Finian McGrath (Dublin North Central, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

130. To ask the Tánaiste and Minister for Social Protection if a vetting process was completed to assign JobPath - Seetec to support unemployed persons, given allegations of human rights abuse and unprofessional conduct (details supplied); and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39063/15]

Finian McGrath (Dublin North Central, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

131. To ask the Tánaiste and Minister for Social Protection her views on correspondence (details supplied) regarding the inability of JobPath and Seetec to provide an adequate and professional service to its service providers in County Longford; and allegations of fraud; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39064/15]

Kevin Humphreys (Dublin South East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I propose to take Questions Nos. 130 and 131 together.

JobPath is a new approach to employment activation that will support people who are long-term unemployed and those most at risk of becoming long-term unemployed to secure and sustain paid employment. Following the completion of a rigorous public procurement process, two companies were selected to provide the JobPath service - Turas Nua Limited and Seetec Limited. The companies will deliver services directly and will also engage a range of local subcontractors, including local training and employment service providers.

JobPath was designed having regard to international experience of contracted out employment services and taking account of inputs received at a number of open information fora and advice received from Irish and International experts. Significant safeguards have been built into JobPath. These include a service guarantee to ensure that all participants receive a baseline level of service as well as penalties for the companies if service performance or service quality does not meet standards. Both companies will be subject to regular on-site inspections and audits to ensure that JobPath is delivered in accordance with contractual obligations. It is also the case that decisions regarding a person’s welfare entitlements while on JobPath will be taken only by Department officials and not by the JobPath companies while the sanction process for clients on JobPath is exactly the same as the process for clients who engage with the Department’s own activation service.

In relation to the experience of the person in Longford, I have been advised that a letter was sent to the person concerned on 13 October inviting her to attend a JobPath group information session on 20 October.

The person concerned received a follow up phone call on 14 October to confirm the appointment but she said that was unable to attend the scheduled group information session. She was offered an alternative appointment on 27 October but again she said she was unable to attend. Arrangements were then made for her to attend an individual information session on 28 October which she duly attended.

In the meantime, the person concerned was interviewed on 19 October for a place on a local Community Employment (CE) Scheme following which she was provisionally offered a position for 19 ½ hours a week for one year.

While CE schemes are intended to help long-term unemployed people to re-enter the active workforce, by breaking their experience of unemployment through a return to work routine for a limited duration, they are not full-time sustainable jobs. A key objective of JobPath is however to assist jobseekers to secure full-time sustainable employment.

Participants on JobPath receive intensive individual support to help them address barriers to employment and to assist them in finding jobs. They will spend a year on the programme and if they are placed into a job they may continue to receive support for the first year of employment. During their time on JobPath they may also be referred for further education and training opportunities. Jobseekers retain their existing social welfare payment while on JobPath.

Given the circumstances of this case I have asked a senior official of the Department to review the person’s case with a view to assessing the validity of the complaint received and determining the best outcome for the person concerned. This review is currently underway.