It seems that the benefit claimants can have the cost of having their tattoos removed paid for by Job Center Plus if it means that they might get a job. It’s already been done in 2002 according to the head of JCP, Darra Singh.
We find this out because David Ruffley, Conservative MP for Bury St Edmunds, Stowmarket, and Needham Market, asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, Chris Grayling, what he knew about payments from the public purse for the removal of tattoos from benefit claimants.
Though Darra Singh replied that detail about what a claimant might by funded for is not recorded he did mention the 2002 case.
I can understand claimants having training courses be paid for if their current industry is outdated. I have personal experience of this with a close relative having a training course paid for after she was made redundant with her job role being hens teeth to get. But to have tattoos removed seems to me to be a step too far. The decision as to whether a training course is provided or tattoos removed or money given to get special work clothes is a decision is not a national policy but made by a “Decision Maker” (actual job title) so it could be that the tattooed claimant had very good reasons for the removal.
But should unemployed people be paid over and above their benefits to help them get jobs. I understand that travel costs can be covered but how far should the state go in helping people get a job.
H/t El Reg