Work Programme ‘a success’, says Pertemps People Development Group MD
25 February 2013
The managing director of welfare-to-work provider Pertemps People Development Group (PPDG) has hit back at criticisms by MPs that the government’s Work Programme is failing.
Mon, 25 Feb 2013The managing director of welfare-to-work provider Pertemps People Development Group (PPDG) has hit back at criticisms by MPs that the government’s Work Programme is failing.
Calling the scheme “a success”, PPDG MD Gareth Edwards tells Recruiter: “My view is that it is working.”
The Work Programme was launched by the government in June 2011 as a radical new approach to get the long-term unemployed into work.
On Friday, the public accounts committee said that during the first 14 months of the programme only 3.6% of jobseekers on the scheme moved off benefits into sustained employment of more than six months, and described the performance of the scheme as “extremely poor”.
Edwards responds that the 3.6% figure “is not an accurate reflection of activity because it is a seven-year contract and we have them [the long-term unemployed] for two years. It takes an average of 20-26 weeks to get people into work; the first measurement point is after six months, so that is 12 months into the programme before you get meaningful results. We have still got two to three months before the end of our first cohort [of unemployed], and it is only then that we will see the true measure.”
Edwards also disagrees with the MPs’ criticism that providers ‘cream off’ those jobseekers who are easiest to place, while ‘parking’ and not bothering to help those who are hardest to place into jobs, such as those on incapacity benefit.
He responds: “Morally and ethically as a business we treat everyone the same; our target is to help 100% of people on the programme.” He adds: “We don’t park people, we give everybody the same opportunity, we don’t give up on them.”
Edwards says that the company only puts people forward for interview when there is a good chance that they will not only get the job, but also keep it. And he goes on to explain that getting people to that stage, when they may have been out of work for 20 years, can take many months and sometimes more than a year.
This is not the first time the Work Programme has been criticised. In November, the Chartered Institute of Personnel & Development (CIPD) found that 49% of UK employers were unaware of the scheme.
A spokesperson for employment services charity the Shaw Trust and Careers Development Group says he is confident that given time the Work Programme “will be a success”.
“Providers have two years to work with people to help them find and stay in work, and therefore it is too soon to state that jobseekers are being ‘creamed and parked’,” he says.
The spokesperson adds: “As you would expect for a scheme of this size, we do feel that further refinements can be made. This includes making sure that funding for providers is based on the needs of the individual rather than the type of benefit they receive, as in the Australian system, which we believe would be another step forward.”
Calling the scheme “a success”, PPDG MD Gareth Edwards tells Recruiter: “My view is that it is working.”
The Work Programme was launched by the government in June 2011 as a radical new approach to get the long-term unemployed into work.
On Friday, the public accounts committee said that during the first 14 months of the programme only 3.6% of jobseekers on the scheme moved off benefits into sustained employment of more than six months, and described the performance of the scheme as “extremely poor”.
Edwards responds that the 3.6% figure “is not an accurate reflection of activity because it is a seven-year contract and we have them [the long-term unemployed] for two years. It takes an average of 20-26 weeks to get people into work; the first measurement point is after six months, so that is 12 months into the programme before you get meaningful results. We have still got two to three months before the end of our first cohort [of unemployed], and it is only then that we will see the true measure.”
Edwards also disagrees with the MPs’ criticism that providers ‘cream off’ those jobseekers who are easiest to place, while ‘parking’ and not bothering to help those who are hardest to place into jobs, such as those on incapacity benefit.
He responds: “Morally and ethically as a business we treat everyone the same; our target is to help 100% of people on the programme.” He adds: “We don’t park people, we give everybody the same opportunity, we don’t give up on them.”
Edwards says that the company only puts people forward for interview when there is a good chance that they will not only get the job, but also keep it. And he goes on to explain that getting people to that stage, when they may have been out of work for 20 years, can take many months and sometimes more than a year.
This is not the first time the Work Programme has been criticised. In November, the Chartered Institute of Personnel & Development (CIPD) found that 49% of UK employers were unaware of the scheme.
A spokesperson for employment services charity the Shaw Trust and Careers Development Group says he is confident that given time the Work Programme “will be a success”.
“Providers have two years to work with people to help them find and stay in work, and therefore it is too soon to state that jobseekers are being ‘creamed and parked’,” he says.
The spokesperson adds: “As you would expect for a scheme of this size, we do feel that further refinements can be made. This includes making sure that funding for providers is based on the needs of the individual rather than the type of benefit they receive, as in the Australian system, which we believe would be another step forward.”
