Civil Service internship. Only children of the "working class"

[Quirkswork]

If your child is coming up for 14 and interested in a career in the Civil Service and you have a job in a profession or that means you pay a lot of tax, I suggest you down tools now.

As reported in the Telegraph,

Civil Service internships will only be offered to students from lower income families in a bid to make Whitehall more working class, ministers have announced.

Only young people from “lower socio-economic backgrounds” will be able to apply to Whitehall’s internship programme, the Cabinet Office has said.

A student will be judged eligible depending on what jobs their parents did when they were 14. Students with parents who are receptionists, electricians, plumbers, butchers or van drivers would be among those eligible for the programme.

So you still hold that Teeside High School alumni have a massive advantage over Tiffin School for Boys?

Oh come on do stop trying to indicate the privately educated in Teesside are somehow disadvantaged. 🙄

Completely agree with the policy. Having been to a private school most of my friends are "reaching out" to their friends to see if there's opportunities for their children in various fields. Particularly in smaller companies there's loads of "unpaid internships" which are created for children of people known to the business, beit through friends, neighbours etc, just so these kids get connections and something on their CV.

I don’t disagree that those things are desirable. They are also very expensive and will take some time to set up. Should we just shrug about inequality of opportunity in the mean time?

But you think those attending Tiffin are?

Private education.
All children are educated. Those in private buy additional advantages. Or do you think all doctors, pilots, architects, accountants etc come from private schools? (Actually, probably a lot do. As a result of the additional advantages. Which is something we should probably address if we actually want the best candidates not just the best at cv/application/interview, don't you think?)

I find it really odd when people talk about political parties ‘hating’ particular classes. They may not be the focus of their policy, but hate?

Bloody hell there are so many turkeys voting for Christmas on this thread.

Good luck when other groups go all virtue signally and do the same thing. When the NHS becomes the preserve of those whose parents are market sellers or who have connections in the NHS. When the police becomes the preserve of children of home help carers or people connected to current officers. When academia becomes the preserve of people who are not actually academic, or people with connections to academics.

This country becomes more like the USSR by the day. But if people think this is the right thing to do, we can definitely say the UK education system is not fit for purpose because it's not producing enough people capable of doing thinking.

Private education discriminates against children based on their parents income.

I can't find anything specific about parents occupation, or anything else that defines what 'from a lower socio-economic background' means in this context. But a good degree is still essential.

Really? Why do people pay so much then? Seems an odd decision if it confers no advantage at all.

it's not being "confused" to literally interpret the words as written.
The term used was socio economic access (I did bold the economic part) - so it's the scheme itself that is conflating the two.

So do state schools.

So why do so many lay for them then? They are buying advantage. I’ve worked in small, provincial independent schools.

How?

Are you really that naive? House prices.

They are academically selective aren’t they? So you would expect that.
Leaving aside that it’s long been recognised that IQ type tests have a class bias.

That’s parental choice, surely? The school is free.

Not entirely, many people who could easily afford private don't use it and comparatively poor parents scrimp and save to send their children private. And of course there are grants and bursaries available at many private schools. It's not all posh people at the school gates of most of the ordinary private schools.

The bit they need to copy is the per capita finance and (often) the expensive facilities. I agree. I’ve worked in both sectors and that’s the primary difference. Up for more tax to pay for it?

Not entirely, of course. There are some exceptions.

But on the whole parents who can afford private school do so because it buys a better education and opportunities than state school.

So it isn't a level playing field. This CS scheme is trying to give a (very small) opportunity to young people who have (on the whole) lacked those opportunities.

It isn't a job. It's the chance of some work experience that might open up the possibility of a job.

This has been covered so many times- many and varied reasons individual to each family. People can choose to spend their money how they want- doesn’t have to be the buy an advantage. Certainly when I decided to send my children private that wasn’t even on my radar. I actually thought it would disadvantage them and that was in my con column!

Provided those people have reached the necessary marks/grades of the UCAT or civil service exams etc why shouldn’t they?

What kind of employment? Does it encourage aspiration? Or is it going into the same manual or low skilled work your parents and siblings and cousins did regardless of what your actual capabilities might be?