Tory Donor Lord Bamford Funds The Reform...
News1 min ago
When is a new job not a new job?
The government is now going to pay more than £2000 for each youngster who is offered a place on a course leading to a permanent job. Which sounds all right in theory.
However up to now similar schemes have only resulted in 1 in 5 being offered a permanent job of which half don't last. Also if the job is only replacing another dismissed employee then the net result hasn't reduced the unemployment levels. All it's done is to enrich the employer by £2,000 and supplied them with weeks of free labour.
Tesco has already come under fire using the old scheme for hiring hundreds of unemployed benefit claimants who receive Job Seekers allowance. but receive no pay from Tesco.
Tesco isn't alone the practice is widespread . Companies are replacing employees when possible with this free labour.
I mentioned an example of this elsewhere but got bogged down in pedantry rather than the situation.
However up to now similar schemes have only resulted in 1 in 5 being offered a permanent job of which half don't last. Also if the job is only replacing another dismissed employee then the net result hasn't reduced the unemployment levels. All it's done is to enrich the employer by £2,000 and supplied them with weeks of free labour.
Tesco has already come under fire using the old scheme for hiring hundreds of unemployed benefit claimants who receive Job Seekers allowance. but receive no pay from Tesco.
Tesco isn't alone the practice is widespread . Companies are replacing employees when possible with this free labour.
I mentioned an example of this elsewhere but got bogged down in pedantry rather than the situation.
Answers
1 to 13 of 13
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by modeller. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
You are right, it is a problem that none of the parties have ever managed to get to grips with.
Really what is required is a cross party concensus as this needs to be a long term aim, but I doubt you will be able to stop Balls from just sniping from the sides as its easier than trying to sove the unsolvable.
Really what is required is a cross party concensus as this needs to be a long term aim, but I doubt you will be able to stop Balls from just sniping from the sides as its easier than trying to sove the unsolvable.
I think you misunderstand the purpose behind Government initiatives such as these. They won't be run by organisations such as Tesco but by people like Action for Employment (A4e). http://www.mya4e.com/about/facts-figures/
These private sector organisations provide a combination of training and placements so get NEETs back into the frame of thinking they can work, when many of them are now well into their twenties and have never held down a job.
It is to be applauded, and by the way, it is exactly what the Labour Government did in 1998 with the 'New Deal for Young People' - the springboard which helped A4e to grow to become the £150m pa. turnover company it currently is.
These private sector organisations provide a combination of training and placements so get NEETs back into the frame of thinking they can work, when many of them are now well into their twenties and have never held down a job.
It is to be applauded, and by the way, it is exactly what the Labour Government did in 1998 with the 'New Deal for Young People' - the springboard which helped A4e to grow to become the £150m pa. turnover company it currently is.
I agree that there are some out there that won't work and something needs to be done about that, but i don't agree with this workfare scheme.
Some of these big companies taking part in workfare make billions in profit, so can afford to pay these job seekers who are being forced into this unpaid labour with threats of having their benefits stopped unless they comply.
I heard today that one of the companies already participating in this scheme have reduced all their paid workers hours by 25%, leaving many of them below the 16 hours required to claim working tax credits.
It isn't just those on job seekers that are being targeted the disabled and the terminally ill are also being pushed into unpaid work too. Sickening truly sickening.
The Wrag group includes those who have been diagnosed with terminal cancer but have more than six months to live; accident and stroke victims; and some of those with mental health issues.
http://www.guardian.c...t-of-comments,someone
Some of these big companies taking part in workfare make billions in profit, so can afford to pay these job seekers who are being forced into this unpaid labour with threats of having their benefits stopped unless they comply.
I heard today that one of the companies already participating in this scheme have reduced all their paid workers hours by 25%, leaving many of them below the 16 hours required to claim working tax credits.
It isn't just those on job seekers that are being targeted the disabled and the terminally ill are also being pushed into unpaid work too. Sickening truly sickening.
The Wrag group includes those who have been diagnosed with terminal cancer but have more than six months to live; accident and stroke victims; and some of those with mental health issues.
http://www.guardian.c...t-of-comments,someone
my hubby's due to see them next week. i can't wait to see what they make of him - he is mad as a box of frogs....but has a degree and a masters. if they try any funny tricks or slave labour, he'll have a f***king meltdown in their office. and this time, i'm not going to hold his hand (i'm a psych nurse by trade). i'd love to be a fly on the wall, tho. some dude called kevin telling him what he needs to do to get a job. priceless - and i'll let you all know how it goes! x
I don't know whether this comes under that scheme modeller, but in Sept last year my 19yr old grandson started an apprenticeship with Microsoft. For the first six months he doesn't get paid at all, but if he completes the 6 mths he will get all the money he should have been paid (hope that makes sense). He has been enjoying it, and has given him some self-confidence which he sorely lacked.
I hadn't heard of A4e but I agree with the motive behind such schemes especially as to NEETS but if a scheme is to be successful it must be seen to be fair to all concerned as well as achieving its aims which it doesn't appear to be doing.
1. If it was started in 1998 then it has clearly failed as the situation is worse today than it was 14 years ago.
2. It also acts as a disincentive to those who do work hard who may find themselves dismissed and replaced by free labour.
3. It is abused by companies who take on this free labour which includes graduates not just the NEETS.
4.So we are not just talking about those on the minimum wage. There are qualified people who are working as interns for nothing in the hope of a job sometime.
5. These are not new jobs, at best they are replacements. At worse they may cost jobs, if a company can get work done for nothing they are not going to pay someone to do the job.
I see Tesco has now agreed they will pay these placements . I bet the numbers they take on will drop dramatically from the present hundreds.
If we look at the country as a whole there must be thousands of these freebie jobs . I have also heard that some companies have a scheme where they top up the Job Seekers Allowance to to make it equal to the minimum wage. So in effect the taxpayer is part paying the firms wages bill.
1. If it was started in 1998 then it has clearly failed as the situation is worse today than it was 14 years ago.
2. It also acts as a disincentive to those who do work hard who may find themselves dismissed and replaced by free labour.
3. It is abused by companies who take on this free labour which includes graduates not just the NEETS.
4.So we are not just talking about those on the minimum wage. There are qualified people who are working as interns for nothing in the hope of a job sometime.
5. These are not new jobs, at best they are replacements. At worse they may cost jobs, if a company can get work done for nothing they are not going to pay someone to do the job.
I see Tesco has now agreed they will pay these placements . I bet the numbers they take on will drop dramatically from the present hundreds.
If we look at the country as a whole there must be thousands of these freebie jobs . I have also heard that some companies have a scheme where they top up the Job Seekers Allowance to to make it equal to the minimum wage. So in effect the taxpayer is part paying the firms wages bill.
sasskins, That scheme has some merit as long as there is a job at the end.
Microsoft are a good company so I would expect his prospects are good.
Before all these fancy schemes came out I use to employ apprentices who we paid and they cost us money for the first couple of years and they only worked a 4 day week . They attended college on one day and also spent three full weeks in the year there. Microsoft are a good company so I would expect his prospects are good.
Microsoft are a good company so I would expect his prospects are good.
Before all these fancy schemes came out I use to employ apprentices who we paid and they cost us money for the first couple of years and they only worked a 4 day week . They attended college on one day and also spent three full weeks in the year there. Microsoft are a good company so I would expect his prospects are good.
buildersmate #It is to be applauded, and by the way, it is exactly what the Labour Government did in 1998 with the 'New Deal for Young People' - the springboard which helped A4e to grow to become the £150m pa. turnover company it currently is. ##
As I said I hadn't heard of A4e but with a £150m they are obviously a big organisation however without a close look at all the details of their accounts we don't know how genuine they are . I use the word genuine as on the news today 4 of their managers have been arrested for corruption .
It appears they have been receiving large sums of money over several years for falsely claiming to have placed people into permanent jobs.
My own daughter went on one such training course which she described as the sort of activity you did in junior school. She told me the instructor borrowed a load of tools from a hardware shop and hung them on the wall as she had been told an inspector was calling. It looked impressive and the inspector went away happy. The tools also disappeared the next day.
Needless to say the experience didn't lead to a job. However every week for 18 months my daughter was rung up by the instructor to ask had she got a job . I appears that if you get a job anytime in the next 18 the firm can still claim their bounty from the government.
My daughter did complain to whoever was running the scheme but was told
" Oh yes we know about them we have had many complaints ."
Years later she learnt that the firm was still operating.
As I said I hadn't heard of A4e but with a £150m they are obviously a big organisation however without a close look at all the details of their accounts we don't know how genuine they are . I use the word genuine as on the news today 4 of their managers have been arrested for corruption .
It appears they have been receiving large sums of money over several years for falsely claiming to have placed people into permanent jobs.
My own daughter went on one such training course which she described as the sort of activity you did in junior school. She told me the instructor borrowed a load of tools from a hardware shop and hung them on the wall as she had been told an inspector was calling. It looked impressive and the inspector went away happy. The tools also disappeared the next day.
Needless to say the experience didn't lead to a job. However every week for 18 months my daughter was rung up by the instructor to ask had she got a job . I appears that if you get a job anytime in the next 18 the firm can still claim their bounty from the government.
My daughter did complain to whoever was running the scheme but was told
" Oh yes we know about them we have had many complaints ."
Years later she learnt that the firm was still operating.
How the government can think of giving £2000 to rogue employers baffles me. As mentioned above its almost equivalent to getting free labour as they will be dispensed with when the term runs out. A similar scheme has been tried before.
It is obvious to many that unemployment will remain high for many years. The only hope for many especially the highly skilled is to become self-employed. However like the last Labour government Brown introduced IR35 which classed self employment for an individual as really working as an employer for a company and was taxed as such.
It is obvious to many that unemployment will remain high for many years. The only hope for many especially the highly skilled is to become self-employed. However like the last Labour government Brown introduced IR35 which classed self employment for an individual as really working as an employer for a company and was taxed as such.
1 to 13 of 13
Latest Posts
ChatterBank14 mins ago
T W A U ... The Chase...from...
Film, Media & TV16 mins ago
Body & Soul19 mins ago
