Irrespective of the ratio of jobs to jobseekers I've not seen any mention of the employability of the long term unemployed here. It's all well and good saying these people should be working, but please tell me who on earth is going to employ someone who has next to no work history in their lives. We've all seen the quality of our friends on the Jeremy Kyle show. Employable? for the most part I think not.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Unemployment benefit/government handouts.
- Thread starter public school boy
- Start date
Irrespective of the ratio of jobs to jobseekers I've not seen any mention of the employability of the long term unemployed here. It's all well and good saying these people should be working, but please tell me who on earth is going to employ someone who has next to no work history in their lives. We've all seen the quality of our friends on the Jeremy Kyle show. Employable? for the most part I think not.
sir albion
New member
What like most eastern Europeans who come here with no work experience and of whom don't speak English that well,more bloody excuses im afraid as these chaps get work and work hard.
Excuses? I don't think so, more a statement of fact. If I was an employer I would take an Eastern European who has the motivation to move to another country to work over an average Jeremy Kyler with a blank CV time and time again. Incidentally the average Eastern European comes with a better command of the English language as well for that matter!
It also has to allow them to pay ever-rising living costs.
sir albion
New member
Who's fault is that then?if you start at the bottom then that should motivate you as a person to succeed,to many have been handed it on a plate for far to long and now it's pay back time.
Guy Crouchback
New member
- Jun 20, 2012
- 665
For a very short moment I thought you meant Poles, but then I realised that Poland
is not eastern but central Europe...
Central Europe - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
... so you must have meant those pesky Russians.
*just kidding*
jakarta
Well-known member
Exactly, my elder brother would be an excellent Kyle Show contender, he hasn't worked on a regular basis since 1996, hasn't worked at all for the past 3 years, just when he is threatened to lose his JSA he gets a job for a few weeks (in one case it lasted one day!) then quits, usually because 'his boss is a bastard' or 'the stress was making him ill' and back onto the rock and roll he goes, back to his Council Flat on Housing Benefit and back to wheeler dealing with his (also unemployed mates) in his dodgy Local in Wythenshawe.
At 54, he'll never work (outside of the black economy) again and that's not Cameron's fault. This isn't the ravings of a Daily Mail reader, it is the true story about a relative of mine that I am bloody ashamed of.
The only funny thing about the situation is my other brother and his wife are both Labour Councillors, know exactly how he plays the system and they can't parrot the Party Line to me!
fork me
I have changed this
We all know people like that, but I think they're a relatively small part of the unemployment problem.
But how do you deal with them? They're never gonna work, and if you do force them into work all you're doing is stopping someone else getting the job who might actually want it. Also, if you were an employer, would you WANT him? Forcing him into work means some poor sap has to deal with him working for them.
Who's fault is that then?if you start at the bottom then that should motivate you as a person to succeed,to many have been handed it on a plate for far to long and now it's pay back time.
Look my friend, I'm not making excuses here, just playing Devil's advocate. It's not about who's fault it is. It may well be that we're talking about a totally lazy individual and the blame lies totally on their shoulders, but that doesn't change the fact that the average Jeremy Kyler would never be considered by an employer. That is the situation as it stands, how we got there is beyond our control.
Bottom line is the owness is on employers to employ the long term unemployed. Fact is they won't!
somerset
New member
Thats the point though isn't it....?... it isnt the minority in this country anymore. Read publications of left and right, and you will get the picture that there are huge swathes of communities who couldnt give a fook, really couldnt care less.... this is well documented fact. So to have good support for your assertion that its a minority, you need to produce facts, not subjective rhetoric that you may have thought up after seeing one of these posts on this here thread.
However, I am by no means diluting the fact that it is hard to get a job at the moment, but that has nothing to do with willingness to get employment, which is another story alltogether.
Safeway
M0DERAT0R
That's the million dollar question. IMO they SHOULD be forced to work. Why should they get away with having everything handed to them on a plate? And if they refuse then take away their benefits and put their children into care if they can't support them. Sounds extreme but how else are they going to get the message?
And just to be crystal clear, I am referring to those that WILL NOT work, not those that CANNOT work.
fork me
I have changed this
Would YOU want to employ them?
I'm concerned there were no smilies in your post so I'm taking this was a serious suggestion ? Do you know how much it costs to keep children in care ? And why should the children be taken away from their parents through no fault of their own ( assuming they aren't in any risk ) ?
desprateseagull
New member
do any of the 'plenty of available jobs' even pay enough, to cover the rent, c/tax?
and maybe enough left over for some luxuries, like food..?
and maybe enough left over for some luxuries, like food..?
Tax evasion from the upper classes far, far exceeds benefit fraud. Perhaps Cameron could look at those at the top cheating the system before those at the bottom.
Safeway
M0DERAT0R
Not particularly, but why should they get away with it just because they're deemed to be too much trouble to train/employ? That sends completely the wrong message. I don't know what the answer is, but this country hasn't always had the Jeremy Kyle generation so there's no reason why it should have one in the future.
fork me
I have changed this
He would do, but they're his mates you see.
Lord Bracknell
On fire
Wrong. Contracting out the 'Paint Lamposts And Pick Litter' business to a fat cat agency would make someone a very great deal of money. Their self esteem would rocket.
Safeway
M0DERAT0R
It's a fact that some people have children purely to get a council house. Probably a very small number of people, but true nonetheless. Taking their children away is obviously an extreme measure, but even the threat of it might make some of them think twice about popping one out in order to simply set up a life of sponging off the state. You could even argue that the children might actually end up better people for it with a decent role model in their life, but as I'm not a parent (yet) I wouldn't like to open that particular can of worms.
fork me
I have changed this
Maybe it is but what's the solution? You say they should be forced into work, OK, but that means you have to force someone to employ them. Who?
Also, you're completely missing the ppoint that there are more unemployed people than there are jobs available, a LOT more. Personally I believe that finding jobs for people that want them is more important than forcing scroungers into work. If there was enough work, I;d be happy to force them to do it, but not when doing so effectively takes a job away from someone who actually wants it.