Re: Why not just pay them to breathe?
 

I did an NVQ about 8 years ago. I got a bonus of a few hundred pounds for completing that.

Re: Why not just pay them to breathe?
 

If it gets these kids off the dole and into paid employment where they are paying tax then it's sound investment imho. £170 is about 4 weeks unemployment benefit.

Re: Why not just pay them to breathe?
 

It may be they are trying to break the cycle not working produces. However I would say any part time work has to be beneficial in terms of experience, and always helps when looking for full time work.

Re: Why not just pay them to breathe?
 

Here's me, muggins, worked hard in school, went to university, worked hard there, left university, got a job, and I work hard at that, and I have to pay for my own MP3 player.

These lazy (only word for it, if they need an incentive to improve themselves to get a job.) idiots do none of the hard work, and get freebies from the government.

It wouldn't be so bad if it was merely a free course for anyone who was having trouble finding a job. To bribe people to find jobs is just out of order.

Re: Why not just pay them to breathe?
 

I think they should only get the IPOD if the end result is they end up in paid employment and hold down the job - after say 12months then they get the reward. I'm all for rewards and incentives as long as they are a reasonable use of tax payers money!

Did I miss read something or are they also being paid £50 for 1 day a week attendance? plus £100 bonus at the end of it! why why why!!!

Re: Why not just pay them to breathe?
 

The thing is that they already do get a reward.

They go to school/college/uni.

They get an education.

They get off their ar*es and get a job.

They work for a month.

At the end of the month they get a "reward" for their month's work (I like to call it a pay cheque).

Re: Why not just pay them to breathe?
 

Mind you when I back to uni, we were given bursaries to help us, but to give kids i-pods to go and find work is such a waste of our hard earned dosh.

Re: Why not just pay them to breathe?
 

I may well be wasting my breath here but since the story has created excitement, I must point out, being in the FE college business myself, that Bournemouth & Poole College like every other FE college is an independent entity, an independent corporation, and not governed or controlled directly as some assume of government or local councils.

There are two ways of looking at this initiative as firstly, a brave attempt to attract more youth to college to study worthwhile subjects, which hopefully will contribute to improving their lives, get them off the streets and show them that an FE college is not like the boring schools they may have known in the past.

The second view is shock horror, I'm tempted to suggest given the kind of idiot who finds himself a college principal against all logic what would you expect!

But in the end surely it is an idea, if it has a chance of persuading otherwise idle youth they have a role to play in society then fine I'm all in favour of it. I'm now scrutinsing the TES job pages to see if the principle of Bournemouth & Poole College is offering newly appointed lecturers BMWs or Jaguars, if so I'm very interested!



:D

Re: Why not just pay them to breathe?
 

Good point.

Also, of course, whilst they're *doing* the course they will not qualify for Job Seekers Allowance etc and thus will not be a drain on the taxpayer.

Re: Why not just pay them to breathe?
 

Presumably if the course was actually any good they wouldn't need to resort to bribery.

Re: Why not just pay them to breathe?
 

Only if they are in full time education would they lose the job-seekers allowance. If the course is part-time they can still claim job-seekers as long as they are below a set number of hours and can provide proof that they are applying for jobs too.

Re: Why not just pay them to breathe?
 

I would love an I-pod, and I went to one of these indpenent colleges to do my A-levels, but I thought they thought more about student numbers than anything?

Re: Why not just pay them to breathe?
 

If you're "not available for work" for more than 16 hours a week (and that includes doing "training") then you don't get JSA.

Given that they'll spend a day at work (ie probably 8 hours) it only needs two half days etc elsewhen during the week for them to lose the benefits.

Re: Why not just pay them to breathe?
 

Doesn't the £50 a week they get for the work disqualify them from JSA as well?

Re: Why not just pay them to breathe?
 

But as I pointed out before, this is aimed at those students whose family income is very low and are the ones who are most likely to give up on college because just finding all the funds to get to and from college,buy stationary and some equipment can be hard for their family.I've forgotten the lower cut off point to pick up £30 per week though. :)