The Jobbridge Scandal

chopper6

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

So should people be allowed to use transport for free on top of everything else they're getting for free?


I spend 2 grand a year on bus fares...to and from work....why are people getting the service for free if they have no jobs?

WhatNowForUs?

chopper6 wrote: »

I'd rather not... i don't believe in living of the largese of anybody.

However i *do* know of people who are on the dole three decades or more and none of them have bones sticking through thier ribs,been forced to abstain from smoking/drinking or denied themselves holidays or flatscreen Tvs.

The problem with the dole is that the longer you're on it,the better you get paid and the easier it is to continue.

No creche fees,no doctor's bills,no tax,no mortage payments...the sort of expenses that are crippling the average working stiff.

Price that out for us.
Is it just another presumption that if there is a particular benefit to be got then everyone on the dole automatically gets it such as for instance Mortage or Rent relief?

Xenji

chopper6 wrote: »

So should people be allowed to use transport for free on top of everything else they're getting for free?


I spend 2 grand a year on bus fares...to and from work....why are people getting the service for free if they have no jobs?

Honestly wrong thread to be discussing this in, loads of threads in the transport forum on this, we do not need the thread derailed again.

chopper6

WhatNowForUs? wrote: »

Price that out for us.
Is it just another presumption that if there is a particular benefit to be got then everyone on the dole automatically gets it such as for instance Mortage or Rent relief?

Obviously if they live at home with thier mammies then it won't apply.

If they dont have kids then some things wont aply either.

but then why should anybody get 800 per month rent on top of nearly 200 per week when there are people in employment struggling to make ends meet out of thier own pockets on less than that?

ladhrann

chopper6 wrote: »

Obviously if they live at home with thier mammies then it won't apply.

If they dont have kids then some things wont aply either.

but if you why should anybody get 800 per month rent on top of nearly 200 per week when there are people in employment struggling to make ends meet out of thier own pockets on less than that?

And where pray tell can you rent a house for a family for E800/month?

osarusan

Debates on the perceived excesses of SW benefits are not related to debates on the merits of the jobbridge scheme.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

chopper6

ladhrann wrote: »

And where pray tell can you rent a house for a family for E800/month?

Ask your friendly private-sector landlord.

chopper6

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Well open another thread an explain in detail why this is not the case.

I happen to see it multiple times a day on my bus into town...yesterday i saw two traveller women with three kids wave a pass at the driver and barge on the bus...last week i heard a junkie tell the driver he'd mislaid his pass and he got on regardless...another time an inspector told a woman her pass was out of date,saluted her and moved on,a bloke behind me was issued with an on the spot fine because he 'd gone two stops past his destination...on a paid ticket costing 2.65.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

chopper6

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Didn't see any of them using wheelchairs...in fact they looked pretty fit to me.

Xenji

chopper6 wrote: »

Didn't see any of them using wheelchairs...in fact they looked pretty fit to me.

What has any of this got to do with JobBridge??

chopper6

Xenji wrote: »

What has any of this got to do with JobBridge??

It's got to do with the dole..to which jobridge is closely allied.

People speak of "working for nothing" when they are getting paid to do nothing via the dole and *should* be working to give something back

Xenji

chopper6 wrote: »

It's got to do with the dole..to which jobridge is closely allied.

People speak of "working for nothing" when they are getting paid to do nothing via the dole and *should* be working to give something back

Take it elsewhere then to the welfare forum, the title says JobBridge Scandal, it has nothing to do with some story about your bus expenses and what you see on your daily commute or rent prices....

osarusan

People put up links to internships on the FAS website but by the time I click the link, a few hours or days later, they are sometimes gone, and I encounter an 'unexpected problem.'

I wonder what percentage of internships are removed for not meeting the criteria, and if records are kept regarding which companies are posting these ineligible internships.

It really is crazy that the internships are only approved/rejected reactively, rather than proactively (if that is actually the case).

chopper6

Xenji wrote: »

Take it elsewhere then to the welfare forum, the title says JobBridge Scandal, it has nothing to do with some story about your bus expenses and what you see on your daily commute or rent prices....

It's not a "scandal" if it means people are finally forced to work for thier dole.

My examples are relevant in that the dole is bleeding the economy white.

osarusan

chopper6 wrote: »

It's not a "scandal" if it means people are finally forced to work for thier dole.

My examples are relevant in that the dole is bleeding the economy white.

How is it so hard to understand?

If the internship scheme is abused, it leads to more unemployment, not less. These people are 'forced to work for their dole', but are they working at the expense of somebody who used to do that job for pay, and is now unemployed?

The state pays 50 euro extra during an internship, so if it doesn't actually get people into employment, it costs more than simple SW for that person on the internship, not to mention possible displacement of people whe were in paid positions.

Now, I don't share in some posters' opinions that the scheme is fundamentally wrong. I think there are some internships through which a person can and will become a more skilled and employable person. If they need 9 months to gain these skills, that is fine with me.

But some of them, examples of which have been posted on here, are simply taking the piss, and could lead to the kind of displacement I mentioned earlier.

Xenji

chopper6 wrote: »

It's not a "scandal" if it means people are finally forced to work for thier dole.

My examples are relevant in that the dole is bleeding the economy white.

Start a new thread then to discuss how the dole is bleeding the economy white, if the government managed to actually create new jobs and not have 80000 people plus on activation schemes, that is what is bleeding the economy white and costs the government billions a year, you are making it out that everyone on the dole is a scrounger who is happy to lead the comfortable life as you called it, I am sure if the vast majority were offered a full time paid position they would jump on it.

chopper6

Xenji wrote: »

Start a new thread then to discuss ...

Sorry,are you a moderator?

Xenji

chopper6 wrote: »

Sorry,are you a moderator?

Not at all, but usually when somebody wants to start a discussion about something that is not relevant or off topic to the existing thread they are posting in, like peoples bus passes and rental costs, they usually make a new thread

CruelCoin

osarusan wrote: »

How is it so hard to understand?

If the internship scheme is abused, it leads to more unemployment, not less. These people are 'forced to work for their dole', but are they working at the expense of somebody who used to do that job for pay, and is now unemployed?

Thats an over simplistic way to look at it.

Once you hire someone, it's nigh on impossible to get rid of them.

They have to have a proven track record of being **** at their job, with warnings, letters and so-on until you can offload them, all the while doing damage to your business.

Businesses are terrified of giving people work, as they don't know what to do if sales slow down, and they can't offload to match, etc.

You can't just assume that all and any work would have been paid. Sometimes it just isn't.

Kirby

CruelCoin wrote: »

Thats an over simplistic way to look at it.

Once you hire someone, it's nigh on impossible to get rid of them.

They have to have a proven track record of being **** at their job, with warnings, letters and so-on until you can offload them, all the while doing damage to your business.

That's true if you work in the civil service...or work in a heavily unionised company.

In the other 90% of companies out there, most people start on a six month probationary contract. So if they are crap, they get the sack. No questions asked. They simply "don't renew your contract" and that's it.

zenno

zenno wrote: »

When I was called in for a one to one meeting with fas, she asked me what I was good at and in what line of work I was interested in, and she went straight to jobbridge to get me on a laptop repair job, but it was already gone. I told her that I was more interested in furthering my educational skills with a year course in computer maintenance and networking as this is what I used to work at, and I was not interested in jobbridge, so she put me down for a year course for this.

I was never forced to do jobbridge. I made the choice for myself to enrol in a year course instead.

You showed that you were willing to do something about your situation by retraining. Most FAS guidence people are willing to work with you if you have something in mind rather than staying on the dole. Good Luck in your course and in your future career.

osarusan

CruelCoin wrote: »

You can't just assume that all and any work would have been paid. Sometimes it just isn't.

I didn't assume that at all.

I said that some of them are taking the piss in this regard, and I'm talking about something like a person not picking up Christmas work at Tesco because it was offered as an internship instead. Or situations like the examples given in the thread, where somebody has their (paid) hours reduced after an intern starts.

Mrs Garth Brooks

chopper6 wrote: »

And so it should be...the country cannot afford to pay people to do nothing forever.

But the country can pay them an extra €50 of tax payers money. It all adds up.

Stacking shelves, a vegetable picker, a laundry assistant. All jobs the employer should be paying, not the country.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Hermy

@Permabear

Firstly, who's sitting on a sofa watching TV?

And secondly, this thread is mostly about the abuse of the Job Bridge scheme.
Expecting somebody to work a nine month internship in an entry level job washing cars or serving sandwiches is hardly going to expand the economy.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

tomwaterford

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

unpaid entry level jobs????

its no life to be going around skrimping and scraping and working for effitevely e1.25 an hour
*e50/40 hours

how can any company stand over paying someone that...its wrong in any eyes....espially in jobs that have little or no promotion chances in the most of these jobs!!!

Hermy

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Point taken.:)

Many successful people got started in entry-level jobs like stacking shelves or washing cars.

Entry level jobs - not entry level internships.