Atos/WCA documentary's

Scorpion0x17 said:

as i said, they dont "lack compassion" for their own family/friends, but when it comes to the job, experience of how they actually are in these "interviews" shows otherwise with "interviewees"

As I've already said some may lack compassion. But lets not tar a whole class of people with the same brush just because of few bad apples. That's exactly what we're all fighting against!

some one said:

i get you may have some personal reason to argue their 'side' as we do arguing our own

Not at all. And I'm not arguing 'their side' - I am present my own personal, as unbiased as I can be, opinion of the situation.

some one said:

but it's simple, theres no real excuse to treat people how they do, it's that simple,

There's no excuse for how some individuals treat people, no. But, again, let's not tar the everyone that does that job with the same brush. We are as bad as those dispassionate individuals when we do so.

some one said:

im not here to debate the morality of the system, just that as it is it's unfair and those working for it are the one's implementing it, and my, and a lot of peoples personal experience at these "interviews" has been negative to stressful and unfair, and it is the "interviewer" who made it so

I don't think that it is the interviewer that 'made it so' - the interviewer is not the one that makes the decisions - those are made by a decision maker - so, again whilst there are inevitably some bad interviewers, who will bias the reports, and so lead to the wrong decision being made, I don't think we can rightly tar all the interviewers with that same brush. Doing so is as bad as the problem interviewers biasing their reports.

some one said:

and im sorry but i wont defend someone i think is doing an unfair job they know hurts people, if we use goatworshipers analogy of ***, 'just doing a job to survive' doesnt really cut it does it

Really?

Oh, come on. We are not being rounded up and sent to death camps, so let's stop with all these nazi analogies. It belittles us as inteligent individuals to lower ourselves to using such arguments.

You have the legal right to appeal any decision made by the DWP decision makers.

Thousands have (and I am one who did), and a high percentage of those that have win their appeal (like I did).

That shows that it is a failing of the system, not of individual interviewers.

Attack the system, not the people, who are just people, like you and me, at the end of the day.

[/quote]

fair enough, you have your views and expriences i have mine, all i know is the majority of experiences i hear about, via people i know or stories from ducumentaries , have been negative, its good you had a positive one, but sadly its rare for most of us

as for the analogy, i merely suggested we go with it, it was not my analogy, i didn't create i just went with it

if you have a problem with that analogy talk to the person who brought it up, i merely suggested 2 things,

its about comparison to having compassion and no or little compassiosn for the "interviewee"

, and the fact that 'doing their job' is never an excuse to treat people badly

as we are on a form on autism, an issue which faces lots of discrimination because of the issues related to it, id woould have thought it was relevant, if its your view that it is "belittling and lowering" to compare, fair enough i dont agree, while it may have been exaggerative, as goatworshiper already admitted, the comparison is still there to be made in some form be it not as exagerative

this was never about the analogy, or our views, its about facts and why they are happening

all i ask is you research just how many people are afected by atos "interviews" and ask them directly why they were affected

we have had a system for a long time, but it wasnt always this way, something changed and who they began to hire changed, and why they hired them

some one said:

as i said, they dont "lack compassion" for their own family/friends, but when it comes to the job, experience of how they actually are in these "interviews" shows otherwise with "interviewees"

As I've already said some may lack compassion. But lets not tar a whole class of people with the same brush just because of few bad apples. That's exactly what we're all fighting against!

some one said:

i get you may have some personal reason to argue their 'side' as we do arguing our own

Not at all. And I'm not arguing 'their side' - I am present my own personal, as unbiased as I can be, opinion of the situation.

some one said:

but it's simple, theres no real excuse to treat people how they do, it's that simple,

There's no excuse for how some individuals treat people, no. But, again, let's not tar the everyone that does that job with the same brush. We are as bad as those dispassionate individuals when we do so.

some one said:

im not here to debate the morality of the system, just that as it is it's unfair and those working for it are the one's implementing it, and my, and a lot of peoples personal experience at these "interviews" has been negative to stressful and unfair, and it is the "interviewer" who made it so

I don't think that it is the interviewer that 'made it so' - the interviewer is not the one that makes the decisions - those are made by a decision maker - so, again whilst there are inevitably some bad interviewers, who will bias the reports, and so lead to the wrong decision being made, I don't think we can rightly tar all the interviewers with that same brush. Doing so is as bad as the problem interviewers biasing their reports.

some one said:

and im sorry but i wont defend someone i think is doing an unfair job they know hurts people, if we use goatworshipers analogy of ***, 'just doing a job to survive' doesnt really cut it does it

Really?

Oh, come on. We are not being rounded up and sent to death camps, so let's stop with all these nazi analogies. It belittles us as inteligent individuals to lower ourselves to using such arguments.

You have the legal right to appeal any decision made by the DWP decision makers.

Thousands have (and I am one who did), and a high percentage of those that have win their appeal (like I did).

That shows that it is a failing of the system, not of individual interviewers.

Attack the system, not the people, who are just people, like you and me, at the end of the day.

Scorpion0x17 said:

The map is not the territory.

Or, in other words, just because someone is forced to implement a discompassionate system, that does not imply that they must lack compassion.

Should all these people end up destitute just because the government introduce a system that is discompassionate?

I don't think that would be fair on them any more than the system is fair on us.

as i said, they dont "lack compassion" for their own family/friends, but when it comes to the job, experience of how they actually are in these "interviews" shows otherwise with "interviewees"

i get you may have some personal reason to argue their 'side' as we do arguing our own, but it's simple, theres no real excuse to treat people how they do, it's that simple,

im not here to debate the morality of the system, just that as it is it's unfair and those working for it are the one's implementing it, and my, and a lot of peoples personal experience at these "interviews" has been negative to stressful and unfair, and it is the "interviewer" who made it so

and im sorry but i wont defend someone i think is doing an unfair job they know hurts people, if we use goatworshipers analogy of ***, 'just doing a job to survive' doesnt really cut it does it

To clarify my view.

If Atos staff are medically trained (I'm not being derrogatory (SP), but I believe they are typicall a lot are people with higher qualifications but not a high grade and therefore find it difficult to penetrate the NHS/Bupa and the likes.) they have a duty of care to patients & clients. If they put the health of someone at risk, technically they can be stripped of professional registration if they knowingly done so. Therefore anyone wanting to work in a medical/caring feild should be wary of this.

The initial Atos staff probably walked into this situation blindly. However I can't fathom why anyone walks into this situation knowing all that as gone on. There are other ocupations. Why don't they go on strike or challenge the DWP like the BMA has done? I hate "yes people", I get in situations at work were I say no to things becasue they are not always ethical or could danger someone. Saying "yes" to things you don't believe in is kind of symbolic of humanities failing's.

The goverment is using collective responsibilty in a similar fashion to what the Nazi's did. One dissents, ten are punished, "were in this together". Also rumors are abound of failing people medicals on incapacity benifit to fast track their migration to ESA if they win at appeal (as you cant re-claim incapacity). 

Grumble, grumble.

The map is not the territory.

Or, in other words, just because someone is forced to implement a discompassionate system, that does not imply that they must lack compassion.

And before you say they are not forced to the job - yes they are - or at least they are forced to do a job, to survive, and unfortunately we can not all choose to do the job we'd prefer to do, some have to take the job that is available to them.

For example the trainer in the Dispatches program - she is unable to do the job she trained to do in her home country, because that field is not recognised in this country - and she clearly wished she didn't have to do that job - but she probably has a mortgage, or rent, to pay, and herself, and possibly a husband, and children, to feed.

And she doesn't define the rules - she just trains people to implement the rules as she has been told they must be implemented.

Likewise the assesors (who, by the way, are all medically trained, if not doctors), also don't define the rules, they simplay have to implement the rules as they've been trained to do. And again, they will all have mortgages, or rent, to pay, and mouths too feed, and so on. And if they don't do the job as they've been trained, they will almost certainly lose that job.

Should all these people end up destitute just because the government introduce a system that is discompassionate?

I don't think that would be fair on them any more than the system is fair on us.

Scorpion0x17 said:

It's not that the Atos workforce, as individuals, are short on compassion, on the whole (though I'm sure there are individual assessors who are lacking in said trait) - if you watched the Dispatches program you would see that's not the case - it's that some element(s) of the system as implemented doesn't allow them to exercise their compassion.

tho that may be true in their 'real life' with their own family etc,

when they are "interviewing" people, they are doing a job, there is no compassion its not what they are there for

thats evident in how they treat people, the form , the things they ask, how they ask it, and the fact that no matter your illness, the points are what matter

they say it themselves all the time onthe form, they arent there to diagnose you or help your illness , they are there to soley learn why you cant work, and how ,if they can, get you back to work

even if the system doesnt implement it,if a person has compassion they probably couldn't do that job day in day out without either lessoning their compassion or leaving the job

Goatworshiper said:

Obviously I'm exagerating, but the template is remarkably close. When I visited Auschwitz I actually made a passing coment that it reminded me of the DVLA/Passport office/Job Center/DWP building. 

 i get what you are saying tho

its the very same idea about compassion , when someone lacks it in general or for specific people they can do many things that they might not do normally or to their own family, friends etc

Goatworshiper said:

The Atos fella asked my gf is she sufferred depression why didn't she have recent suicide attempts. Rediculous question's not relating to her health at all, it was stab in the dark "oh you are a loon, what time do you howl at the moon" kinda stuff. I interupted and said it's not relevant as she hasnt claimed she has suicide attempts. I then asked him what his knowledge of this illness was? He just moved on.

He also wouldnt let us record the interview,

I found it was very much like a trial. Everthing was about tripping her up rather than assessing. 

Previous system was far better. Real doctors, reading your GP's notes etc.

aye sounds about right, good for you well done, you seem to handle them really well

yeah they dont like being recorded, how can they lie if they are recorded !!!!

but having a notepad, writing down things every so often, getting their name, its enough to put them off their usual power trip so they start of at a disatvantage that way, knowin gevne if they arent recorded they are still held accountable in some way

exactly REAL doctors and people who are there for health NOT money

these people are not doctors they are hired burecrats to do a doctors job, and they know nothing about illness, disability, mental health, autism or anything else

my "interview" with this specific person was just as bad, this person literally mocked my illness , tho their 'superiors' later claimed it wasnt what they were doing, (of course) and as i said they just lied in the form, it was incredible 

but as far as im aware they get money every time they put someone off benefits and s they dont get held accountable they can do what they want

It's not that the Atos workforce, as individuals, are short on compassion, on the whole (though I'm sure there are individual assessors who are lacking in said trait) - if you watched the Dispatches program you would see that's not the case - it's that some element(s) of the system as implemented doesn't allow them to exercise their compassion.

stranger said:

The Atos fella asked my gf is she sufferred depression why didn't she have recent suicide attempts.