Is a workforce of the Mentally Disabled really the way to go for primary schools in the UK?

[DrP]

A Tory MP on the Radio 4 news this morning was fielding questions regarding the size of the UK workforce to fill jobs such as primary school teachers, nursing and care assistant places after Brexit. It is thought that we will loose thousands of 'unskilled' workers from our workforce. He wasn't worried at all when this was pointed out to him as he has a plan....  his plan?  -  His plan, the Tory plan, and I use plan in a very vague sense here, is to get the mentally ill off of benefits and back to work to cover the problem of loosing 10's of thousands of potential employees. Although individuals suitability to work will be tested (again presumably as they have already gone through the hell of ATLAS tests), if found fit to work they will be forced to take jobs as carers or primary school teachers to cover the shortfall. "They will be delighted to be able to work again" he declared!...  yea, sure.

So - the plan, after losing thousands of employees due to Brexit, is to bully the mentally unstable/disabled into forced labour to teach our primary school children and to take care of the old....  wtf!?

So - Is this a good idea?   

 

 

Edited November 29, 2017 by DrP

[Strange]

What could possibly go wrong?

[DrP]

Sorry - it isn't just the mentally disabled - they are looking to get all disabled people back or into work. They talk about it as if it is a great plan that will benefit all the disabled people buy getting them into employment....  but what it probably actually means is that they plan to take away the disability benefit and force the disabled into jobs they do not want to undertake.

[Strange]

2 minutes ago, DrP said:

but what it probably actually means is that they plan to take away the disability benefit

Maybe that is where the £350 million a week for the NHS will come from.

[Phi for All]

2 hours ago, DrP said:

Sorry - it isn't just the mentally disabled - they are looking to get all disabled people back or into work. They talk about it as if it is a great plan that will benefit all the disabled people buy getting them into employment....  but what it probably actually means is that they plan to take away the disability benefit and force the disabled into jobs they do not want to undertake.

That sounds distinctly American. Actually, in the US they would then take the benefit and give it to the employer for hiring the disabled, so a double-whammy for the taxpayers!

[dimreepr]

On 29/11/2017 at 11:49 AM, DrP said:

A Tory MP on the Radio 4 news this morning was fielding questions regarding the size of the UK workforce to fill jobs such as primary school teachers, nursing and care assistant places after Brexit. It is thought that we will loose thousands of 'unskilled' workers from our workforce. He wasn't worried at all when this was pointed out to him as he has a plan....  his plan?  -  His plan, the Tory plan, and I use plan in a very vague sense here, is to get the mentally ill off of benefits and back to work to cover the problem of loosing 10's of thousands of potential employees. Although individuals suitability to work will be tested (again presumably as they have already gone through the hell of ATLAS tests), if found fit to work they will be forced to take jobs as carers or primary school teachers to cover the shortfall. "They will be delighted to be able to work again" he declared!...  yea, sure.

So - the plan, after losing thousands of employees due to Brexit, is to bully the mentally unstable/disabled into forced labour to teach our primary school children and to take care of the old....  wtf!?

So - Is this a good idea?   

 

 

3

 

It's a good idea, without the obvious political agenda; if we can lose the label "disabled" and just seek what we're all able to do.  

It's a good idea if we lose the idea that everyone has to contribute to society, in monetary terms, and that those that don't, can't be of benefit.  

I have been a carer in a Steiner based school and don't agree with his philosophy, but he did have a point. 

[CharonY]

6 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

 

It's a good idea, without the obvious political agenda; if we can lose the label "disabled" and just seek what we're all able to do.  

It's a good idea if we lose the idea that everyone has to contribute to society, in monetary terms, and that those that don't, can't be of benefit.  

I have been a carer in a Steiner based school and don't agree with his philosophy, but he did have a point. 

That is not likely  the point though. I do not know the situation in the UK, but if a disabled, but otherwise capable person applies for a job, they would at least be considered equally if not preferentially if they are citizens. or permanent residents. I.e. if they are not in the workforce, why should they suddenly be a replacement for loss in workers?

[dimreepr]

5 minutes ago, CharonY said:

That is not likely  the point though. 

1

I realise that.

7 minutes ago, CharonY said:

but if a disabled, but otherwise capable person applies for a job, they would at least be considered equally if not preferentially if they are citizens. or permanent residents.

1

That doesn't seem to be the case, I wish it were.

 

[DrP]

13 minutes ago, CharonY said:

. if they are not in the workforce, why should they suddenly be a replacement for loss in workers?

Because the Tories have been trying for years to force people who claim not to be able to work into work. They don't want to subsidise the lives of these people that are not paying money into society. 'there but by the grace of god go I"...  I would have thought human decency would have you take care of the inflicted - it could happen to any of us at any time. It is just right wing politics though...  The extreme right wing people I used to know were advocates of cleansing the gene pool of disabilities by not allowing people with disabilities to breed.....  it is totally despicable....  that and throwing shit at paki* shops.

 

* - this word is considered very offensive in the UK by left wing people. The right wingers just use it as an abbreviation of the word Pakistani. They totally mean offence with the word and then deny it when challenged. I don't actually know if it is considered offensive by people of Pakistani decent or not. For me it is just like the abbreviation of the word British to Brit - but I stopped using the word as it offended too many people. I think part of the problem is that people in the middle that use it as an abbreviation get called racists and they think it is ridiculous so the left wing message gets lost in political correctness and ignored.... it is how/why things like brexit happen imo.

[dimreepr]

12 minutes ago, CharonY said:

I.e. if they are not in the workforce, why should they suddenly be a replacement for loss in workers?

They certainly shouldn't be unless they want to be, and that's my point.