[Etherlord87]

Imagine what would happen if everyone did what the author did. The system would collapse. I think you put a wrong diagnosis that the author couldn't possibly affect the administration. Maybe not much, maybe there was only a chance, but statistically he did put some pressure on that organization.

[TeMPOraL]

More likely they'd just cancel the benefits.

[p_l]

The process described is literally an attempt at canceling benefits in "frog boiling" method. If Tories went straight to canceling benefits, they would end up in trouble, by making worst possible process they could put it in terms of "verifying eligibility and that benefit funds are not scammed out".

Similar approaches are utilized in other areas of british government, unfortunately.

[TeMPOraL]

We seem to have the same in Poland, given that I occasionally hear about people being upset they have to re-prove to ZUS or NFZ they have a missing limb or other such (still) permanent disability.

> Similar approaches are utilized in other areas of british government, unfortunately.

Look, I'm as cynical as they get, but where you see an attempt at "boiling the frog", and the author sees a personal insult, I see a simple security/anti-fraud measure. They're doing it for the same reason your bank logs you out after some 20+ minutes even if you're active, why most sites have you reauthenticate withing days to months, why your certificates expire after a year, or why you may rotate your access/API keys frequently. This prevents an erroneous (or fraudlent) state from living forever.

I'm usually the security hater around these parts, never thought I'd have to defend these ideas. But the truth is: you don't have a process like this in place, you'll eventually discover double-digit percent of the money is going towards people with fake disabilities, registered once 40 years ago in bumfuck nowhere, and never verified since.

FWIW, I do agree such process can be weaponized against people in general or some groups specifically, and I'm also not saying the process described in TFA is perfect. I am saying that the process was not a problem in this story. This is a story with a protagonist that's an asshole who abuses technology to hurt innocent people.

[defrost]

There's a middle ground between once, 40 years ago, never again, and once every year.

There's a show The Last Leg that talks about the UK procedures along with many other disability issues and hurdles.

Missing limbs don't grow back, Cerebral Palsy is incurable, and so on ... yet year in year out people are facing disruptions and re-checks for the 15th or 16th time now they're 28 .. and on it goes.

How much waste and needless aggro comes about from annual checks, how hard is it to follow through once every five years or even ten on conditions that have been confirmed three or four times already.

> you'll eventually discover double-digit percent of the money is going towards people with fake disabilities,

Yeah ... along with double digit election fraud and other fervid fantasies.

[p_l]

The reason I'm seeing "boiling the frog" is that tories did bunch of reforms, and were literally caught red handed with stuff like ordering a software vendor ensure the software would mistakenly bar people from getting services they are entitled for.

Our ZUS is broken because someone let basic anti-fraud checks go out of hand without review, Tories got caught literally redesigning entire benefit system with goal of slowly dismantling it (curiously after their redistricting of NHS the system suffered massive loss in efficiency and capability)

[johnnyanmac]

That politician would cancel their re-election. Assuming it gets that far. Even this federal administration can't handle the pushback of straining benefits. A local government stands zero chance with such a maneuver.

[TeMPOraL]

If everyone does that, per the commenter's question, then there will be no re-election, as at that point the country is on the brink of civil war.

[mothballed]

If everyone did it the managers would screech for more money, more headcount, and maybe get it. Worst case the employees are in the same position as before, best case the management is richer and more powerful and possibly some of the current workers become low level management over the new employees. It is doubtful they would try to make the process smoother/easier/accommodating because that would remove the method by which they can gain more power and employees. To see this in action note how agencies are constantly burning up all their budget even if they don't use it so they can justify as much or more the next year, if they have extra time/money they will invent something to justify not giving it up.

Government works the opposite of industry. In industry you win power/prestige/money generally by getting more profits which usually means making needlessly inefficient process less so (although in large company with multiple layers of middle management this can become completely decoupled). In government there is no concept of profit so you win more power/prestige/money by having more headcount and paperwork to shuffle around which justify your existence.

[watwut]

Yes, the republican dominated congress will allocate more money for these, because some social service manager is screeching over pdfs. Really?