Do you want to discuss boring politics? (52 Viewers)
- Thread starter mrtrench
- Start date
clint van damme
Well-Known Member
Or let those who aren't so academically minded take up apprentiships a year or 2 earlier.
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
Though even then I’m not a massive fan of this split. I would like my hairdressers and plumbers to have a bit about them!
Just thinking it’s one lesson to teach a kid how to replace a plug or swap out a light switch or plumb a tap put up a shelf or something. At least start them off a bit.
But yeah, at 14 there should be that option to go to a “trade school” even if only a couple of days a week with a day on the job or something. Hell a few of them could go around the school fixing leaks or building shelves for classrooms or whatever if finding businesses is too hard. Could even expand into the community doing odd jobs. So little imagination. It’s like a school I was at that ran childcare courses from Y10, the girls fucking hated it cos it was all classroom based learning. Just completely unable to think outside that box.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
That was, tbf, in my Physics lessons pre GCSE
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
Good to see Labour really really trying their best to tell me not to vote for them. In a period where public services are collapsing due to austerity they're promising not to spend more money.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Is the taking back control slogan not working for you?
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
I'm not bothered about slogans, I care about the substance. It does seem a bit of a silly slogan as he once again does a wanker sign to the silly centrist and FBPE types who coveted him.
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
As I've posted here previously I live in a very tight marginal, just under 600 vote majority for Tories in 2019“Why do Labour keep doing things that have lead to a massive polling lead when trying to get elected and not specifically to me, a young lefty in a safe Labour seat?“
“
How can something said today be responsible for the results of a poll taken last week?
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Out of interest, what was its majority in 2017?
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
You’re not a swing voter. You aren’t going to vote Tory ever.
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
Labour majority of just under 2.5k in 2017
Tory majority of just under 5k in 2015 and 2010
Labour majority of 9k in 1997, the seat was retained in the next couple of elections but the majority was down to <800 by 2005.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Is it things Labour have done that has caused them to lead in the polls or is it more the absolute fucking mess the Conservatives have made of pretty much everything?“Why do Labour keep doing things that have lead to a massive polling lead when trying to get elected and not specifically to me, a young lefty in a safe Labour seat?“
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
Little column A little column B, but as we saw in 2017 and 2019 it’s possible for a government to be fucking useless and still ahead in the polls.
Both, mainly Tory shitshow but don’t discount the benefits of Starmer being seen as just a sensible, competent and less threatening alternative than someone like Corbyn. Whether some like it or not, he has restored some credibility for Labour amongst the electorate. He just doesn’t really inspire although I don’t think that’s the publics main concern at the moment - this could change in the coming months as there’s not a huge difference between him and Sunak on a personality level.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
'Safe' is probably an asset after Johnson and Truss!
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
Its all about baseline expectations as well. People already think Labour will be radical and spend on public services and be green or whatever. Their messaging is from that starting point. Same as the Tories are cruel but good with money (until recently) so their messaging has to come from that starting point.
Was reading a good discussion between politicos on Laboura Brexit strategy the other day. One was bemoaning the lack of clear support for joining the EEA, and another (also pro EU, but a polling rather than policy expert) was pointing out that Labours trust on Brexit is very fragile and would lead to all the old framing questions but no one really believes they’ve gone anti EU and so they’d pay little penalty for changing tack post election.
People want honesty in campaigning but it’s incredibly naive and just not how human psychology works. The same message from different people is taken in entirely different ways.
Labours policy platform is actually pretty radical if you dig into the details. But they can’t present it as that as it plays into voter preconceptions. So it’s presented as austere and common sense instead, despite still being a Labour platform. And we know this works because even politicly engaged lefties believe the vibes rather than actually looking at the policy detail.
We’ve seen it here with the same words spoken by Starmer and Corbyn are taken two different ways.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Groundhog day.
www.theguardian.com
A Keir Starmer government might be more radical than you think | Michael Jacobs
The party’s policies on the economy, devolution, workers’ rights and the environment pack a punch, writes professor of political economy Michael Jacobs
Grendel
Well-Known Member
its possible to have engineering / practical colleges and start them at 14 as well as getting them to do basic gcse education so they get some education - also as practical work is often self employed so some basic business knowledge m
The reality is no one at that age wants to do it. A skilled welder employed could command £50 grand a year easily. Plumber £80 self employed grand and an electrician the same.
People now see not attending some form of university as a failure so you end up with the only people generally going into these apprenticeships as people who can’t find anything else to do then end up seeing apprentices as low paid and take another job in a shop or McDonald’s as it’s easier
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
Not sure where you’ve got this from. Certainly not my experience when teaching. I was told that insurance and H&S meant a lot of firms were reluctant to take on U18s though.
A quick glance at industry body research also suggests lack of involvement from companies is the issue.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
i meant it’s possible if you want to change the legislation to develop engineering and practical colleges are that age
many firms do take 16 year olds on as apprentices in manufacturing the issue is the drop out rate is horrendous as many aren’t interested and are only doing it as they don’t want to stay in education
there’s no insurance issues - you do have to have specific H and S requirements but the HSE assessments aren’t that different
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
That's changing a little, tbf.
Easier said than done, but the snobbery both ways needs to end. Accept a degree course that isn't immediately 'practical' can still be useful, accept that training as a plumber isn't the failure's option.
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
Yeah it would need a legislation change. I think drop out rates are pretty high across the board for apprenticeships, 35% on average. Which suggests a bigger problem with the structure.
Tell a lie, it’s up to 47%: Shock as half of apprentices drop out
Grendel
Well-Known Member
This is kind of the issue. Training to be skilled in engineering is a skill. The guy with a PHD in biological science I wouldn’t trust to wire a business to current standards or fix my toilet. It’s just a different skill but it’s a skill and short supply
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Admittedly the scheme doesn’t help. It’s open to abuse from employers - also from colleges which aren’t that bothered other than filling spaces and being paid a lot of money for the course places.
They just want to fill spaces, will lower educational requirements to get government money
Needs a complete overhaul
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Yeah, also doesn't help when some have no obvious career progression within the company they're at, either. Do the apprenticeship, leave- where's the incentive in that case, other than a nebulous qualification? And effectively you know the employer's using you for cheap labour too, they're not invested in you, so why should you be with them?
Grendel
Well-Known Member
True to an extent but as I say the colleges are only interested in the £9 grand a year per student as well offer little or no support to the employer and are also only actually interested in signing companies in and enrolling students
A lot of apprentices leave companies well before completion as they only do it as they have to be at a college education until 18 - a lot of businesses do invest properly and it’s a let down
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
I did the Marconi apprenticeship after leaving school at 16. Basically college (internal) with some work in the holidays first two years and six months work/college (Cov College) split the next two. Was great, got my quals, worked all over the business, could see a clear pathway to a career.
We got an apprentice in my last job. Boss literally wanted someone to do shit work for less than NMW, “training” was the odd day every few months with some shitty company who were clearly in it for the cash. I basically told her to get some experience then fuck off and find a proper job when I left. And she could only afford it because her husband earned enough to look after her.
I’m sure there’s good schemes out there, and in my day they were like hens teeth. I remember feeling honoured to have got a place at Marconi and valuing it highly. But some of the shite out there I wonder if it hasn’t devalued the whole thing in some peoples eyes. And I agree the whole “stay in education but not school” thing backfired massively. Same as the student support for sixth form, kids just wanting their mark to get their cash.
If the leaving age is 18 make it compulsory and improve links with technical training and schools or have trade schools and have fewer higher quality apprenticeships at 18 with a proper career path. Hell, give them the same financial support Uni students get.
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
We all know the reason why.
Lots of wealthy and influential people heavily invested in fossil fuels and they don't want to lose out, so they exert pressure on the politicians. In some cases they're the same people.
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
It all goes back years to target setting for apprenticeship volumes (Labour and the coalition did this), when I worked for the SFA, the measure of performance for colleges and training providers was how many learners they recruited. It leads to all sorts of dysfunctional behaviour and ultimately lots of wasted time and money.
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
They don’t call them walking cheques in FE for nothing.
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
Agreed. People all have different areas of skills and interests, yet we seem determined to tell kids that these few things are worthwhile but everything else is just a waste of time and they're not trying at the 'hard' subjects. I did well at school, but if the 'core' subjects had been stuff like PE, D&T or art I'd have left with barely a qualification.
We need to value things more widely rather than denigrating them. Stuff like emptying bins might not be glamorous or highly skilled, but it's goddamn important.
Also the obsession with getting young people to university etc (started under a Labour govt) has had a massive detrimental knock on effect both in devaluing the qualification and creating a situation where very few are willing to do the more menial jobs on offer having invested so much time and effort into their education to avoid that. It's all very well wanting everyone to have qualified, highly skilled jobs and high pay, but all those other jobs will still need doing.