18
February
2013
A panel of judges has ruled that the government’s controversial work-for-your-benefit schemes are unlawful and that the secretary of state for work and pensions had acted unlawfully by not giving unemployed people enough information about the penalties they faced and their rights to appeal against being made to work unpaid (in some cases hundreds of hours).
University graduate Cait Reilly won her claim that requiring her to work for free at a Poundland discount store was unlawful. Reilly, 24, from Birmingham, and 40-year-old unemployed HGV driver Jamieson Wilson, from Nottingham, both succeeded in their claims that the unpaid schemes were legally flawed.
The Department for Work and pensions (DWP) was refused leave to appeal, but said they will take matters to the Supreme Court as they try to avoid paying out rebates to tens of thousands of unemployed people who received sanctions under the ‘Work Experience’ and ‘Work Programme’ schemes.
Commenting on the decision GMB Senior Organiser Terry Mellor said: “This decision is a well-deserved kick in the pants for the government’s flawed forced labour programme that makes young people take unpaid work by threatening to remove their benefits. Cait Reilly had been lambasted by the right wing press as some kind of work shy scrounger, but has received massive public support and has now been backed by the judges ruling that the work and pensions secretary acted unlawfully. The government should put more effort into addressing problems in the economy and the scandal of youth unemployment rather than forcing young people to take unpaid jobs, often for large retail chains who can more than afford to pay the going rate”.
Despite arguing that the Judges decision is flawed, the DWP has already taken steps to issue fresh regulations.
