Sunday, January 22, 2012

Charity slams David Cameron's Work Programme for unemployed

The news about welfare reforms in England are in vogue nowadays. This kind of reform means that because of citizen’s social demands the social system needs some structural adjusts because these demands means problems have turned into social dissatisfied.
The David Cameron’s work policy in England held by Employment Minister Chris Grayling to facing unemployment problems is in a critical moment at the present because of a dispute between some relevant actors on economic issues.
This unemployment plan involves charities and private firms or institutions to set up a structure of opportunities to unemployed people of the country which consist basically in give work experience and a special unemployed training. This strategy is supported by the effective relationship between public and private institutions mentioned.
Voluntaries institutions claim that the private firms have incurred in illegal economical practices with them. They request that private firms of employment failed to the agreements in relation to pay commissions for contracts that they sign when an unemployed person get any job thanks to private area.
The association of voluntaries institutions claims that privates use them to attract -“like a bid-candy”- unemployed people and sign contracts, and then don’t reward to voluntaries.
This kind of practices, getting dirty the social space ‘in the name’ of a public interest as the unemployment policy, which is totally manipulated to cover up high levels of private firms profits.  


To get more information about this news, go to: http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/jan/21/david-cameron-work-programme-unemployed

1 comment:

  1. Good Diego.

    Some comments:

    The word "News" is uncountable, so ALWAYS "News" IS.

    Also, the word you need is "adjustment" (structural adjustments) (Noun) not the verb "adjust". You have the same problem with the word "DISSATISFACTION" Noun needed, not adjective, "dissatisfied". Also the word "disruption" (noun) and not "disrupt" (verb). Check this issue out in an English-English dictionary. I recommend "Cambridge dictionary on line", google it.

    As we agreed in class, you get a 4,0.

    ReplyDelete