Quizzes & Puzzles0 min ago
Why Give Them A Job In The First Place?
9 Answers
http://
Of course we know the reason, all part of the 'diversity' programme.
Of course we know the reason, all part of the 'diversity' programme.
Answers
1 to 9 of 9
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. 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.
Who interviewed them and decided to offer them a job having first found out they didn't have the basic skills needed ? They should be sacked first.
Meanwhile I'm all for employers investing in training so maybe folk could be moved into a job they can do, and trained to be able to cope with the job they were supposed to be doing ?
Meanwhile I'm all for employers investing in training so maybe folk could be moved into a job they can do, and trained to be able to cope with the job they were supposed to be doing ?
AOG
In a number of cases, the people will be working for contract agencies who may have less stringent rules on spoken and written English.
For instance, cleaning staff, facilities management workers and catering staff will have minimal interactions with customers, but would still be counted in the 7,400 figure.
In a number of cases, the people will be working for contract agencies who may have less stringent rules on spoken and written English.
For instance, cleaning staff, facilities management workers and catering staff will have minimal interactions with customers, but would still be counted in the 7,400 figure.
I see that the Daily Wail has taken quotes out of context yet again. What the report actually says is this:
"We consider a high estimate of the proportion of workers who are potentially insufficiently fluent as 0.4%. This is based on 2011 Census data for people over 16 and in employment within public administration, education and healthcare sectors, who report that English is not their main language
and they do not speak it well, or at all. This higher rate assumption would mean that ~7,400 employees (0.4% of 1.8m employees) in scope may not be able to meet the necessary levels of fluent English"
Someone who works as a cleaner in a school, council office or hospital could be classified by the 2011 census as working in education, public administration or healthcare. They've got no 'customer-facing' role (and don't need first-rate language skills) but they're still included in that figure of 7400 people (which the report acknowledges is at the upper end of the likely number of such people, with 5,500 being a preferred estimate).
The report recognises that:
"about 1.3 million in scope workers (in England only) are already subject to English language regulations; these include doctors, nurses, midwives, dentists, dental care professionals, pharmacists and pharmacy technicians"
and that:
"a large number of respondents across different professions informed us that they routinely assess candidates for customer-facing roles against oral and written communication skills, or similar, and although they did not set a specific language standard the majority expected few or none of their customer-facing staff would not be fluent to the necessary standard for their role"
https:/
"We consider a high estimate of the proportion of workers who are potentially insufficiently fluent as 0.4%. This is based on 2011 Census data for people over 16 and in employment within public administration, education and healthcare sectors, who report that English is not their main language
and they do not speak it well, or at all. This higher rate assumption would mean that ~7,400 employees (0.4% of 1.8m employees) in scope may not be able to meet the necessary levels of fluent English"
Someone who works as a cleaner in a school, council office or hospital could be classified by the 2011 census as working in education, public administration or healthcare. They've got no 'customer-facing' role (and don't need first-rate language skills) but they're still included in that figure of 7400 people (which the report acknowledges is at the upper end of the likely number of such people, with 5,500 being a preferred estimate).
The report recognises that:
"about 1.3 million in scope workers (in England only) are already subject to English language regulations; these include doctors, nurses, midwives, dentists, dental care professionals, pharmacists and pharmacy technicians"
and that:
"a large number of respondents across different professions informed us that they routinely assess candidates for customer-facing roles against oral and written communication skills, or similar, and although they did not set a specific language standard the majority expected few or none of their customer-facing staff would not be fluent to the necessary standard for their role"
https:/
Oh so cleaners have no need to speak or understand English?
How do they communicate with their English supervisors or even the general public in certain circumstances?
Once in a supermarket I had need to approach a member of it's staff so as to inquire where a certain product was situated, the staff member just put his hands up in the air, indicating that he could not speak English.
How do they communicate with their English supervisors or even the general public in certain circumstances?
Once in a supermarket I had need to approach a member of it's staff so as to inquire where a certain product was situated, the staff member just put his hands up in the air, indicating that he could not speak English.
1 to 9 of 9
