Enjoyed the jubilee events? read these then reply.. *shocking*

[Lyndhurst 14]

Those talking it up as a BBC conspiracy of silence will also, I suspect, lose out heavily as I would fully expect them to make hay with the story once they can contact participants rather than re-report what would currently be heresay.

Now been picked up by the BBC

 

[stickboy]

Didint click the link as its the Guardian and is full of shit. That paper just hates anthing british. Scum paper.

 

[Goldstone Rapper]

this!

If the longterm unemployed are prepared to get off their bums and - whilst still receiving benefits - complete an NVQ that clearly involves outdoor work and unsociable hours, how exactly can they complain when their 'live work experience' includes exactly that?!

I don't think anyone is complaining that the work was outdoors and involved unsociable hours.

What is unsatisfying is:
- Lack of pay for doing a security firm's work for them.
- Being told they'd be paid and then that being retracted.
- No adequate area for changing, and lack of transparency before that there would be none.
- No adequate area for sleeping, and lack of transparency before that there would be none.
- Being asked to take on 'work experience' with such poor level of support around them.
- The main motivation for the participants was the fear of having their benefits removed.

 

[Goldstone Rapper]

Didint click the link as its the Guardian and is full of shit. That paper just hates anthing british. Scum paper.

Not as much as some people here seem to hate British people who are between jobs.

 

[Falkor]

Not as much as some people here seem to hate British people who are between jobs.

think to be picked for this scheme's you have to be unemployed for 12months dont you?

 

[Arthur]

But should they be working for free for a private, profit-making company, though?

Yeah why not? The company are getting cheap labour and employee is getting work experience as well it would seem a qualification which again by the sounds of it will do them no harm in finding work at the olympics. Seems like a win win situation to me.

I've got two apprentices working for me at the moment and they've been brilliant and restored my faith in young people. I expect at the end of their 12 months we'll offer them both full time roles and assuming they pass the course have a qualification which is the equivalent of 2.5 A Levels.

 

[Goldstone Rapper]

Yeah why not? The company are getting cheap labour and employee is getting work experience as well it would seem a qualification which again by the sounds of it will do them no harm in finding work at the olympics. Seems like a win win situation to me.

I've got two apprentices working for me at the moment and they've been brilliant and restored my faith in young people. I expect at the end of their 12 months we'll offer them both full time roles and assuming they pass the course have a qualification which is the equivalent of 2.5 A Levels.

But I take it the apprentices at your place get paid...

If so, where you work is very different to the scenario being described regarding Close Protection UK. Apprentices getting an apprentices' pay while they are learning their trade? No problem. From what you say, it sounds like a supportive environment where apprentices have a long-term job prospect if they do well. Again, no problem with that. And I'm sure you've never promised pay and then retracted that promise.

Surely you don't want the exploitative way CPUK have operated to be conflated with the positive action your firm takes?

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Didint click the link as its the Guardian and is full of shit. That paper just hates anthing british. Scum paper.

English is clearly your second language, so which nationality are you?

 

[geodavies]

I think it's well overdue to give these 'long term unemployed' a kick up the arse.
They can't pick & choose when/where they work over a period of a few years! If they worked in Tesco for minimum wage 5 days a week stacking shelves or pushing trolleys they wouldn't have to endure the 'volunteer' work.

Guarantee if the weather was spectacular they would have had a great time. It seems like 75% of the moan was about working out in the wind and rain. Man up.

Spot on.

 

[Arthur]

But I take it the apprentices at your place get paid...

Yes they do and quite well actually. Legally we only have to pay them something daft like £50 a week (can't remember the exact figure but it's not much). However it's still considerably less what we'd pay a full time junior.

If so, where you work is very different to the scenario being described regarding Close Protection UK. Apprentices getting an apprentices' pay while they are learning their trade? No problem. From what you say, it sounds like a supportive environment where apprentices have a long-term job prospect if they do well. Again, no problem with that. And I'm sure you've never promised pay and then retracted that promise.

Surely you don't want the exploitative way CPUK have operated to be conflated with the positive action your firm takes?

If they were promised pay and then it was retracted then yes that is out of order and it doesn't sound to clever making them sleep on the street either. However I've no problem with them profiting by using apprentices or volunteers even if they have forced into doing it by threat of losing their benefits.

 

[Pat McCrotch]

I doubt it somehow

 

[Greg Bobkin]

Workfare works like this. You are asked to join an eight-week work programme for which you will not be paid. The sweetener supposedly is you get skills and training. You can, I believe, opt out in the first few days but after that if you stop the programme you will lose your benefit entirely. (In which case I imagine you're supposed to eat grass). Once you are on a programme you cannot refuse to do anything effectively and that appears to be the situation with these poor sods. They were initially told they were going to be paid then told no but you'll get Olympics jobs later. This is what is known in economics as "jam tomorrow".

In a nutshell, this is cynical, greedy, morally repugnant exploitation of the least well off and it's laughable that anyone would even attempt to defend it. How much do you suppose Britain has just spent on the jubilee? How much money is sloshing around London in the bank accounts of the few? And you're content to treat people like this?

Eh? Don't understand these two elements.

So they potentially get a job at the end of it at the Olympics? Mrs Bobkin had to work unpaid shift as part of her "back to nursing" training, and got on with it. I fail to see what the difference is. I still maintain that if it was a lovely day, no-one would say a word.

Plus, given the amount of shite written about football transfers in newspapers, I'm inclined to take this story with a huge dollop of salt.

 

[Barrel of Fun]

Companies are taking advantage of the long-term unemployed.

I befriended a homeless chef. He was sacked from Jamie Oliver's restaurant (unfairly, it seems) and didn't know his rights. He ended up sleeping rough for 8 months, before myself and another managed to get him some temporary accomodation. He has been looking for work and got taken on by M&S in their cafeteria. Despite being better qualified than all the staff in the canteen, he was told to clean tables for two weeks during his 'work trial' and then told there was no work at the end of it. So they got 80 hours work for the the price of ten bus tickets.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

In the comments section after the article, one of the participants has said that there was plenty of accommodation, and the only reason that they were under the arches, was that they were sheltering waiting for their shuttle buses.

 

[Boroseagull]

So The Gruniad & the BBC look mugs again! Labour camp? No, we just had a great time, Lord Prezza: Jobless Jubilee stewards dismiss 'exploitation' claims | Mail Online

 

[Goldstone Rapper]

So The Gruniad & the BBC look mugs again! Labour camp? No, we just had a great time, Lord Prezza: Jobless Jubilee stewards dismiss 'exploitation' claims | Mail Online

Oh, come on, that's a typical Daily Mail hatchet job. Like when they get women doing columns complaining about feminism, gays opposing Pride, black people extolling the British Empire etc.

 

[itszamora]

It's quite worrying the level of hatred some on here seem to have for the unemployed. We are in the middle of a recession, you know? A lot of people are not unemployed through choice or fecklessness, they're unemployed because there are no jobs.

 

[Goldstone Rapper]

It's quite worrying the level of hatred some on here seem to have for the unemployed. We are in the middle of a recession, you know? A lot of people are not unemployed through choice or fecklessness, they're unemployed because there are no jobs.

This.

A lot of people who are unemployed have paid considerably towards social security through taxation when they have been working. It's f***ing shabby if they're being forced to do free labour to access some of the money they've already earned to give to the state.

 

[spring hall convert]

Right hold on a minute. They slept in tents on concrete under a bridge They changed in public They had no access to water for 24 hours

Whatever your opinion on workfare, this is wrong.

 

[brightonlass2009]

Right hold on a minute. They slept in tents on concrete under a bridge They changed in public They had no access to water for 24 hours

Whatever your opinion on workfare, this is wrong.

However an actual work experience person has said it was the bus companies fault. They were supposed to get to London for 5am, because they had to be on duty for that stage, but the bus company overestimated what time they would get there. They were then dropped off at 3am and the bus driver just buggered off and left them.

Sounds like the bus companies fault, and not workfares.