Dole claimants may have to work in community

Riamfada

How else are we going to build the autobahns and increase our invasion forces?!

leshogan

something needed to be done, at least its something, I see too many young ins on the dole who have no expenses, living with mam and daddy and spending €200 a week a sauce and fags, other whose friend,brother, sister or mother will go in and sign on when claimant is on 'holidays' in spain for the week or maybe just gone to Australia.

there is so much horsesh!t going on its about time they did something. Its easy pick the applicants, people who have limited PRSI contributions, indicating they have done fcuk all work upto know.

Dont show up, dont get paid - just like the rest of us

Gang of Gin

the_dark_side wrote: »

I haven't looked at the finer points of what is proposed in this scheme, but what I do think is the type of work that people will be asked to do, will not be low skilled and /or demoralizing.

My guess is if you show a bit of creativity and write your own job description, and show that you are prepared to do 19.5 per week, it can only be a good thing, as the work will stand you in good stead in terms of experience and references if you plan to emmigrate and want to improve your cv etc.

Plus you are networking when your out on the job. Other work could come your way, from the new contacts that you will meet through work.

If your signing and sitting in the house, you have zero chance of networking.

http://www.linkedin.com/

This is a powerful tool.

the_dark_side

Gang of Gin wrote: »

http://www.linkedin.com/

This is a powerful tool.

Ive been on it for the last 2 years, cheers

zuroph

Thaedydal wrote: »

Can't see this working given that garda vetting takes 3/6 months.

this. schools and after school care?! Nice idea; wont happen.

Gang of Gin

the_dark_side wrote: »

Ive been on it for the last 2 years, cheers

Not making much use of it then?

the_dark_side

Gang of Gin wrote: »

Not making much use of it then?

I only started to look at it more closely recently, it is very useful, I agree... looking forward to using it more. I can see the potential benefits of it would be very big.

dvpower

zuroph wrote: »

this. schools and after school care?! Nice idea; wont happen.

Obvioulsly they couldn't use this scheme to place unqualified people in work that requires qualifications (or unvetted people in work that requires vetting)

There would also have to be exemptions for people who have childcare responsibilities.

Executive Steve

wolfpawnat wrote: »

Also I think the jobs such as childcare and looking after the elderly you will be under the supervision of qualified people and as people have said there are a few people qualified in this area who could get a long term career out of it if they are lucky!


All I want to know is can I stck any experience I get onto a CV??? Will look great in an interview when there are jobs to get, shows you are a willing and able worker!!!

A long term career? What would be the incentive to hire you for a long term career and pay you a full living wage if you'll work for your dole money?

As for sticking the experience on a CV, do you really think a Fortune 500 company is more likely to hire you because you spent six months on a chain gang doing landscaping for Fianna Fail cronies?

dvpower

Executive Steve wrote: »

As for sticking the experience on a CV, do you really think a Fortune 500 company is more likely to hire you because you spent six months on a chain gang doing landscaping for Fianna Fail cronies?

Recruiters in Fortune 500 companies probably wouldn't view it as such.

Gang of Gin

the_dark_side wrote: »

I only started to look at it more closely recently, it is very useful, I agree... looking forward to using it more. I can see the potential benefits of it would be very big.

Yeah, I fear it isn't really that popular in Ireland.

The Gibzilla

On paper this scheme is an excellent idea it gets people involved in community projects which will hopefully boost respect in some people for public services and the area in which they live. It will also hopefully catch out dole cheats and long term moochers.
In practice though it could be a disaster. Childcare? ffs they'll have to do background checks on people and as for long term moochers as people have mentioned whats stopping "Git" whose been on the scratch all his life from showing up for work and sitting on his arse doing nothing will there be someone monitoring the standard of work being carried out?

I'd like to read the finer points of the scheme does anyone know if it's online to read? Sorry to be an information moocher :P

Adamisconfused

homerjay2005 wrote: »

bulls*it, i just love the moral outrage cos of one example. this would involve 3% of the total people unemployed rising to about 8%, so first off, the chances of him being selected are slim. for every person like your friend, there are dozens of lazy useless ***** ripping us all off by nliving the highlife off the state.

So for every decent unemployed person, there at dozens of people ripping us off and living the high life? I'll assume you just mean two dozen and not more than that. Basically, you're saying, out of the four hundred thousand unemployed, there are over 380k scrounging off us. Such a crock of horse excrement.
I count my blessings every day that I'm not one of those people in the dole queues and I don't begrudge them one cent. Just because someone might have rent and heat allowance doesn't mean they're living the high life off €200 a week. I spend the best part of that on weekly shopping and don't consider myself as living the high life because I get to buy bachelors baked beans instead of store brand.

JONJO THE MISER

Surprise Surprise people who get put on this scheme will not be counted on the Live Register, so basically another 40,000 people or more will be off the live register but still will be on the social like the 80,000 already on Fas courses.
I have no problem with the FAS courses or the schemes but they should be included on the live register, all about spin and how many people have come off the live register when in fact none of them have gotten Jobs, expect RTE and the papers to say the recession is over when the live register falls sharply but in fact it hasnt.

starbelgrade

I don't often do this - in fact I have never done this before, but as there is a mountanous amount of ill thought out logic & well, quite frankly, utter & complete boll*x being posted by a lot of people on this issue, I am going to re-post what I posted earlier in this thread.

If those who are in favour of this scheme can come up with an even half hearted attempt to counteract my argument, it would be a lot better than the sh*te that's being spurned out over the last few pages:

starbelgrade wrote: »

10 reasons that the “work for dole” scheme is an odious idea.

1) The overwhelming majority of people on the dole paid PRSI for years before they became unemployed. It is not their fault that the government has blown ninety thousand million euros on bailouts and guarantee schemes and recapitalisation schemes for bankers. Forcing, at economic gunpoint, the weakest people in society to serve the political interests of the government is inequitable, and constitutes majoritarian tyranny against a weak demographic.

2) This scheme will not remove one single person from government dependency. The dole bill will still have to be paid, and this scheme will almost certainly cost more in administration than it will save in fraud reduction.

3) Such a scheme can only be fair if all 400,000 unemployed people are expected to partake in it. As is, 10% of unemployed people will be singled out for special treatment, leaving 360,000 lucky lottery winners free to continue as usual. Again, utterly inequitable.

4) Finding people with skills to work in the economy for less than those skills are worth fundamentally undermines the value of the skill for everyone. For example, if a community wants a project built, and an unemployed architect is assigned to them from this scheme, then architects in employment are missing out on work and fees, and the person working is being paid a pittance for their labour.

5) In the alternative, assigning people with general skills to activities for which they are not specifically qualified (for example, assigning a former secretary to work with the elderly) exposes the government to potentially huge liability in the event that unmotivated, unskilled workers make a mistake. Do we think that unmotivated, unskilled workers might make a mistake?

6) The idea that the purpose of such a scheme will be to crack down on fraud is a fundamentally disingenuous one. For starters, cracking down on fraud can be accomplished by allocating existing resources to that task (spotchecks + higher mandatory sentences). More importantly, if the scheme is limited to 10% of the unemployed, as news reports suggest, it will target only 10% of the fraud. This fact will be routinely ignored by the proponents of the scheme.

7) The added costs of compliance with such a scheme will be devastating for the unemployed. Are we going to pay for the childcare for a single mother who has to go out to work for a pittance? Are we going to pay transport costs? Or are we going to force people living below the poverty line to take a real terms cut in living standards for the sake of a cheap, populist, stunt?

8) By definition, most of the work will be pointless. “Work schemes” tend to create work for which there is no economic market – the idea that the hedgerows of ireland need trimming will be news to the average person living in rural Ireland, for example. If the work is meaningful, it will put existing people out of jobs (for example, repainting a school may be an idea the government has in mind, but what happens the local painter). If it is meaningless, then the scheme has no societal benefit at all.

9) Why wasn’t this scheme introduced in the boom? The answer? Because while there were many many jobs which could have been done by people on such a scheme because of the labour shortage, the people in office preferred to allow immigrants to do those jobs. At a time when it could have been imaginative, there was no imagination. Now, when it is mean spirited and pointless, there is no shortage of those traits in government.

10) The human reason. Contrary to the spin that this scheme will somehow be empowering, the only emotions this kind of work will arouse in your average unemployed accountant are those of humiliation, shame, and resentment.

It’s an odious idea, designed to win votes from grumpy taxpayers on the backs of the “lazy” unemployed, and to detract attention from the failings of government. It should be resisted fiercely.

I seriously cannot believe that our utter failure of a government manage to consistently blind some people in this country with their contemptuous policies & spin. I love Ireland & I love it's people, but sometimes, I have to wonder if we are a nation made up of a large percentage of complete f*cking half-wits.



Now, can we close the thread please before I get a f*cking hernia?

fonecrusher1

starbelgrade wrote: »

I don't often do this - in fact I have never done this before, but as there is a mountanous amount of ill thought out logic & well, quite frankly, utter & complete boll*x being posted by a lot of people on this issue, I am going to re-post what I posted earlier in this thread.

If those who are in favour of this scheme can come up with an even half hearted attempt to counteract my argument, it would be a lot better than the sh*te that's being spurned out over the last few pages:



I seriously cannot believe that our utter failure of a government manage to consistently blind some people in this country with their contemptuous policies & spin. I love Ireland & I love it's people, but sometimes, I have to wonder if we are a nation made up of a large percentage of complete f*cking half-wits.



Now, can we close the thread please before I get a f*cking hernia?

Listen to this guy???

What the fcuk is this? Starbelgrade.ie ???
Gets a couple of POTD's & he's running the show.:pac:

bryaner

i_love_toast wrote: »

yeah thats right bite the hand that feeds you. You do know its the same government who increased your dole over the last 6 years to the massive 204e a week that it is now......

I think you will find it's €196.80, lets go fcukin mental.

AckwelFoley

I heard 10 euros an hours was touted as the wage.. not bad.

I personally dont see a problem with it, id do have one concern.

Government bodies, regardless of political make up are useless at organising anything, it takes 7 council workers to dig a hole,

So i have reservations as to the effective this will be rather than essentially costing more money and getting nothing done. Id rather if the money to be spent was spent on getting people back to work in a mix of privte and punblic sector jobs by means of paying for some of the employees wages

fonecrusher1

If its the longterm dole hogs to be targeted for the 'work' im all for it.

ultain

How many walls can one country have??

bryaner

fonecrusher1 wrote: »

If its the longterm dole hogs to be targeted for the 'work' im all for it.

Correct even when we nearly had full employment there was still 100'000
on the dole.

bryaner

bryaner wrote: »

Correct even when we nearly had full employment there was still 100'000
on the dole.

It's very important to differntiate between those "between jobs" and long term and then look at those longtermers and look at why they didn't find a job.

How many are actually better off not working and why!

ultain

If the government was doing what needs doing for our communities...There would be plenty of interesting/educational schemes out there where People could actual benefit from the experience of these scams..sorry schemes.

bryaner

Deleted User wrote: »

It's very important to differntiate between those "between jobs" and long term and then look at those longtermers and look at why they didn't find a job.

How many are actually better off not working and why!

Really!

starbelgrade

fonecrusher1 wrote: »

Listen to this guy???

What the fcuk is this? Starbelgrade.ie ???
Gets a couple of POTD's & he's running the show.:pac:

I'm going to buy this place and install a f*cking jukebox and liven all you stiffs up a bit!

ultain

starbelgrade wrote: »

I'm going to buy this place and install a f*cking jukebox and liven all you stiffs up a bit!

you shouldn't have any hassle getting a few bods to install the jukebox now anyway:)

monkeypants

fonecrusher1 wrote: »

If its the longterm dole hogs to be targeted for the 'work' im all for it.

Those are the very people who'll put the most effort in to get out of this scheme. I'm sure that dangerous incompetence will get one sent home and referred back to the SW office and most likely to the back of the queue.

Mr Benevolent

bryaner wrote: »

I think you will find it's €196.80, lets go fcukin mental.

It's €196.00.

starbelgrade

Here's a comparison to highlight the idiocy & daft thinking behind this scheme;

Let's imagine that the Social Welfare is a shopping centre & that the dole frauds are shoplifters. Let's imagine that the shopping centre's owners are clueless f*ckwits.

Now, if they weren't totally incompetant dickheads, the obvious solution to cut down on shoplifting, would be to increase security & employ a professional security company to cut down on the amount of goods being nicked from their shops.

But these owners are buffoons remember, so they come up with a contrived plan that they think is genius - they decide to get a small percentage of their shoppers to work in their shopping centre. The theory behind it being, that if they are working in the shops, they'll be less likely to be stealing as they will have less time to do so.

But the owners have ignored the fact that there is still a larger number of customers who might be shoplifters, who aren't part of their scheme, so the chances are, a lot of stuff will still get nicked. They also don't counter in the fact that they actually have to pay the ones working in the shop & that they too could be nicking in their spare time, as they only have to do 2 days work.

So they really haven't saved any money or cut down on shoplifting.

Meanwhile, a large professional security company goes bust because they can't get contracts with any shopping centres.

-Trek-

I believe you, but you could just have said their idea is sh!t instead of coming up with an analogy, would save you a bit of typing.