Can't see the wood for the trees? You need our free industry newswire
What happens to NDPAs?
by Serafina on 11 Apr, 2008 in
Hi,
As a New Deal Personal Adviser in a Jobcentre office, what can I expect when Flexible New Deal comes in? I know there are lots more job cuts coming up. Will my job be protected?
There seem to be differing answers to this.
From what Ive read on the internet, DWP are implying that most NDPA's will be found alternative roles and only a small number might have to go to private providers (under TUPE). Providers, on the other hand, seem to be expecting the opposite.
Both can't be true.
I'm in agreement with ahomage on this one. It's not clear how many JCP staff will go to providers or elsewhere, although DWP have said they'll give more details at the ITT stage of the competition in a few months.
An important thing to bear in mind is that the previous New Deal providers' staff will also be transferred into flexible New Deal. This means that there may potentially be fewer vacancies than people to fill them, leading to JCP staff being TUPE transferred then instantly made redundant by the provider owing to overstaffing.
A clarification on this, as people have been asking questions. The key word above is 'potentially' - there's no guarantee that the new provider will have more jobs than the previous provider + NDPA combined total, but equally it's not certain that there would be fewer jobs and thus redundancies.
I know several JCP NDPA's, and they say that if they can't stay in the civil service, they'd prefer to have a redundancy package.
Thanks for the replies. I don't really know enough about the difference between Jobcentre Plus and providers to be sure what option I would prefer. It will be interesting to see what happens.
the public sector pension contributions of 20%+ per year are really scary for private providers. imo some of the big new welfare to work entrants comin in for FND will be considering where to use the scalpel, and will have the experience to use it pretty harshly.
having said that, the civil service doesn't pay nearly as well as some of the providers if you can get off the bottom rung.
The DWP have declared their hand on this, and are not planning to transfer staff to providers. Saves a lot of trouble all round, really. I suspect the concerns of providers would be more around effectiveness than cost - the increase in pension and other welfare costs is surely at least partly offset by the difference in wages.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
From that statement by DWP then, what is the likelihood that the initial part of the program for JSA claimants being sub-contracted out to providers? (The 12 months prior to fND 'kicking in').
It's down to companies approaching DWP with a plan to take it over, basically. There may be some legal issues in contracting out some parts of the welfare system, but they can presumably be sorted out once a proposal is made. If a proposal is workable and offers potential savings / benefits, it will be put to tender. Taking over entire Jobcentre Plus offices or districts seems feasible, but anything very different or scary would doubtless have its size limited until it was proven to work.
I can't see it...
I think stricter benefit sanctions will have to be brought in BEFORE providers could realistically take on the full JCP role.
As it sounds so far, I imagine JCP advisers doing the 6-month Gateway stage, but maybe with more flexibility than they currently have as NDPAs.
As the dept has stated that no staff will be forced to work for providers, it would seem logical for JCP NDPA's to be moved to the Gateway role. Many 'employable' people will find work within 6 months, so I can't imagine the DWP wanting to pay providers for helping these people. I thought the whole point of fND was to help the hardcore unemployed, not the very employable?
Post new comment