Dáil Éireann Debate, Tuesday - 29 January 2019
569. Deputy John Brady asked the Minister for Employment Affairs and Social Protection if her attention has been drawn to research carried out by Waterford Institute of Technology into JobPath following interviews with JobPath participants; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [4111/19]
Amharc ar fhreagraAcademics from Waterford Institute of Technology recently made statements to the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Employment Affairs and Social Protection. The statements made reference to research undertaken where 121 unemployed persons had been interviewed as part of their research into experiences of unemployment. Some 25 of those who partook in the research reported an experience of the JobPath programme. It is unclear from the statements made as to the degree to which those interviewed reflect a representative sample of service users upon which the conclusions and recommendations contained are based.
However, it should be noted that reports to the Committee are at variance with the surveys conducted by the Irish National Organisation of the Unemployed, INOU, and contrary to the feedback and findings arising from research carried out by an independent external consultants W5. This research specifically assesses the level of satisfaction with JobPath services across the country. In summary, the W5 surveys conducted in 2016, 2017 and 2018 reflect the views of some 6,000 jobseekers and found that JobPath participants view the service very positively. On the key aspects of premises, staff, services and processes, reaction is almost uniformly positive and at odds with the findings of the authors’ report.
All of the evidence available to my Department indicates that the experience of customers who have engaged with the JobPath service to date has been quite positive. In addition, the service providers are subject to regular audits and inspections. The Department’s contract with the JobPath provider requires them to have a comprehensive complaints process, and this is advertised in every provider location. The process contains various levels of escalation, allowing complaints to be dealt with at a level appropriate to the concern.
Up to December 2018, approximately 201,972 jobseekers have engaged with the JobPath service, with only 836 complaints received in total – 0.41%. The Department has completed ten reviews of complaints and participants have the option of requesting the Ombudsman to conduct a further review, although to date none have done so.
With regard to the issue of penalty rates of payment, jobseeker payments are conditional on jobseekers being genuinely available for work. The activation and employment support services provided by the Department, at significant expense, are designed to help jobseekers secure employment. In line with the principle of rights and responsibilities, jobseekers are entitled to be provided with these services but are also required to engage with the services when they are made available. This obligation applies irrespective of whether the service is provided by my Department’s own case officers, those employed by the Local Employment Service or by JobPath. Failure, without good cause, to engage with the services can result in a reduction in the payment to the jobseeker. However, reductions are only applied after jobseekers have been given due notice on two occasions and an opportunity to provide an explanation for their non-engagement and to re-engage with the services. All decisions on the application of a reduced rate of payment are made by staff of the Department.
Where the jobseeker is dissatisfied with this decision, it is open to that individual to appeal the decision to the independent Social Welfare Appeals Office. Should an appeal against a decision to apply a penalty rate be upheld, the amounts withheld from the jobseeker payment would be refunded to the person concerned.
I hope this clarifies the matter for the Deputy.
