Slave labour jobs available

yourpics

I've seen ads on jobbridge for fully qualified solicitors - what a joke

Doctor Jimbob

yourpics wrote: »

Yes there are people at the bottom of the ladder but surely they are entitled to a proper wage

They're still getting their welfare money. From my own experience of being on welfare, I'd rather be working for that money than doing nothing. That's just me though, obviously other people think differently.

yourpics

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

They're still getting their welfare money. From my own experience of being on welfare, I'd rather be working for that money than doing nothing. That's just me though, obviously other people think differently.

For your welfare, you should not have to work more than 21 hrs per week (8.65 ph). Working 40 hrs is a joke and is really taking advantage of people.

starbelgrade what is your line of business? You say you are doing well and your intern might leave even though you have a job for them down the line. I would like to apply if its a suitable position

Doctor Jimbob

yourpics wrote: »

For your welfare, you should not have to work more than 21 hrs per week (8.65 ph). Working 40 hrs is a joke and is really taking advantage of people.

It's only taking advantage if the person feels they're being taken advantage of.

Slunk

starbelgrade wrote: »

It's not the same thing. In order for you meet the criteria to take on ten interns, you would have to have a company that already employs at least 40 people.

A company of that size would be contributing a significant amount of tax revenue while a guy paying people to work for cash would not.

The legality of it is far from the only difference.

But i thought i wasn't an issue of how much tax was paid? Its if the work is there. Did you not say that? If it was benefiting the company and gettin a return?

cloptrop

starbelgrade wrote: »

It's not the same thing. In order for you meet the criteria to take on ten interns, you would have to have a company that already employs at least 40 people.

A company of that size would be contributing a significant amount of tax revenue while a guy paying people to work for cash would not.

The legality of it is far from the only difference.

so tesco gets an advantage over the local retailer yet again thanks to the goverment , sorry local butchers you dont employ more than 40 people , you cant have slaves like tesco have

yourpics

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

It's only taking advantage if the person feels they're being taken advantage of.

Say a man and woman do like work, then they receive like wages.

So if a permanent employee does like work as an intern, they should receive like pay and conditions

gustafo

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

They're still getting their welfare money. From my own experience of being on welfare, I'd rather be working for that money than doing nothing. That's just me though, obviously other people think differently.

i agree with you mate as long as it's in walking distance to the job, if it's costing money to get there they can keep it.

cloptrop

id rather be at home with my kids than letting tesco abuse me , taking another mans job for 50 quid a week minus lunch ,, say awh he doesnt wanna work all you want , if tesco offered me a minumum wage job id take it

partyatmygaff

partyatmygaff wrote: »

I'm going to open up a marketing agency next thing tomorrow. We'll specialise in "Human Billboards" for local Dublin businesses.

I'm going to set up a home office and advertise a few internship posts. I'll go find a few businesses willing to avail of my new company's services and i'll assign my budding interns to their posts. It's really a win-win situation, isn't it? I get free labour for my business and my interns get free experience in marketing.

After all, any experience is better than no experience, isn't that right Doctor Jimbob?

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

Yes, any experience is better than no experience. Do you have any comment to make that isn't smart assed thanks whoring? Or are we done now?

Excellent.

I really like your work ethic and your general attitude towards work. I would be honoured if you would join me as one of my first interns. I'd be even more honoured if you asked your unemployed friends and family to join me as well.

What do you say? Are you ready to take on this once-in-a-lifetime experience? Are you ready to take the first step on the marketing career ladder?

Doctor Jimbob

cloptrop wrote: »

id rather be at home with my kids than letting tesco abuse me , taking another mans job for 50 quid a week minus lunch ,, say awh he doesnt wanna work all you want , if tesco offered me a minumum wage job id take it

Preferring to be at home with your kids is perfectly understandable, but calling it abuse is way OTT.

starbelgrade

partyatmygaff wrote: »

I'm going to open up a marketing agency next thing tomorrow. We'll specialise in "Human Billboards" for local Dublin businesses.

I'm going to set up a home office and advertise a few internship posts. I'll go find a few businesses willing to avail of my new company's services and i'll assign my budding interns to their posts. It's really a win-win situation, isn't it? I get free labour for my business and my interns get free experience in marketing.

After all, any experience is better than no experience, isn't that right Doctor Jimbob?

If you manage to go to the trouble and expense of setting up your own business, in order to take on an intern, you will have to already have one employee working at least 30 hours per week and paying PRSI & PAYE, which means you'll have to have an established client list to foot this bill as well as all your other overheads including public and employers liability insurance.

If you do manage that and you do manage to give someone an internship, then I would say "fair play to you".

yourpics

At the end of the day jobbridge is a bail out for business people. The employer should have to contribute 100 or 150 a week to the intern.

Katgurl

People capable of working should not be getting dole for sitting on their arses. I would defo do this if I was out of work. People talk about private companies like they are the work of the devil, they are struggling too. Why shouldn't dixons utilise the scheme? Why shouldn't people work for their dole money? It provides a structure to their day and may stop people
sliding into a depression. Ok it's nobodys dream job but IMO better than no job. The country us financially crippled and it's everyones responsibility to pull together an get it back on it's feet. Nobody should be getting money for nothing and companies should be supported.

cloptrop

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

Preferring to be at home with your kids is perfectly understandable, but calling it abuse is way OTT.

it is abuse , its full time work for 50 quid that they are not paying
it is promising me experience in stacking shelves which is making a fool of me
how is it not abuse

ThePower11

Got to laugh at starbelgrade and Doctor Jimbob trying to defend this hair brained scheme, presumably you both have one of these slaves working for your business'?

starbelgrade

cloptrop wrote: »

so tesco gets an advantage over the local retailer yet again thanks to the goverment , sorry local butchers you dont employ more than 40 people , you cant have slaves like tesco have

A local butcher can take on the same amount of interns relative to the size of his existing workforce as Tesco, so Tesco don't have actually have any advantage.

yourpics

Katgurl wrote: »

People capable of working should not be getting dole for sitting on their arses. I would defo do this if I was out of work. People talk about private companies like they are the work of the devil, they are struggling too. Why shouldn't dixons utilise the scheme? Why shouldn't people work for their dole money? It provides a structure to their day and may stop people
sliding into a depression. Ok it's nobodys dream job but IMO better than no job. The country us financially crippled and it's everyones responsibility to pull together an get it back on it's feet. Nobody should be getting money for nothing and companies should be supported.

People on the dole don't get it for nothing. I worked and paid all my taxes for years and I am still paying through vat, taxes etc. I also give alot back to my community.
Nobody getting money for nothing - sure businesses are getting labour for free

partyatmygaff

starbelgrade wrote: »

If you manage to go to the trouble and expense of setting up your own business, in order to take on an intern, you will have to already have one employee working at least 30 hours per week and paying PRSI & PAYE, which means you'll have to have an established client list to foot this bill as well as all your other overheads including public and employers liability insurance.

If you do manage that and you do manage to give someone an internship, then I would say "fair play to you".

No problem.

I'd pay any amount of money to set up a business with such lucrative margins.

Slunk

KatGurl - struggling companies ok. But Dixons made 57 million in 2010. I don't think they are struggling. They can afford to pay someone minimum wage

ThePower11

Katgurl wrote: »

People capable of working should not be getting dole for sitting on their arses. I would defo do this if I was out of work. People talk about private companies like they are the work of the devil, they are struggling too. Why shouldn't dixons utilise the scheme? Why shouldn't people work for their dole money? It provides a structure to their day and may stop people
sliding into a depression. Ok it's nobodys dream job but IMO better than no job. The country us financially crippled and it's everyones responsibility to pull together an get it back on it's feet. Nobody should be getting money for nothing and companies should be supported.

Tesco announced profits of over £2,000,000,000 in February 2011. So your argument is bullshit!

Doctor Jimbob

Katgurl wrote: »

People capable of working should not be getting dole for sitting on their arses. I would defo do this if I was out of work. People talk about private companies like they are the work of the devil, they are struggling too. Why shouldn't dixons utilise the scheme? Why shouldn't people work for their dole money? It provides a structure to their day and may stop people
sliding into a depression. Ok it's nobodys dream job but IMO better than no job. The country us financially crippled and it's everyones responsibility to pull together an get it back on it's feet. Nobody should be getting money for nothing and companies should be supported.

A bit of sense, at last.

cloptrop wrote: »

it is abuse , its full time work for 50 quid that they are not paying
it is promising me experience in stacking shelves which is making a fool of me
how is it not abuse

No, slave labour is abuse, child labour in third world countries is abuse. Working in tesco for enough money to keep you going is not fúcking abuse.

ThePower11 wrote: »

Got to laugh at starbelgrade and Doctor Jimbob trying to defend this hair brained scheme, presumably you both have one of these slaves working for your business'?

And I've got to laugh at you for spouting drivel like that when you clearly haven't read half my posts.

Doctor Jimbob

ThePower11 wrote: »

Tesco announced profits of over £2,000,000,000 in February 2011. So your argument is bullshit!

Tesco are not all large private companies though.

ThePower11

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

No, slave labour is abuse, child labour in third world countries is abuse. Working in tesco for enough money to keep you going is not fúcking abuse.

You really are deluded, "enough money to keep one going" ??? Really?

mikemac1

Butchery is a trade, not a minimum wage job

Tesco can take on shelf stackers, local butchers employ trained staff.

Sure an intern can learn about the trade but in that case they may as well just do the apprenticeship

starbelgrade

partyatmygaff wrote: »

No problem.

I'd pay any amount of money to set up a business with such lucrative margins.

And therein lies the rub.

Slunk

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

Tesco are not all large private companies though.

So do you agree with tesco hiring interns ? Whatever about other companies

ThePower11

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

Tesco are not all large private companies though.

Oh excuse me so, I thought the whole point of this thread was the taking advantage of unemployed people by large private company's such as Tesco and Dixons/Curry's.

Doctor Jimbob

ThePower11 wrote: »

You really are deluded, "enough money to keep one going" ??? Really?

Yes, clearly I'm the deluded one here.

yourpics

Dixons are a joke of a company and their poor after service has been well highlighted

Katgurl

yourpics wrote: »

Katgurl wrote: »

People capable of working should not be getting dole for sitting on their arses. I would defo do this if I was out of work. People talk about private companies like they are the work of the devil, they are struggling too. Why shouldn't dixons utilise the scheme? Why shouldn't people work for their dole money? It provides a structure to their day and may stop people
sliding into a depression. Ok it's nobodys dream job but IMO better than no job. The country us financially crippled and it's everyones responsibility to pull together an get it back on it's feet. Nobody should be getting money for nothing and companies should be supported.

People on the dole don't get it for nothing. I worked and paid all my taxes for years and I am still paying through vat, taxes etc. I also give alot back to my community.
Nobody getting money for nothing - sure businesses are getting labour for free

ok not everyone, but I still maintain that it is good to work as a job gives a sense of purpose to the day. I have a young guy living in my house and I can only describe him as drifting and ambitionless. Likewise with a friend of mine who has been on the dole for ten years. I don't see why they are getting paid at all instead of doing some form of work. I have worked the crappiest jobs over the years and while I didn't love them all, not working never really seemed an option. I just don't see why dole us being handed out to able-bodied people when we are up to our b0!!oxk$ in debt.

yourpics

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

Yes, clearly I'm the deluded one here.

Are you living/existing on 188 a week despite not being reponsible for the recession?

ThePower11

Great to see the British still raping the ordinary "Paddy" and "Mick" in 2012.

Doctor Jimbob

ThePower11 wrote: »

You really are deluded, "enough money to keep one going" ??? Really?

Katgurl wrote: »

ok not everyone, but I still maintain that it is good to work as a job gives a sense of purpose to the day. I have a young guy living in my house and I can only describe him as drifting and ambitionless. Likewise with a friend of mine who has been on the dole for ten years. I don't see why they are getting paid at all instead of doing some form of work. I have worked the crappiest jobs over the years and while I didn't love them all, not working never really seemed an option. I just don't see why dole us being handed out to able-bodied people when we are up to our b0!!oxk$ in debt.

You're probably going to get ripped apart for this post, but I completely see the sense in it. The opinion of most people in this thread reeks of some deluded sense of entitlement.

yourpics

Katgurl wrote: »

ok not everyone, but I still maintain that it is good to work as a job gives a sense of purpose to the day. I have a young guy living in my house and I can only describe him as drifting and ambitionless. Likewise with a friend of mine who has been on the dole for ten years. I don't see why they are getting paid at all instead of doing some form of work. I have worked the crappiest jobs over the years and while I didn't love them all, not working never really seemed an option. I just don't see why dole us being handed out to able-bodied people when we are up to our b0!!oxk$ in debt.

Yes I see where you are coming from. Like I say I try to give back to my community and thereby provide structure to my day.
I really despise those who receive dole and just drink it all.

ThePower11

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

Yes, clearly I'm the deluded one here.

No not just you, you're friend starbelgrade too, I don't see anyone else on this forum agreeing with you're bile.

yourpics

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

You're probably going to get ripped apart for this post, but I completely see the sense in it. The opinion of most people in this thread reeks of some deluded sense of entitlement.

Everyone is entitled to work and make a living for themselves

partyatmygaff

Katgurl wrote: »

TPeople talk about private companies like they are the work of the devil, they are struggling too.

I don't care if they're struggling. They've no right to get free labour trafficked to them through our government at cost to the taxpayer and the "Intern" involved.

Why shouldn't dixons utilise the scheme?

A little something called ethics.

Ok it's nobodys dream job but IMO better than no job.

Doing menial tiring work for free just to help a company lower its costs is not better than doing nothing. At least not for me anyway.

The country us financially crippled and it's everyones responsibility to pull together an get it back on it's feet.

I know right? I'm going to go right up to Dunnes tomorrow and offer to clean their floors. I won't even ask for any equipment. I'll be a good citizen and i'll buy the equipment myself. I couldn't possibly expect a poor Irish company to pay its own costs.

Slunk

Yes them examples should be cut off. But what about the people who want to work but can't because there companies are getting free labour. And by work i mean get paid the going rate for it

Doctor Jimbob

yourpics wrote: »

Are you living/existing on 188 a week despite not being reponsible for the recession?

No, I'm living/existing on fúck all a week because I got up off my ass and left the country rather than sit on the dole at home. I've been here for 6 months and have had two jobs where I worked my ass off, so apologies if I don't have much sympathy for people who sit on their ass complaining that they're living on 'only' 188 a week. As for the responsibility bit, why does that even matter. Recessions happen. Crying that we aren't responsible for it isn't going to solve a thing.

ThePower11 wrote: »

Great to see the British still raping the ordinary "Paddy" and "Mick" in 2012.

Ah ok, you've run out of points so you're just going to bash the British. Fair play.

Doc Ruby

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

Yes, clearly I'm the deluded one here.

Finally some sense.

Katgurl wrote: »

ok not everyone, but I still maintain that it is good to work as a job gives a sense of purpose to the day. I have a young guy living in my house and I can only describe him as drifting and ambitionless. Likewise with a friend of mine who has been on the dole for ten years. I don't see why they are getting paid at all instead of doing some form of work. I have worked the crappiest jobs over the years and while I didn't love them all, not working never really seemed an option. I just don't see why dole us being handed out to able-bodied people when we are up to our b0!!oxk$ in debt.

Right.

ThePower11

Slunk wrote: »

Yes them examples should be cut off. But what about the people who want to work but can't because there companies are getting free labour. And by work i mean get paid the going rate for it

We can't be having people working for money these days are you mad.

mikemac1

Last year the phrase on boards was "lucky to have a job"

This year it's "lucky to get a salary"

People are beat down, no wonder all the posts on boards about no confidence

Never waste a good recession, IBEC must be loving this

yourpics

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

No, I'm living/existing on fúck all a week because I got up off my ass and left the country rather than sit on the dole at home. I've been here for 6 months and have had two jobs where I worked my ass off, so apologies if I don't have much sympathy for people who sit on their ass complaining that they're living on 'only' 188 a week. As for the responsibility bit, why does that even matter. Recessions happen. Crying that we aren't responsible for it isn't going to solve a thing.



Ah ok, you've run out of points so you're just going to bash the British. Fair play.

Not everyone can just leave the country, personal circumstances can dictate otherwise.
Responsibility is important, those who caused it should pay. If I robbed a bank I wouldn't expect you to go to jail for my crime.

10green bottles

I for one hope that the jobbridge collapes very soon,and is never re-built.It is slave labour under fancy marketing.No excuses should be made to defend it.It has some(minimal) good points but they are heavily outweighed by the way it is abused by some companies.It defo needs to be overhauled by Fas and a new and fairer scheme should be introduced.:mad::eek:

Doc Ruby

partyatmygaff wrote: »

I know right? I'm going to go right up to Dunnes tomorrow and offer to clean their floors. I won't even ask for any equipment. I'll be a good citizen and i'll buy the equipment myself. I couldn't possibly expect a poor Irish company to pay its own costs.

Nonsense, do the right and honourable thing and just start wiping the floor with your bare palms, it adds a nice natural veneer anyway.

ThePower11

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

Ah ok, you've run out of points so you're just going to bash the British. Fair play.

And you're points amount to;

1: People on the dole have nothing better to do, so they should work for nothing.

2. Some poor old private company's are struggling these days, so lets get the unemployed to help them out. and work like a slave. (at least the slave got free lunch)

Doctor Jimbob

ThePower11 wrote: »

Oh excuse me so, I thought the whole point of this thread was the taking advantage of unemployed people by large private company's such as Tesco and Dixons/Curry's.

It is, my point was it's not specifically about Tesco.

ThePower11 wrote: »

No not just you, you're friend starbelgrade too, I don't see anyone else on this forum agreeing with you're bile.

That's ok, I'm not here to win a popularity contest.

yourpics wrote: »

Everyone is entitled to work and make a living for themselves

Yes, which would be what people getting work under this scheme would be doing. Working. For money.

Slunk wrote: »

Yes them examples should be cut off. But what about the people who want to work but can't because there companies are getting free labour. And by work i mean get paid the going rate for it

Why does it bother you that the companies are getting free labour exactly? It doesn't effect you.

ThePower11 wrote: »

We can't be having people working for money these days are you mad.

:rolleyes:

twinQuins

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

Some people have to work at the bottom too. Just because it's beneath you doesn't mean it's beneath other people. Not everything has to be beneficial to you. It's beneficial to society. Just because you don't get any benefit from it doesn't make it a bad thing.

Not everyone has to have a flowering career. If everyone makes their way to the top of the career ladder, there's no one left to support the bottom, so the whole thing falls apart.

Okay look at it like this: the state invests in these schemes because the assumption is people will pick up marketable skills that can be used to get them off the dole and on to a career.
If people are only going to be performing the most menial tasks - i.e. those that will not result in developing marketable skills - what kind of return can the government expect on its investment?

As it is, the government is just ploughing money into private companies with the result that these people will still be on the dole because they haven't gained the skills to advance to a career that's actually hiring.

It's not a case of the work being beneath people, it's a case of this type of work completely negating the whole point of the scheme. The person on the scheme loses, the taxpayer loses, the only people who actually benefit are the shareholders of these companies.

ThePower11

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

:rolleyes:

Running out of bullshit are we?