• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

UK PoliGAF thread of tell me about the rabbits again, Dave.

Lirlond

Member
Dec 5, 2008
4,386
0
0
The English government has been fucking the NHS for years, it should be outside political influence.

If you plan to force people into work you should pay them minimum wage. The only unpaid work anyone should do is either voluntary or to work off a debt. Before you say they are paying their debt for benefits, they're parents most likely paid taxes. If they had a job, they have paid taxes. When they get a job, they will pay taxes.

I pay national insurance, and have done for several years(I've only not worked one year of my over 16 life). If, touch wood, I am made unemployed tomorrow I will be forced to take jsa. My skill set may not be in demand, and I may be unemployed for a long time. Now would you say it is right that I am sent to a 'work camp' because I am the target "young unemployed"?

We pay into the system to be eligible for these safety nets, and everyone should be eligible regardless of status or employment history.
 

WayneMorse

Banned
Oct 2, 2013
2,165
0
0
 

Jezbollah

Member
Jun 14, 2010
12,380
2,456
1,200
If you plan to force people into work you should pay them minimum wage....

I agree with this. I have no problem with the principle of the policy that was announced, but I do with the amount of money not going up for 30hrs of work.
 

kitch9

Banned
Jan 23, 2007
7,201
0
0
Yes, indeed. Are there no workhouses these shiftless layabouts can be sent too?

24 years ago I worked most weekends on a market stall whilst doing my A levels. I worked from 6am whilst 4pm for 15 quid a day.

I largely failed my A levels, education wasn't really my thing.

Whilst I enjoyed the work on the market the pitiful money was largely irrelevant because when I went to my first real interview I had a great reference from my market boss who I got on well with. At 18 I got a job in an electronics factory instead of university on the shop floor which paid reasonably well and by the time I was 20 was training to be a technician, shortly after I then landed a job selling cars on the back of a strong reference from both the market job and the factory. I had a company car and a lot of disposable income. 6 years later I was managing the sales floor, a couple of years after that running an entire showroom. (The now defunct Rover cars.)

All because I managed to get one person to write nice things about me. I am currently a managing director of my own company which has seen turnover grow year on year ever since I took over. Now I am an employer I would employ the person who had been unemployed for 2 years but had made every effort to better themselves over the person who has only been unemployed 12 months but effectively done nothing in that time.

Wood and trees my friend, wood and trees
 

Lirlond

Member
Dec 5, 2008
4,386
0
0
Wow right from the American dream playbook. What ran true 20, even 10 years ago will not now. The job market is a mess, expecting people to pull on their bootstraps and find work simply won't work.

I also fail to see how picking up rubbish for less than £2 an hour helps breed anything but resentment. That job gives you no transferable skills and now you need to spend money getting there, money you could have used on a training course, or travelling to volunteer work that will give you transferable skills.
 

kitch9

Banned
Jan 23, 2007
7,201
0
0
Wow right from the American dream playbook. What ran true 20, even 10 years ago will not now. The job market is a mess, expecting people to pull on their bootstraps and find work simply won't work.

I also fail to see how picking up rubbish for less than £2 an hour helps breed anything but resentment. That job gives you no transferable skills and now you need to spend money getting there, money you could have used on a training course, or travelling to volunteer work that will give you transferable skills.

Yup no point even trying. Might as well sit around waiting for someone to hand it to you on a plate because that would be the best strategy. All those who you are competing with who go to college and do training are doing a totally futile exercise because it is YOU who are more likely to get a job sat on the couch whilst wallowing in your self righteous indignation of the system.

Go you.

I've another anecdote for you, a mate of mine did an extremely daft thing and has spent the last 5 years in prison and is due to be released in August. He realizes what he did was stupid and with the birth of his daughter just after he got sentenced he was kicking himself as he put himself and his family in a horrible position financially as they lost his wage and who was going to employ a long term con with no real qualifications?

He decided to do what he could and take it from there, so in prison he effectively went back to school and has done courses in joinery, diesel fitting and electrics. The second he was offered a work rehabilitation placement he took it and has done time diesel fitting and doing his qualification that will allow him to work on overhead powerlines on the railways. The government takes 40% of his £6.50 an hour he gets paid on these work placements.

He currently has two job offers for when he gets out in August and one of them pays very well after his 6 month probationary period. The American dream? No, far from it, but you ask most of the twats in prison if its impossible to find work doing time so they might as well re-offend.

Most employers don't give a shit if you put going to the gym or like socialising on your CV they just want to see a bit of drive and courage in the face of adversity not a something for nothing attitude as it screams laziness. Most employers are SME's, people with possibly huge loans, mortgages up to the hilt with huge financial pressures following a dream. Your average small business owner runs the risk of losing everything and being financially ruined if it all goes wrong, you need to give these people confidence in taking a further risk on you. To further that point, even if you are going for a job at a large corporation you will usually be tasked to work for a specific department which will be headed by a manager who job effectively depends on his staff doing their job so his department performs, you need to give this person confidence in risking taking you on as well. If you sit in an interview and when asked why you did a work placement tell the interviewer that you wanted to prove yourself and if working for nothing for a little while meant you could do that then so be it you can guarantee than your interview will at least be considered and not instantly binned.

You are right about the economy 20 years ago.......

It was much smaller.
 

JesseEwiak

Member
May 9, 2013
5,839
0
0
24 years ago I worked most weekends on a market stall whilst doing my A levels. I worked from 6am whilst 4pm for 15 quid a day.

I largely failed my A levels, education wasn't really my thing.

Whilst I enjoyed the work on the market the pitiful money was largely irrelevant because when I went to my first real interview I had a great reference from my market boss who I got on well with. At 18 I got a job in an electronics factory instead of university on the shop floor which paid reasonably well and by the time I was 20 was training to be a technician, shortly after I then landed a job selling cars on the back of a strong reference from both the market job and the factory. I had a company car and a lot of disposable income. 6 years later I was managing the sales floor, a couple of years after that running an entire showroom. (The now defunct Rover cars.)

All because I managed to get one person to write nice things about me. I am currently a managing director of my own company which has seen turnover grow year on year ever since I took over. Now I am an employer I would employ the person who had been unemployed for 2 years but had made every effort to better themselves over the person who has only been unemployed 12 months but effectively done nothing in that time.

Wood and trees my friend, wood and trees

In other words, you got luck. Congrats. But, the problem is, you think you were largely successful due to your own hard work instead of that luck.
 

Jezbollah

Member
Jun 14, 2010
12,380
2,456
1,200
In other words, you got luck. Congrats. But, the problem is, you think you were largely successful due to your own hard work instead of that luck.

In my, now 21 year career, I have spent a total of six months on the dole. I hated every moment of it. If I was to summarise my career from 1994 until now, it would have a similar tone to it than Kitch.

Work ethic goes a great deal when it comes to both getting a job and doing a job + climbing up the career ladder. And yes luck does have a part to play in it sometimes. But at the same time, you also have to make your own luck by creating your own opportunities.
 

Nicktendo86

Member
Mar 24, 2009
7,498
211
1,100
35
London
Not only very good employment (majority of which is full time) and pay figures today but, almost more importantly, vacancies are at their highest level ever.

Not only are there now a record number of peoe in employment with their wages now exceeding inflation by quite some margin but there are plenty of jobs out there.
 

kitch9

Banned
Jan 23, 2007
7,201
0
0
In other words, you got luck. Congrats. But, the problem is, you think you were largely successful due to your own hard work instead of that luck.

Yes mate, all luck. When I was getting up at 5am on a weekend whilst still at school as was imagining how lucky I was, I felt really lucky doing the graveyard and nightshift at the factory and then I thought I had found the gold pot at the end of the rainbow doing 65-70 hour weeks including weekends and bank holidays in the car showroom.

So much luck.It definitely wasn't a long steep ladder.

My manager at the factory told tell me in the interview that I was pretty much the only young school leaver to turn up with a comprehensive and strong reference that could be verified. They employed me at 17 along with 3 others who were all over 30 years old. The reference got me me first foot on the ladder at a young age.
 

real_slime

Banned
Feb 26, 2013
2,125
0
0
I have read in the guardian that the cost of putting into practice this new policy of community service work for benefits nationwide would be £20 million, which would be paid for with the savings that will be made with the reduction in benefits being paid out under the Universal Credit scheme (although I don't know how much that cost itself), which is interesting to me because in the short term, it seems that they are immediately spending the money they have saved by cutting benefits elsewhere by making the benefits system more restrictive and taxing to make use of. So it would appear that this is not about simply saving the government money, although perhaps with the idea being that this would encourage young people to get off benefits, they would end up paying out less on new claims and discontinued claims going forward. So that all seems to even out to not be very substantial in terms of savings from a glance.

Another reason to do this would be the more utilitarian idea that this will encourage young people to improve their situation by making the undesirable position of a life supported by benefits less appealing, and so they will end up earning their own income and learn how to be an adult. I think this is a good instinct because I agree that this kind of life is not one people should be content with, but it is obviously a very complex thing where you are dealing with people from social backgrounds where there is no aspiration to a better life. These people often come from difficult family backgrounds and languish in substandard and uninvolved education, so their actual prospects are quite limited without being given a meaningful leg up. I don't know that the idea of doing 30 hours a week of community service from the first day they make a benefit claim is going to propel them into the workforce, but it definitely might discourage them from ever claiming benefits. A lot of these people will find it difficult to get a job even if they try due to issues like criminal history, a difficult personality, and so on - so what you might get is a new section of the population who are now even more desperate to get by, and I'd be concerned that this would lead to them falling even further out of society and turning to petty crime to get by.

I don't place much value in the idea of instilling a work ethic in people by the brute force of what will likely end up as ineffectual and meaningless community work, and I definitely don't think the amount of £57 a week is enough to justify it. For those people who are unable to acquire private sector jobs in the places that would be available to them, like retailers and other minimum wage jobs, but who aren't the type who would turn to crime, they might find themselves working for some time in these community jobs, not getting the money they should legally be owed for this work, and coming out at the end of these 3 month placements with very little to show for it. I don't believe that suddenly a generation of people brought up by alcoholic or drug addicted parents who live on benefits themselves, and who have gone to badly run and taught schools, will have a positive revelation about work after 3 months being strong-armed into washing dishes 30 hours a week for less than a third of the minimum wage.

So this particular idea sounds quite bad, and based on a misunderstanding of the kinds of people who this policy will actually impact. However, the policy isn't designed to be appreciated by those people, because they don't vote - but middle and working class people who disdain 'scroungers' do.

Wood and trees my friend, wood and trees

Your using this cliche to cap off your personal anecdote is ironic. I don't think there is as much universal knowledge to be gleaned from your own origin story as you seem to believe.
 

Lirlond

Member
Dec 5, 2008
4,386
0
0
Getting an interview depends entirely on getting past the CV screening process. I very recently had two vacancies up for grabs. I received over 300 applications. I picked 10 of those for interviews, but I still had at least 100 unread emails in the recruitment account.

Your mate did good for himself, but he is a general outlier. When I worked in a Railway recruitment agency(Coyles), where we regularly took on coss, ohl, and plant workers, we had to screen everyone through disclosure Scotland, any criminal activity meant an instant fail.
 

kitch9

Banned
Jan 23, 2007
7,201
0
0
Getting an interview depends entirely on getting past the CV screening process. I very recently had two vacancies up for grabs. I received over 300 applications. I picked 10 of those for interviews, but I still had at least 100 unread emails in the recruitment account.

Your mate did good for himself, but he is a general outlier. When I worked in a Railway recruitment agency(Coyles), where we regularly took on coss, ohl, and plant workers, we had to screen everyone through disclosure Scotland, any criminal activity meant an instant fail.

The railways seem to be taking a proactive approach with the prison service at the moment there must be decent government incentives to do so. A recruitment agency trying to maintain a reputation for sending decent workers is always going to ignore cons, they don't fit their business profile, which is why its harder for cons than anyone to get back into work. My mate is an outlier because he made himself one, simple as that.

Out of those 300 applications how many were actually unemployed and how many were people looking for a change of job?

I employ out of job centres or if my staff have someone they know looking for work. I train myself so I ain't looking for rocket scientists I just need sharp minded individuals who don't mind a bit of graft to get what they want. Hundreds of thousands of employers like me.

Your using this cliche to cap off your personal anecdote is ironic. I don't think there is as much universal knowledge to be gleaned from your own origin story as you seem to believe.

I'm from Doncaster, an ex mining village that got shafted royally by the strikes. Out of everyone I know, those with a strong work ethic and attitude have employment and always have done, even if they lost a job for whatever reason they tend to just walk into another.
 

Vivalaraza

Member
Sep 30, 2009
34,357
0
0

Same with this bollocks about the Tories destroying the NHS. It is just nonsense and we can't have a proper debate about the future of our health service with screaming banshees sticking to the 'Cameron is selling it off to his friends' etc rubbish. I mean, Labour have outsourced more of it than the Tories have and were the first to start doing so!

The terrible state of the NHS in Wales and scandals such as Mid Staffs should show that Labour cannot be trusted with the NHS
but if they keep repeating the lie that only they can be trusted with it people start to believe it. Its just rubbish.But there was more embarrassment for Mr Balls as it emerged that he had made basic errors in adding up one of his claims and had filled in his expenses forms incorrectly for months.

This seems like a contradiction
 

Lirlond

Member
Dec 5, 2008
4,386
0
0
We advertised only to the job centre, so I imagine all of them were. The ten I interviewed were certainly unemployed.
 

Nicktendo86

Member
Mar 24, 2009
7,498
211
1,100
35
London
This seems like a contradiction
Agreed, poor wording. Point I was trying to say was perhaps they can't, or at least they could be accused of not being trustworthy to a similar degree that the Tories can't.

I don't think healthcare should be in the hands of politicians at all really.
 

kitch9

Banned
Jan 23, 2007
7,201
0
0
We advertised only to the job centre, so I imagine all of them were. The ten I interviewed were certainly unemployed.

I'm not sure everyone looking for jobs in a job centre is unemployed either, they are there for all to see.
 

Lirlond

Member
Dec 5, 2008
4,386
0
0
I'm trying to show you that the odds of getting an interview, of having your CV read are incredibly low. You could have a great CV, good experience, a few good references, doesn't matter if the recruiter arbitrarily decides to skip your application because there are hundreds, or thousands.

What amounts to slave labour is not the way to fix this. There is far too much stigma attached to a service we pay for in our taxes. Should we be attacking people who use the NHS instead of Bupa? Who take the free glasses rather than the designer? Pensioners who claim the state pension? It's nonsense.
 

kitch9

Banned
Jan 23, 2007
7,201
0
0
I'm trying to show you that the odds of getting an interview, of having your CV read are incredibly low. You could have a great CV, good experience, a few good references, doesn't matter if the recruiter arbitrarily decides to skip your application because there are hundreds, or thousands.

What amounts to slave labour is not the way to fix this. There is far too much stigma attached to a service we pay for in our taxes. Should we be attacking people who use the NHS instead of Bupa? Who take the free glasses rather than the designer? Pensioners who claim the state pension? It's nonsense.

At 5-7% unemployment levels they are no lower than they are always been. You must be one jaded recruitment worker to not understand the concept of trying to make yourself stand out, which begs the question, what type of people do you actually want to employ? When I got my job in car sales I was in the same room as 50 other people, the interview was a full day and you were expected to stand up in front of the room and say your bit, they even asked everyone to sell them a pen.....

I remember getting a CV when I was running a showroom which had a crazy good hand drawn sketch of a car on the front and they guy stuck glitter on the inside of the page which went all over me, made me read the CV thinking "you cheesy twat," but it was a good CV and he ended up getting the job.

Finding a job has never been easy.
 

War Peaceman

You're a big guy.
Sep 24, 2009
6,992
1
445
I think the bigger question over Cameron's proposals is not if they are moralbut if they are actually effective. There are very few jobs that they can do that will not be already performed by employed people. In this sense, the forced labour would actually hurt employment by providing lower wage workers.

Frankly, the job market needs to expand - it is gradually improving, but not enough - and that should be the focus of legislation rather than punitive tasks.

Personal anecdotes are not persuasive as to the benefits or negatives of legislation. They are just anecdotes and often reflect a (completely understandable) set of cognitive biases by the person.
 

JonathanEx

Member
Jan 5, 2006
13,636
0
0
England
www.jonathancresswell.co.uk
I think the bigger question over Cameron's proposals is not if they are moralbut if they are actually effective. There are very few jobs that they can do that will not be already performed by employed people. In this sense, the forced labour would actually hurt employment by providing lower wage workers.

A quick glance at their analysis: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...-young-people-trailblazer-impact-analysis.pdf

From Twitter:
"Jason Beattie
Report for DWP concludes that making young jobless do community work had "no significant employment impact" after 8 weeks. 2/2"

Seems to be more about scaring people off applying for benefits rather than any meaningful impact on unemployment? I haven't got the time to read through that properly, but it seems to me that changes may help people earlier on - when they first sign up, doing a better job there - than the 6 months stuff?
 

War Peaceman

You're a big guy.
Sep 24, 2009
6,992
1
445
What sort of legislation would you enact to improve the jobs market?

Well if I knew the answer to that I wouldn't be doing my current jobs!

But one big priority has to be housing. Which Labour are better positioned to do (due to electoral politics not competence). A more radical one; improving transport infrastructure*.


*In Nottingham it is fantastic and improving but there are many areas where it is lacking or substandard, particularly on rail. We need serious modernisation,
 

kitch9

Banned
Jan 23, 2007
7,201
0
0
I think the bigger question over Cameron's proposals is not if they are moralbut if they are actually effective. There are very few jobs that they can do that will not be already performed by employed people. In this sense, the forced labour would actually hurt employment by providing lower wage workers.

Frankly, the job market needs to expand - it is gradually improving, but not enough - and that should be the focus of legislation rather than punitive tasks.

Personal anecdotes are not persuasive as to the benefits or negatives of legislation. They are just anecdotes and often reflect a (completely understandable) set of cognitive biases by the person.

There are people out there with no qualifications, no interest in gaining qualifications and no references for any potential employer to investigate. These people need to understand that in an already crowded job market they are at the absolute bottom of the pile, very few if any employers are going to risk their position on someone with no backup no matter how well they interview.

Sorry, but that's how it is. Sometimes you have to go back to basics and start from scratch, and if that means tearing yourself away from Jeremy Kyle for a few weeks and working for very little to get someone to actually back you up with a reference then so be it.
 

zomgbbqftw

Banned
Jan 21, 2011
14,538
0
0
Ed Miliband really is the world's biggest moron. IDS stupidly accused Ed of dodging taxes with a Deed of Variation, but instead of letting it lie Ed decided to ask for an apology and retraction. Now the deed of variation is going to be on the evening news with in depth reports over what it means and whether or not Ed did it (he did) and whether he saved any tax (he did not) or intended to save tax (he did). Without the intervention from Ed the IDS claim would be relegated to internet articles and a few angry blogs from the Staggers and the Guardian.
 

War Peaceman

You're a big guy.
Sep 24, 2009
6,992
1
445
There are people out there with no qualifications, no interest in gaining qualifications and no references for any potential employer to investigate. These people need to understand that in an already crowded job market they are at the absolute bottom of the pile, very few if any employers are going to risk their position on someone with no backup no matter how well they interview.

Sorry, but that's how it is. Sometimes you have to go back to basics and start from scratch, and if that means tearing yourself away from Jeremy Kyle for a few weeks and working for very little to get someone to actually back you up with a reference then so be it.

So the solution is something that by the government's own evidence (the trial runs linked above) has "no significant employment impact" after eight weeks?

What the policy does is achieve a "statistically significant (~11%) reduction in the 18-24 year old JSA count", IE, it doesn't improve employment but does save cash. This is not helpful to those who do need help.
 

Lirlond

Member
Dec 5, 2008
4,386
0
0
At 5-7% unemployment levels they are no lower than they are always been. You must be one jaded recruitment worker to not understand the concept of trying to make yourself stand out, which begs the question, what type of people do you actually want to employ? When I got my job in car sales I was in the same room as 50 other people, the interview was a full day and you were expected to stand up in front of the room and say your bit, they even asked everyone to sell them a pen.....

I guarantee no modern interview will deal with 50 people at once. The amount of time and money you'd need to spend to have people interview them is insane. Re imaginative cvs: No. I need to be able to get all relevant info at a glance. If your CV is too long or waffles on it goes in the bin. I have a limited time allocated to me to do recruitment, time that cuts into my own job. It's a terrible system but it's the one that people are entering. This is true of any entry level no skill job. Almost anyone will do.
 

kitch9

Banned
Jan 23, 2007
7,201
0
0
Ed Miliband really is the world's biggest moron. IDS stupidly accused Ed of dodging taxes with a Deed of Variation, but instead of letting it lie Ed decided to ask for an apology and retraction. Now the deed of variation is going to be on the evening news with in depth reports over what it means and whether or not Ed did it (he did) and whether he saved any tax (he did not) or intended to save tax (he did). Without the intervention from Ed the IDS claim would be relegated to internet articles and a few angry blogs from the Staggers and the Guardian.

I don't understand where politicians are going with this tax avoidance is not illegal and we all should avoid paying more tax than we legally have to which is what they appear to be arguing over.

If a deed of variation is legal and it reduces your tax liability under law then deed your damn variations for gods sake.

HMRC will be sticking charity boxes in shops at this rate, christ almighty.
 

kitch9

Banned
Jan 23, 2007
7,201
0
0
So the solution is something that by the government's own evidence (the trial runs linked above) has "no significant employment impact" after eight weeks?

What the policy does is achieve a "statistically significant (~11%) reduction in the 18-24 year old JSA count", IE, it doesn't improve employment but does save cash. This is not helpful to those who do need help.

A massive eight weeks to get everyone back to work! Eight weeks, that's an eternity!

I guarantee no modern interview will deal with 50 people at once. The amount of time and money you'd need to spend to have people interview them is insane. Re imaginative cvs: No. I need to be able to get all relevant info at a glance. If your CV is too long or waffles on it goes in the bin. I have a limited time allocated to me to do recruitment, time that cuts into my own job. It's a terrible system but it's the one that people are entering. This is true of any entry level no skill job. Almost anyone will do.

No offence, but I wouldn't want to work for you.
 

War Peaceman

You're a big guy.
Sep 24, 2009
6,992
1
445
A massive eight weeks to get everyone back to work! Eight weeks, that's an eternity!

Ok. So you suggest pushing ahead with something which has no statistical merit, according to the government's own report?

FYI after 8 weeks there was 0% change in employment. 0. That's not just bad that's pointless. Of course it is a sample and not a full-length study, but there is no benefit to it for the workers. None. Zero percent. Those 13 weeks were free work for an employer, which is bad for the job market and in which so much more could have been achieved.

The main problem with the job market is that too many people are working for jobs they are over-qualified for. There aren't enough high-skill jobs and thus employment cascades down, with the people with the least qualifications suffering the most.
 

kitch9

Banned
Jan 23, 2007
7,201
0
0
Ok. So you suggest pushing ahead with something which has no statistical merit, according to the government's own report?

FYI after 8 weeks there was 0% change in employment. 0. That's not just bad that's pointless. Of course it is a sample and not a full-length study, but there is no benefit to it for the workers. None. Zero percent. Those 13 weeks were free work for an employer, which is bad for the job market and in which so much more could have been achieved.

The main problem with the job market is that too many people are working for jobs they are over-qualified for. There aren't enough high-skill jobs and thus employment cascades down, with the people with the least qualifications suffering the most.

I suggest something which is a large operational change such as this one is given more than 8 weeks yes.

I'm not sure where you get the idea that just allowing someone to work for you on these schemes is free, newbies are a pain in the ass for most employers, they need managing, insuring, training such as manual handling and H&S, risk assessments, the list goes on, then when you just about get some of them to anything like being productive whilst having to deal with the serial moaners they disappear and the next batch turns up.

I'm afraid it's pressure from above that pushes me to work the way I do. Blame my bosses.

Group interviews are still extremely common by the way, especially in sales environments.
 

Nicktendo86

Member
Mar 24, 2009
7,498
211
1,100
35
London
Ed Miliband really is the world's biggest moron. IDS stupidly accused Ed of dodging taxes with a Deed of Variation, but instead of letting it lie Ed decided to ask for an apology and retraction. Now the deed of variation is going to be on the evening news with in depth reports over what it means and whether or not Ed did it (he did) and whether he saved any tax (he did not) or intended to save tax (he did). Without the intervention from Ed the IDS claim would be relegated to internet articles and a few angry blogs from the Staggers and the Guardian.
As I see it he has no where else to turn and feels he gets good coverage/rating when seen to be standing up to 'vested interests'. His attacks on tax avoidance was a good move, even though as I have said it was hypocritical and as you have pointed out this government has done much more than the last in clamping down on tax avoidance. But he has run out of things to to say. Trying to portray himself as being in the side of 'normal' working people seems to be his strategy.

Where it falls apart of course is he is very much a part of the establishment and I am not sure he is from this planet.
 

Lirlond

Member
Dec 5, 2008
4,386
0
0
I suggest something which is a large operational change such as this one is given more than 8 weeks yes.

I'm not sure where you get the idea that just allowing someone to work for you on these schemes is free, newbies are a pain in the ass for most employers, they need managing, insuring, training such as manual handling and H&S, risk assessments, the list goes on, then when you just about get some of them to anything like being productive whilst having to deal with the serial moaners they disappear and the next batch turns up.



Group interviews are still extremely common by the way, especially in sales environments.

Yeah usually in groups of 5-6, not 50. We spend an hour on group interview stuff then a spend the rest of the time 1on1.
 

pulsemyne

Member
Sep 6, 2004
3,864
0
0
So while all the tories on here were crowing about the 4 point lead the ICM pool gave them, why haven't we heard anything about the TNS poll today giving labour a 7 point lead?
As I said earlier, don't believe outliner polls. If you see a poll with a big lead either way then it's bollocks. The lead that labour has is about 2 points. It's neck and neck stuff but one thing is for certain and that it will likely be another coalition albeit a labour one.
 

pulsemyne

Member
Sep 6, 2004
3,864
0
0
Ok. So you suggest pushing ahead with something which has no statistical merit, according to the government's own report?

FYI after 8 weeks there was 0% change in employment. 0. That's not just bad that's pointless. Of course it is a sample and not a full-length study, but there is no benefit to it for the workers. None. Zero percent. Those 13 weeks were free work for an employer, which is bad for the job market and in which so much more could have been achieved.

The main problem with the job market is that too many people are working for jobs they are over-qualified for. There aren't enough high-skill jobs and thus employment cascades down, with the people with the least qualifications suffering the most.

He also forgets that in order to do these wonderful things it often costs people money to travel to areas etc, the cost of food that they may need and so on and so on. It actually costs the poor money they need to live on. It's actually not just pointless from an employment point of view it's also making the poor worse off.
 

WayneMorse

Banned
Oct 2, 2013
2,165
0
0
So while all the tories on here were crowing about the 4 point lead the ICM pool gave them, why haven't we heard anything about the TNS poll today giving labour a 7 point lead?
As I said earlier, don't believe outliner polls. If you see a poll with a big lead either way then it's bollocks. The lead that labour has is about 2 points. It's neck and neck stuff but one thing is for certain and that it will likely be another coalition albeit a labour one.

A Lab-Lib coalition wouldn't be that bad. Though I'm sure Clegg's removal will be the first condition if he survives the election.

On the polling side though it's pretty much meaningless until April. We've been switching back and forth between narrow Labour leads to narrow Tory leads for the past year almost.
 

JesseEwiak

Member
May 9, 2013
5,839
0
0
He also forgets that in order to do these wonderful things it often costs people money to travel to areas etc, the cost of food that they may need and so on and so on. It actually costs the poor money they need to live on. It's actually not just pointless from an employment point of view it's also making the poor worse off.

As an American who's been dealing with 40 years of conservative and neoliberal hate for the welfare state, that's not a bug, that's a feature. If you make the poor more desperate and more hardened, they're more apt to simply give up and get out of the political process.

Sorry, but that's how it is. Sometimes you have to go back to basics and start from scratch, and if that means tearing yourself away from Jeremy Kyle for a few weeks and working for very little to get someone to actually back you up with a reference then so be it.

Yes, those lazy layabouts need to simply learn some people are better than them, and that as lazy shiftabouts, they should be happy they're paid any money at all, since we're not in the good ole' days when you could get people to work for nothing by the government's order.
 

kitch9

Banned
Jan 23, 2007
7,201
0
0
He also forgets that in order to do these wonderful things it often costs people money to travel to areas etc, the cost of food that they may need and so on and so on. It actually costs the poor money they need to live on. It's actually not just pointless from an employment point of view it's also making the poor worse off.

Yup, best to leave them watching Jeremy Kyle.

Saying that, those who take training or college currently get help with travel expenses so maybe it isn't best?

Anymore "poor" card objections?
 

kitch9

Banned
Jan 23, 2007
7,201
0
0
Yes, those lazy layabouts need to simply learn some people are better than them, and that as lazy shiftabouts, they should be happy they're paid any money at all, since we're not in the good ole' days when you could get people to work for nothing by the government's order.

I said something earlier about left minded hyperbole. If someone can't find it in them after being employed for a long time to do a few weeks light work in order to gain a recent reference then there's no helping them. They aren't being asked to break rocks.
 

Lirlond

Member
Dec 5, 2008
4,386
0
0
It doesn't matter how strenuous the work is, the fact is they are working for a slave wage. In a system with the culture of forcing people off benefits rather than into work. This is the same system that sanctioned a claimant for attending an interview instead of a tutoring day.

The bottom line here is no one should be expected to work for nothing, it's demeaning and reduces the value of the jobs they perform. The flipside however is that people should expect state support for paying NI, or on the assumption they will pay it back during their lifetime. That's why we pay the taxes in the first place!
 

kitch9

Banned
Jan 23, 2007
7,201
0
0
It doesn't matter how strenuous the work is, the fact is they are working for a slave wage. In a system with the culture of forcing people off benefits rather than into work. This is the same system that sanctioned a claimant for attending an interview instead of a tutoring day.

The bottom line here is no one should be expected to work for nothing, it's demeaning and reduces the value of the jobs they perform. The flipside however is that people should expect state support for paying NI, or on the assumption they will pay it back during their lifetime. That's why we pay the taxes in the first place!

When was the last person you employed without a recent reference? How about when someone doesn't have a reference at all? Sometimes we have to accept that there is more value to something other than monetary and stuff doesn't always get handed on a plate to you.
 

kmag

Member
Aug 27, 2012
7,154
0
0
A Lab-Lib coalition wouldn't be that bad. Though I'm sure Clegg's removal will be the first condition if he survives the election.

On the polling side though it's pretty much meaningless until April. We've been switching back and forth between narrow Labour leads to narrow Tory leads for the past year almost.

I don't see any way for Clegg to survive as Lib Dem leader. They might be able to keep some of their southern English strongholds, but they've collapsed completely in Scotland which is their other major stronghold. Today's Daily Record/Survation poll of 1011 scots has them on 5% which is in line with almost all other Scottish polling. Those figures would have them losing 11 of their 12 Scottish MP's. Even if they maintain 2/3rds of their English MP's (which is likely a best case) then they'll have been gutted.
 

kitch9

Banned
Jan 23, 2007
7,201
0
0
The Lib Dems have done an awful job of communicating what they have done in Government whilst the Tories have managed to take credit for everything.

The tuition fees thing screwed them even if the deal students get with regards paying back is actually top notch.
 

Nicktendo86

Member
Mar 24, 2009
7,498
211
1,100
35
London
*hypocrisy alert* labour accepted £400,000 in donations from 'tax dodging specialists' PwC last quarter.

Also received £2million more than the Tories so this myth that they are the scrappy, poor underdogs going against the cash rich Tories can die a bit.