Unemployed cannot be forced to work in Poundland

By Peter Dominiczak, Political Correspondent

Ministers said they were “disappointed and surprised” after Cait Reilly, a university graduate, won her Court of Appeal claim that requiring her to work for free at a Poundland discount store was unlawful. 

Miss Reilly, 24, from Birmingham, and a 40-year-old unemployed HGV driver Jamieson Wilson, from Nottingham, both succeeded in their claims that the unpaid schemes were legally flawed. 

Their solicitors said later the ruling means “all those people who have been sanctioned by having their jobseekers' allowance withdrawn for non-compliance with the back-to-work schemes affected will be entitled to reclaim their benefits”. 

Her legal team was seeking to have two Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) back-to-work schemes – the Community Action Programme and Work Academy Scheme – declared unlawful. 

The Government said it will attempt to appeal the ruling and said that it is “ridiculous” to describe the schemes as forced labour. 

The Government will now introduce new regulations to ensure future schemes are lawfully based. 

Miss Reilly had been claiming job seekers’ benefits since 2011 after she failed to find work after graduating in 2010. 

In November 2011, Miss Reilly had to leave her voluntary work at a local museum and work unpaid at the Poundland store in Kings Heath, Birmingham, under a scheme known as the "sector-based work academy". 

She was told that if she did not carry out the work placement she would lose her jobseeker's allowance. 

For two weeks she stacked shelves and cleaned floors. 

Mr Wilson, a qualified mechanic, was told that he had to work unpaid, cleaning furniture for 30 hours a week for six months, under a scheme known as the Community Action Programme. 

He objected to doing unpaid work that was unrelated to his qualifications and would not help him re-enter the jobs market. 

He refused to participate and as a result was stripped of his jobseeker's allowance for six months. 

After the ruling Public Interest Lawyers, who represent Ms Reilly and Mr Wilson, said the Court of Appeal's unanimous decision was a "huge setback for the Department for Work and Pensions, whose flagship reforms have been beset with problems since their inception". 

They said that "until new regulations are enacted with proper parliamentary approval, nobody can be compelled to participate on the schemes". 

Solicitor Tessa Gregory said: "Today's judgment sends Iain Duncan Smith back to the drawing board to make fresh regulations which are fair and comply with the court's ruling. 

"Until that time nobody can be lawfully forced to participate in schemes affected such as the Work Programme and the Community Action Programme. 

"All of those who have been stripped of their benefits have a right to claim the money back that has been unlawfully taken away from them." 

Miss Reilly said she was “delighted” with the judgement. 

“I brought this case because I knew it was wrong when I was prevented from doing my voluntary work in a museum and forced to work in Poundland for free for two weeks as part of a scheme known as the sector based work academy,” she said. 

"Those two weeks were a complete waste of my time as the experience did not help me get a job. 

"I wasn't given any training and I was left with no time to do my voluntary work or search for other jobs. 

"The only beneficiary was Poundland, a multimillion-pound company. Later I found out that I should never have been told the placement was compulsory. 

"I don't think I am above working in shops like Poundland. I now work part time in a supermarket. It is just that I expect to get paid for working. 

"I hope the Government will now take this opportunity to rethink its strategy and do something which actually builds on young unemployed people's skills and tackles the causes of long-term unemployment. 

"I agree we need to get people back to work but the best way of doing that is by helping them, not punishing them. 

"The Government ought to understand that if they created schemes which actually helped people get back into work then they wouldn't need to force people to attend." 

Mark Hoban, the Minister for Employment, today said the Government will attempt to appeal the ruling. 

“The court has backed our right to require people to take part in programmes which will help get them into work,” Mr Hoban said. 

“It’s ridiculous to say this is forced labour. This ruling ensures we can continue with these important schemes. 

“We are however disappointed and surprised at the court's decision on our regulations. There needed to be flexibility so we could give people the right support to meet their needs and get them into a job. We do not agree with the court's judgment and are seeking permission to appeal, but new regulations will be tabled to avoid any uncertainty. 

“Ultimately the judgment confirms that it is right that we expect people to take getting into work seriously if they want to claim benefits.” 

TUC general-secretary Frances O'Grady said the ruling £blows a big hole” in the Government’s workfare policies. 

“This blows a big hole through the Government's workfare policies,” she said. “Of course voluntary work experience can help the jobless, and it is right to expect the unemployed to seek work. 

“But it is pointless to force people to work for no pay in jobs that do nothing to help them while putting others at risk of unemployment. 

“This policy is about blaming the jobless, not helping them. Ministers should now abandon this misguided approach, and instead guarantee real jobs for the long-term unemployed, especially the young.” Telegraph