Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The Jobbridge Scandal

Options
1…144145147149150…195

Comments

  • Options
    #4382
    Tombi!
    Registered Users Posts: 6,689 ✭✭✭Tombi!


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    They're completely different schemes, why do we need bananas when we have oranges?

    They were aimed at giving people experience.
    We had things that did it.
    Now we have a much, much less effective scheme that not only encourages people to work well below minimum wage (generally that's considered illegal in most countries) but for some reason, you're going on about draconian minimum wage laws.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_in_Europe_by_minimum_wage
    For some draconian countries, the ones listed there aren't exactly the worse in the world. Better than several, I'd say from talking to people from there. Exception being San Marino and Monaco since I don't know anyone from there.

    Here's what gets me about your entire opinion: you're defending the practice of encouraging working below minimum wage, letting businesses take advantage of the unemployed and doing it because it's "draconian minimum wage laws".
    You do realize how bloody expensive things are in this country, right?

    I have to ask, why? Why are you so defensive on the sides of the employer of either actual employed workers or JB workers? Did you benefit as an employer from this scheme or what? I'm just curious how you can honestly defend it with pride.


  • Options
    #4383
    Iwasfrozen
    Registered Users Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    Brutal Deluxe wrote: »
    They were aimed at giving people experience.
    We had things that did it.
    Now we have a much, much less effective scheme that not only encourages people to work well below minimum wage (generally that's considered illegal in most countries) but for some reason, you're going on about draconian minimum wage laws.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_in_Europe_by_minimum_wage
    For some draconian countries, the ones listed there aren't exactly the worse in the world. Better than several, I'd say from talking to people from there. Exception being San Marino and Monaco since I don't know anyone from there.

    Here's what gets me about your entire opinion: you're defending the practice of encouraging working below minimum wage, letting businesses take advantage of the unemployed and doing it because it's "draconian minimum wage laws".
    You do realize how bloody expensive things are in this country, right?

    I have to ask, why? Why are you so defensive on the sides of the employer of either actual employed workers or JB workers? Did you benefit as an employer from this scheme or what? I'm just curious how you can honestly defend it with pride.
    And bananas and oranges are both fruit. But the schemes aren't identical, JB is a much better scheme for college graduates who hoping to enter the professional class and who have good qualifications but little to no experience. So the government effectively subsidizes their training through the jobbridge scheme.

    Now you're somehow trying to correlate high minimum wage with prosperity? Causation is not correlation, Zimbabwe could tomorrow morning put into law a 9 euro minimum wage law, it wouldn't improve to say the least. Countries in Europe are relatively rich despite a relatively high minimum wage. Not because.

    Jobbridge gives those whose market value is less that of minimum wage the right to work for a company while the government subsidises their training. It's a good scheme that has helped many people but will only work if people are willing to make sacrifices, and of course they're smart enough not to apply for a job washing cars...

    Yes I realize things are expensive in this country I don't believe I've ever pretended they aren't.

    I defend jobbridge because I've seen it help people, simple as that. People who were smart, highly qualified but couldn't get a job through no experience. Jobbridge gives companies the chance to take these people on and train them up, then when they have 9 months experience under their belt they're a much more attractive person to employ.


  • Options
    #4384
    Tombi!
    Registered Users Posts: 6,689 ✭✭✭Tombi!


    Right, so you're defending it in the same terms you could defend proper internships, okay. I can accept that. I think you're defending its proper theoretical use.

    But stuff like this or this are having a laugh and you know it.

    So what's the opinion on those two ro those like it? First one is a coffee shop and the second one already needs skills. This isn't "spent a few years in college and need to learn skills to work" it's "you need training to be trained".

    The aim of the National Internship Scheme is to assist in breaking the cycle where jobseekers are unable to get a job without experience, either as new entrants to the labour market after education or training or as unemployed workers wishing to learn new skills. The scheme will also give young people a real opportunity to gain valuable experience to bridge the gap between study and the beginning of their working lives.

    So, before you do what you did a few months ago and say it's for employers, it's not. It's for unemployed people first and only them.


  • Options
    #4385
    weisses
    Registered Users Posts: 9,455 ✭✭✭weisses


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    I defend jobbridge because I've seen it help people, simple as that. People who were smart, highly qualified but couldn't get a job through no experience. Jobbridge gives companies the chance to take these people on and train them up, then when they have 9 months experience under their belt they're a much more attractive person to employ.



    Why would someone employ a person when that job can be filled by another JB victim?

    To whom would that person be attractive ?

    This "getting experience" thing should be done as an addition to your education and not some cheap labour in disguise scheme


  • Options
    #4386
    Iwasfrozen
    Registered Users Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    weisses wrote: »
    Why would someone employ a person when that job can be filled by another JB victim?

    To whom would that person be attractive ?

    This "getting experience" thing should be done as an addition to your education and not some cheap labour in disguise scheme
    As I've said before, training costs. And if you're in a JB scheme in an industry without high training costs my advice is get out, you're wasting your time.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #4387
    weisses
    Registered Users Posts: 9,455 ✭✭✭weisses


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    As I've said before, training costs. And if you're in a JB scheme in an industry without high training costs my advice is get out, you're wasting your time.

    But why would someone hire a person who did a job bridge scheme when that job can and is be filled by other JB participants ?

    Training costs are not the issue otherwise the company Training you via jobbridge would take you on after your "training" .... That would be a situation I could understand but unfortunately that is not the case


  • Options
    #4388
    Iwasfrozen
    Registered Users Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    weisses wrote: »
    But why would someone hire a person who did a job bridge scheme when that job can and is be filled by other JB participants ?

    Training costs are not the issue otherwise the company Training you via jobbridge would take you on after your "training" .... That would be a situation I could understand but unfortunately that is not the case
    If you're in a JB scheme in a sector without high training costs then my advice is to get out. You're wasting your time. If it's cost them money to train you you can bet they'll take you on.


  • Options
    #4389
    darkpagandeath
    Closed Accounts Posts: 24,465 ✭✭✭✭darkpagandeath


    Brutal Deluxe wrote: »
    Can you explain to me why we needed JB when we had CE schemes?

    Easy to fudge the job figures, There are currently 89k on various schemes Retraining and all that. 89k that are still receiving sw of some sort.


  • Options
    #4390
    byhookorbycrook
    Moderators, Education Moderators, Regional South East Moderators Posts: 12,498 Mod ✭✭✭✭byhookorbycrook


    jank wrote: »
    To be honest, this is a disgraceful move by the unions but sure what can we expect.
    Primary teachers have already doing teaching practice in college and newly qualified teachers are mentored in their schools. Jobsbridge is a con for them, preying on an oversupply of trained teachers.


  • Options
    #4391
    mickstupp
    Registered Users Posts: 1,764 ✭✭✭mickstupp


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    If you're in a JB scheme in a sector without high training costs then my advice is to get out. You're wasting your time. If it's cost them money to train you you can bet they'll take you on.
    I wish the real world was like your world.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #4392
    Iwasfrozen
    Registered Users Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    byhookorbycrook wrote: »
    Primary teachers have already doing teaching practice in college and newly qualified teachers are mentored in their schools. Jobsbridge is a con for them, preying on an oversupply of trained teachers.
    Why should the government not make use of supply and demand? Why not get taxpayers the best possible value for money?


  • Options
    #4393
    PopePalpatine
    Registered Users Posts: 11,939 ✭✭✭✭PopePalpatine


    Brutal Deluxe wrote: »
    You don't see why it's okay for it to be legal to hire someone from below a minimum wage, to encourage unethical practices, to essentially destroy entry level jobs and replace them with unemployed people who are still considered unemployed, just not for the purposes of the government being able to consider them on the register.

    Are you having a laugh?

    Yes, he's having a laugh while saving up for a ticket to Elysium Space Station. This is why I fear a libertarian state: there's no holds barred for big businesses that want to **** you over.


  • Options
    #4394
    byhookorbycrook
    Moderators, Education Moderators, Regional South East Moderators Posts: 12,498 Mod ✭✭✭✭byhookorbycrook


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    Why should the government not make use of supply and demand? Why not get taxpayers the best possible value for money?
    NQTs are already on a hugely reduced salary and most of them have little prospect nothing more than short term subbing.

    "Best possible value for money?"So all teachers should work Jobsbridge? Ah sure feck it, don't pay them at all.


  • Options
    #4395
    Iwasfrozen
    Registered Users Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    PopePalpatine wrote: »
    Yes, he's having a laugh while saving up for a ticket to Elysium Space Station. This is why I fear a libertarian state: there's no holds barred for big businesses that want to **** you over.
    Yeah companies that are being prevented from training people due to our draconian minimum wage laws want to **** you over. :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #4396
    Tombi!
    Registered Users Posts: 6,689 ✭✭✭Tombi!


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    Yeah companies that are being prevented from training people due to our draconian minimum wage laws want to **** you over. :rolleyes:

    What makes them draconian? You've never stated what makes them draconian.


  • Options
    #4397
    shruikan2553
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,113 ✭✭✭shruikan2553


    Yay, lets get more people reliant of social welfare as they cant afford to work. Great idea.


  • Options
    #4398
    Iwasfrozen
    Registered Users Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    byhookorbycrook wrote: »
    NQTs are already on a hugely reduced salary and most of them have little prospect nothing more than short term subbing.

    "Best possible value for money?"So all teachers should work Jobsbridge? Ah sure feck it, don't pay them at all.
    The industry is overly subscribed, every workers wages represent a balance between the demand for the workers skills and how plentiful those skills are in the economy. Primary teachers are exempt from this balance by standardized wage agreements. Effectively causing a market floor, leading to greater supply than demand.

    If the standardized wage agreements were scrapped, teachers wages would be allowed to fall until supply drops to meet demand.

    Given that teachers are earning more than their "market value" from the outset why shouldn't I cheer jobbridge positions that are saving taxpayers (of which I am one) money?


  • Options
    #4399
    weisses
    Registered Users Posts: 9,455 ✭✭✭weisses


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    Given that teachers are earning more than their "market value" from the outset why shouldn't I cheer jobbridge positions that are saving taxpayers (of which I am one) money?

    because by your on admission Jobbridge is there to get you trained up ... and I dont think you want people teaching your kids who are not ready/properly trained for the job


  • Options
    #4400
    66ad
    Closed Accounts Posts: 84 ✭✭66ad


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    why shouldn't I cheer jobbridge positions that are saving taxpayers (of which I am one) money?

    This is what I don't get, you being a "tax payer". Would rather your taxes being spent on giving employers free labour.

    From your taxes, "allegedly". I wouldn't be suprised if you never worked a day in your life...


  • Options
    #4401
    PopePalpatine
    Registered Users Posts: 11,939 ✭✭✭✭PopePalpatine


    66ad wrote: »
    This is what I don't get, you being a "tax payer". Would rather your taxes being spent on giving employers free labour.

    From your taxes, "allengedly". I wouldn't be suprised if you never worked a day in your life...

    I'd say it's more a case of never lived a day in anything resembling poverty. Funnily enough, you rarely see economic libertarians coming from working class backgrounds.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #4402
    Iwasfrozen
    Registered Users Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    66ad wrote: »
    This is what I don't get, you being a "tax payer". Would rather your taxes being spent on giving employers free labour.

    From your taxes, "allengedly". I wouldn't be suprised if you never worked a day in your life...
    I don't mind taxes being spent on jobbridge, it's only an extra 50 euro per person and I've seen it help so many people.

    If you're going to put allegedly in quotation marks and accuse me of never working at least spell it right dude...


  • Options
    #4403
    jank
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 13,018 ✭✭✭✭jank


    To be honest, I find the attitude here very disappointing. Internships can offer valuable experience. People look at the lowest common denominator like a small business offering a place in a car wash and using that example to dismiss the entire scheme even when there are many many good positions available and when the stats have proved that it does help people find work. Don't let the stats get in the way of a coddled tiger cub's rant though. Its slavery I tell ya!!


  • Options
    #4404
    Tombi!
    Registered Users Posts: 6,689 ✭✭✭Tombi!


    jank wrote: »
    To be honest, I find the attitude here very disappointing. Internships can offer valuable experience. People look at the lowest common denominator like a small business offering a place in a car wash and using that example to dismiss the entire scheme even when there are many many good positions available and when the stats have proved that it does help people find work. Don't let the stats get in the way of a coddled tiger cub's rant though. Its slavery I tell ya!!

    I think you'll find more people yelling it's slavery and that at the same time gladly admitting that it's a great scheme if done right. The problem is that the misuse of it seems to be done in a way that makes it out to be a joke in general.


  • Options
    #4405
    66ad
    Closed Accounts Posts: 84 ✭✭66ad


    PopePalpatine wrote: »
    I'd say it's more a case of never lived a day in anything resembling poverty. Funnily enough, you rarely see economic libertarians coming from working class backgrounds.


    I'd say daddy is using a few "slaves" from jobbridge himself. That attitude has to come from somewhere.


  • Options
    #4406
    Tombi!
    Registered Users Posts: 6,689 ✭✭✭Tombi!


    Iwasfrozen, any chance you can explain what's draconian about the minimum wage laws?


  • Options
    #4407
    Iwasfrozen
    Registered Users Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    jank wrote: »
    To be honest, I find the attitude here very disappointing. Internships can offer valuable experience. People look at the lowest common denominator like a small business offering a place in a car wash and using that example to dismiss the entire scheme even when there are many many good positions available and when the stats have proved that it does help people find work. Don't let the stats get in the way of a coddled tiger cub's rant though. Its slavery I tell ya!!
    The entitlement among many is pretty scary, they expect to leave college and get a 25k internship in their desired field straight away.


  • Options
    #4408
    66ad
    Closed Accounts Posts: 84 ✭✭66ad


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »

    If you're going to put allegedly in quotation marks and accuse me of never working at least spell it right dude...

    Sorry for typo but you can see I relised my mistake before your post, we are not all as perfect as you dude...


  • Options
    #4409
    Tombi!
    Registered Users Posts: 6,689 ✭✭✭Tombi!


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    If you're going to put allegedly in quotation marks and accuse me of never working at least spell it right dude...

    66ad wrote: »
    I'd say daddy is using a few "slaves" from jobbridge himself. That attitude has to come from somewhere.

    Folks, be a bit nicer please. No more grammar nazism or sly digs.


  • Options
    #4410
    darkpagandeath
    Closed Accounts Posts: 24,465 ✭✭✭✭darkpagandeath


    Brutal Deluxe wrote: »
    What makes them draconian? You've never stated what makes them draconian.

    Aye I wonder what is, Germany introduced it recently.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #4411
    shruikan2553
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,113 ✭✭✭shruikan2553


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    The entitlement among many is pretty scary, they expect to leave college and get a 25k internship in their desired field straight away.

    Nah, its when the bastards expect minimum wage the problems start. Do they really think a company can afford to actually pay them for 38-40 hours of work a week? The state should be paying everyones wages for the first few years until the company deems them worthy of being paid.


Advertisement