Do you want to discuss boring politics? (18 Viewers)

Forums New posts
chiefdave

chiefdave

Well-Known Member
Grendel said:
The minimum wage is £4.20 an hour
Click to expand...
Screenshot 2021-06-01 at 17.00.25.png

Think the youngest apprentice we've had was 18, the two who started last week (to replace two full time salaried employees who have left) are both in their 30s so paying £4.30 an hour, before any subsidy, is a lot cheaper than employing someone on at least £8.91 an hour although if you told a recruiter the salary for those jobs was £18K you'd be told you have zero chance of recruiting anyone.
Grendel said:
Also how on earth can you ensure there is a job in 2 years?
Click to expand...
You can't that's the point. People are recruited into the scheme on the promise of a job at the end that doesn't exist.
 
Grendel

Grendel

Well-Known Member
chiefdave said:
View attachment 20333

Think the youngest apprentice we've had was 18, the two who started last week (to replace two full time salaried employees who have left) are both in their 30s so paying £4.30 an hour, before any subsidy, is a lot cheaper than employing someone on at least £8.91 an hour although if you told a recruiter the salary for those jobs was £18K you'd be told you have zero chance of recruiting anyone.

You can't that's the point. People are recruited into the scheme on the promise of a job at the end that doesn't exist.
Click to expand...

If the apprentice lasts into the second year you then have to pay the minimum wage do you not relating to that persons age?

You don’t have to make any commitment about a job in the future - many drop out of their own volition
 
chiefdave

chiefdave

Well-Known Member
Grendel said:
If the apprentice lasts into the second year you then have to pay the minimum wage do you not relating to that persons age?
Click to expand...
Not sure what you're trying to argue here to be honest. My original point was full time salaried staff being replaced by apprentices who aren't up to the job to save the company money. A one year apprentice at under £9K a year is far less than employing someone in a salaried position of £25K plus. Even if you employed someone on minimum wage, which as I said you wouldn't be able to recruit at that rate, it would still be over £17K so any way you look at it the apprenticeship is the cheap option.
Grendel said:
You don’t have to make any commitment about a job in the future - many drop out of their own volition
Click to expand...
That's exactly the point. These types of apprenticeships are pushed as having a job at the end of them, that job doesn't exist and as you say there is nothing to say the employer has to make any commitment to employ even a single person that passes through the scheme.

The result is half the client facing workforce are apprentices, the company saves a decent chunk of change and those of us who do know what we're doing get more and more work piled on resulting in ever increasing hours in roles that don't get TOIL or overtime. Less trickle down, more flow up.
 
Grendel

Grendel

Well-Known Member
chiefdave said:
Not sure what you're trying to argue here to be honest. My original point was full time salaried staff being replaced by apprentices who aren't up to the job to save the company money. A one year apprentice at under £9K a year is far less than employing someone in a salaried position of £25K plus. Even if you employed someone on minimum wage, which as I said you wouldn't be able to recruit at that rate, it would still be over £17K so any way you look at it the apprenticeship is the cheap option.

That's exactly the point. These types of apprenticeships are pushed as having a job at the end of them, that job doesn't exist and as you say there is nothing to say the employer has to make any commitment to employ even a single person that passes through the scheme.

The result is half the client facing workforce are apprentices, the company saves a decent chunk of change and those of us who do know what we're doing get more and more work piled on resulting in ever increasing hours in roles that don't get TOIL or overtime. Less trickle down, more flow up.
Click to expand...

Well it wasn’t your original point. You said they are paid under £5 an hour well below minimum wage.

Not true if they are 16 - 18 and not true by year 2 of the apprenticeship

You do have some due diligence with the supplying college and they’d raise flags if as you suggest a company is rotating its main workforce every other year by first ditching the prior intake and shipping in new. Given they have to attend college days if the company is downgrading jobs to a minimum wage why would they bother and instead just take minimum wage contractors or employees on a sub 2 year deal And have them there 5 days a week?

What level 3 course are they actually studying and where?
 
skybluetony176

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
D

Deleted member 4439

Guest
Things did get better though. The best government we've had in my sixty years. Admittedly the bar's been low, on both Tory and Labour sides. But for me, it was the best government.
 
Evo1883

Evo1883

Well-Known Member
PVA said:
...though Priti Patel certainly doesn't

www.bbc.co.uk

Napier Barracks: Housing migrants at barracks unlawful, court rules

Six asylum seekers said Napier Barracks was "unsafe" and dormitory use caused a Covid-19 outbreak.
www.bbc.co.uk
Click to expand...

I've stayed in barracks like these a few times whilst training in the forces
. worst thing about them is the separate showers away from the dorms .
I would never call living in them as a temporary solution as inhumane though , the judge however doesn't agree with me on that .
I don't have any idea if the Barracks has everything in working order either and I have no idea wether they are following the rules of maximum beds per dorm .


It is a difficult situation for any sitting government though, where do they go ?

We have them occupying the Coventry Hill as an example, which by the way needs a massive lick of paint .
We have housing waiting lists of years and years .

It is a difficult situation in all fairness
 
W

wingy

Well-Known Member
Evo1883 said:
I've stayed in barracks like these a few times whilst training in the forces
. worst thing about them is the separate showers away from the dorms .
I would never call living in them as a temporary solution as inhumane though , the judge however doesn't agree with me on that .
I don't have any idea if the Barracks has everything in working order either and I have no idea wether they are following the rules of maximum beds per dorm .


It is a difficult situation for any sitting government though, where do they go ?

We have them occupying the Coventry Hill as an example, which by the way needs a massive lick of paint .
We have housing waiting lists of years and years .

It is a difficult situation in all fairness
Click to expand...
I'll put a price in for that after the fumigation has been done and don't mean that detrimentally to the inhabitants , it's just required more and more these days with the transient nature of tenants moving in out and on,next.
 
Philosoraptor

Philosoraptor

Well-Known Member
dubed said:
Things did get better though. The best government we've had in my sixty years. Admittedly the bar's been low, on both Tory and Labour sides. But for me, it was the best government.
Click to expand...

I thought showing the song with the video snippets of the Iraq war instead was in a bit of bad taste, even for this place.

I will say we need a desperate change in how this country is run. The setup with the current parties just isn't working.
 
fernandopartridge

fernandopartridge

Well-Known Member
Grendel said:
If the apprentice lasts into the second year you then have to pay the minimum wage do you not relating to that persons age?

You don’t have to make any commitment about a job in the future - many drop out of their own volition
Click to expand...
It's in no sense an apprenticeship then, is it? It's a temp trainee.

The govt and previous ones have tied themselves in knots making commitments to arbitrary numbers of apprentices, employers don't really want them.

Back when I worked for the LSC / SFA there were spiv training providers claiming for non employed apprentices. It's a racket.
 
Grendel

Grendel

Well-Known Member
fernandopartridge said:
It's in no sense an apprenticeship then, is it? It's a temp trainee.

The govt and previous ones have tied themselves in knots making commitments to arbitrary numbers of apprentices, employers don't really want them.

Back when I worked for the LSC / SFA there were spiv training providers claiming for non employed apprentices. It's a racket.
Click to expand...

But if people wanted that why not employ under the kick start scheme? Appreciates have study time assigned and even for level 2 it’s likely to me two days a week so you are employing someone to work 3 days and funding the rest
 
P

PVA

Well-Known Member
giphy.gif



 
D

Deleted member 4439

Guest
fernandopartridge said:
The govt and previous ones have tied themselves in knots making commitments to arbitrary numbers of apprentices, employers don't really want them.

Back when I worked for the LSC / SFA there were spiv training providers claiming for non employed apprentices. It's a racket.
Click to expand...

I think part of the reason for the Employers Levy was to try combat both of those concerns, i.e. encouraging employers to engage whilst curbing the shocking misuse of public funds that occurred during the likes of Train to Gain.

But an even bigger problem is that the customer interest isn't there - going to uni is a far more attractive option.

Going back a few years ago, the mood music coming from Whitehall was that the Govt wanted to see a very significant reduction in those going to university vs. training, not least due to the cost of funding the university sector, yet I don't really see evidence of real change.

The problem possibly rests on having to put more money in now to make apprenticeships more attractive to both employers and apprentices, before transitioning the budget away from university funding. Change has to happen - by far the biggest channel for funding the sector is the effective subsiding of uni places through unpaid loans. That's currently running at over £9bn pa, and by 2025 is expected to be £22m, or four times higher than the cost when the Tories last came into office. The other problem is that having a right to a university seduction is very popular across the classes, and it's almost become a given like the NHS.
 
shmmeee

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
dubed said:
I think part of the reason for the Employers Levy was to try combat both of those concerns, i.e. encouraging employers to engage whilst curbing the shocking misuse of public funds that occurred during the likes of Train to Gain.

But an even bigger problem is that the customer interest isn't there - going to uni is a far more attractive option.

Going back a few years ago, the mood music coming from Whitehall was that the Govt wanted to see a very significant reduction in those going to university vs. training, not least due to the cost of funding the university sector, yet I don't really see evidence of real change.

The problem possibly rests on having to put more money in now to make apprenticeships more attractive to both employers and apprentices, before transitioning the budget away from university funding. Change has to happen - by far the biggest channel for funding the sector is the effective subsiding of uni places through unpaid loans. That's currently running at over £9bn pa, and by 2025 is expected to be £22m, or four times higher than the cost when the Tories last came into office. The other problem is that having a right to a university seduction is very popular across the classes, and it's almost become a given like the NHS.
Click to expand...

Why we don’t just steal the German model for vocational and call it a day I’ll never understand. There’s this weird thing in this country about making vocational education “rigorous” which means making it as academic as humanly possible. So you end up with a bunch of shit box ticking and not much actual useful on the job training.

The Marconi apprenticeship I did at 16 is worlds away from the L3 Data apprenticeship I just finished writing a skills map for.
 
D

Deleted member 4439

Guest
I should note that I'm quite sure most won't want a right to education seduction, though they might want a right to a decent spell checker.
 
chiefdave

chiefdave

Well-Known Member
Why does the simple concept of supply and demand not relate to jobs? Makes me annoyed when I see articles on skills shortages like the one today on the BBC site.
Jobs vacancies in the UK are soaring but there are not enough workers to fill them, a report suggests.

The easing of Covid restrictions and reopening of various sectors meant demand for workers rose at its fastest rate in May for more than 23 years, according to a KPMG survey.

But the number of staff available to fill those jobs declined at the quickest rate since 2017.

KPMG called on the government and firms to address skills gaps.

Workers were especially needed in IT and computing, which has been a long-term trend, as well as hospitality, the survey found.
Click to expand...
On the rare occasion that we try to replace someone who has left with someone that knows what they're doing we end up with a vacant position for months and a string of candidates who aren't up to the job. And you have management complaining they can't find anyone who is suitable.

If there's such a shortage of people how come salaries have barely moved since 2010? Even if my salary had just risen in line with inflation since then I'd be £9K a year better off. Been hearing for years there's an IT shortage but the same crap wages are still offered with ever decreasing benefits.
 
shmmeee

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
chiefdave said:
Why does the simple concept of supply and demand not relate to jobs? Makes me annoyed when I see articles on skills shortages like the one today on the BBC site.

On the rare occasion that we try to replace someone who has left with someone that knows what they're doing we end up with a vacant position for months and a string of candidates who aren't up to the job. And you have management complaining they can't find anyone who is suitable.

If there's such a shortage of people how come salaries have barely moved since 2010? Even if my salary had just risen in line with inflation since then I'd be £9K a year better off. Been hearing for years there's an IT shortage but the same crap wages are still offered with ever decreasing benefits.
Click to expand...

I started my first job in IT straight out of uni in 2003 on £3k/yr more than the lad who just joined my department did (I have no say in salary). Somethings seriously wrong there.

And as we’re talking about apprenticeships, I was paid significantly more in 1997 to do mine than we’re paying the apprentice we’re looking to hire as well.
 
P

PVA

Well-Known Member
chiefdave said:
Anyone that has booked anything without checking they are covered for alternations and / or cancellations only has themselves to blame.
Click to expand...

Yes absolutely.

I was supposed to be in Spain for a wedding next week. Booked a hotel with free cancellation and the flights were only £70. I can move the flights to other dates so either I'll just go later in the year (not to the wedding though obviously) or I'll just lose the £70 which is annoying but not the end of the world.

Anyone booking stuff and then moaning that they are losing out is just stupid
 
P

PVA

Well-Known Member
Yeah no one is angry, like BSB says just bemused that this is what the voters notice, not the corruption and other fuck ups.

Kind of sums up Tory voters and their I'm alright Jack' attitude though.

Not arsed about the corruption & gross incompetence because it doesn't directly affect them, but as soon as it costs them a few quid they're outraged.
 
Last edited:
shmmeee

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
PVA said:
Yeah no one is angry, like BSB says just bemused that this is what the voters notice, not the corruption and other fuck ups.

Kind of sums up Tory voters and their I'm alright Jack' attitude though.

Not arsed about the corruption & gross incompetence because it doesn't directly affect them, but as soon as it costs them a few quid they're outraged.
Click to expand...

If they cared mostly about social progress they wouldn’t be voting Tory in the first place.

Everyone has different priorities. I guess I’d just like to see people welcoming those who have had enough of the Tories.
 
Grendel

Grendel

Well-Known Member
It is funny. Blair may be a busted flush and clearly spends far too much time under a sun lounger but on the Marr show he was followed by the insipid Nandy and then Percy from Blackadder

it’s very obvious even now the old snake oil salesman would attract more votes than any of the losers the dead Labour club appoint.
 
Sky Blue Pete

Sky Blue Pete

Well-Known Member
Grendel said:
It is funny. Blair may be a busted flush and clearly spends far too much time under a sun lounger but on the Marr show he was followed by the insipid Nandy and then Percy from Blackadder

it’s very obvious even now the old snake oil salesman would attract more votes than any of the losers the dead Labour club appoint.
Click to expand...
Sounds so easy and sensible doesn’t it to have a vaccine / health passport. Can’t help feeling uneasy about it with echoes of the past when groups were deemed unworthy of normal opportunities. However people have passports for malaria and other diseases so the argument is how far down the line the world goes rather than whether to or not. I really do think those that choose not to have vaccines really do bring any consequences on themselves but still feel deeply concerned at that
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 14 (members: 1, guests: 13)
Top