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…6970727475…195

Comments

  • Options
    #2132
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #2133
    Ann Landers
    Closed Accounts Posts: 817 ✭✭✭Ann Landers


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    Less than 20% in the host organisation.


  • Options
    #2134
    everdead.ie
    Registered Users Posts: 9,153 ✭✭✭everdead.ie


    Ann Landers wrote: »
    Less than 20% in the host organisation.
    It is still an impressive statistic even if it gets you a job somewhere else.


  • Options
    #2135
    Ann Landers
    Closed Accounts Posts: 817 ✭✭✭Ann Landers


    everdead.ie wrote: »
    It is still an impressive statistic even if it gets you a job somewhere else.

    How do we know Jobbridge is what got the person a job?


  • Options
    #2136
    Guy:Incognito
    Registered Users Posts: 38,247 ✭✭✭✭Guy:Incognito


    everdead.ie wrote: »
    It is still an impressive statistic even if it gets you a job somewhere else.

    Is it ? All it shows is that people are looking for and getting jobs. It doesn't show any connection to the job and them having done an internship.

    even the 20% that get jobs in the host company could be jobs that would have been there anyway but the company fancied getting the person for free for the first 9 months. I'm sure there's plenty of companies that wouldn't mind saving €20k


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2137
    leonidas83
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,065 ✭✭✭leonidas83


    everdead.ie wrote: »
    It is still an impressive statistic even if it gets you a job somewhere else.

    Only impressive if they get a job in their chosen profession/field. What about the countless amount that had to get a proper paying job lower down the scale just because they couldnt afford to live on a jobbridge wage anymore.

    Its very easy to massage these type of statistics & the government have become very adept at this practice over the years.


  • Options
    #2138
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #2139
    shruikan2553
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,113 ✭✭✭shruikan2553


    The statistics are quite pathetic, lets just say that people got a better offer elsewhere so didnt take up the job offer with the intern company its only 1 in 3 people. No wonder they are trying to force/"encourage" people to go on it, if they throw enough people into it some has to stick. Its working for a minority but I dont see how anyone can see that and think it doesnt need a huge overhaul.


  • Options
    #2140
    Guy:Incognito
    Registered Users Posts: 38,247 ✭✭✭✭Guy:Incognito


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    So give the supermarkets the people for free instead of the few that would have been hired is some sort of solution?

    Is there a glut of full time shelf packer jobs that the supermarkets are struggling to fill because they can't find people with 9 months experience? Or will it be a conveyor belt of 9 month internships doing jobs that require no experience then still not being able to get a job when they are done?


  • Options
    #2141
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2142
    guinnessdrinker
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,469 ✭✭✭guinnessdrinker


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    No I am not acknowledging any such thing.

    Also I am not speaking for other people. I was agreeing with your point that if interns were not available that organisations would not hire an equivalent number of full time employees.

    The fact is that Jobbridge is replacing many jobs that would have been paid positions before the scheme exisisted.

    The 61.4% figure you mention. This can be used in any context. For example how do we know that a large proportion (or even all) of these people would have found employment regardless of their participation on Jobbridge?

    You said yourself that minimum wage and taxes on employment act as a barrier to people entering the workforce. So it's only natural for companies then to take advantage of the Jobbridge scheme and get someone to do the work for free at no expense to the company. They would be foolish not to and this is one of the main problems of the scheme.


  • Options
    #2143
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #2144
    Ann Landers
    Closed Accounts Posts: 817 ✭✭✭Ann Landers


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    That's still terrible. The 61.4% figure is pretty meaningless unless it can be shown that Jobbridge led to all of those employments.


  • Options
    #2145
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #2146
    Guy:Incognito
    Registered Users Posts: 38,247 ✭✭✭✭Guy:Incognito


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    There is nothing to say it leads to employment for 61.4% of participants. All that says is 61.4% of them get a job within that time frame . If they are on the dole for the gap could we say the dole leads to the employment?


  • Options
    #2147
    Xenji
    Registered Users Posts: 11,505 ✭✭✭✭Xenji


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    That figure has been dismissed by quite a few experts on various radio shows due to the government saying that a week before the figures were released that they reported 75% did not complete their placement. If 25% do and 38% of those get a full-time position, the government has a success rate of 8%.


  • Options
    #2148
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #2149
    Guy:Incognito
    Registered Users Posts: 38,247 ✭✭✭✭Guy:Incognito


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    No. There aren't that many available jobs. But can we say that anyone that gets a job having been on the dole go it because of the dole?

    any chance of a reply to my previous post where I answered you about the supermarket.


  • Options
    #2150
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #2151
    guinnessdrinker
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,469 ✭✭✭guinnessdrinker


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    I know from first hand experience. I have worked in companies that have hired interns into positions that would have traditionally been paid roles.

    The statistics are meaningless unless we can quantify them correctly. So it's a bit pointless quoting them in fairness.

    I'm not assuming that "the work" just exists. Why would I assume that?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2152
    guinnessdrinker
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,469 ✭✭✭guinnessdrinker


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    You are not comparing like with like. You are attempting to compare the total number on the dole with a segment of those on a scheme. Jobbridge participants are made up of just one particular segment of people on the dole.

    Someone could use an example of any particular segment of people on the dole such as Doctors for example and come up with statistics that mean very little.

    Would you expect 61.4% of Doctors be on the dole in 5 months time.


  • Options
    #2153
    shruikan2553
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,113 ✭✭✭shruikan2553


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    Most people who do the scheme get a job elsewhere which suggests that companies are hiring just for the free labour with no intention of giving the person a job at the end of it.

    We dont know that the scheme leads to that figure. If someone does a car wash internship and gets work in dunnes for 3 weeks over Christmas before going back on the dole it doesnt make jobsbridge a success.


  • Options
    #2154
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #2155
    Xenji
    Registered Users Posts: 11,505 ✭✭✭✭Xenji


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    I take it your talking about the Indecon report from 2012 and getting figures from that, either way only 8 percent of people at the time in JobBridge got kept on by there host organization.


  • Options
    #2156
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #2157
    guinnessdrinker
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,469 ✭✭✭guinnessdrinker


    guinnessdrinker wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.
    Permabear wrote: »
    This post has been deleted.

    Permabear, I think we are getting wires crossed here a bit. I said particpants are just one segment of people on the dole which is true and not a misconception. I didn't mention anything about age groups?


  • Options
    #2158
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #2159
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #2160
    Theanswers
    Registered Users Posts: 697 ✭✭✭Theanswers


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    I think it's got very little to do with the programme - instead the people who undertake Job-Bridge do so because they have a strong work ethic and therefore much more likely/ 'want' to get a job vs. the person sitting down at the pub day in day out. Claiming every benefit going and have no intention of giving that up.

    That is why the percentage who get job after the scheme get one, they 'want' it. Many people on the dole don't.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2161
    everdead.ie
    Registered Users Posts: 9,153 ✭✭✭everdead.ie


    leonidas83 wrote: »
    Only impressive if they get a job in their chosen profession/field. What about the countless amount that had to get a proper paying job lower down the scale just because they couldnt afford to live on a jobbridge wage anymore.

    Its very easy to massage these type of statistics & the government have become very adept at this practice over the years.

    Not everyone has the luxury to get a job in their chosen field everyone knows that but plugging a 9 month gap on your cv really helps it is far easier to get employment when you are currently working. It is a success if it gets people off the dole that is its remit.
    Guy:Incognito wrote: »
    Is it ? All it shows is that people are looking for and getting jobs. It doesn't show any connection to the job and them having done an internship.

    even the 20% that get jobs in the host company could be jobs that would have been there anyway but the company fancied getting the person for free for the first 9 months. I'm sure there's plenty of companies that wouldn't mind saving €20k
    Ann Landers wrote: »
    How do we know Jobbridge is what got the person a job?


    It is a much higher rate of employment after completing it then their is if you just stay on the dole. It may not be a defining factor for the reason they got employment but again it is definitely a contributing factor.

    I don't think the jobsbridge scheme is perfect and some of the jobs which are just menial labour jobs which require very little skill I don't think they should be allowed to be put forward as positions but there is a degree of success that can't be denied.

    I think the real question shouldn't be how do we shut it down but how can it be improved to increase your chances of gaining permanent employment.


Advertisement