
Being a security guard is a pretty cushty job at the best of times but imagine how laid back it is with fourteen other people to pick up the slack.

I did my own dole hunting yesterday and there were three security bods in the building. Two were on the fat side of normal sized, but one was about six foot four inches tall and built like a cave troll. I assume the tubby two just exist to point him in the right direction when things go sour.

Also everyone there quite nice, probably because I'm dead charming and lovely, unlike you miserable buggers.

>>13291

The other two are ammo for him to lob.

I'm just hijacking this thread for my own Job Centre related /101/ moaning now, but today, as I sat in a Job Centre and agreed to my "Universal Credit commitments" my claim was closed in real time, by someone in another part of the country, as I had not yet agreed to said commitments, despite being moments away from doing so. Now I get to enjoy more looks of disappointed bafflement than usual as I explain a situation that "has never happened before" according to the chap I was meeting with.

I think I owe Ken Loach an apology, this is buggered and it's actually left me quite depressed.