-Angel- Posted February 16, 2012 Report Share Posted February 16, 2012 I don't see any rational argument against it. Its ok to sit around and do nothing for benefits, but using the time you have gaining work experience is somehow slavery? Link to post Share on other sites
WhiteHawksan Posted February 16, 2012 Report Share Posted February 16, 2012 I don't see any rational argument against it. Its ok to sit around and do nothing for benefits, but using the time you have gaining work experience is somehow slavery? There are 3 arguments against it. Firstly: The companies can afford to pay the minimum wage for the posts. at 30 hours a week on benefits you're working for £2.12/hour. Secondly: They make no attempt to hire on staff after the 'work(un)fare' Thirdly: Companies are taking on unpaid staff in replacement of paid staff because they're free Link to post Share on other sites
-Angel- Posted February 16, 2012 Report Share Posted February 16, 2012 Firstly, its nothing to do with what companies can afford. No-one should have the right to be given money if they are able to work for it. Why should someone be able to sit at home playing xbox for £2.12/hr when they could be cleaning a park or stacking a shelf? I don't see the need to reply to the last two, since i doubt there are any hard facts or statistics to back up either claim. Link to post Share on other sites
WhiteHawksan Posted February 16, 2012 Report Share Posted February 16, 2012 http://www.boycottworkfare.org/ heavily biased, but has some fact in it. You'd have to be incredibly naive to think that companies would pay people to take paid positions when by not hiring them you're assuring that there are the same unpaid positions. It can save millions in wages across a chain of stores if you have 30 hours of free work from members of staff. Link to post Share on other sites
Hedganian Posted February 16, 2012 Report Share Posted February 16, 2012 So if you don't like it, GET A JOB! Link to post Share on other sites
WhiteHawksan Posted February 16, 2012 Report Share Posted February 16, 2012 It's not that simple for a lot of people, I'm well qualified and work in a comfortable job, some of my friends have been struggling for work for months because there simply isn't any employment going, workfare would be brilliant if companies were required to offer 'successful' workfare placements a paid position at the job they'd been doing. Link to post Share on other sites
-Angel- Posted February 16, 2012 Report Share Posted February 16, 2012 http://www.boycottworkfare.org/ heavily biased, but has some fact in it. You'd have to be incredibly naive to think that companies would pay people to take paid positions when by not hiring them you're assuring that there are the same unpaid positions. It can save millions in wages across a chain of stores if you have 30 hours of free work from members of staff. I'm not reading anything on that site beyond "listen to this completely anonymous but totally genuine testimony, see the government are b*stards!". I think most companies would be far happier with someone they know can do the job, on minimum wage, than a new person every 6 weeks who could be utterly incompetent. Link to post Share on other sites
WhiteHawksan Posted February 16, 2012 Report Share Posted February 16, 2012 I would disagree entirely, and Take sainsburies for example, 1,000 stores, if each store has only a single unpaid worker working in it that is a saving of 182,000 a year over a min wage paid staff. I'm guessing you haven't worked in a large business if you really think 'ethics' has anything to do with profit margins. Now, I take sainburies as I know several people who work in sainsburies, both as checkout and mangerial roles. And I assure you they were not opening new positions to paid staff because the demand could be filled by either under 18's (lower min wage) or Job Centre Workfare people. They are forced to take the position when it comes up so they don't need to advertise and there are never a shortage of unemployed to fill the position. I agree that the long term unemployed need a good *albartroth* kicking, but workfare does nothing to improve anyone's chances of employment and ties up positions that COULD be held by paid (and therefore tax-paying and contributing members of society) I still say that the companies should be required to offer the position that the workfare person worked as a paid position upon successful completion of the workfare. Link to post Share on other sites
paranoiddroid Posted February 16, 2012 Report Share Posted February 16, 2012 things that ###### me off today people whinging at me to quit smoking. *fruitcage* off im having a fag sod off I have moved to vaping because I like being warm not to give up. Link to post Share on other sites
scorch Posted February 16, 2012 Report Share Posted February 16, 2012 Not being paid for the work you're doing is slavery. The only people after something for nothing are the companies on the scheme, the workers want a fair wage for the work done. So far Tesco have had over £1.5 million worth of labour for free. Link to post Share on other sites
Hedganian Posted February 16, 2012 Report Share Posted February 16, 2012 There are plenty of people on benefits who have never done a day's work in their lives, while people who are genuinely trying to find work after being made redundant or other issue struggle to get any decent amount of support. I certainly approve of a requirement to do something to earn the handout money instead of just being given money for doing nothing. The only people I can see objecting to this are the workshy spongers who don't deserve handout money in the first place. Link to post Share on other sites
scorch Posted February 16, 2012 Report Share Posted February 16, 2012 I don't have a problem with doing something for the money I receive. Not in a million years would I. So long as its a fair wage for a fair days work. Minimum wage should be just that. (EDIT: I'd do some volunteering for my benefits, but only for genuine volunteering opportunities. Working for one of the biggest companies in the country is not one, working at a soup kitchen or for the local meals on wheels is.) Even then, the people that decided what minimum wage should be ought to try living on it for a while. Living alone on minimum wage is impossible. Link to post Share on other sites
WhiteHawksan Posted February 16, 2012 Report Share Posted February 16, 2012 http://www.businessinsider.com/people-are-slamming-tesco-on-twitter-saying-its-promoting-slavery-and-exploiting-the-unemployed-2012-2 as if to enforce my point. 3000 jobs, at 6.21/hr at 30 hours a week saving Tesco (our poor needy corporate giant) 29 MILLION in wages, closing 3000 jobs to paid workers (thus keeping 3000 people OUT of work and on benefits.) Link to post Share on other sites
Hedganian Posted February 16, 2012 Report Share Posted February 16, 2012 The point is rather that those people who are benefits spongers wouldn't be going out and getting a job, they prefer just sitting around getting paid to do nothing while people like me struggle to make ends meet. If they don't like having to actually work for their benefits money and feel they deserve to be paid more for that work, then they might be more motivated to get a job and get off benefits. Link to post Share on other sites
WhiteHawksan Posted February 16, 2012 Report Share Posted February 16, 2012 oh I agree there, but that's a whole different ballgame, you can sign off from benefits for a week, lose 1 weeks benefits, and restart your 'cycle' so those people will never actualyl get of their *albartroth* to go on the workfarce. Which makes me to another point, people who consider benefits (and other 'untaxed' incomes...) as a career for life. They should be given a choice of a job or being shot. Link to post Share on other sites
Hedganian Posted February 17, 2012 Report Share Posted February 17, 2012 If you're physically and mentally able to work, then you should be required to do so. Jobseekers' Allowance should never be a long-term thing. A big part of the problem in the UK is that people seem to think that they're too good to do a lot of the jobs out there, which is why the place is full of Polish people cleaning things and suchlike. This is partly the fault of the education system trying to push everyone into University when they mostly have no place being there, and should be carpenters or plumbers instead. My girlfriend and I came up with the best answer to this issue and it's environmentally friendly too, saving a lot of plastic. Instead of having miles of motorways filled with plastic cones, we'll give the dole-sponging scumbags hi-vis vests and make them stand there instead. After a week of 8-hours-on, 8-hours-off back to back shifts being a road cone on a motorway, I'm pretty sure most people would be begging to work as a cleaner or a brickie or something... Link to post Share on other sites
WhiteHawksan Posted February 17, 2012 Report Share Posted February 17, 2012 the problem is simple, there's no reason to get OFF benefits. If the government pays for your house, your car, your holidays, your life etc. And all you have to do is sell a few drugs or theft on the side to raise a little cash then why would you get a job? I mean oh noes what's gonna happen? Go to prison? More like a hotel. come back out, straight on benefits again. Rinse repeat. Link to post Share on other sites
Hedganian Posted February 17, 2012 Report Share Posted February 17, 2012 Being a human road cone would be a good reason to get off benefits... Link to post Share on other sites
WhiteHawksan Posted February 17, 2012 Report Share Posted February 17, 2012 oh imagine a pile-up XD Link to post Share on other sites
Mike_West Posted February 17, 2012 Report Share Posted February 17, 2012 If you're physically and mentally able to work, then you should be required to do so. Jobseekers' Allowance should never be a long-term thing. A big part of the problem in the UK is that people seem to think that they're too good to do a lot of the jobs out there, which is why the place is full of Polish people cleaning things and suchlike. This is partly the fault of the education system trying to push everyone into University when they mostly have no place being there, and should be carpenters or plumbers instead. It's because the Polish immigrants take cues from a recurring character from a local comedy series popular in the 70s. Her catchphrase was "I'm a working woman, I'm not afraid of any job!". Link to post Share on other sites
Hedganian Posted February 17, 2012 Report Share Posted February 17, 2012 oh imagine a pile-up XD "In the news today, car crash on the M6 - three drivers and 127 road cones in hospital...." Link to post Share on other sites
Mike_West Posted February 17, 2012 Report Share Posted February 17, 2012 "In the news today, car crash on the M6 - three drivers and 127 road cones in hospital...." Quote of the friggin' week. Somehow, I just imagined Nick Frost (that fat bloke from Shaun of the Dead and Hot Fuzz) dressed in a dayglo vest and with a road cone on his head. Link to post Share on other sites
my_plague_666 Posted February 17, 2012 Report Share Posted February 17, 2012 Not being paid for the work you're doing is slavery. The only people after something for nothing are the companies on the scheme, the workers want a fair wage for the work done. So far Tesco have had over £1.5 million worth of labour for free. yeah, but they are being paid to do work... via benefits. sure, it's ###### poor money, but if they don't like it they should go and look for a proper job. it's an incentive, a guy i work with, his brother is (was) a proper 100% benefit scrounger, once he found out he was going to have to work for his benefits he went out and got a job. an awful lot of people are perfectly happy to sit on the dole because they consider themselves above certain jobs. one of my GF's friends has passed up opportunities for various jobs because it's not something she'd like to do. she's even quit 2 or 3 jobs and gone back on benefits just because she didnt enjoy the work or didnt like her manager. Link to post Share on other sites
scorch Posted February 17, 2012 Report Share Posted February 17, 2012 Ok so you're working full time, for your benefits. When exactly do you have the time to look for a job? You can do a few online applications, sure. Maybe even send out some CVs in the snail mail. These are mostly ineffective methods. If you can't get out there and get in peoples faces, you often don't even get a chance. I massively agree that something should be done about the ones that are "career dolescum" but this is certainly not the answer. If anything this will make things worse. The country's top supermarket should be encouraged to create real jobs, not be given free workers. But where is the incentive to do so with this scheme? I lost my job just after christmas, and have since found out that my previous employer has just taken on people from this scheme. Unfortunately I can't really do anything about that as they let me go after a probationary period for some ###### trumped up reason that basically equated to my line manager not liking me. Link to post Share on other sites
Tinkerton Posted February 17, 2012 Report Share Posted February 17, 2012 Kwik fit. Saying a wheel was unfit to drive on. Going to another garage to get a new wheel, then having the mechanic (as kwik fit didn't have the wheel in stock), say it was fine. Go to another garage to have a second mot test (as kwik fit insisted they would not pass the car with that wheel on) and they say it was fine/safe (also it didn't even come up in the risk area but the egg in the tire did, which kwik fit did pick up; correctly). Also a bulb that kwik fit said wasn't working, clearly was. Rant of the day:- Not having the courage to ask how to spell a word. Its a very old problem for me (a small problem, but it is still very annoying). Getting back to the important things in life (I agree with some of the comments regarding Workfare, it's not something i can change, so not something i'm losing any sleep over) WHY WOULD YOU EVER take a car to a Kwik-Fit? Why? FOR THE LOVE OF GOD WHYYYYYY!? Kwik-fit are notorious for employing truly horrific business practices, such as those like you've described above. If that wheel/tyre was perfectly fine (which i imagine it was) then in an ideal world, you should've phoned up VOSA, and submitted a formal complaint about the kwik-fit you first went to, BEFORE you had the fault fixed. Kwik-Fit, the people that you visit because you need a new tyre due to a (repairable) puncture, and end up leaving with 3 new tyres, new front brake discs and pads and a rear exhaust box. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.