Pressure’s on to Replace Atos

Atos healthcare, the company that won the government contract for awarding Employment Support Allowance (ESA), appear to be in trouble, with leaked government documents revealing plans to cease using them.

Atos was brought in on a government contract worth £500 million and is responsible for carrying out assessments to decide whether claimants are eligible for ESA, which is the main out-of-work health related benefit for people with disabilities.

Constant Criticism

Since they began assessments, Atos has been under constant criticism over their methods of evaluating claimant’s capabilities to work, with many saying that the entire process is flawed.

Over half a million appeals have been lodged against Atos decisions since the system began, with four out of every 10 being upheld.  This has resulted in high costs to tax payers of £60 million a year, highlighting the case for change in the way the system is handled.

Disability minister, Mike Penning, told MPs that there was a ‘real concern’ due to the amount of appeals people were making against Atos decisions, and that it was wrong for one company to hold a monopoly over the assessment process.

Disability Rights

Leading charity, Disability Rights UK, spoke out saying that it’s important that the whole system is reviewed and not just the provider.

They feel that the entire process is flawed and that assessments do not accurately gauge the ability of many people with disabilities to work.  The current test measures things such as an individual’s ability to walk a certain number of steps against whether or not they would be able to work.  Disability Rights UK feels that tests like these are too black and white and it would depend on the nature of the job; in many cases, being able to walk a few steps would not translate into having the ability to do a days work.

Philip Connolly, policy and communications manager for Disability Rights UK, says: “Atos should not be allowed to be the only fall guys when the blame also lies inside Government for the stress faced by people with disability or long-term health problems.

“A good system would not only match those in genuine need to the allowance but also match support to those able to work.  The present system fails on both counts.”