The Jobbridge Scandal

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

runawaybishop

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Of course people will object, you don't need a 9 month internship for them. You need on the job training and a wage, not exploitative schemes that give away free labour.

Ann Landers

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Not having a third level degree =/= only doing menial labour. Can't believe I have to point this out. Your posts are highly disingenuous. Well they were, until you admitted that the only use for the Jobbridge was to circumvent the minimum wage. The brass tacks of the matter. Thanks for that.

Daith

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

You answer your question!

Before the Job Bridge they didn't need placements. Why the need now? For the employer to get around the min wage which you said.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

tomwaterford

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

you surly don't want to see a return to the days of hotels etc paying IR£20 for a ten hour shift for jobs that require little to no training??

this wasn't isolated case...it was going on wholesale...I remember I had many relations who were on such wages working as cleaners,farm labourers,etc
it serves no one only person who is hiring doesn't want to pay wages!!!
sure why they pay wages when they can get government to pay them for it....
something badly amiss with the world when people on high wages argue that poorer people should be getting paid less and not touch there wages

why cut the min wage-its minimum amount to live in this country....it should be going up if anything (I know this wont happen;))...with all the government new made up taxes and rises in the ESB prices ,petrol increases,road tax etc

and people come out then argue that the government undermining the min wage job market is a good thing
in all honesty what good is internship in stacking shelves,washing cars,farm labouring??

Ann Landers

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

"High" minimum wage and businesses paying for workers they need. Can't afford that? Well then, why are they in business?

I've been in pre-minimum wage low paid youth employment. It was almost impossible to survive on, and this was late 90s, early 00s. Can't imagine what it would be like now.

Daith

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Yet your stats apparently show that people (60%) who complete a job bridge are being hired. At the min wage or more? So....what is your point? Clearly companies can afford to hire people judging by this success?

coffee_cake

Ann Landers wrote: »

"High" minimum wage and businesses paying for workers they need. Can't afford that? Well then, why are they in business?

So you want less competition, higher prices, and higher unemployment?

Ann Landers

bluewolf wrote: »

So you want less competition, higher prices, and higher unemployment?

I added this part on to my post:

Ann Landers wrote: »

I've been in pre-minimum wage low paid youth employment. It was almost impossible to survive on, and this was late 90s, early 00s. Can't imagine what it would be like now.

I've been there, it was pittance even then.

Do people forget that these are human beings? Yay, a business can survive, but I can't! Woo!

Daith

bluewolf wrote: »

So you want less competition, higher prices, and higher unemployment?

We still have a high minimum wage and the people on job bridge aren't employed? So what's the difference?

Are we saying Ireland needs people on 9 months internships to have more competition, low prices and low unemployment?

coffee_cake

Daith wrote: »

Are we saying Ireland needs people on 9 months internships to have more competition, low prices and low unemployment?

I don't know what you're saying, but I've already clarified I don't like job bridge

Daith

bluewolf wrote: »

I don't know what you're saying, but I've already clarified I don't like job bridge

I don't know what you're saying either then.

coffee_cake

Ann Landers wrote: »

I added this part on to my post:



I've been there, it was pittance even then.

Do people forget that these are human beings? Yay, a business can survive, but I can't! Woo!

Okay well if you want to have a salary review based on "but I'm a human being", good luck

Almost impossible to survive or actually impossible to survive on?

coffee_cake

Daith wrote: »

I don't know what you're saying either then.

Ann & I were talking about minimum wage

Daith

bluewolf wrote: »

Okay well if you want to have a salary review based on "but I'm a human being", good luck

Sorry I've a business to run and can't afford to keep two of you. Sorry Joe. Next week...everyone this is our new intern!

Reviews are based on alot of things!

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Daith

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I rather see them in an actual job? Wouldn't you?

As you said 60% or higher get a job after a placement so it can't all be to do with the min wage can it?

Backstreet Moyes

What i really can't understand is how the goverment actually came up with this idea. How could they not see it was going to be exploited. It really is simple to sort the problem.

Struggling business needs an employee they can't afford to pay minimum wage. So the goverment pay €238 and the business pays say €100 for an employee to bring them up to minimum wage.

Struggling businesses are getting an employee for a third of what they would normally pay so they can hire more people. People on Jonsbridge would be brought up to minimum wage and would pump back money into the economy. Businesses who are making up jobs to get people for free wouldn't bother paying €100 a week for a slave. So everybody benefits i really can't understand what is so difficult about this.

Dyr

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

55.3% per cent of participants who responded to the survey. The respondants, from memory, weighed heavily towards those particpants that completed the scheme as opposed to the large numbers that didn't. Joanie didnt pay money and set a scope so she could be made to look bad

its the little details in surveys

http://irisheconthoughts.wordpress.com/2012/10/22/indecons-interim-evaluation-of-jobbridge/

Ann Landers

bluewolf wrote: »

Okay well if you want to have a salary review based on "but I'm a human being", good luck

Almost impossible to survive or actually impossible to survive on?

Surviving, but with no level of comfort at all, none. Just existing.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Ann Landers

Daith wrote: »

As you said 60% or higher get a job after a placement so it can't all be to do with the min wage can it?

:pac:

Dyr

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

You're very fond of the trying to railroad people with false dilemma questions aren't ya? That libertarian trick does'nt wash outside fox news

Daith

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

And this new job will not have to train them at all then?

Curious, out of the 60% who got a job, did it say how many got a job in the area they had their placement?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Guy:Incognito

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

So what are we spending money giving people to companies for 9 months for if theres no jobs anyway?