Support NeoGAF

[kitch9]

Take a look again at your employment history.

You worked in a factory at 18, I assume being paid minimum wage or just above? Then you were given training by said company? Did you pay to complete the training? or was it free? employer funded?

Minimum wage didn't exist back then. Before overtime I started on a wage of around £180.00 per week net.

The training was on the job, performed by other technicians. I pretty much picked a lot of it up as I was working on the shop floor as a lowly machine operative as I was always interested in pushing my knowledge further.

In that factory the operatives set the machines up, loaded them with components etc etc and also checked the quality of the product spitting out the other end. The technicians generally maintained the machines and calibrated them etc etc.

 

[SteveWD40]

I think the biggest thing to do would be for the government to live up to its promise of "making work pay". Even ignoring comparisons to the benefits system entirely, working a full-time, minimum-wage job does not come close to paying a living wage, and that's always going to be the elephant in the room when politicians are making speeches about how much better off people will be if they were to get off benefits and into work.

And the notion that you can start on the bottom rung and work your way up might be true in some cases, but there's so many jobs on the lowest rung that have absolutely no future prospects, and wouldn't even help you get another job (having a year or two cleaning toilets in a small local business on your CV is only ever going to help you to get another job cleaning toilets).

The problem is, there is a disconnect between reality and what a politician can admit openly, for example, we do not need 10% of our workforce anymore. It's a shitty fact but it's true, it's the same in the US as well as other developed nations, as automation increases then the requirement for labour decreases.

We also need people to do the jobs that no-one else wants, it's just a fact.

To go out and offer this fairytale that everyone can be anything if they "work hard enough" or want it enough is disingenuous at best, every "self made" man or women had their share of fortunate circumstance, be it luck, family, connections or just right place right time.

Capitalism is a casino, you need just enough people winning to make everyone think they have a shot so they will stay quiet / happy while they toil away, it never mattered as much when we all used to die at 60 but now we face long retirements (30 years on avg right now).

 

[travisbickle]

Minimum wage didn't exist back then. Before overtime I started on a wage of around £180.00 per week net.

The training was on the job, performed by other technicians. I pretty much picked a lot of it up as I was working on the shop floor as a lowly machine operative as I was always interested in pushing my knowledge further.

In that factory the operatives set the machines up, loaded them with components etc etc and also checked the quality of the product spitting out the other end. The technicians generally maintained the machines and calibrated them etc etc.

So you were given on the job training while being given a wage. And that on the job training allowed you to be promoted/increase your wage by a lot within a 3 year period.

And now as a business owner I assume you take on new untrained staff and pay them whilst also giving them on the job training to help them for future employment in a higher paid job?

Or do you want to be paid by the government to take on a free employee who you can give a couple of months training and kick them out the door for the next batch of free labour?

 

[kitch9]

So you were given on the job training while being given a wage. And that on the job training allowed you to be promoted/increase your wage by a lot within a 3 year period.

And now as a business owner I assume you take on new untrained staff and pay them whilst also giving them on the job training to help them for future employment in a higher paid job?

Or do you want to be paid by the government to take on a free employee who you can give a couple of months training and kick them out the door for the next batch of free labour?

Yep, all my staff have been trained from scratch by me. My work is very specialised and there are no "official" training courses for it as it is a product I developed. As an employer I spend a lot of time and effort in my staff so I need to know I'm getting someone conscientious and not someone who's along for the ride. I will always pick the person who demonstrates they have the drive to better themselves over the person who's never worked with a few qualifications.

I see you are one of the short sighted ones...... Good luck with that.

 

[Psychotext]

Yep, all my staff have been trained from scratch by me. My work is very specialised and there are no "official" training courses for it as it is a product I developed. As an employer I spend a lot of time and effort in my staff so I need to know I'm getting someone conscientious and not someone who's along for the ride. I will always pick the person who demonstrates they have the drive to better themselves over the person who's never worked with a few qualifications.

See my last post. It's great that you would train these people, but most businesses I know would use them up and spit them out, even if it's to the detriment of their existing staff and reputation of their business. Free looks great on the balance sheet, especially when all you're capable of doing is thinking short term.

 

[travisbickle]

Yep, all my staff have been trained from scratch by me. My work is very specialised and there are no "official" training courses for it as it is a product I developed. As an employer I spend a lot of time and effort in my staff so I need to know I'm getting someone conscientious and not someone who's along for the ride. I will always pick the person who demonstrates they have the drive to better themselves over the person who's never worked with a few qualifications.

I see you are one of the short sighted ones...... Good luck with that.

I was also a small business owner, I would take on and train people when there was a position available.

The very idea of a government push for on-the-job training when we have record levels of unemployment is preposterous! There's no jobs, what are they training people for?

edit: It's just an act of juggling unemployment figures.

 

[Songbird]

I've no problem with people who need it receiving benefits, but I do have a problem with people being on benefits and nothing being expected of them in return. There was a recent issue where the government was going to arrange voluntary work experience for those on benefits where people could go and work for an employer for free for a few weeks whilst still getting benefits and there was a massive uproar with leftie crazies screaming it was against peoples human rights and what do you know all the big companies who signed up to the scheme backed out and its now flat on its ass.

If I'm put on a full time job by the job centre which is only made possible by firing an existing employee at the company or removing their overtime, I should get paid minimum wage. So when it's my time for this I will volunteer with someone who needs it instead, like a hospital or care home.

By 18 I'd secured a job in an electronics factory, by 19 I was training to be a technician for the machines they used, and by 21 I was earning £30K a year with a company car..... 14 years later I'm a director of my own business and have numerous investment properties.

So when in history could someone get such an obscene rise in the ladder? It isn't now.

As an employer if a potential employee sat in front of me and said I'm currently on benefits but I signed myself up for voluntary work so I could build my CV to impress the likes of you I would be massively impressed but sadly it never seems to happen, and alas thanks to the human rights brigade it appears it never will.

Forgetting the typical human rights knock, where in the country is this company based so I may apply some day with this experience?

 

[CyclopsRock]

So when in history could someone get such an obscene rise in the ladder? It isn't now

You can in the right industries, with the right mentality. Within the first 2 years of my employment, my salary went up about 80%, and that's in an industry where you don't really even need a degree (though I have one).

Another thing that I think is useful to note about welfare and unemployment is that the welfare trap, where you find there's little point in getting a job, is in no small part caused by immigration. Now, I'm all for immigration myself, but then, I work in a highly skilled industry (which also has a lot of immigrants working in it) and highly skilled workers tend to be less affected by welfare traps. If you avagander at this graph...

And, to show it isn't just during the recession...

In fact, almost all of the 2 million jobs created under Labour went to immigrants. The reason this impacts the welfare trap is, hopefully, obvious - most immigrants do not get these same benefits. The option to sit at home is usually not available to them. For British nationals, the welfare system is broken to the point that sometimes it'll cost a person money to go to work, or more frequently at least offer them a negligible benefit (financially, at least - their welbeing may well improve). In a closed environment, this would force companies to raise their wages to encourage employees into the market, because as much as they might not like paying more money, if the choice is between that and not having employees then, well, it's not a choice. They can afford to raise wages up to a penny below that person's "net gain" to the company.

That only works in a closed system, though. In a system like ours with very open borders for EU nationals (and not enormously closed for many others), there is always an over-supply of labour, so there is no need for companies to increase their wages - they don't need to, they can still attract workers. Because most foreign nationals (inc EU) cannot get most benefits unless they have been living here and paying NIC for quite some time, they aren't in a position where they have to earn quite a large amount for them to be better off like those in benefits. There aren't many jobs out there, it's true - but when Foreign nationals cannot get a job, they go home. When British nationals cannot get a job, they go on welfare. And in the last 15 or so years, about 90% of the "new" jobs have gone to immigrants. As the graph above shows, even during the recession, those jobs which have been created have gone overwhelmingly to immigrants (between 2010 and 2011, total employment increased by 181k. 14k of these went to British nationals, and 163k went to immigrants).

(Edit: Props to the Speccie for the graphs.)

 

[Songbird]

You can in the right industries, with the right mentality. Within the first 2 years of my employment, my salary went up about 80%, and that's in an industry where you don't really even need a degree (though I have one).

But you haven't said what this line of work and miracle cure to my woes is.

Another thing that I think is useful to note about welfare and unemployment is that the welfare trap, where you find there's little point in getting a job...

Okay, sure.

...is in no small part caused by immigration. Now, I'm all for immigration myself, but then, I work in a highly skilled industry (which also has a lot of immigrants working in it) and highly skilled workers tend to be less affected by welfare traps. If you avagander at this graph...

Wait, what? What are you trying to say here with this data? Immigrants are getting these jobs because of unemployed British slobs, or that they're takin er jerbs?
I assume there's a reason you went on that tangent, like my situation? I find this whole "I got an 80% payrise in my career within two years" or "my salary rose to £30k" theme hugely disturbing because these jobs require training which I'm too qualified to do at college or just get randomly turned down for. That or they're not advertised and kept within family. Don't say I need to be working harder over this.

 

[Dambrosi]

You can in the right industries, with the right mentality. Within the first 2 years of my employment, my salary went up about 80%, and that's in an industry where you don't really even need a degree (though I have one).

Where is this magical job opportunity? What do I need to do to get it? Please let me--

Another thing that I think is useful to note about welfare and unemployment is that the welfare trap, where you find there's little point in getting a job, is in no small part caused by immigration.

--oh. I see now, you're one of...those people. How depressing.

Now, I'm all for immigration myself, but (snip)

There's always a "but" with you guys, isn't there? Gee, next you'll be saying that some of your best friends are coloured. Don't worry, though - one of my best friends is racist!

Songbird already said what I was going to say about your "data", so I'll leave it. But seriously, Cyclops - back off on all the BNP/UKIP/Daily Express shit. Doesn't do you any favours.

 

[CyclopsRock]

But you haven't said what this line of work and miracle cure to my woes is.


Okay, sure.


Wait, what? What are you trying to say here with this data? Immigrants are getting these jobs because of unemployed British slobs, or that they're takin er jerbs?
I assume there's a reason you went on that tangent, like my situation? I find this whole "I got an 80% payrise in my career within two years" or "my salary rose to £30k" theme hugely disturbing because these jobs require training which I'm too qualified to do at college or just get randomly turned down for. That or they're not advertised and kept within family. Don't say I need to be working harder over this.

Ok, I think there's been a misunderstanding - I have literally no idea who you are. I don't know anything about your woes or your situation personally. I don't religiously read this thread, I just post when I think I have something to contribute. Literally none of my post was aimed at your "situation", and only the very first line was even aimed at you. The rest was to stop me double posting (a mistake I won't be making again), and was a contribution to the developing discussion over welfare.

I suspect, re: 'takin er jerbs', you'll get an answer in my reply to the chap below you...

 

[CyclopsRock]

Where is this magical job opportunity? What do I need to do to get it? Please let me--


--oh. I see now, you're one of...those people. How depressing.


There's always a "but" with you guys, isn't there? Gee, next you'll be saying that some of your best friends are coloured. Don't worry, though - one of my best friends is racist!

Songbird already said what I was going to say about your "data", so I'll leave it. But seriously, Cyclops - back off on all the BNP/UKIP/Daily Express shit. Doesn't do you any favours.

Songbird didn't say anything about my "data" (and why is that in quotation marks? It is data.)

I don't know how to explain my position any more clearly. I'm personally for immigration. Over half my colleagues are from overseas, and I love it. I live in central London, and I love walking down the road and seeing a Bangladeshi restaurant followed by a lebanese falafal cafe, followed by a jellied eel shop. I don't think British culture is being eroded, and, as a Libertarian, I don't think that a job belongs to anyone. No one can "take our jobs" because they aren't our jobs, they're just a job. I love that shops can be cheaper because they have lower wages staff. I don't know what else to say to champion the benefits of immigration. None of this stops me recognising the effect that immigration has on unskilled employment in the UK.

If it makes you feel better, and will actually encourage the debate rather than you dismissing me as "you guys" and throwing some random, absolutely inappropriate political organisations ("BNP/UKIP/Daily Express shit") at me, let's forget the word immigration. Let's pretend that there was an enormous baby boom 18 years ago, any now we have a ton more lovely, stout, British lads entering the work force. As in, orders of magnitude more than normal. But our growth in production hasn't increased by orders of magnitude. In fact, even during the boom it was a lot less than that, and now it's basically stagnant. What's going to happen to employment levels? Due to the flooding of labour into the employment market, its value is going to go down (just like when you print money and flood markets with it, the value of a currency goes down). In this scenario we don't have British people and Immigrants but the point stands - an over-supply of labour keeps wages down. That's an economic fact. It's not some myth cooked up by the BNP. It's the same reason why professional football players get paid so much - there are so few people with the skill to play at that level, that they're hotly sought after and clubs with one-up each other to get the player. With an over-supply of labour (which mostly only happens at the unskilled end of the spectrum), they know they don't have to offer you a higher wage, because there will always be someone else there who doesn't have a job who'll do it. It doesn't matter if it's due to an internal baby boom, immigration, work-fare or even automation of production processes, an over-supply of labour leads to lower, or stagnant, wages.

Now to put it back in the context in which I raised it - why that's a problem in the UK. As I've said several times in this thread, the problem with welfare in this country isn't that it's too generous or that people are too lazy. The problem is the system itself incentivises people not to get a job unless it's particularly well paid, because often times the loss in the various benefits, each with their own criteria, will be more than their newly earned wages. In other instances, it's a big chunk of their new wages at least. In terms of take-home pay, for a lot of people coming off of benefits, you suffer an effective tax rate of some 70-90% of their new wages.

When you put these two things together, you get a bit of a disaster. In the UK, we have - yes, due to immigration, but try not to let that word make you punch a wall, try and read what I'm writing, that's a good chap - an enormous supply of labour. A lot of people come to the UK in search of work. These people that come, however, cannot receive the vast majority of benefits. This is why the two paragraphs above collide - on the one hand you have a welfare system that means it's often not worth a UK national going back to work unless they're getting a really quite good wage, and on the other you have a huge pool of labour that cannot receive these benefits keeping wages down. If we didn't have a large labour pool - let's say there was no immigration, no workfare, no increase in working age population and roughly no increase in technology - companies would be forced to raise their wages, otherwise they'd get no employees. Under the current system, it's the value of the work that dictates whether someone will both coming off of welfare, and when their effective tax rate is about 80%, it's just not worth it for the extra £1.40 an hour that they'd get from a minimum wage job. As such, businesses would be forced to up their pay in order to get employees (just like Football clubs do in order to get the best talent). It's just the nature of supply and demand, with welfare acting as de facto competition to paid employment. Businesses would have to offer a better opportunity for people than welfare does. Except, of course, that in the UK they don't, because we do have work fare, immigration, a growing internal population and greater automation of production.

Now, like I said, I'm for immigration. I'm a Libertarian. I want fully open borders. I love globalisation - the majority of my clients are over seas and I appreciate the opportunity to do business in their country, and if they can find work in mine, good on them. You do, though, need to be wilfully ignorant of the facts of the last 10-15 years, as well as the nature of economics, if you refuse to acknowledge the effect that immigration has had on the employment prospects for unskilled British people. The data above - yes, "data" - describes quite clearly what I'm explaining. It's sad that I have to end any post about immigration with a paragraph like this, because we should be able to discuss the negative impacts of immigration (as well as the positive) without having your post content ignored and told to " back off on all the BNP/UKIP/Daily Express shit". If you're going to try and do that again, don't fucking bother. I've just written about a thousand words explaining why I think this - don't do me the disservice of meeting that explanation with inane and incorrect platitudes again, please.

 

[zomgbbqftw]

Also, I think a very large amount of debt forgiveness is inevitable. Fuck the deficit.

Debt forgiveness? To Britain? Get your head out of your own arse for a minute. The largest holder of UK Gilts is the Bank of England, the government can't very well forgive debt it owes itself as that would turn the country into a banana republic. The next largest holder are the collective group of pension funds. I would like to see fund managers explain to the contributors that they decided that the government debt was too large and they would be forgiving vast sums of this debt to make the job easier for the government. Fuck their clients who have been diligently paying into pension schemes and funds, no, the government who fucked everything up deserve the relief.

No, there is no debt relief for the UK government, there never will be. We are saddled with the £1.1tn worth of debt (and rising) until the government cuts spending by around £70bn per year. So far they have cut around £21bn out of the structural deficit leaving £70bn. The structural deficit is that which remains even if Britain returned to trend growth over the last 20 years. It stood at around £90bn in 2009/10.

You have no sense of realism, you might well say fuck the deficit, but then who pays for the education system, the NHS, the benefits system, public sector wages, the police, the military, the medical research council? We have got to balance the budget in the medium term, any incoming Labour government would have to do the same. Anyone looking to France for inspiration had a very short lived boost, Hollande ripped up his pre-election deficit reduction plan and has basically reverted to the one he inherited from Sarkozy, to reduce the deficit to less than 3% by 2014, and eliminate it entirely by 2017. That is just one year slower to elimination than Sarkozy. Nothing like the 2020 that was being mentioned in the campaign.

Anyway, you can't on the one hand say fuck the deficit, then on the other want all of these nice things that the government do like education, NHS, policing etc... They go hand in hand right now. If we were to eliminate the deficit over night we would have to privatise the education system, the police, the road network and slash benefits by 40%. That's what comes of Britain telling the bond holders to go take a hike, that's not a country I would want to live in, with a fully privatised eduction system and private police (think G4S).

 

[Visualante2]

Glad we're finally having a discussion about training and entry level jobs. I have no problem working for my benefits personally. I get paid equivalent of 9 hours at minimum wage. Give me a single day at any local business and I'll happily work it off, plus the last hour to cover my transport? But 30 hours, hurting my job search? And for a low skill job that requires basically no training? No freaking way.

Lefties and human rights aside, you do realise that scheme had major, major ramifications for the rest of us right? I personally know two directors who hire only trainees because they get a grant from the government for them. These trainees were originally used to replace long term permanent staff, and as soon as they were able to, the trainees themselves were fired and replaced with more trainees so as to continue getting cheap staff / grants.

Now imagine the same thing, but with workers you can get for less than minimum wage. Do you really think that companies aren't going to take advantage of that, to the detriment of fully paid staff? Don't even bother saying that those staff wont be as good... because frankly most of the businesses I deal with at the moment just don't care. They're all about cutting costs, even if it means their service and reputation goes down the drain.

There are plenty of voluntary opportunities out there for the unemployed without the government needing to take it upon themselves to make an entire underclass of forced labourers.

Edit - For what it's worth, I'm also a director, and oddly enough I also worked for a pittance when I was younger (though I did get qualifications). £1.92 per hour for my first proper job.

Yep, three jobs at a web design company came up recently. I don't do web design but I'd happily make the transition for it to get in with a business like that. I know some programming and Photoshop already. They're all apprenticeships paid at £2.XX an hour. Sure I'd get some training but what's the stop them kicking me out after a year and getting in a new bunch of apprentices? They aren't going to want to hire me at £6.XX an hour. I've seen it with family friends working at garages, 11 apprentices all kicked out after the 1 year and the garage gets their cheque. It's displacing the market. I've cautiously approached the company because I think it is a real opportunity but I'm going in with it with the attitude "what are you going to do for me?" given that it's paid so poorly. Who knows if I can live on that money, but what I do know is that the company has clients like Vodafone and Orange and they can blatantly afford to pay min. wage. They do it for the profit not for the investment in people.

I often question, do I have an entitlement complex? Expecting a job, expecting a minimum wage.. but the Guardian piece recently "Why did paid work become the only thing Britain really values?" was food for thought.

If most of us here lost our jobs I think we'd do everything in our power to get another as soon as possible and maybe not even claim benefits until we had to, but there's thousands and thousands out there who do everything in their power not to work and game the system. The system needs to be hard to game so only those who really need it get it.

I do see a lot of people who are damn unemployable who will spend their lives in the dole queue and it saddens me.

Professor Tracy Shildrick of the Social Institute at Teesside University noted that many of society's lowest earners prefer to work even if benefits leave them better off, because they believe that "getting by" is a more respectable option to living on welfare. Shildrick interviewed an intermittently employed care worker, Andre, who told her: "The whole thing repulsed me, signing on. I just couldn't be doing with it; sponging off the state."

see above

 

[Songbird]

Ok, I think there's been a misunderstanding - I have literally no idea who you are. I don't know anything about your woes or your situation personally. I don't religiously read this thread, I just post when I think I have something to contribute. Literally none of my post was aimed at your "situation", and only the very first line was even aimed at you. The rest was to stop me double posting (a mistake I won't be making again), and was a contribution to the developing discussion over welfare.

Ok, I think I understand. I would still appreciate it if people gave me a vague idea of the area of work when they talk about how well they've done or are doing.

Glad we're finally having a discussion about training and entry level jobs. I have no problem working for my benefits personally. I get paid equivalent of 9 hours at minimum wage. Give me a single day at any local business and I'll happily work it off, plus the last hour to cover my transport? But 30 hours, hurting my job search? And for a low skill job that requires basically no training? No freaking way.

I absolutely agree. As soon as the work placement is for more hours a week than I would be working to earn my benefit, I will be objecting to it and volunteering elsewhere.

 

[zomgbbqftw]

snip

Awesome post btw.

Surely uprating benefits by 5.2% and minimum wage by just 1.7% is not the solution.

The solution to the problem is a benefits freeze (real terms reduction) coupled with above inflation minimum wage rises. The government will save vast sums of money by freezing benefits, part of which can be used to make up for the inevitable tax shortfall that will come with a minimum wage rise.

 

[Napoleonthechimp]

well well




Hey Tories!

FUCK YOUUUUUUU!!

What the fuck?

 

[Visualante2]

I absolutely agree. As soon as the work placement is for more hours a week than I would be working to earn my benefit, I will be objecting to it and volunteering elsewhere.

Seems like they're within their right to force you to quit your volunteering to take up the state sanctioned placement. As per the Cait Reilly case.

Been looking for volunteering opportunities myself recently so I can try that myself. I want something that will benefit me*, not the multinational.

* or my community, ahem.

To me the obvious solution to making work pay, is to improve the quality of pay and benefits. The whole thing with the public sector is it is meant to improve working conditions for everyone. If people are pissed with the private sector they can go work in the public sector.. and the private sector is meant to attract talent from the other pool with higher wages, better benefits. It's meant to be a backup that can absorb people in times of economic hardship from the private sector and the unemployed. And in more fruitful times the private sector should pay more and attract that talent. It's rather competitive in a sense and I don't see why it didn't work.
Really we should be making private sector work pay, instead we are laying off everyone from the public sector, and the private sector is loving every minute of it. I dunno maybe it's unrelated but I think the core problem with this country is that we pander too much to private industry who are the same people who outsourced everything.

 

[Songbird]

What the fuck?

Welcome to nine days ago

Spoiler

and I agree with him

.

Seems like they're within their right to force you to quit your volunteering to take up the state sanctioned placement. As per the Cait Reilly case.

Been looking for volunteering opportunities myself recently so I can try that myself. I want something that will benefit me, not the multinational.

Damn, I forgot reading about Cait Reilly. If they can really stop me volunteering somewhere important they truly are toying with unemployment figures.

About where to go: I'm really wanting to help at a hospital. Since I was turned down for training that would have led to a nursing degree I've moved on from wanting a health care career, but it would be nice to assist.

 

[CyclopsRock]

Ok, I think I understand. I would still appreciate it if people gave me a vague idea of the area of work when they talk about how well they've done or are doing.

The CG industry in London.

 

[Pie and Beans]

The real solution is of course population control, but no democratic government is ever going to want to get its dick wet in that particular sea of discontent.

So as a society we'll pretend that we can keep having as many little fleshbag fucks as we want, as automation of lower skilled work and efficiency drive down the number of jobs that will ever actually be available, and march ever onwards towards societal collapse because popularist politics is the cowardly way we cope with the running of a country.

In other news I went to an NHS dentist I'd finally found up't north the other day and only paid £17.50 for an appointment, scale, and polish. I thought they'd all gone fucking extinct! Well chuffed. Hopefully my future spawn won't have to say the same about general practitioners, I'll make sure to have at least 10 of them to really fuck things.

 

[Songbird]

The CG industry in London.

CG as in computer graphics? You really don't need a degree for that? I have some Maya knowledge if that's what you meant, so I'll do some research.

 

[Visualante2]

Well I think you're wrong about society thinking we can have as many fleshbag fucks as we watn. But evidence suggests many are putting off having children purely 'cause they can't afford it. I guess you might be hinting at capped child benefits like in China though? Punishing the people who have kids for the benefits. Well we just had the benefits cap, I guess we're going down that road.

Read your post Cyclops. I think you answer some of the questions I had RE: public/private/welfare employment balance and why it failed.

 

[zomgbbqftw]

Yep, three jobs at a web design company came up recently. I don't do web design but I'd happily make the transition for it to get in with a business like that. I know some programming and Photoshop already. They're all apprenticeships paid at £2.XX an hour. Sure I'd get some training but what's the stop them kicking me out after a year and getting in a new bunch of apprentices? They aren't going to want to hire me at £6.XX an hour. I've seen it with family friends working at garages, 11 apprentices all kicked out after the 1 year and the garage gets their cheque. It's displacing the market. I've cautiously approached the company because I think it is a real opportunity but I'm going in with it with the attitude "what are you going to do for me?" given that it's paid so poorly. Who knows if I can live on that money, but what I do know is that the company has clients like Vodafone and Orange and they can blatantly afford to pay min. wage. They do it for the profit not for the investment in people.

So you don't think that the experience from the apprenticeship will help you get a proper job elsewhere. Your problem is that you want to start at the top. That never happens. You think I just waltzed into my bank as a senior analyst? In my first year my gross hourly rate was lower than £6.50, less than I was paid at uni working part time at a disabled kids centre. However, I didn't turn around like you and tell them to fuck off, I just did it and hey presto here I am nearly four years later as a senior analyst on my way to Shanghai in March.

You can't start at the top, no one does. What they do for you is give you experience and some kind of training, if you go in with the attitude like you do then expect to live on unemployment benefits until the government force you into a job or workfare and you will resent them for it. You are inexperienced, you need experience, there are people out there willing to give that to you along with training. You need to just get it into your head that companies have got queues of people wanting to take on these low paid internships and apprenticeships to get experience, and you are now behind them in the ladder to get real jobs because you declined the opportunity to gain experience because you were getting paid a lower rate for a few months.

CG as in computer graphics? You really don't need a degree for that? I have some Maya knowledge if that's what you meant, so I'll do some research.

No you don't need a degree. Like so many things in the world. You will need to start at less than zero though, be prepared to work for nothing on projects that amount to nothing for a few years though to break into the industry.

 

[Songbird]

So you don't think that the experience from the apprenticeship will help you get a proper job elsewhere. Your problem is that you want to start at the top. That never happens. You think I just waltzed into my bank as a senior analyst? In my first year my gross hourly rate was lower than £6.50, less than I was paid at uni working part time at a disabled kids centre. However, I didn't turn around like you and tell them to fuck off, I just did it and hey presto here I am nearly four years later as a senior analyst on my way to Shanghai in March.

You can't start at the top, no one does. What they do for you is give you experience and some kind of training, if you go in with the attitude like you do then expect to live on unemployment benefits until the government force you into a job or workfare and you will resent them for it. You are inexperienced, you need experience, there are people out there willing to give that to you along with training. You need to just get it into your head that companies have got queues of people wanting to take on these low paid internships and apprenticeships to get experience, and you are now behind them in the ladder to get real jobs because you declined the opportunity to gain experience because you were getting paid a lower rate for a few months.

You're not understanding what he's accusing employers of doing. Apprenticeships have become a replacement for proper interning and temp/trainee positions. People leave with the experience you want them to have but then experience great difficulty moving forwards because more money and resources go into disposable apprentices than the next job. Cool off, please.

 

[Bony Manifesto]

Awesome post btw.

Surely uprating benefits by 5.2% and minimum wage by just 1.7% is not the solution.

The solution to the problem is a benefits freeze (real terms reduction) coupled with above inflation minimum wage rises. The government will save vast sums of money by freezing benefits, part of which can be used to make up for the inevitable tax shortfall that will come with a minimum wage rise.

I totally agree that the minimum wage needs to rise at a much faster rate (with the ultimate goal of getting it to a standard where it's possible to live off of it without state assistance), but there's no chance this government will do it, because they're not going to do anything that'll piss off businesses.

I'm not sure why you'd think there'd be a tax shortfall from rising the minimum wage though, as it would result in the lowest-earners paying more tax, as well as reducing the benefits the government would have to pay to those in work. But like I say, it'll be businesses footing the bill, so they're obviously not going to let it happen.

No you don't need a degree. Like so many things in the world. You will need to start at less than zero though, be prepared to work for nothing on projects that amount to nothing for a few years though to break into the industry.

How are you supposed to survive long enough to get a paying job in the industry though?

 

[zomgbbqftw]

You're not understanding what he's accusing employers of doing. Apprenticeships have become a replacement for proper interning and temp/trainee positions. People leave with the experience you want them to have but then experience great difficulty moving forwards because more money and resources go into disposable apprentices than the next job. Cool off, please.

Employers who do that will go bankrupt, short termism like that for small beer savings will destroy company performance. There are plenty of entry level jobs that require just some experience and work history. Even at my bank we take on so many unqualified people as cashiers.

 

[Pie and Beans]

How are you supposed to survive long enough to get a paying job in the industry though?

zomg is above such earthly concerns as rent and putting food into mouths. You start from the bottom son, you dont get to have a bed with a roof over your head. You live off of rice and water!

Apprenticeships and subsequent positions in the country need to be regulated a hell of a fuckload more rather than the dispensable human-being soul farming shenanigans they've become, especially in any tech industry and the usual "any kid would kill to be working in ________" spiel.

 

[Psychotext]

Employers who do that will go bankrupt, short termism like that for small beer savings will destroy company performance.

Sadly there are plenty of employers who can survive just fine whilst doing those sorts of things. My experience is that they sabotage growth rather than forcing themselves towards failure... and they still don't care, because it's far easier to tell that costs are down than that you're messing with future growth potential.

You want them to fail, you really do, but in reality as long as they're not trying to replace key employees that way they'll survive just fine. Especially in low skill industries (fast food, production lines, warehouses etc). Don't forget, many of these trainees aren't poor workers, they're just inexperienced, and experience doesn't really count for much in some jobs (aside from being a little more efficient).

 

[zomgbbqftw]

I totally agree that the minimum wage needs to rise at a much faster rate (with the ultimate goal of getting it to a standard where it's possible to live off of it without state assistance), but there's no chance this government will do it, because they're not going to do anything that'll piss off businesses.

I'm not sure why you'd think there'd be a tax shortfall from rising the minimum wage though, as it would result in the lowest-earners paying more tax, as well as reducing the benefits the government would have to pay to those in work. But like I say, it'll be businesses footing the bill, so they're obviously not going to let it happen.



How are you supposed to survive long enough to get a paying job in the industry though?

There will be a tax shortfall as unemployment will increase, at least in the short term as jobs growth will slow, or go in reverse. In the long term tax take will increase as the equilibrium is reached and jobs growth gets back to normal. However, I completely agree, what we need is minimum wage at ~ £15000 per year and the tax free allowance of around £12000, so tax is only paid on the final £3000 at 20%, so £600 income tax on £15000 earnings for people in minimum wage, nothing too large but it still gives them a stake in what the government do.

You have to live at home, with your parents. Suck it up. I did it.

 

[reggieandTFE]

zomg is above such earthly concerns as rent and putting food into mouths. You start from the bottom son, you dont get to have a bed with a roof over your head. You live off of rice and water!

Apprenticeships and subsequent positions in the country need to be regulated a hell of a fuckload more rather than the dispensable human-being soul farming shenanigans they've become, especially in any tech industry and the usual "any kid would kill to be working in ________" spiel.

I'm not English, but I enjoy reading these political threads and it's amusing to see how wrong ZOMG was in every one of his predictions on policy successes. He's still shoveling the same shit, but doesn't seem to have the same paternalistic enthusiasm as before.

 

[Visualante2]

So you don't think that the experience from the apprenticeship will help you get a proper job elsewhere. Your problem is that you want to start at the top. That never happens. You think I just waltzed into my bank as a senior analyst? In my first year my gross hourly rate was lower than £6.50, less than I was paid at uni working part time at a disabled kids centre. However, I didn't turn around like you and tell them to fuck off, I just did it and hey presto here I am nearly four years later as a senior analyst on my way to Shanghai in March.

I don't want to start at the top, I want to be paid minimum wage so I can live a little. You cite a wage of £6.50 but I'm citing a wage of £2.80 or so. I don't believe because an employer is training someone that it is somehow an excuse to pay less than minimum wage. I guess my problem is with skilled people being forced into apprenticeships because there are no other options out there.

You're not understanding what he's accusing employers of doing. Apprenticeships have become a replacement for proper interning and temp/trainee positions. People leave with the experience you want them to have but then experience great difficulty moving forwards because more money and resources go into disposable apprentices than the next job. Cool off, please.

Exactly, thank you for clarifying. I have a hard time expressing myself, it probably came off the wrong way. I find it mind blowing that Morrisons can employ half their staff on a "retail apprenticeship". Pre-recession I had a job at a competing supermarket and was trained while being paid the minimum wage. I don't want to hate on that scene too much because I think apprenticeships can be done, really well. But most are not.

 

[Pie and Beans]

I'm not English, but I enjoy reading these political threads and it's amusing to see how wrong ZOMG was in every one of his predictions on policy successes. He's still shoveling the same shit, but doesn't seem to have the same paternalistic enthusiasm as before.

He suffers from a very severe case of myopic viewpoints where he lets his own experiences and one-sided data over-ride any logic involved in achieving a sense of balance. Be this in political threads whole-heartedly supporting terrible policies because he's gone chips all in on something or in threads on gaming side attacking developers because he has friends on the other side of the fallout and letting that colour the other side as out and out villains.

"Suck it up and live with parents" is another classic example when chances are other peoples parents are just as unemployed and struggling to pay their own cost of living let alone their now adult child. You need to have some real fucking circumstances behind you to be able to branch out and tackle certain industries these days that expect a couple of years sacrificing your life, health, any romance, and monetary balance "just to get your foot in the door". That and uni fee's now beyond even a rational barrier of entry and you are looking down the barrel of a total and utter lost generation on the way.

 

[Songbird]

You have to live at home, with your parents. Suck it up. I did it.

That's wonderful, but my parents don't want me back. Plus in Hull/County Durham the companies which you trained at are in short supply.

Exactly, thank you for clarifying. I have a hard time expressing myself, it probably came off the wrong way.

That's okay, I was worried I was speaking for you.

 

[nib95]

I'm not English, but I enjoy reading these political threads and it's amusing to see how wrong ZOMG was in every one of his predictions on policy successes. He's still shoveling the same shit, but doesn't seem to have the same paternalistic enthusiasm as before.

This post made me laugh. Burned.

 

[Pie and Beans]

That's wonderful, but my parents don't want me back. Plus in Hull/County Durham the companies which you trained at are in short supply.

Its your fault your parents werent born in London.

Which reminds me of when we were having discussion about regionalisation of pay for things like the NHS, and possibly beyond it. Good times.

 

[operon]

There will be a tax shortfall as unemployment will increase, at least in the short term as jobs growth will slow, or go in reverse. In the long term tax take will increase as the equilibrium is reached and jobs growth gets back to normal. However, I completely agree, what we need is minimum wage at ~ £15000 per year and the tax free allowance of around £12000, so tax is only paid on the final £3000 at 20%, so £600 income tax on £15000 earnings for people in minimum wage, nothing too large but it still gives them a stake in what the government do.

You have to live at home, with your parents. Suck it up. I did it.

So if your married with kids and get made redundant and all you can get is shitty apprenticeships like, are you telling them to suck it up and move back in with their parents

 

[travisbickle]

You won't work for £3 an hour!!!!

I had to work for £6.50 an hour and I didn't complain!!!!

 

[Bony Manifesto]

There will be a tax shortfall as unemployment will increase, at least in the short term as jobs growth will slow, or go in reverse. In the long term tax take will increase as the equilibrium is reached and jobs growth gets back to normal. However, I completely agree, what we need is minimum wage at ~ £15000 per year and the tax free allowance of around £12000, so tax is only paid on the final £3000 at 20%, so £600 income tax on £15000 earnings for people in minimum wage, nothing too large but it still gives them a stake in what the government do.

Ah I see. I'm not sure there'd be too much of a rise in unemployment, as I'm not convinced employers frivolously hire staff at the best of times, let alone in today's economic climate. I suspect most companies have already laid off anyone not 100% essential to the running of their business. If there are companies scraping by on the edge of the teeth where raising the minimum wage would make it impossible to make any money, I reckon their days would be numbered anyway.

You have to live at home, with your parents. Suck it up. I did it.

You say that like it's a viable option for everyone. If you do have understanding parents that will continue to support you into adult life, then great, but not everyone does. Plus, if your parents don't live within commuting distance of where these opportunities are, it won't do you much good.

 

[zomgbbqftw]

So if your married with kids and get made redundant and all you can get is shitty apprenticeships like, are you telling them to suck it up and move back in with their parents

Err, the advice was for people who are unable to find their first job? People who are made redundant have had at least one job and the experience to help them find another job, they would already be higher on the employment ladder than people starting from zero.

Also, where have I said that people who are made redundant or are sacked shouldn't get unemployment benefits? I don't think I have, because it wouldn't make sense.

 

[Locke_211]

Nick Clegg's unwitting new charity single:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUDjRZ30SNo&feature=player_embedded

 

[operon]

Err, the advice was for people who are unable to find their first job? People who are made redundant have had at least one job and the experience to help them find another job, they would already be higher on the employment ladder than people starting from zero.

Also, where have I said that people who are made redundant or are sacked shouldn't get unemployment benefits? I don't think I have, because it wouldn't make sense.

It's alright saying suck it up but not everyone gone go back home and live with their parents, and that's even assuming their apprenticeship is even near where they live, working for under £3 an hours ain't going to cover to much

 

[sohois]

So you don't think that the experience from the apprenticeship will help you get a proper job elsewhere. Your problem is that you want to start at the top. That never happens. You think I just waltzed into my bank as a senior analyst? In my first year my gross hourly rate was lower than £6.50, less than I was paid at uni working part time at a disabled kids centre. However, I didn't turn around like you and tell them to fuck off, I just did it and hey presto here I am nearly four years later as a senior analyst on my way to Shanghai in March.

A bit off-topic, i hope no one minds, but I see you finally decided to move to Shanghai, i recall you saying a few times you were thinking about going. Whereabouts in the City are you gonna be? I've been in the city almost a year now, so if you have any questions feel free to pm me.

Now back to your regularly scheduled Politics discussion. (Incidentally, get ready to pretty much stop caring about UK politics once you leave the country)

 

[kitch9]

I was also a small business owner, I would take on and train people when there was a position available.

The very idea of a government push for on-the-job training when we have record levels of unemployment is preposterous! There's no jobs, what are they training people for?

edit: It's just an act of juggling unemployment figures.

Its not on the job training, it was a voluntary scheme where companies would let them work for them and in return they would get a reference and a reasonably powerful USP to use in a job interview.

Like I said if a person sat in front of me at said I've done all work experience schemes I can to improve my CV for free, I'd feel inclined to take he/she on over the guy who's been laid on the couch doing nothing.

There's a lot of employers out there who couldn't care less what grades you got umpteen years ago, they just want to know you are driven and focused so you will stick it through.

The jobs market is massively competitive at the minute and you need an edge..... People should have been thankful for the opportunity as most new employees are next to useless for the first few weeks and need to be told exactly what to do and checked up on until they build confidence and start to use their own initiative. Some of the companies agreeing to the work experience schemes would have had to devote a lot of time and effort to it.

When I was 17 my mates were working on Joinery/Plumbing/Electriction etc etc apprenticeships for £40 a week for years. In the last year of their apprenticeships they were getting £68 a week and some of them were doing 50-60 hour weeks at 20-21 year old as well as a day in college. They hated it at the time and it was slave labour but you ask any of them if they were thankful for the opportunity and they are completely.

If I'm put on a full time job by the job centre which is only made possible by firing an existing employee at the company or removing their overtime, I should get paid minimum wage. So when it's my time for this I will volunteer with someone who needs it instead, like a hospital or care home.


So when in history could someone get such an obscene rise in the ladder? It isn't now.


Forgetting the typical human rights knock, where in the country is this company based so I may apply some day with this experience?

My first job was with a company called Tunstall Electronics in Doncaster... Its still going but possibly not as big a concern as it was. I left those guys when I was 23 to be a car salesman for Rover and Dixon Motor Group (Now defunct.) and by 27 I was a Sales manager working 65+ hours a week, (Extremely good money though.) and I did 12 months as a General Manager of a Dealership (Better money.) before I finished there to work in the building game initially for the family business, but I'm now a director of my own company that works as technical advisors for the Cement Render industry....

You could say I get around a bit! I earn less now than I did at my peak, but I work much less hours so I'm happy with that.

 

[kitch9]

Deleted

 

[Jackpot]

And, to show it isn't just during the recession...

Um, aren't those graphs a little disingenuous? The first one for not taking into account the population size differences and the second for not showing UK employment alongside it?

 

[CHEEZMO™]

What on Earth is going on in here?

 

[phisheep]

I don't want to start at the top, I want to be paid minimum wage so I can live a little. You cite a wage of £6.50 but I'm citing a wage of £2.80 or so. I don't believe because an employer is training someone that it is somehow an excuse to pay less than minimum wage.

Like everything else it depends how these things are done.

My accountant takes on an apprentice every 2 years at £2.80 an hour. His practise is staffed entirely by his apprentices and ex-apprentices, who get their qualifications alongside dealing with real clients/making coffee/answering phones and all the other stuff - and in terms of genuine, grounded, real-life accountants who know real clients, understand business and are helpful and responsive they beat the hell out of some of the university types I've come across from the larger firms.

Benefits on all sides here, the apprentices get not only the qualifications but the real-life experience real fast, the accountant gets cheap labour, the clients get a better-staffed and less aloof office to deal with, the apprentices get qualifications and real-life experience at a net cost to them (min wage less apprentice pay) lower than university tuition.

What's to worry about?

Of course, it doesn't all work that way - this is an example of it working well.

 

[kitch9]

What on Earth is going on in here?

A conversation.

On a forum.

Fancy that.

 

[Visualante2]

If qualified people are taking these positions, then where are all the unqualified people who apprenticeships are really suited going? I can't cite that but why exactly does someone need a qualification in low skill entry level work like warehouse operations?

http://jobseekers.direct.gov.uk/det...824-4907-b2af-40b650a0ddb3&pid=2&j=PRS/137854

We used to joke that my local institute offered an NVQ in tea making, but it's not far from the truth these days, we've created a system where anyone can make up a bullshit qualification and pay less than half the minimum wage. With no obligation to employ the person this is undercutting real jobs just like prison staff do.

I'm not trying to undermine jobs, saying that there is no skill involved in working these types of jobs which is often the first line of defence. They're perfectly respectable jobs. I just don't see why it needs a qualification. You become a manager because you work hard and stay dedicated for years, not because you have an NVQ in it. My store manager left school with no qualifications and worked his way up from the bottom, he couldn't even spell with all the stupid notes he put up around the store reminding us to work hard and do things pooperly