'If you don't take a job as a prostitute, we can stop your benefits'

The Telegraph ^ | 30/01/2005 | Clare Chapman

[ijcr]

A 25-year-old waitress who turned down a job providing "sexual services'' at a brothel in Berlin faces possible cuts to her unemployment benefit under laws introduced this year.

Prostitution was legalised in Germany just over two years ago and brothel owners – who must pay tax and employee health insurance – were granted access to official databases of jobseekers.

The waitress, an unemployed information technology professional, had said that she was willing to work in a bar at night and had worked in a cafe.

She received a letter from the job centre telling her that an employer was interested in her "profile'' and that she should ring them. Only on doing so did the woman, who has not been identified for legal reasons, realise that she was calling a brothel.

Under Germany's welfare reforms, any woman under 55 who has been out of work for more than a year can be forced to take an available job – including in the sex industry – or lose her unemployment benefit. Last month German unemployment rose for the 11th consecutive month to 4.5 million, taking the number out of work to its highest since reunification in 1990.

The government had considered making brothels an exception on moral grounds, but decided that it would be too difficult to distinguish them from bars. As a result, job centres must treat employers looking for a prostitute in the same way as those looking for a dental nurse.

When the waitress looked into suing the job centre, she found out that it had not broken the law. Job centres that refuse to penalise people who turn down a job by cutting their benefits face legal action from the potential employer.

"There is now nothing in the law to stop women from being sent into the sex industry," said Merchthild Garweg, a lawyer from Hamburg who specialises in such cases. "The new regulations say that working in the sex industry is not immoral any more, and so jobs cannot be turned down without a risk to benefits."

Miss Garweg said that women who had worked in call centres had been offered jobs on telephone sex lines. At one job centre in the city of Gotha, a 23-year-old woman was told that she had to attend an interview as a "nude model", and should report back on the meeting. Employers in the sex industry can also advertise in job centres, a move that came into force this month. A job centre that refuses to accept the advertisement can be sued.

Tatiana Ulyanova, who owns a brothel in central Berlin, has been searching the online database of her local job centre for recruits.

"Why shouldn't I look for employees through the job centre when I pay my taxes just like anybody else?" said Miss Ulyanova.

Ulrich Kueperkoch wanted to open a brothel in Goerlitz, in former East Germany, but his local job centre withdrew his advertisement for 12 prostitutes, saying it would be impossible to find them.

Mr Kueperkoch said that he was confident of demand for a brothel in the area and planned to take a claim for compensation to the highest court. Prostitution was legalised in Germany in 2002 because the government believed that this would help to combat trafficking in women and cut links to organised crime.

Miss Garweg believes that pressure on job centres to meet employment targets will soon result in them using their powers to cut the benefits of women who refuse jobs providing sexual services.

"They are already prepared to push women into jobs related to sexual services, but which don't count as prostitution,'' she said.

"Now that prostitution is no longer considered by the law to be immoral, there is really nothing but the goodwill of the job centres to stop them from pushing women into jobs they don't want to do."

[Truth666]

http://www.google.com/search?q=Hartz+IV+macht%27s+m%C3%B6glich:+Die+Vermittlung+von+langzeitarbeitslosen+

Google found 153 results on the only article on the subject that appeared in the german media (taz, a newspaper owned by mainstream media packaged as "alternative" media).

[Kennesaw]

bump

[redgolum]

So now the German government is officially a pimp.

[Angry Enough]

Paging Margaret Atwood...

[Sally II]

Lol. I remember in high school and JC, they offered tests to assess the job best fit for one's personality. I guess now that prostitution is considered an acceptable occupation in Germany, young girls all over Germany can have the delight of opening up their results and finding: "Congradulations! After evaluating your skills and interests, we have determined that the job you are best suited for is: Prostitution. To find out more about this occupation, please speak to your high school counselor."

[FormerACLUmember]

No wonder the EuroSocialist scum don't want any mention of God in the upcoming EC "Constitution."

This is also the true fqace of the US democrat party which (completely justifiably) sees itself as the American branch of EuroSocialism.

[FormerACLUmember]

fqace = face

[ijcr]

Einmal ist genug. Do you believe the MSM is different in der
mutterland?

[No Dems 2004]

And we wonder why Schroder and the Germans don't like us?

[Cigarboy]

First: If true,this act by the German govt is shameful.
Now, just what we need, another blind bible-thumper.
What profession do you think Mary Magdalen was in?

[JFK_Lib]

The increase in the spread of STDs by legalizing prositution do not come from the legal sex industry itself but from its illegal periphery that would continue to exist but driven to offer what is still illegal - unprotected, sadistic/masochistic, underage, sodomizing, etc.

This periphery will increase as the industry itself sates the illicit yearnings of stupid and naive men who should know better.

Keep prostitution illegal for ever or let evolution take its course with the naive and innocent lured into acts of stupidity.

[critilo]

great headline for the yellow press.

nothing more.

it is true that there is a "clue" in the law, but according to german articles the whole story is based on the assumption, that one could be forced to do such a job.

but, as the government does not offer such jobs, because it does not have such jobs, no one would be forced to do such a job.

how about thinking?

[JFK_Lib]

According to the article:
"Under Germany's welfare reforms, any woman under 55 who has been out of work for more than a year can be forced to take an available job – including in the sex industry – or lose her unemployment benefit.....
The government had considered making brothels an exception on moral grounds, but decided that it would be too difficult to distinguish them from bars. As a result, job centres must treat employers looking for a prostitute in the same way as those looking for a dental nurse."

Where in the article does it say that a woman is only coerced to take government jobs, when the above quote makes it clear it can be any job offered by a legal employer?

Try thinking yourself or presenting some facts instead of making unwarranted assertions.

Good greif.

Besides, it is the logical next step when you consider the European amorality and their tight budgets.

I wouldnt be surprised that they end up doing far worse and little twitters like you will shake their head and tell everyone they are being gullible, bah!

[americanbychoice2]

Hi, getting a work permit in Germany is extremely hard.
You could always apply for a civilian job with dod, or, go there and try to land one through non- appropriated funds.
Very hard

[NormalPerson]

The article is sensationalist as has been noted. The German law on prostitution explicitly states that no one may be coerced into prostitution. The main problem seems to be that benefits may be stopped if an unemployed person turns down a job that is borderline (e.g. as a waitress in a brothel or a table-dancing club).

The fundamental issue behind this problem is the reform of Germany's benefits system. The law currently states that benefits will not be stopped if a claimant who turns down available work can demonstrate that the work that was offered was unacceptable. It is extremely likely that a woman who was unwilling to accept work in a job she found sexually demeaning would have her case upheld. There have certainly been no cases of women whose hearings have failed. Given the willingness of some women to take such employment (however much some may dislike the fact of the sex industry's existence at all), it is surely correct to offer such work through the normal channels.

The difficulty is drawing the line between acceptable and unacceptable. At present, with the exception (ignored by the Telegraph) of the case of prostitution, the decision is made o a case-by-case basis. This level of vagueness is probably inevitable, as an increasingly diverse society such as Germany cannot reasonably expect everyone to subscribe to the same standards in such matters. Like many laws, this one relies of the good sense of judges and other members of the legal profession in interpreting it.