Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

News

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

New workfare trial for school leavers.

92 replies

carernotasaint · 28/08/2012 20:57

www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/workfare-for-school-leavers-work-30-1284204?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed

OP posts:
NovackNGood · 29/08/2012 20:55

Starting multiple threads about the same thing is a bit off in my opinion.

limitedperiodonly · 29/08/2012 20:59

carer feels passionately about this issue. So do I, and lots of others.

What's wrong with that novack?

It's not as if I've ever complained about your posts, repetitive and stubbornly resistant to questions or facts as the few I can actually understand are.

flatpackhamster · 29/08/2012 21:01

epeesarepointythings

flatpackhamster I am old enough to remember the days before Labour reintroduced the NMW. People working for £1 - £2 per hour, knowing that if they objected, they would be booted out to be replaced by some other desperate soul. Is that what you want to go back to? Really?

Oh yes, in the good old days before Labour fucked the economy.

FWIW I do not mind some of my taxes going to subsidise wages for people starting out - as long as it is the NMW and not less.

Good for you. That's your money, you can do what you like with it.

It isn't as if the NMW is a living wage in any case.

Depends where you live - which is another reason why the NMW is such a dumb idea.

I am not a higher rate tax payer, my DH and I are not rich, but if we are willing to support those worse off than we are, why can't others? Your argument seems to be all about the 'haves' going 'me, me, me'.

Only if you can't read.

Call me a socialist, I'll take it as a compliment.

Bless.

To my mind the NMW is the hallmark of a civilised society. The choice as I see it is stark - do we want to engage in a race to the bottom with the sweatshop countries, or do we want to draw a line? Of course that leads to wider questions about what we want the world economy to be - a constant striving for that mythical thing called 'growth' which means in the end that someone at the bottom always pays for it, or a striving for a world in which everyone can live and afford to live? Unfortunately we'll probably get the former.

You also have not addressed my question as to why it is OK for our taxes to subsidise employers - many of whom are making nice profits for shareholders - but it is not OK for our taxes to subsidise young people's wages.

Well what you've done here is not address the issues I raised about the NMW, but basically told me "I am a lovely person because I think this. You are a bad person because you think that."

You haven't addressed:

The permanent underclass you create when you have a minimum wage;

The issue of taking money off people who already have high living costs to give it to those with low living costs;

My issue with your claim that there's a "going rate" for unskilled labour which the government somehow magically knows.

You're incapable of looking at the issue rationally, because all you're interested in is what 'kind of society' you want to live in and applying your rules for 'making things lovely' to the people that live in it.

What you should be doing is looking at the people that live in it and seeing how they live and building the system around them.

But true socialists like you aren't interested in the world as it is, you always want to change it to how you think it should be. And that's why socialism always fails and leaves a trail of corpses in its wake.

epeesarepointythings · 29/08/2012 21:10

Yup, limited - usual response from flatpack, summed up like this - capitalism works, all other systems suck. Clearly we have a deep philosophical disagreement which will not ever change.

And there isn't a permanent in countries where there is no minimum wage? Or is it not an underclass if very, very occasionally someone manages to fight their way out, leaving all the others in the shit...

Because the American Dream works soooo well, for sooo many people, doesn't it?

What's wrong with wanting to change the world as it is, given that it fails to work for the majority of people everywhere?

flatpackhamster · 30/08/2012 07:43

epeesarepointythings

Yup, limited - usual response from flatpack, summed up like this - capitalism works, all other systems suck. Clearly we have a deep philosophical disagreement which will not ever change.

And here you are, once again, not addressing any of the issues. If you've got no way of supporting your socialist views with reasoned arguments, don't you think it's probably about time you looked again at your views? They're so shallow that you can't even address minor criticisms of them.

The American Dream is so famously awful that people across the planet will do anything for a Green Card. How many people were fighting to get in to the USSR? Where's the queue of people trying to get in to Cuba?

Nothing wrong with wanting to change things. But you don't want to change the world to fit the people, you want to create the world and fit the people in to it. And that isn't how people work.

limitedperiodonly · 30/08/2012 09:09

It's not me that's failing to address the issues Flatpack

I asked you to explain how this particular scheme will make the economy grow and help the taxpayer?

Why don't you give it a go? It's because you haven't got a clue, isn't it?

flatpackhamster · 30/08/2012 11:18

limitedperiodonly

It's not me that's failing to address the issues Flatpack

I asked you to explain how this particular scheme will make the economy grow and help the taxpayer?

Why don't you give it a go? It's because you haven't got a clue, isn't it?

I've given up trying to explain because you don't understand the answers. If I can put together an answer in words of one syllable for you I'll be in touch.

limitedperiodonly · 30/08/2012 12:21

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by Mumsnet for breaking our Talk Guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.

flatpackhamster · 30/08/2012 12:29

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by Mumsnet for breaking our Talk Guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.

limitedperiodonly · 30/08/2012 12:45

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by Mumsnet for breaking our Talk Guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.

butisthismyname · 30/08/2012 12:47

from what I have found out ( as someone who works in the voluntary sector), the plan is for young people to work for charities. Thus not lining 'employers' pockets as such. Still not sure what i think of it though

Darkesteyes · 30/08/2012 12:54

But then charities would have the power to initiate a benefit sanction being issued. Causing the very poverty that they are campaigning against.

limitedperiodonly · 30/08/2012 13:04

but I've never heard of a charity that doesn't pay at least some of its employees.

That's before we start on the question of whether it's right for give even more concessions to charities when they already run shops in competition with other traders without paying market rents and business rates and with free stock and labour.

Sometimes they set up specialist shops with carefully-selected free stock which puts an intolerable strain on neighbouring traders who also sell books or designer clothes but don't have all the advantages of being a charity shop.

Charity shops are businesses. That also makes me wonder how many small shops would want to employ lots of people with no experience of, or aptitude for retail.

sweetkitty · 30/08/2012 13:12

My neice has been through such a scheme, she left school at 15 (almost 16) were in Scotland, anyway she did nothing for 2 years, sponged off my SIL who gives her whatever she wants as she's scared of her, she went to college for about 2 weeks that's it. At 18 she could sign on but would give an 18 year old no qualifications, sat on her backside for 2 years, a job?

So she went on a workfare placement for 8 weeks, in a local pub, she did get offered a job at the end but at £5 for 20 hours only. Better than nothing but long term, who knows but at least she is working and doing something.

butisthismyname · 30/08/2012 13:18

That's true, but surely it is preferable to have young people doing 'work experience' or whatever you like to call it for a Charity, rather than somewhere like Tescos? At least it would be slightly more ethical.

limitedperiodonly · 30/08/2012 13:42

Not sure about ethics. Some charities have very questionable employment practices and poor attitudes to employees including bullying which go unchallenged because it's all for charity.

I would be less suspicious of them if they dished out experience of the highly skilled jobs they provide - administration, handling ethical issues, working with partner organisations in local and national government and health and education.

But I still think that if you need someone to fill those roles, even as a trainee, you should pay them and institute a proper training programme.

I think the bulk is going to be shop work and people accept that working in a charity shop = no pay.

It's what the govt have been searching for ever since many companies shied away from the Work Programme because of bad publicity.

Darkesteyes · 30/08/2012 13:46

This article actually uses the phrase "if we insist on unpaid work"!!

www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/aug/30/unpaid-work-experience-jobseekers?commentpage=last#end-of-comments

Darkesteyes · 30/08/2012 13:48

We shouldnt be insisting on unpaid work and then in the next breath proudly announcing that we sell Fairtrade products and displaying them in the very stores that uses workfare. It is hypocrisy of the highest order!

Darkesteyes · 30/08/2012 13:49

I am generalizing by using the phrase "we"

SaskiaRembrandtWasFramed · 30/08/2012 13:49

"If there is work to be done they can pay someone to do it "

This ^

Giving employers free workers simply undermines people who are in paid employment. Also, how does working for no pay make anyone appreciate the value of a proper job with a wage

butisthismyname · 30/08/2012 13:55

What we want to do where I work (volunteer centre) is actively encourage young people to come and volunteer. There are hundreds of interesting opportunities for them. What we will not do, is 'work' with workfare providers who send people along, expect us to shove them into a role, do all the providers paperwork for them and let the provider smile and 'fiddle' the figures. I have been appraoched by several of these types of people, all of whom have got quite unpleasnt when i have declined working with them. Volunteering England is very interested in such schmes and asks us to let them know if we are approached. It's not Rocket Science, volunteering can be brilliant but forcing people into it isn't volunteering.

limitedperiodonly · 30/08/2012 14:14

volunteering can be brilliant but forcing people into it isn't volunteering

I totally agree but. If only more people got it and also accepted that forcing people into these roles helps no one except the DWP and Work Programme providers.

alemci · 30/08/2012 14:26

what about reintroducing the YTS. that seemed to help young people get into jobs including my own DH in the 80's.

make it pay more that unemployment benefit to give youngsters some incentive to go and work. I am sure there are loads that do already

limitedperiodonly · 30/08/2012 14:27

Oh, DArkeyes' link reminds me: a number of new charities have already been created under an organisation called the Shaftesbury Partnership which has extensive links to Conservative Party MPs and activists.

They're not really charities as any sane person would understand the word.

They exist only to hoover up government contracts for pretending to get people work.

SaskiaRembrandtWasFramed · 30/08/2012 14:52

"what about reintroducing the YTS"

I think that might work. I know there were criticisms of it at the time, but I also know a few people who were on the scheme who did benefit from it. Not only did they get useful experience, but because they were expected to study too they got useful qualifications. None of the schemes currently on offer seem to provide more than the 'chance' to be used as cheap labour in an unskilled job.

Swipe left for the next trending thread