The Jobbridge Scandal

sunflower27

I don't know why the media is not all over it.

The problem is the government is throwing around all these figures about people getting full-time jobs out of it. Given the fact there is so many of them, they would want to be.

I would love to see the real stats. There was no reason to extend the scheme for 18 months other than it keeps businesses happy and keeps the live register down.

The stats don't include all the people that leave the scheme because they were being abused and quit.

strobe

Soft Falling Rain wrote: »

What was once (allegedly mind) aimed at getting graduates a foot on the ladder has now become a scheme designed to getting as many people "off" the lives register as possible.

By making the JC the minimum required they'll be targeting many young people who have left school early and at risk of becoming "dole lifers".

Which isn't a bad thing, it just means it's becoming less and less something that will attract graduates as the days go by.

I don't think for a second that forcing someone to work for below minimum wage and slightly above the dole if they want a job will make anyone decide not to be a "dole lifer". If anything it destroys the one motivation people had to think "this working **** isn't half bad" after they start getting their first paychecks from their first ****ty awful job.
Not to mention peoples first ****ty jobs are being made worse by having to put up with all kinds of crap because a metric fukk ton of free labour has been dumped like toxic waste into the environment.

Smidge

Xenji wrote: »

The majority of people on social welfare actually want to work and get out of the house, well except people on disability of course, they are not all happy just to just get their money every week and never have to work like a lot of the more entitled people on this board think. It is just a shame that these are the only jobs they can take, and it is getting worse week on week, even the seasonal Christmas jobs are all being put up on the scheme and you know they will just let the staff go in January.

100% agree.
I just was curious that if its not "mandatory" to do one of these "internships"(and never have I seen a term so loosely used) can people just not do them?

I think its an outrage to get free labour(and lets be honest thats what the majority of these employers are doing under the guise of "training" some one to cut grass etc) and in a lot of cases mislead the applicant as to there being a possibility of a position at the end of the placement.

So many people are qualified and hungry to work that its is unconscionable to exploit people like this.

Soft Falling Rain

strobe wrote: »

I don't think for a second that forcing someone to work for below minimum wage and slightly above the dole if they want a job will make anyone decide not to be a "dole lifer". If anything it destroys the one motivation people had to think "this working **** isn't half bad" after they start getting their first paychecks from their first ****ty awful job.
Not to mention peoples first ****ty jobs are being made worse by having to put up with all kinds of crap because a metric fukk ton of free labour has been dumped like toxic waste into the environment.

I agree with you, but they're going to be forced to take up these internships. It really is a farcical, horrible, opportunistic and easily manipulated piece of **** of a scheme.

Ace2007

What you need is to corner a TD on a live TV show with a question of do you see the internship of a way a student/person on doles earns valuable experience that he won't learn outside the job, or do you see the internship as a way for business to "hire" cheap labour for simple jobs.

Then when they TD says it's for valuable experience, you come back in (or your mate with the next question), with there are jobs on the website for Deli assistance and car valets - even have them printed out and offer to hand them to him, and ask where the valuable experience is in these, and how does it take 9 months to learn these trades.

Then when they give a reason of how it take 9 months, ask then is it simple a case the person doing the same internship but for 18 months is just free slave labour.

Of course the chances of you getting this far before being cut off are slim, but if there were enough people in a studio - he could be backed into a corner.

FWIW - agree with the TD that there are valuable experience internships, but for every 5 legitimate ones, there are about 25 joke ones, as per examples above.

runawaybishop

Grandpa Hassan wrote: »

But that is the issue with the whole scheme rather than picking on this job in particular, which seems to be not in the same category as the others posted on this thread.

Many SMEs cant hire more people. They don't have the cashflow. The intern may help the company expand, which might create a permanent job where none previously existed. And then the intern can be kept on

The issue is with Tesco etc using it, not small companies like a bike shop IMO

Jobbridge is not for the benefit of companies looking to expand on the back of free labour. It is to provide skills to people that they would not be able to get otherwise to allow them to gain employment. That job would come with on the job training by default. It should not have been accepted into the scheme.

Grandpa Hassan

runawaybishop wrote: »

Jobbridge is not for the benefit of companies looking to expand on the back of free labour. It is to provide skills to people that they would not be able to get otherwise to allow them to gain employment. That job would come with on the job training by default. It should not have been accepted into the scheme.

But the scenario I describe would create a job. That was not previously there. A win win for everyone

gozunda

Grandpa Hassan wrote: »

But the scenario I describe would create a job. That was not previously there. A win win for everyone

In a perfect world maybe

Otherwise free labour is being used to create profit for the employer at the taxpayer expense - there are no guaranteed jobs derived from this scheme

The main political aim appears to be to reduce live register figures and make present government look good. In the meantime employees rights to minimum pay and conditions are being trampled into the mud

So much for progress and equality

denlaw

gozunda wrote: »

In a perfect world maybe

Otherwise free labour is being used to create profit for the employer at the taxpayer expense - there are no guaranteed jobs derived from this scheme

The main political aim appears to be to reduce live register figures and make present government look good. In the meantime employees rights to minimum pay and conditions are being trampled into the mud

So much for progress and equality

Its what IBEC have always wanted, as i've said before, they're the main drivers behind the scambridge...

cloudatlas

They should be observing each sector and seeing if this scheme is in fact advantageous to that particular sector. They shouldn't be solely looking at the scheme as a whole.

Xenji

The people we have in on Jobbridge are only getting an observer in next month and they will only have a couple of weeks left after that, so after 8 months, this is the first time they have been checked up on, asked a friend of mine in another departement in the council and he said that the ones he is looking after have theirs a week before they leave, so it shows that how highly unregulated the scheme is.

DrumSteve

About a hundred years ago people were protesting for a fair days work for a fair days pay. Looks like things havent changed.

Augmerson

Ace2007 wrote: »

What you need is to corner a TD on a live TV show with a question of do you see the internship of a way a student/person on doles earns valuable experience that he won't learn outside the job, or do you see the internship as a way for business to "hire" cheap labour for simple jobs.

Then when they TD says it's for valuable experience, you come back in (or your mate with the next question), with there are jobs on the website for Deli assistance and car valets - even have them printed out and offer to hand them to him, and ask where the valuable experience is in these, and how does it take 9 months to learn these trades.

Then when they give a reason of how it take 9 months, ask then is it simple a case the person doing the same internship but for 18 months is just free slave labour.

Of course the chances of you getting this far before being cut off are slim, but if there were enough people in a studio - he could be backed into a corner.

FWIW - agree with the TD that there are valuable experience internships, but for every 5 legitimate ones, there are about 25 joke ones, as per examples above.

Great idea but the media never presses politicians in this country unless it is Sinn Fein. They always let them off the hook.

ABajaninCork

Tried to have a discussion about JB with one of the local (FG) TD's a while ago. Didn't go anywhere, as he'd clearly been programmed to give the party line. (He's as fat as a seal since he got in and about as useful as a chocolate teapot anyway)

I even gave him some of the adverts advertising these positions asking him what he thought of them. Couldn't get an answer out of him.

I'm just waiting for him when the elections come round soon....:mad: If he thinks I'm voting for him and the rest of that shower, he lie!

mothnot

Soft Falling Rain wrote: »

I agree with you, but they're going to be forced to take up these internships. It really is a farcical, horrible, opportunistic and easily manipulated piece of **** of a scheme.

Good description of this job bridge scheme. Where I work we have a guy who will be with us for 9 months, getting not a penny from company...meanwhile the company cuts existing staff hours as he is covering for us and we will not be taking on extra staff this Christmas as this guy again will be doing that work also. :mad:

runawaybishop

Grandpa Hassan wrote: »

But the scenario I describe would create a job. That was not previously there. A win win for everyone

A win in my arse. "Lets give companies free labour so they can expand off the back off it and maybe make up some new positions" is not a win for everyone.

Xenji

mothnot wrote: »

Good description of this job bridge scheme. Where I work we have a guy who will be with us for 9 months, getting not a penny from company...meanwhile the company cuts existing staff hours as he is covering for us and we will not be taking on extra staff this Christmas as this guy again will be doing that work also. :mad:

I have noticed already a serious lack of advertisements for part time Christmas work around town this year, it would not surprise me if stores took on staff on a Jobbridge and then just ditched them in January, as there are no rules against doing that, think one big chain clothes store in town has done it already.

mothnot

Xenji wrote: »

I have noticed already a serious lack of advertisements for part time Christmas work around town this year, it would not surprise me if stores took on staff on a Jobbridge and then just ditched them in January, as there are no rules against doing that, think one big chain clothes store in town has done it already.

Naw... they will not ditch them after Christmas but keep them for 9 months , then replace them with another intern for another 9 months or 18 months.
we are currently on our third intern!!!

runawaybishop

mothnot wrote: »

Naw... they will not ditch them after Christmas but keep them for 9 months , then replace them with another intern for another 9 months or 18 months.
we are currently on our third intern!!!

That's not allowed, report.

Xenji

runawaybishop wrote: »

That's not allowed, report.

Actually there is no rule against it, you do not have to keep the intern on, and you have now have no cooling off period as Joan got rid of it, so you can bring a new one in straight after, sure we have had close to 100 since the scheme started.

runawaybishop

Xenji wrote: »

Actually there is no rule against it, you do not have to keep the intern on, and you have no cooling off period now so you can bring a new one in straight after, sure we have had close to 100.

They dropped the limitation on how soon you could bring a new one in? When did they do that

Xenji

runawaybishop wrote: »

They dropped the limitation on how soon you could bring a new one in? When did they do that

A couple of months back when they extended it to 18 months, although you can only do a maximum of 9 months with one company, but now you can do up to 3 Jobbridges.

SeaFields

mothnot wrote: »

Good description of this job bridge scheme. Where I work we have a guy who will be with us for 9 months, getting not a penny from company...meanwhile the company cuts existing staff hours as he is covering for us and we will not be taking on extra staff this Christmas as this guy again will be doing that work also. :mad:

Being honest, if ye had a union I would expect them to be all over it. I aint a huge fan of unions but this is exactly the type of thing they should be attempting to stamp out.

mothnot

SeaFields wrote: »

Being honest, if ye had a union I would expect them to be all over it. I aint a huge fan of unions but this is exactly the type of thing they should be attempting to stamp out.

Laugh......I have to or else I would be crying!!! No union allowed here. This job bridge is a Godsend to my employer.
Previous to this they used to get in people with learning/physical disabilities ( all unpaid) and the onus was on staff to supervise them and keep them busy. There were days when we had as many as 4 all on at same time and we had to spend the whole day finding jobs for them and keeping them in separate locations so that didn't start to fight.
Now we have interns and TY students

Soft Falling Rain

mothnot wrote: »

Good description of this job bridge scheme. Where I work we have a guy who will be with us for 9 months, getting not a penny from company...meanwhile the company cuts existing staff hours as he is covering for us and we will not be taking on extra staff this Christmas as this guy again will be doing that work also. :mad:

I still can't get my head around this, both in terms of it surely contravening the rules of the scheme and in terms of staff actually accepting it.

Job Bridge, at least in theory, is not a scab system and for it to be treated as such is an abuse of the scheme.

ABajaninCork

Scheme's being abused left, right and centre. The Government will do nothing about it, as they're on the same tip! :mad:

runawaybishop

Soft Falling Rain wrote: »

I still can't get my head around this, both in terms of it surely contravening the rules of the scheme and in terms of staff actually accepting it.

Job Bridge, at least in theory, is not a scab system and for it to be treated as such is an abuse of the scheme.

That's the part that is extra hard to understand - watching an unpaid intern literally taking money out of your paycheck

Xenji

Sinn Féin seem to be the only party having ago about this and criticizing it.

SeaFields

mothnot wrote: »

No union allowed here.

As an employee, its your and your colleagues constitutional right to join a trade union if you so wish.

runawaybishop

SeaFields wrote: »

As an employee, its your and your colleagues constitutional right to join a trade union if you so wish.

Doesn't mean a lot of they refuse to engage with the union.