16% of travellers in employment

GuanYin

Few points:

1. The Indo. :rolleyes:

2. Putting people into jobs for the sake of it is a bad idea in any language. A bad idea that probably costs taxpayers more than social welfare while getting very little more in return.

3. *splutter* - because travellers are the only people in Ireland that scam the system? No Student, Farmer, Self Employed etc etc has *EVER* mis-represented or not declared earnings in a bid to gain social welfare, student grants for children, lower tax etc etc etc?

Mrs Roy Keane

Well done to the 16% of the travellers who are employed, paying tax, prsi and paye.

As stated in other posts who would employ travellers not many employers would.

Many travellers have no skills, education is low and poor, some cannot read or write

I agree that is alot of scam artists out there in all sectors not only travellers who work and claim dole payments

Mweelrea

dodgyme wrote: »

why do you think. If 16% are working, who has to pay to keep them????

a traveller pays no tax and can collect the dol from a number of towns as they have no fixed residence

why on earth does the government keep them?

they dont contribute in anyway to society
why should i work hard all day and give my cash to a tinker who sits around all day of is off stealing

not all travellers are bad, i know quite a few whom are as kind and honest as anyone you will ever meet but the vast majority are freeloaders

mikemac

Mweelrea wrote: »

a traveller pays no tax and can collect the dol from a number of towns as they have no fixed residence

Realy?
How would you claim the dole multiple times if every person only has one PPS number?
I'm not doubting you but I'm just interested to know how it's done.

GuanYin

I'm going to say this once:

Any uninformed anti-traveller propaganda will be dealth with swiftly and harshly.

Mweelrea I'm interested in you backing you your accusations.

Tha Gopher

psi wrote: »

Mweelrea I'm interested in you backing you your accusations.

And I am interested in OscarBravo backing up his accusation, on a poster to poster level irregardless of whether he is a mod or not (seeing as he deleted my post on the grounds of questioning the modding, which it clearly wasnt). I PM`d and have not got a response.

I would also like Hobbes to clarify whether he still believes the indo was manipulating statistics, seeing as it appears that they clearly were not.

As for the dole scam mentioned, unsure if it has been clamped down on these days, but way back when, due to the high infant mortality rate in the community, along with many travellers sticking to the same small group of first names for children, people would share birth certs, or use birth certs belonging to dead relatives in order to claim benefit. As said, I m unsure if this is still possible today or whether birth certs are cross referenced with death records to clamp down. Additionally, until the 80s many (mainly settled) people in the border counties were either claiming dole on both sides of the border or working/living on one side while pretending to live/unemployed on the other, but this has largely been done away with by greater checks by the authorities.

oscarBravo

Tha Gopher wrote: »

And I am interested in OscarBravo backing up his accusation, on a poster to poster level irregardless of whether he is a mod or not (seeing as he deleted my post on the grounds of questioning the modding, which it clearly wasnt). I PM`d and have not got a response.

I honestly don't believe you're stupid, so you can't claim not to understand that this falls under the category of discussing moderation, which the charter explicitly forbids. It's not about a poster-to-poster level discussion; the question of whether or not I am a mod here is moot, since I am.

Stay on topic. No more discussion of moderation. Last warning.

moe_sizlak

i hired travellers to do some work about a year ago , paid them in cash and that was the end of it , they returned recently insisting that i buy something off them , something which i didnt need as i already owned the item they were selling , they were extremley agressive and insistent that i purchase off them and i had difficulty getting rid of them eventually i succedded


next morning i discovered my dog was dead , he,d been posioned

GuanYin

moe_sizlak wrote: »

i hired travellers to do some work about a year ago , paid them in cash and that was the end of it , they returned recently insisting that i buy something off them , something which i didnt need as i already owned the item they were selling , they were extremley agressive and insistent that i purchase off them and i had difficulty getting rid of them eventually i succedded


next morning i discovered my dog was dead , he,d been posioned

Once a friend of mine had severe gastrointestinal problems. I gave him a laxative and he spent an hour in the toilet. The next day, there was a sewage problem down the street.

I'm not an idiot, so without actual evidence or proof, I don't go around telling people that my friend had a crap so big he took out the sewage system.

The Corinthian

psi wrote: »

I'm not an idiot, so without actual evidence or proof, I don't go around telling people that my friend had a crap so big he took out the sewage system.

True, but there are coincidences and there are "join the dots Sherlock" coincidences.

If we simply view the Traveller issue as an employment issue (and thus not limited to them), then the question is how to deal with the work shy without hurting others who are genuinely unemployed. Proper policing of social welfare fraud and nixers is essential to this, as well as a carrot and stick approach to unemployment. After all, Traveller or not, you really do need to have a good excuse not to be working after a year.

moe_sizlak

psi wrote: »

Once a friend of mine had severe gastrointestinal problems. I gave him a laxative and he spent an hour in the toilet. The next day, there was a sewage problem down the street.

I'm not an idiot, so without actual evidence or proof, I don't go around telling people that my friend had a crap so big he took out the sewage system.

interesting story but i have to ask why on earth you inserted such a post along a quote from my post

what relevance has it to my post

BIZZARE

GuanYin

The Corinthian wrote: »

True, but there are coincidences and there are "join the dots Sherlock" coincidences.

Well, if one were to believe such, then you'd imagine there would be police involved and such, whether or not there was a result. "My dog died" doesn't quite have the end the implication of the story merits.

moe_sizlak wrote:

interesting story but i have to ask why on earth you inserted such a post along a quote from my post

what relevance has it to my post

I don't quite see how your accusations about travellers poisoning your dog have any relevance to this thread, if you want to do a soapbox about how travellers have wronged you, do it somewhere else.

The Corinthian wrote: »

If we simply view the Traveller issue as an employment issue (and thus not limited to them), then the question is how to deal with the work shy without hurting others who are genuinely unemployed. Proper policing of social welfare fraud and nixers is essential to this, as well as a carrot and stick approach to unemployment. After all, Traveller or not, you really do need to have a good excuse not to be working after a year.

Exactly, the fact is, the policing of all social welfar payouts is poor in Ireland. As I've said earlier, between the various departments, fraud is widespread... I remember the children of well-to-do farmers claiming means tested student grants when I was in Uni. I doubt thats changed. I also remember waiting staff I worked with claiming dole at the same time. I doubt travellers are any different to the rest of the Irish people when it comes to scamming the system.

moe_sizlak

psi wrote: »

Well, if one were to believe such, then you'd imagine there would be police involved and such, whether or not there was a result. "My dog died" doesn't quite have the end the implication of the story merits.


I don't quite see how your accusations about travellers poisoning your dog have any relevance to this thread, if you want to do a soapbox about how travellers have wronged you, do it somewhere else.




Exactly, the fact is, the policing of all social welfar payouts is poor in Ireland. As I've said earlier, between the various departments, fraud is widespread... I remember the children of well-to-do farmers claiming means tested student grants when I was in Uni. I doubt thats changed. I also remember waiting staff I worked with claiming dole at the same time. I doubt travellers are any different to the rest of the Irish people when it comes to scamming the system.

my post refered to the fact that travellers were harassing me into buying something i did not want , this is a common occurrence with travelllers as anyone that knows anything about them is well aware of

i didnt accuse travellers of poisioning my dog , i found the dog dead subsequent to there visit

Zombrex

moe_sizlak wrote: »

this is a common occurrence with travelllers as anyone that knows anything about them is well aware of

I've never had a traveler try and hassle me into buying something I didn't want.

I have had plenty of settled people try hassle me into buy something I didn't want.

moe_sizlak wrote: »

i didnt accuse travellers of poisioning my dog , i found the dog dead subsequent to there visit

You just decided to mention an unrelated event for the fun of it?

angelbabyk

In all honesty i just think travellers get an awful bad rep from the Irish.. I do agree that a lot of the travelling community are on social welfare benefits and from my understanding alot of them dont have a choice cause people pre judge them on being robbers and scammers.. I have alot of friends that are traveller and yes some of them are on welfare but the majority are out there earning a living and they had to work twice as hard to get the jobs they have because people pre judged them. What about the tens of thousands of other people in Ireland that are not from the travelling community and have every oppurtunity to get a job and just couldnt be bothered ans sign on the dole every month.... They have no pre judgements made against them. Thats the problem with Ireland today.. Everyone is out to judge everyone else.. AS THE SAYING GOES PEOPLE IN GLASS HOUSES CANT THROW STONES

SeanW

moe_sizlak wrote: »

i didnt accuse travellers of poisioning my dog , i found the dog dead subsequent to there visit

Your post reminds me of a skit in the American comedy TV show "All in the Family" where the star, Archie Bunker, a duplicitous but uneducated, ultra conservative, bigot, tells some Puerto Ricans who intend to buy the house next door that "I'd never buy a house that was riddled with termites." (These being wood-eating bugs) Needless to say they prompty backed away from it.

Asked why he said the house had termites he responded, "no I just said that I wouldn't buy a house with termites ..."

You see, there are unrelated statements, and there are statements that may be technically unrelated but are clearly intended to be taken as related.

EVEN IF, and it's a fairly big if, those individual travellers DID poison your dog, it wouldn't say anything about anyone except those individuals. Inferences otherwise would just be tarring all travellers with the same brush, and would require evidence that pet-posioning is the standard traveller response to settled people not buying stuff.

they were extremley agressive and insistent that i purchase off them and i had difficulty getting rid of them eventually i succedded


next morning i discovered my dog was dead , he,d been posioned

Please tell me how this is not supposed to be taken as "travellers poisoned my dog because I didn't buy anything from them?" or worse "travellers are spiteful bastards."

I've had travellers try to sell me stuff before, sometimes I buy, sometimes not. But as of yet, I've yet to find the severed head of a dead cow on my doorstep the day after or anything like that.

Tha Gopher

moe_sizlak wrote: »

i didnt accuse travellers of poisioning my dog , i found the dog dead subsequent to there visit

Why are you retracting? You were harrassed by a group of people who didnt take kindly to your attitude, and soon after this surly crowd leave you find your dog has been poisoned. You were inferring you were of the opinion the guys had done it, there is no need to retract it.

The sniping at this guy is unreal, really. Its christmas now, and the skangers are going door to door singing god awful renditions. Say you have two visitors between 9 and 9pm, one is an old lady collecting for whatever, the other a group of singing scobes. You dont give the scobes money, and you have no change for the womans collection.

At 9:15 someone puts a brick through your car window. Well Sherlock, who is the most likely suspect?

I used the word skangers seeing that if Moe had come in to a thread about settled people who are unwilling to work and essentially stated "a couple of local workshy skangers poisoned my dog" there is no "opressed" community mentioned, and therefore everything is okey doke. Ridicilous :rolleyes: I agree the thread is about travellers and employment, not essentially travellers and crime, and therefore the post was OT, but the comments directed towards a victim of a probable crime are disgraceful. Assuming the dog was maliciously poisoned it would be a stretch of the imagination of Joe O`Reilly defence proportions that it was someone other than the sellers who had done it.

Back to the point, any opinions as to why benefits should simply be cut for those unwilling to work? Lack of education does not really cut it- walk into your local library and its wall to wall ads for free adult litreacy courses. An illiterate person starting on these probably wont ever graduate from TCD but once able to read there most avenues would be avaialable. If benefits were to be cut, as said there are two choices. Get a job or go to the UK and claim. Nobody would starve to death. The state does not owe anyone able bodied a free ride unless they are unemployed with very good reason, and I would be interested to see if anyone can honestly argue with that point.

GuanYin

I'm not quite sure where the misunderstanding is here. If you want to talk about travellers and employment or lack there of, this is the theead for you. If you want to make baseless generalisations or use this thread for your anti-traveller rants, I'll ban you.

If you want to argue about it, do it in the right places, do it here and I'll ban you.

Thats all I expect to have to say on this matter.

Wacker

Mweelrea wrote: »

a traveller pays no tax and can collect the dol from a number of towns as they have no fixed residence

why on earth does the government keep them?

I'd love to hear your suggestion as to how the government could not keep them?

Actually, maybe I wouldn't.

Look, even if all your accusations are true, then a solution needs to be found. Moaning about it while suggesting precisely nothing achieves precisely nothing.

johnnyskeleton

Tha Gopher wrote: »

Ive personally never worked with a traveller, despite the four figure amount of various nationalities Ive worked with. Come to think of it I have never seen one in any workplace (I do have a joke about one who applies for a job in a sporting goods store, but this is neither the time nor the place )

They're easily identifyable by the star of david that they are obliged to wear.

Tha Gopher

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

They're easily identifyable by the star of david that they are obliged to wear.

Or by factors such as accent, physical appearance, and a relatively small group of common surnames. And hey, in Nazi Germany one could argue your surname, your complexion (which, despite much mixing through the generations, may still have displayed traits of your middle eastern ancestors), and, assuming European Jews had a distinctive accent the same way as many American born Jews have from other Americans, that alot of people could spot a Jewish person instantly. So if you were in Germany in 1939 and were talking to two guys, you would have needed the star to inform you which one was the Jew if you met a tall blonde man called Hans Beckenbauer and his swarthy friend called Isaac Goldberg? Your point is beyond childish.

And re travellers, certain christian names more common than in the general population, especially certain religious names that are very common among young travellers but rare among most settled people below middle age). One minute its apparently incorrect to not regard them as a seperate race (which I dont), the next its prejudiced to actually recognise a traveller when you see one. I am supposed to recognise their legitimacy as an ethnic group and at the same time not notice if the person standing infront of me is of traveller heritage. As you imply that to do so is racist. I am HUGELY confused Ted......

Rather than playing Godwins Law and equating opinion with Nazisim do you actually have any realistic intelligent point to contribute here or not? You know, like maybe an opinion on why only 16% of travellers are in legitimate employment, compared to something like 95% plus of the settled community? That is the question raised after all, and my point was relevant due to the fact I was talking about their lack of presence anywhere I have worked.

I dont expect a response, seeing as two other opposing points I have raised in this thread have failed to garner any.

GuanYin

OK, I did a bit of digging and I call shennannigans on the details in the OP of this post.

According to the 2002 census, Vol 8, there are approximately 23,700 travellers in Ireland.

Of this population, 2 in every 5 (40%) were aged under 15, while 3.3% were over 65.

Hobbes already went through this.

Now, what the census adds, is that the labour force participation rate for travellers is 72% for males and 38% for women (against 70% and 48% for total population) BUT that given the census definition of unemployment via the self-assessed principal economic status question in the census, 73% of male and 63% of female travellers were classed as unemployed.

So what can we say about this topic?

It was an indo article.

Tha Gopher

There was a census in 2006. What does the 2002 census mean in regards to the population of a social group with the highest birth rate in Ireland? Nothing, really.

BUT that given the census definition of unemployment via the self-assessed principal economic status question in the census

Explain, please. Im tired. I presume however, the census asked people essentially "are you unemployed". If they answered Yes, it didnt necessarily mean they were on benefits. Can you provide figures showing that (If i am understanding your post correctly) while a large proportion of travellers classed themselves as unemployed, only a small percentage of these actually claim dole? If you can show me figures stating 84% of travellers are on unemployed but only 1% (or whatever their percentage of the potential labour force is) of dole claimants are travellers, I will be mightily impressed. tbh I couldnt care less if 110% of them are unemployed, as long as they arent getting by on my tax money. I am, however, disturbed by the thought I might be getting up in the cold and dark at 6:45 all week to contribute a percentage of my income to a large amount of people who are still in bed when I go for my lunch.

Bally8

Lack of education cannot be used as an excuse for some people in the travelling community not working and instead claiming the jobseekers allowance. I work for an educational organisation that pays teenage travellers to do the leaving certificate but all except for 1 have left without completing it. Why? Well one reason is we pay 10 euro per week less than the dole. One girl left last month after turning 18 and as she put it 'why would I come to school when I can sit at home and get paid for it?'

Of course there are other factors but it annoys me alot when people say lack of education and an inflexible education system are to blame for low literacy levels etc in travellers. We bend over backwards to accomodate our students and are always left feeling we are wasting our time- its easy money and not employment which drive them *

*At all times I am referring to my personal experience of 6 years of dealing with traveller teenagers from my area and am not generalising to the whole traveller community:)

Tha Gopher

Bally8 wrote: »

*At all times I am referring to my personal experience of 6 years of dealing with traveller teenagers from my area and am not generalising to the whole traveller community:)

If anyone wishes to attack this guy as a vicious brutal racist and demands links for what you may alledge is generalisations and spurious nonsense, please also include in your post a response to my three main points


a- The indo appears to not have misepresented the stats in the report. And I personally wouldnt wipe my arse with the indo, it generally can be tripe. So there goes any reader bias out the door.

b- Is poor previous school education really at fault when adult litreacy courses are available to everyone?

c- Exactly what is wrong with stopping benefits to those not working? As said they will either be forced to get a job or be forced to move to the UK and live off their welfare. For the billiontth time- NOBODY WILL STARVE TO DEATH.

Before accusing that guy of this that and whatever, answer the above three. Because we are 5 pages in and alot of people have alot of things to say execpt, seemingly, about the above 3 points.

moe_sizlak

Tha Gopher wrote: »

Or by factors such as accent, physical appearance, and a relatively small group of common surnames. And hey, in Nazi Germany one could argue your surname, your complexion (which, despite much mixing through the generations, may still have displayed traits of your middle eastern ancestors), and, assuming European Jews had a distinctive accent the same way as many American born Jews have from other Americans, that alot of people could spot a Jewish person instantly. So if you were in Germany in 1939 and were talking to two guys, you would have needed the star to inform you which one was the Jew if you met a tall blonde man called Hans Beckenbauer and his swarthy friend called Isaac Goldberg? Your point is beyond childish.

And re travellers, certain christian names more common than in the general population, especially certain religious names that are very common among young travellers but rare among most settled people below middle age). One minute its apparently incorrect to not regard them as a seperate race (which I dont), the next its prejudiced to actually recognise a traveller when you see one. I am supposed to recognise their legitimacy as an ethnic group and at the same time not notice if the person standing infront of me is of traveller heritage. As you imply that to do so is racist. I am HUGELY confused Ted......

Rather than playing Godwins Law and equating opinion with Nazisim do you actually have any realistic intelligent point to contribute here or not? You know, like maybe an opinion on why only 16% of travellers are in legitimate employment, compared to something like 95% plus of the settled community? That is the question raised after all, and my point was relevant due to the fact I was talking about their lack of presence anywhere I have worked.

I dont expect a response, seeing as two other opposing points I have raised in this thread have failed to garner any.

a superbly well articulated piece if i may say so

the only thing that matters to theese clowns is that travellers are SACRED COWS , so inconsistency in there points in bound to be evident throughout

AckwelFoley

i think a similar % of the prison population are travellers ie. 15%.

Now considering the population of travellers in Ireland are not exceeding 25k that is a extremely disproportinate representation within the prison system.

I think then its fair to assume that there is a rather high % of this community claiming unemployment, illiteracy amd poor over all education.

The problem lies within a circle starting with social status, lack of education and stigmas tied to their community. Its important that travellers are given funding for education to get the next generation out of the loop which they are in , and while it may seem to some like unfair attention its improtant to give younger generations the chance perhaps their parents did not have.

Dont get me wrong, im far from a bleeding heart, and there are some in the traveller community i personally would like to assault with a slash hook for things they were responsible for towards my posessions, however on the flip side of that i know a few travellers (setteled) that are as "normal" as the next man , if not even better neighbors.

brianthebard

psi wrote: »

Exactly, the fact is, the policing of all social welfar payouts is poor in Ireland. As I've said earlier, between the various departments, fraud is widespread... I remember the children of well-to-do farmers claiming means tested student grants when I was in Uni. I doubt thats changed. I also remember waiting staff I worked with claiming dole at the same time. I doubt travellers are any different to the rest of the Irish people when it comes to scamming the system.

Regarding grants, a farmers land is taken into account in the means testing, so I imagine if someone owns too much then their children won't get the grant. Regarding staying unemployed for a year (corinthians post) I've been unemployed for seven months now. When I tried to apply for a fas job in an art gallery I was told I had to be unemployed for a year. is it any wonder people end up unemployed long term if the government body in charge of helping them won't even give them jobs? Btw I have an Honours degree, I'm not unemployed cause I'm a bum.

colliegG

Personally I don't understand the furore about the op. So a percentage of travellers don't work? It's not racist or discriminatory to post that. There could be any number of reasons for that and as pointed out by an earlier post they could range from disability or marital status etc. There are more than enough people in the settled community who are in the same position to negate travellers being "at fault".

But what I would take issue with is the function of the dole as a whole especially where it involves people from any community receiving without contributing. This is wrong as I believe it does remove the imperative that drives most people who do go to work.

I don't think this issue need involve Godwins Law unless, with the greatest respect to the poster who mentioned it, people wish to get hysterical about it. I believe that that well meaning positive discrimination is one of the major factors involved in keeping the communities seperate.

For example I was in Dublin City Council today and one of the Council's points on why they won't discriminate is "membership of the travelling community". Why not no discrimination on any basis?

Unfortunately Pavee Point with their grinding tales of miserableness have painted the Travelling Community in the most negative of lights. I.e uneducated (due to discrimination) unable to find work (due to discrimination) litigous (due to discrimination) and unaware of social norms (due to discrimination). Who would employ such a person?

If I said the above, due to the fact I'm not a Traveller, I'd be accused of Traveller bashing and probably banned off this forum.

johnnyskeleton

Tha Gopher wrote: »

Or by factors such as accent, physical appearance, and a relatively small group of common surnames.

Accent - what is the traveller accent? I guess it depends on where they've been. Very few people can tell where I'm from just from my accent, in fact the only accents that are really obvious are the ones that sound unique (e.g. Donegal, Dublin City Centre, West Cork, etc).

Physical appearance - what do you mean by this? How do travellers look different to other people? Are you honestly saying that you recon you could walk into a random workplace and say "oh, look over there on the forklift, that's a traveller?

Small group of common surnames - which are also common among the settled population - ward, murphy, mcdonagh. Do you go into every workplace and ask people their surnames to check if they're travellers?

Tha Gopher wrote: »

So if you were in Germany in 1939 and were talking to two guys, you would have needed the star to inform you which one was the Jew if you met a tall blonde man called Hans Beckenbauer and his swarthy friend called Isaac Goldberg? Your point is beyond childish.

Far from it, because you are only assuming things. While in many instances you might be right, in others you will be mistaken. How can you then categorically state that you've never seen a traveller in a workplace?

Tha Gopher wrote: »

One minute its apparently incorrect to not regard them as a seperate race (which I dont), the next its prejudiced to actually recognise a traveller when you see one. I am supposed to recognise their legitimacy as an ethnic group and at the same time not notice if the person standing infront of me is of traveller heritage. As you imply that to do so is racist. I am HUGELY confused Ted......

Well it's because no-one is asking you to see them as a race, they want you to see them as a recognised minority social group. It's not prejudiced to recognise a traveller when you see one, but it is to assume that they all look alike and are clearly distinguishable from other people, and to such an extent that you base your opinions on them as a class on your prejudice.

I'm not implying that to do so is racist, I'm implying that it is very difficult, if not impossible to look at a random person and know exactly who they are and where they are from all the time. Have you ever assumed someone was Czech only to find that they are Slovakian? Australian/New Zealand? Kenyian/Ethiopian? To distinguish travellers from non travellers so that they would be easily identified you would have to mark them out.

Tha Gopher wrote: »

Rather than playing Godwins Law and equating opinion with Nazisim do you actually have any realistic intelligent point to contribute here or not?

It's not really a thread for realistic intelligent points, if it was it would be over when Seamus said:

Seamus wrote:

That Indo piece is low on substance.

Tha Gopher wrote: »

You know, like maybe an opinion on why only 16% of travellers are in legitimate employment, compared to something like 95% plus of the settled community? That is the question raised after all, and my point was relevant due to the fact I was talking about their lack of presence anywhere I have worked.

If I was to say that I have never worked with a homosexual person (apart from the difficulty of sustaining this point on the basis that I have never worked with someone who looked and sounded like the stereotypical gay and who was called Julian) that does not sustain an argument about the general homosexual population.

Tha Gopher wrote: »

I dont expect a response, seeing as two other opposing points I have raised in this thread have failed to garner any.

I guess I'm the only one foolish enough to feed the troll.