in thinking this work experience is exploitation?

[sweetkitty]

Bit of background first DNeice leaves school at 15 as she can't be bothered, it was a few months before her 16th birthday so by the time the authorities got around to doing anything she was 16.

Anyway for the next 2 years she has done nothing, not looked for work oh she went to college for a week once!

My SIL is a soft touch DN has a temper and SIL is scared of her, she has walked over SIL forever, SIL pays for hair extensions, her extensive wardrobe, nights put, £160 a month phone etc

Once she turned 18 SIL frogmarched her to the DSS hoping that they would sort her out.

She's now on work experience in a bar so she can have done sort of CV whilst I think on the one hand this is good for her to actually work, on the other hand she is only receiving her file money, she's working full time for less than minimum wage, she has to do 2 months and if she's good she'll get kept on. Don't quite see that happening as there will be done other person they can get in and pay nothing.

I know there's no jobs put there but one can be found as long as its not costing the company anything, it's sheer exploitation.

tethersend - Work experience is no different from work apart from the salary when someone is capable of doing the job. If however they are not, the difference is that they get on the job training to be able to do the job. They would never actually get given the job in the 1st place, as they are not capable of doing it.

The thing is the way to avoid being "exploited" is to sort yourself out. I worked in the family business for 2 years between the ages of 14 and 16, now that was fcuking exploitation I can tell you.
However I had something to put on a CV when I went for a lovely job in the city centre that sold posters of men holding babies and was a good place to meet cool boys
The pub will be similar for DN

Yes £160 a month phone bill and last time we visited she had a brand new iPhone, all paid for by SIL, the £250 hair extensions every 3 months was what cracked me up the most. SIL bought her a £800 Chihauhau for going to college as well!!

Personally I think she would be better back at college doing her Highers and have a bar job part time.

The fact that your niece has run rings around your SIL all her life has no bearing on the employment law issues here.

We'd need more information to judge whether the employer is taking advantage. If it's genuine work experience, where she is being properly trained and mentored over a fixed time period, then great. If it's an enforced DSS placement, or she is doing a full time job for less than minimum wage, I think it's wrong - the pub should be employing someone under legal working conditions and paying minimum wage. I agree with Tethers - if niece is doing a full time job they should pay her.

lesley- how do we know she is not capable?

How is she supposed to understand the value of work without the wage that enables her to be independent?

This scheme does not ask if your mum pays your phone bill and buys you hair extensions- it treats the OP's niece in exactly the same way it does an 18 yr old struggling to find work and living alone. Do this 'work experience' or lose your JSA. It exploits them.

Unpaid work is not a prerequisite for getting a 'real' job; nor should it be.

It is not a prerequisite but its a good starting point. As others have said, you have something to put on your CV.

Work experience shouldn't be used for every person for every situation. Its only beneficial in some circumstances.

Tether I don't know. But as I have already said work experience placements can be ery exploititive, but in some individual cases they are useful. As inertia says we would need to know more to make a judgement call about which it is.

Sorry that's just me going off on a tangent about her being a spoilt best.

I had not heard of this scheme and I'm very divided about it. The pub in question is a Wetherspoons in an erm rough town. Hopefully they will have proper training in place for her. I'm actually amazed she's lasted the 3 days she has, I thought pulling pints would also be beneath her.

From my dim and distant memory of managing a busy pub, it normally took between 4 to 8 weeks for new, inexperienced staff to be anything more than an extra burden, and anyone who did start being useful in this time frame tended to be offered permanent hours - we had an on-going supply of students asking for jobs. So DN, if she pulls her finger out and puts some effort in, has every chance of getting a job out of this - I reiterate, very new bar-staff are a PITA and I used to hate having to keep an eagle eye on them, I much preferred nights when I knew I had trusty regulars on duty.

But were they paid a wage, fussbucket?

Tethersend - the pub WE is not a job, I doubt very much that they will be getting a full days work from her at this stage, but hopefully she will have the skills/experience she needs to get an actual paying job soon.

WE like this would obviously be exploitative if it was long term, but the op was talking about a few weeks!

Do you do realise that (leaving the benefits issue aside for a moment) many, many young people are forced to take unpaid jobs while at university or afterwards, to get a foot in the door and a chance of a job? My Sil did unpaid placements in a law firm for 3 months every year, and further unpaid placements as a postgrad....... she has just landed a fantastic job and regarded those months of unpaid (no benefits either), work as being essential for showing her dedication. My next door neighbour's DT daughters are both on their 2nd 6 month unpaid placement since graduating last year........ again, they need to show dedication, get experience, gain contacts.

WE, if you are on benefits or not on benefits, is about gaining the skills (and that could include basic skills such as the self-discipline to get to work on time in some cases!), motivation and experience to make you an attractive prospect to your future employer. My sisters job includes handling her small firms disciplinary procedures. She was telling my how very difficult it is to actually sack someone for being bad at their job/having attitude problems which affect the workplace etc - the laws/procedures round this area have to be followed very very carefully and can take many months and a lot of money (for retraining and other remedial help for the employee) or the employer risks ending up in a tribunal....... so hardly surprising that employers want to have some evidence a potential employee is reliable, can work with others, can do the job required in a competent way etc.

Yes tethers - I paid them as at that time Work Experience wasn't an option - what I'm trying to say is that for the first few weeks, economically speaking, they weren't worth it, so we would start them on a month's trial and no hard feelings at the end if they hadn't proved to be any good at it. We're looking at the late 1980's/early 90's here.
I'm very much in two minds about the current Work Experience experiment. I do think people of whatever age who have for whatever reason not been employment, when physically capable of it, for a long period, should be able to get experience at real work situations without losing benefits, but there must be a way of ensuring they are not used as cheap unskilled labour without gaining anything from the process, and also to prevent unscrupulous employers taking on an endless succession of Work Experience 'trainees' with no real intention of ever employing any of them permanently.

IME work experience people take more than you get out of them. The constant supervision and direction, plus incompetence and mistakes generally make them more hassle than its worth.

"The pub is a Wetherspoons in a rough town"
How is your niece getting home after her "shifts" Are there busses running late at night (because on JSA she certainly cant afford taxis) or is she able to get a lift from one of her "colleaugues".

The key thing she will get is some work experience and a reference. If she hasn't been at college and hasn't had a job in years, she won't have a referee. And no-one will take her on without a reference, unless she does work experience.

If she's working FT she should be paid min wage, and that, philosophically, has to be the end of it.

It's up to your sister to stand up to her - kick her out and make her live on benefits.

oldmum - work experience in a law firm is a different kettle of fish to work experience in a pub. one leads to a career with a decent, possibly spectacular wage further down the line, the other leads to a minimum wage job.

I agree with tethers - people should be getting a day's pay for a day's work.

Carernotasaint - she does get travel expenses but my SIL will be waking her up, driving her there and picking her up no matter what the time. I doubt she would actually go unless SIL drove her there.

If she were my daughter I would have kicked her out years ago the minute she was violent, SIL does not have a bedroom door in hinges upstairs as DN has broke them all in a rage. Her older sister left home at 16 in part due to DN, she ended up in a hostel then got a 2 bed council flat as SIL had to declare she was not welcome back home, I was angry at this because it sends the wrong message that you can have a strop with your parents and get a council flat when there are families desperate for decent housing. At least she works.

Sorry I'm digressing again. I honestly don't know where DN will end up I hope it gives her the kick up the arse she needs like someone else's son on here to realise that all she is ever going to get is a minimum wage job.

I honestly cannot see her getting her hands dirty and actually working. Maybe it'll keep her off her phone for a bit and SIL will stop moaning about the bills.

YABU absolutely unreasonable.

My eldest DC has just started voluntary work - for nothing, to get something to put in his CV and to give him skills to add value to am employer.

DC did this off own back, first I knew was when asked to provide a lift.

Your neice is a lazy little madam who wouldnt get a chance at work like this any other way, no one with her history would get a job.

Weatherspoons btw have good work schemes, so I would imagine she would get a job at the end, if she can be bothered to pull her finger out of her arse.

Why should she be paid a full wage, for them giving her a chance, not all work experience can be the same, but in the this instance, its doing exactly what it is suppose to.

my SIL will be waking her up, driving her there and picking her up no matter what the time

Waking her up? Good grief.

Don't see the problem too many are banging on about exploitation. It's 8 weeks ffs. She might get a job at the end or a reference if no job but if she works hard then she'll benefit.
There are too many people who think the world owes them a living.

I'll ask again;

What is 'file money'?

This girl's behaviour sounds like an utter nightmare, and it doesn't sound as though her mother has ever dealt with it successfully. Nevertheless, it's not the responsibility of Wetherspoons or anyone else to teach her a lesson about how unacceptable her behaviour at home is. It's been the job of her parent (s?), and now she has to start taking responsibility for herself.

Regardless of how much of a PITA niece is, it would still be morally wrong for the pub to take her on on the pretext of Work Experience if they are not actually training/mentoring her. If they are using her as a cost cutting measure to do the work of staff they haven't got , then it deprives somebody else -who could and would willingly work- of paid employment with a contract and a minimum wage. This is about more than just teaching one teenager a lesson- if she's on a scheme that allows employers to make other employees redundant or avoid taking on properly paid employees in the first place, then somebody else who could work is losing out. I'd hope that if there is any kind of state funding for WE programmes like this, that the company uses the funding to employ a member of staff responsible for training and development.

And I do understand that makes me sound hopelessly naive, but I really don't think that people in low-wage jobs need any less job security than they currently have.