Quizzes & Puzzles0 min ago
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Psybbo. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
No.
Job Centres are staffed in the main by box tickers. Absolutely no help to people who have educational qualifications and really want to find employment. One size fits all. The lowest denominator.
Woe betide you if you have more qualifications than the person supposedly interviewing you.
I was made to go on a course to learn how to write a CV. Had been teaching that skill for the previous 5 years.
On the plus side I helped at least five people to write their CVs. Person running the course B....y Useless.
Job Centres are staffed in the main by box tickers. Absolutely no help to people who have educational qualifications and really want to find employment. One size fits all. The lowest denominator.
Woe betide you if you have more qualifications than the person supposedly interviewing you.
I was made to go on a course to learn how to write a CV. Had been teaching that skill for the previous 5 years.
On the plus side I helped at least five people to write their CVs. Person running the course B....y Useless.
There's a grain of truth in it. Some people are work-shy. Add to that , that it's sometimes possible to be better off on benefits than working. And the principle in the old saying "Beggars can't be choosers" applies; there's really no room to be picky, because, after all, a job is a job.
This woman was still being paid by us, the taxpayers, working or not. What is so offensive in this scheme, is that the employer is getting menial labour, with no educational or improving value, for nothing. I don't see how doing it prepares the employee for paid work or improves their chances.
This woman was still being paid by us, the taxpayers, working or not. What is so offensive in this scheme, is that the employer is getting menial labour, with no educational or improving value, for nothing. I don't see how doing it prepares the employee for paid work or improves their chances.
Doing any job and doing it well is the way to get noticed and progress up the ladder . Tesco have a policy that everyone starts by stacking shelves and then if they show enough skill / enthusiasm they graduate to the tills and then onto better jobs. My son started at Tesco 12 years ago , he wanted to be a baker but had to stack shelves first. Now he is bakery manager for 3 large stores with a company car.
An unpaid job still teaches you the importance of getting to work on time , getting on with the job and working with other people, you can't learn that from sitting at home on benefits.
An unpaid job still teaches you the importance of getting to work on time , getting on with the job and working with other people, you can't learn that from sitting at home on benefits.
the woman who took her case to court was doing voluntary work already, and was told instead to work in poundland, hardly a job that would give her cachet in the real world. Taking on any job may be fine for those who have sufficient support, from family, but if you are on your jack jones not exactly sure how you can do it.
I cannot bear IDS, but I actually agree with a lot he said yesterday. The problem lies not with the woman working in a shop (she is by no means the only student supplementing their student loan in this way!) but the fact that Poundland is getting labour for nothing, rather than paying someone who would be far better suited to the job. Sounds like the YTS scheme all over again to me. But yes, I think that shelf stackers ARE more important than geologists - they are to me anyway!
If you are in a low paid job you can claim housing/ council tax benefit to be able to pay your rent . It is often not realised that over 85% of housing benefit recipients are actually in work full or part time. Any one who works 16 hours or more a week will also get working tax credit if they are on a low wage.
One problem is that we now produce huge numbers of graduates often with obscure degree subjects who assume that 'the world owes them a living'
There was a question on here a while back from a Mum complaining that her son had to do a job as a shelf stacker despite haveing a degree in 'Theatre and Stage Lighting' she just could not see that there are very few jobs around for Theatre lighting experts. If he had got a degree in engineering , maths or science he would have had a choice of jobs.
One problem is that we now produce huge numbers of graduates often with obscure degree subjects who assume that 'the world owes them a living'
There was a question on here a while back from a Mum complaining that her son had to do a job as a shelf stacker despite haveing a degree in 'Theatre and Stage Lighting' she just could not see that there are very few jobs around for Theatre lighting experts. If he had got a degree in engineering , maths or science he would have had a choice of jobs.
not a gallery but a museum, and she wasn't the only one to win her case,
http://
http://
>>>>So who voted this bunch in, despite the warnings from their past Thatcher government,
People voted "this lot" in because yet again Labour managed to nearly bankrupt the country.
And Thatcher was voted in (3 times) because people remmeber the "winter of discontent" when the country was brough to its knees by the unions and the Labour government.
http://
And the only reason Blair and Brown were able to get into power with a strong stable economy was because of the great way Thatcher ran the country. We were the laughing stock of Europe before she came to power.
But even then Blair and Brown (and Labour) managed to take it from a strong economy to a bankrupt one.
I would rather have a few "rich tories" running the country than the labour party who are happy to let anyone in the country who wants to come here, and pay them huge benefits for sitting on their backside doing nothing.
People voted "this lot" in because yet again Labour managed to nearly bankrupt the country.
And Thatcher was voted in (3 times) because people remmeber the "winter of discontent" when the country was brough to its knees by the unions and the Labour government.
http://
And the only reason Blair and Brown were able to get into power with a strong stable economy was because of the great way Thatcher ran the country. We were the laughing stock of Europe before she came to power.
But even then Blair and Brown (and Labour) managed to take it from a strong economy to a bankrupt one.
I would rather have a few "rich tories" running the country than the labour party who are happy to let anyone in the country who wants to come here, and pay them huge benefits for sitting on their backside doing nothing.
