Do you want to discuss boring politics? (24 Viewers)

Evo1883

Well-Known Member
I took the kids to Allesley Park earlier , sat down to watch the footy , feel fucked .

Shows how little sun we've had when an hours worth has messed me up
 

PVA

Well-Known Member
Parks is a nasty piece of work. Attempts to bully Dom on here and throws insults out all the time. Then he’s the first crying on the mental health threads. Hypocrite


giphy.gif
 

PVA

Well-Known Member
Doesn’t the pot call the kettle black? You should be careful with saying things like that after what you’ve been saying on here recently.

Why's that mate? Insinuating I'm racist again.

What have I said that is racist?
 
D

Deleted member 11652

Guest
So you agree I'm not remotely racist. Got there in the end.

I’m not going to repeat the things you have said as they could be turned as if I have said them. But your comments on women, Europeans and over 50’s are appalling and I’m ashamed that you’re a Coventry fan. I would like you to be banned but I guess freedom of speech means you’re able to express these horrific views. Will have to put you on ignore I’m sorry
 

PVA

Well-Known Member
I’m not going to repeat the things you have said as they could be turned as if I have said them. But your comments on women, Europeans and over 50’s are appalling and I’m ashamed that you’re a Coventry fan. I would like you to be banned but I guess freedom of speech means you’re able to express these horrific views. Will have to put you on ignore I’m sorry

Hahaha

Which comments are these?

I said that although I don't agree with them I don't think burkas should be illegal because it's part of their religion. That makes me a woman hater?

I'm pro EU, 100% a remainer, and pro freedom of movement within the EU and that means I hate Europeans? This is the stupidest one of the lot.

I said over 50s are more prone to falling for right wing nonsense on social media and that means I hate over 50s?


Meanwhile your buddy Grendel continues to condone Islamophobia.

You are unhinged.
 

chiefdave

Well-Known Member
Imagine if Diane Abbot...


The apprenticeships scheme is an absolute scam IMO. Subsidises firms to employ staff on less than minimum wage on the promise of non-existent jobs when the apprenticeship ends. My company now has about 50% of its client facing staff from this scheme, they've replaced full time, salaried positions. There's no training plan for them, they just have to google stuff and try and work it out for themselves. While they are nice enough people they have zero clue how to do the job so their work flows up the chain to my team.

The cost of their education is paid to the FE college by the tax payer, a middleman company is paid by the taxpayer to run the apprenticeship schemes and their wages are also subsidised by the taxpayer. Who is benefitting from this?

At least in the industry I work in, and I suspect others are the same, it has reduced the number of people employed in actual jobs and has helped to suppress wages.
BBC said:
Peter Cheese, chief executive of the CIPD, said: "On all key measures the apprenticeship levy has failed and is even acting to constrain firms' investment in apprenticeships and skills more broadly.

"It appears to have achieved the opposite of its policy objectives. Without reform it will act as a handbrake on employer investment in skills, damaging firms' ability to recover from the pandemic."
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
The apprenticeships scheme is an absolute scam IMO. Subsidises firms to employ staff on less than minimum wage on the promise of non-existent jobs when the apprenticeship ends. My company now has about 50% of its client facing staff from this scheme, they've replaced full time, salaried positions. There's no training plan for them, they just have to google stuff and try and work it out for themselves. While they are nice enough people they have zero clue how to do the job so their work flows up the chain to my team.

The cost of their education is paid to the FE college by the tax payer, a middleman company is paid by the taxpayer to run the apprenticeship schemes and their wages are also subsidised by the taxpayer. Who is benefitting from this?

At least in the industry I work in, and I suspect others are the same, it has reduced the number of people employed in actual jobs and has helped to suppress wages.

Yeah we’re about to hire one instead of a real employee because they’re cheap basically.
 

SBAndy

Well-Known Member
The apprenticeships scheme is an absolute scam IMO. Subsidises firms to employ staff on less than minimum wage on the promise of non-existent jobs when the apprenticeship ends. My company now has about 50% of its client facing staff from this scheme, they've replaced full time, salaried positions. There's no training plan for them, they just have to google stuff and try and work it out for themselves. While they are nice enough people they have zero clue how to do the job so their work flows up the chain to my team.

The cost of their education is paid to the FE college by the tax payer, a middleman company is paid by the taxpayer to run the apprenticeship schemes and their wages are also subsidised by the taxpayer. Who is benefitting from this?

At least in the industry I work in, and I suspect others are the same, it has reduced the number of people employed in actual jobs and has helped to suppress wages.

Interesting you say that, and I’ve heard similar criticisms over the last few years. Just thinking logically, could it be reformed so that companies have to pay up the wages and then get a grant once the employee is signed up to a full-time contract? Could it be that apprenticeship contracts could carry more employment weight than standard contracts to ensure employees are not immediately got rid of? I don’t know enough about employment law but surely there’s ways around this type of thing if there’s the will to.
 

chiefdave

Well-Known Member
Interesting you say that, and I’ve heard similar criticisms over the last few years. Just thinking logically, could it be reformed so that companies have to pay up the wages and then get a grant once the employee is signed up to a full-time contract? Could it be that apprenticeship contracts could carry more employment weight than standard contracts to ensure employees are not immediately got rid of? I don’t know enough about employment law but surely there’s ways around this type of thing if there’s the will to.
Don't see any reason you couldn't do what you suggest. There's already different terms for apprentices so thats not the issue.

Whats minimum wage now, £8 something, apprentices are on £4.15 plus you get a grant (£1,000?) per apprentice. From what I've seen the system is designed to get people off the jobless figures and funnel taxpayer money into companies who manage apprenticeships.

Of course if you had to guarantee a job at the end the number of companies taking on apprentices would crash.
 

SBAndy

Well-Known Member
Don't see any reason you couldn't do what you suggest. There's already different terms for apprentices so thats not the issue.

Whats minimum wage now, £8 something, apprentices are on £4.15 plus you get a grant (£1,000?) per apprentice. From what I've seen the system is designed to get people off the jobless figures and funnel taxpayer money into companies who manage apprenticeships.

Of course if you had to guarantee a job at the end the number of companies taking on apprentices would crash.

Absolutely get that take-up would drop significantly, but is the point of the apprenticeship scheme not that you may get benefit of a skilled employee part-funded by the UKG? If they decide to move on then so be it, but you’ve paid next to fuck all for them in the first instance.

There may be something obvious I’m disregarding and if so, apologies. I know the bare minimum about this stuff.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Don't see any reason you couldn't do what you suggest. There's already different terms for apprentices so thats not the issue.

Whats minimum wage now, £8 something, apprentices are on £4.15 plus you get a grant (£1,000?) per apprentice. From what I've seen the system is designed to get people off the jobless figures and funnel taxpayer money into companies who manage apprenticeships.

Of course if you had to guarantee a job at the end the number of companies taking on apprentices would crash.

The minimum wage is £4.20 an hour

Also how on earth can you ensure there is a job in 2 years?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top