IDS = Tool

[drew]

So IDS comes out with crap about shelf stacking being more important than geology. What planet is he living on? Well if he'd studied geology he'd probably know. Apparently he thinks that if you are looking for something on shelf and it isn't there then a shelf stacker is more important to you than a geologist! Really. If something isn't on a shelf I don't panic and start thinking my life will fall apart if I can't find someone to stack that shelf! I would go without what I wanted and still wouldn't put a geologist below a shelf stacker. Anyone can stack shelves, not everyone can be a geologist. Afterall, what is more important, someone making sure there is a packet of uncle bens on the Tesco shelves or someone monitoring seismic activity in the pacific and getting ready to send out a Tsunami warning. Or maybe someone who studying the effects of Fracking or other similar activities.


This Cait Reilly seems to have put his nose out of joint but surely he is missing the point. Not sure many people are actually against the principle that if you are claiming work benefits and you haven't found work for some time in your chosen field then you need to accept work elsewhere. However, that work should not be unpaid and should be at least equal to the relevant minimum wage for the age group. Furthermore, in this particular case she was not a work shy benefit scrounger. She was working voluntarily at a museum gaining some experience in her chosen field so hardly work shy. She also now works part time in a supermarket so the principle of working there is obviously not beneath her.

Cue a rabid response from the Daily Mail readership!

 

[Bodular]

Most of the daily mail readers are asleep now aren't they

 

[Barrel of Fun]

Some of these feckless winkers are so far up their own rich arses, they have confused themselves.

Poundland profits = £21m

Free labour with no job prospects afterwards as opposed to creating jobs for the local market.

Beggars belief that he feels Poundland is more worthy than the charity she was working for.

- - - Updated - - -

Most of the daily mail readers are asleep now aren't they

[TheMatrix]They are always asleep[/TheMatrix]

 

[8ace]

I've never understood how it's different from just having the shits

 

[Adders1]

So IDS comes out with crap about shelf stacking being more important than geology. What planet is he living on? Well if he'd studied geology he'd probably know. Apparently he thinks that if you are looking for something on shelf and it isn't there then a shelf stacker is more important to you than a geologist! Really. If something isn't on a shelf I don't panic and start thinking my life will fall apart if I can't find someone to stack that shelf! I would go without what I wanted and still wouldn't put a geologist below a shelf stacker. Anyone can stack shelves, not everyone can be a geologist. Afterall, what is more important, someone making sure there is a packet of uncle bens on the Tesco shelves or someone monitoring seismic activity in the pacific and getting ready to send out a Tsunami warning. Or maybe someone who studying the effects of Fracking or other similar activities.


This Cait Reilly seems to have put his nose out of joint but surely he is missing the point. Not sure many people are actually against the principle that if you are claiming work benefits and you haven't found work for some time in your chosen field then you need to accept work elsewhere. However, that work should not be unpaid and should be at least equal to the relevant minimum wage for the age group. Furthermore, in this particular case she was not a work shy benefit scrounger. She was working voluntarily at a museum gaining some experience in her chosen field so hardly work shy. She also now works part time in a supermarket so the principle of working there is obviously not beneath her.

Cue a rabid response from the Daily Mail readership!

It's very easy to have a pop at a large proportion of job seekers if you are able to use your connections, wealth and non-exec directorships to get your own children paid internships at top companies. IDS, like many of his peers, is living in a bubble, and he really is not worth paying any attention to - he failed as a candidate, and he fails as a human being. I wonder if he dare ask the people of Christchurch or Fukushima who they would consider more valuable.

 

[martyn20]

IDS is on a crusade, like Lord Longford tried to do over pornography many years ago. He sees this as type of 'my life's work' project, 'what I was put on this earth to do' and that has blinded him to the real damage he is doing and that damage is massive.
The longer the Tory party allow him to continue the longer they will alienate large groups of their supporters. It's impossible the be a conservative supporter and disabled or poor and it should not be that way.

 

[Albion Rob]

I can't fathom why people are expected to workforfree (no cost to the'employer' anyway) at private sector firms. Surely if there's a job to be done then employ someone? If 'my taxes' aregoing to be spent sending someone on benefits to work then I'd rather it was something that benefitted the community like reading with kids in schools or cutting the grass in local parks. Surely thereareplenty of things that could be done in all our communities?

 

[clippedgull]

I can't fathom why people are expected to workforfree (no cost to the'employer' anyway) at private sector firms. Surely if there's a job to be done then employ someone? If 'my taxes' aregoing to be spent sending someone on benefits to work then I'd rather it was something that benefitted the community like reading with kids in schools or cutting the grass in local parks. Surely thereareplenty of things that could be done in all our communities?

Agree. But again, if there are things to be done in the communities and jobseekers are sent to do them, then it should be at minimum wage. A job is a job is a job, so should be paid accordingly.

 

[Albion Rob]

Agree. But again, if there are things to be done in the communities and jobseekers are sent to do them, then it should be at minimum wage. A job is a job is a job, so should be paid accordingly.

Indeed. I don't know how much job seekers allowance is but presumably it equates to somewhere between two and four days per month?

 

[Silk]

I think it's seismologists that monitor earthquake activity, but generally agree with all this. If people are given work instead for benefits, it should be paid at the minimum wage. But of course, that would cost the taxpayer more, so it wouldn't be long before Daily Mail types started saying they should sit at home and do nothing instead of working and costing the taxpayer so much.

The real problem is our economy is failing, and doesn't provide enough jobs for people. But no-one wants to accept the obvious. It's far easier to label people as feckless scroungers to divert attention from failed policies, failed politicians, failed system, criminal bankers, etc.

 

[Deleted member 22389]

I think it's seismologists that monitor earthquake activity, but generally agree with all this. If people are given work instead for benefits, it should be paid at the minimum wage. But of course, that would cost the taxpayer more, so it wouldn't be long before Daily Mail types started saying they should sit at home and do nothing instead of working and costing the taxpayer so much.

The real problem is our economy is failing, and doesn't provide enough jobs for people. But no-one wants to accept the obvious. It's far easier to label people as feckless scroungers to divert attention from failed policies, failed politicians, failed system, criminal bankers, etc.

I would also like to add that there are not enough quality jobs. What I would especially for our young people is get them in jobs they want to do, so at least they are learning something. If the young person shows enthusiasm and turns out to be valuable to that company then they can top up their money, send them to college. Who knows it might lead to something more permanent for them, and if it doesn't work out then at least some work experience has been gained.

As regards the amount of jobs, we are certainly not helping our own situation in this country if we get hundreds of thousands of people heading from Bulgaria and Romania to get full access to our jobs market in Jan 2014. We need to be realistic for many reasons. At the moment it just feels like we are digging a deeper hole.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

2 more years and they'll be history. There is no way these idiots will get re-elected, no way at all.

- - - Updated - - -

2 more years and they'll be history. There is no way these idiots will get re-elected, no way at all.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

Indeed. I don't know how much job seekers allowance is but presumably it equates to somewhere between two and four days per month?

About £75 a week - certainly not very much. So I guess someone who is on JSA should do around 12 hours a week.

 

[JCL666]

Just another example of a politician, missing the point entirely.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

2 more years and they'll be history. There is no way these idiots will get re-elected, no way at all.

Actually, without the political prejudice, I'd predict a hung parliament again which leaves us in a very dodgy position. There's plenty of people who will still remember the disaster of the Brown government and lots of people who will have turned away from the Tories thanks to this government. Lib Dems are as good as dead and UKIP might play a part.

 

[DavidinSouthampton]

So IDS comes out with crap about shelf stacking being more important than geology. What planet is he living on? Well if he'd studied geology he'd probably know. Apparently he thinks that if you are looking for something on shelf and it isn't there then a shelf stacker is more important to you than a geologist! Really. If something isn't on a shelf I don't panic and start thinking my life will fall apart if I can't find someone to stack that shelf! I would go without what I wanted and still wouldn't put a geologist below a shelf stacker. Anyone can stack shelves, not everyone can be a geologist. Afterall, what is more important, someone making sure there is a packet of uncle bens on the Tesco shelves or someone monitoring seismic activity in the pacific and getting ready to send out a Tsunami warning. Or maybe someone who studying the effects of Fracking or other similar activities.


This Cait Reilly seems to have put his nose out of joint but surely he is missing the point. Not sure many people are actually against the principle that if you are claiming work benefits and you haven't found work for some time in your chosen field then you need to accept work elsewhere. However, that work should not be unpaid and should be at least equal to the relevant minimum wage for the age group. Furthermore, in this particular case she was not a work shy benefit scrounger. She was working voluntarily at a museum gaining some experience in her chosen field so hardly work shy. She also now works part time in a supermarket so the principle of working there is obviously not beneath her.

Cue a rabid response from the Daily Mail readership!

I agree entirely. I saw that part of the inteview yesterday, and was almost shouting at the television because he was being such a patronising dense idiot. I would accept that there are people for whom this sort of scheme might be worthwhile, people who perhaps through no fault of their own do not have a work ethic or have lost confidence and need educating into it, acceptin that there are people who think they are genuinely incapable of doing anything useful. It would do even more for them if they were paid something above the level of JSA.

Conversely, in a case like this I wold have thought it could actually do more harm than good - "I am a graduate and is all i am good for just sacking shelves".... not that there is neessarily anthing wrong with stacking shelves, but if someone is already actively doing something useful off ther own bat elsehere.... .

 

[Deano's Invisible Pants]

I think we would all acknowledge that long term joblessness is a problem. Even as unemployment as a whole has fallen in the last few months, long term joblessness has remained stubbornly high. Right now, about 1 in 3 people claiming unemployment benefit has been without a job for more than a year - in many of these cases it is much longer than this. This is no good for them, no good for society and no good for the tax-payer. There are many things driving this and all too often we have over-simplistic explanations (eg. there are not enough jobs; we've got too many work-shy scroungers etc etc), but the fact of the matter if that it's a problem. There are some cheap shots about IDS and his background here. Personally, I think he is a good man who is genuinely trying to find a solution to a problem that has remained unsolved for too long.

Unfortunately, people with degrees in geology are not guaranteed to get the job of their choice, since there are only so many roles for geologists. There are hundreds of thousands of graduates who are finding that their degree means very little in a saturated market. It may be that in this case working in a supermarket didn't represent the best option for her, but in the vast majority of cases IDS is right. Some work, more or less whatever it is, is better than no work, and people who have not had a job for a long period should be strongly encouraged to accept it when offered to them.

 

[drew]

I think it's seismologists that monitor earthquake activity, but generally agree with all this. If people are given work instead for benefits, it should be paid at the minimum wage. But of course, that would cost the taxpayer more, so it wouldn't be long before Daily Mail types started saying they should sit at home and do nothing instead of working and costing the taxpayer so much.

The real problem is our economy is failing, and doesn't provide enough jobs for people. But no-one wants to accept the obvious. It's far easier to label people as feckless scroungers to divert attention from failed policies, failed politicians, failed system, criminal bankers, etc.

I appreciate that seismology is a different discipline but I very much suspect will find there is a requirement to understand the composition of earth structure, ie geology. Having said that, if she was qualified as a seismologist, IDS would still want her to stack shelves.

 

[Deleted member 22389]

I think we would all acknowledge that long term joblessness is a problem. Even as unemployment as a whole has fallen in the last few months, long term joblessness has remained stubbornly high. Right now, about 1 in 3 people claiming unemployment benefit has been without a job for more than a year - in many of these cases it is much longer than this. This is no good for them, no good for society and no good for the tax-payer. There are many things driving this and all too often we have over-simplistic explanations (eg. there are not enough jobs; we've got too many work-shy scroungers etc etc), but the fact of the matter if that it's a problem. There are some cheap shots about IDS and his background here. Personally, I think he is a good man who is genuinely trying to find a solution to a problem that has remained unsolved for too long.

Unfortunately, people with degrees in geology are not guaranteed to get the job of their choice, since there are only so many roles for geologists. There are hundreds of thousands of graduates who are finding that their degree means very little in a saturated market. It may be that in this case working in a supermarket didn't represent the best option for her, but in the vast majority of cases IDS is right. Some work, more or less whatever it is, is better than no work, and people who have not had a job for a long period should be strongly encouraged to accept it when offered to them.

And cameron is going to make the market even more saturated by allowing unlimited numbers of students from india to come over here, study and have access to our jobs market. I admit they pay a lot of money to study, but it doesn't benefit the thousands of british students looking for work.

 

[Postman Pat]

A few years ago I briefly worked for one of the companies that ran one of these schemes in Brighton. The problem is that they need companies to offer placements for work experience, the only people willing to offer them are supermarkets and retailers. The schemes only pay out if someone is in a work placement hence they end up stacking shelves in Sainsbury's or Poundland.

The likes of L&G, AMEX, NHS or Universities will not support these schemes despite being the largest employers in Brighton. Therefore there is very little choice of placement.

These schemes are trying to support the majority, uneducated school leavers, long-term unemployed or offenders. They do not have the skills to support graduates with Geology, History, Sociology degrees who are looking for jobs within their fields of 'expertise' which are few and far between.