Originally Posted by Gary L (Post 35384278)

Eh?
Minimum wage is:
£6.08 - the main rate for workers aged 21 and over
= £152
£4.98 - the 18-20 rate
= £124

why would you sooner work 25hrs a week for £50 - £67 instead of the above amounts, just so you don't have to take the same job for the above amounts?

Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35384287)

Think about it Gary ,25hrs work most likely easy menial work ,lets say dishwashing or stacking shelves .In return the claimant gets jsa ,full housing benefit ,free prescriptions council tax rebate and any other benefit you can think of so he/she gets the security of a life on benefits and the DWP is off their back about finding work .Doesn't sound like much of an incentive to take 25hrs paid work and lose most of the benefits

Originally Posted by Gary L (Post 35384290)

Fair point about the housing benefit and such, but what about this and the other companies getting the free work and saving hundreds if not thousands of pounds in saved wages at the expense of the taxpayer?

not forgetting unpaid taxes.

Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35384292)

That's what's wrong about the whole scheme .A company like Tesco should employ someone at the going rate if there is a job to be done .If this is being vaunted as a training scheme then the company should offer some form of qualification and a job offer at the end

Originally Posted by Gary L (Post 35384295)

It could be the case that these companies actually pay the persons JSA in the background in exchange for the governments approval of the cheap labour.

but then all hell that breaks loose when all hell breaks loose will be all hell broken loose :)

Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35384297)

still cheap labour

Originally Posted by Gary L (Post 35384295)

It could be the case that these companies actually pay the persons JSA in the background in exchange for the governments approval of the cheap labour.

but then all hell that breaks loose when all hell breaks loose will be all hell broken loose :)

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35384319)

And then again, it probably isn't the case, and you are making it up.

Originally Posted by danielf (Post 35384283)

It seems to me that this is turning into a spectacular coalition own goal. Honestly, if employers are pulling out of 'make claimants work for free' you know you're on to a loser. (Unless, you're called Tesco of course).

Originally Posted by Gary L (Post 35385210)

Tesco is to hold crisis talks with employment officials as the row over the supermarket chain’s use of ‘slave labour’ intensifies.

Several high-profile companies have already pulled out of the Government’s under-fire ‘workfare’ scheme and the food retail giant is getting increasingly jittery after one of its stores was forced to close by protesters.

Tesco says it wants the rules changed to make it clear no one would lose their benefits if they do not wish to continue working.

Tesco is also concerned after thousands of angry customers wrote in and posted messages on its Facebook page, accusing the firm of profiting from hundreds of thousands of hours of forced unpaid work.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...rk-scheme.html

Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35384287)

Think about it Gary ,25hrs work most likely easy menial work ,lets say dishwashing or stacking shelves .In return the claimant gets jsa ,full housing benefit ,free prescriptions council tax rebate and any other benefit you can think of so he/she gets the security of a life on benefits and the DWP is off their back about finding work .Doesn't sound like much of an incentive to take 25hrs paid work and lose most of the benefits

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35384375)

Not worried at all, Gary - I just like to base my discussion on evidence and reality, not statements like and
Anyway, back to reality....

If these schemes are taking the place of permanent jobs, they are wrong - people should be paid the going rate for the job.

If however, these are temporary and are voluntary (where voluntary is where you can drop out in the first week, rather than half-way through and you can't be bothered getting out of bed), and where, in the case of Tesco, one quarter of all the people who took part ended up getting a permanent job, surely this is a good thing.

Regarding the job adverts stating the companies are looking to make these permanent, it has been reported that these are mistakes by the Job Centre IT system if this is not true, I would have expected the Unions in Tesco, etc, to be up in arms about it, and I would support them in this.

People have to realise that work experience is one of the biggest factors in getting a job, as employers are looking for proof that you can get up in the morning and turn up regularly, as well as have the capabilities to do the work - this is difficult to prove if you have been unemployed for some time, or never had a job. However, it has to be a two-way undertaking, where the person doing the work experience gains some skills and knowledge, as well as getting used to the idea of getting up and turning up. When we give people two to four weeks work experience (not as part of this scheme, but as part of a graduate employability skills programme), it actually reduces our productivity for the time as we spend more time on supervision and coaching than we gain in work throughput.

Originally Posted by TheDaddy (Post 35385802)

Err this seems to be aimed at the young so they probably aren't getting housing benefits or council tax rebates as they live with their parents and what sort of work experience is dishwashing unless you're planning a career washing dishes of course...