Travel3 mins 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.
There is a fight for yhe Conservative Party. In all probability, they will not win the next election and will ditch their leader. Withon the Party, they know he is a lame duck, so people such as IDS are setting out their stall for the post Cameron era. In IDS' case, he want to take the party extreme rightwards.
And he is completely wrong about the Geology graduate. She did not object to working in a supermarket (that is her current job). She objected to working for nothing with no benefit to her future career prospects for a company that is very profitable. And IDS seems to overlook that the courts agreed with her.
IDS was a terrible Conservative leader. Why people still give him airtime is a mystery.
And he is completely wrong about the Geology graduate. She did not object to working in a supermarket (that is her current job). She objected to working for nothing with no benefit to her future career prospects for a company that is very profitable. And IDS seems to overlook that the courts agreed with her.
IDS was a terrible Conservative leader. Why people still give him airtime is a mystery.
Hi Gromit- I agree that he distorted the situation slightly, but she was being paid (JSA) for the work and the courts did not agree with her in the way you suggest- I understood the courts agreed that there was a flaw in the rules about witholding benefits and this has been addressed so that an identical claim in future would fail
I thought we were talking about a very small number of people who had been out of work and receiving benefits for quite some time and the idea was to get them some work experience and increase their 'employability' in the eyes of employers. It seemed to work for the Poundland girl- she got a job in another supermarket. Having said that, I think it is political unwise to offer these unpaid schemes in the private sector, however well-meaning the intentions; it's far better to have them working for charities or community schemes
Surely it would be more sensible to provide meaningful job schemes where there is an end product ( Plumbers, electricians, bricklayers,plasterers etc.) I cannot for the life of me see the point of sending people to stack shelves ( this is a skill ?) & to do it for a private company who will not pay a wage. What kind of reasoning is this ?. I would suggest that future politicians go straight from public schools into unpaid employment for a period to teach the little darlings what life is all about before they start spouting in parliament what the rest of us should do.
WR.
WR.
I dont get it.
IDS is saying that stacking supermarket shelves is just as important as geology.
Why does that make him a rich Tory? Doesn't it make him ... "correct"?
If the supermarkets are closing for a day, say at Christmas, there is mass panic, queues, stock piling, etc. just imagine if the shelves were not stocked for a month!
But we could last a month with no geologists, I think.
IDS is saying that stacking supermarket shelves is just as important as geology.
Why does that make him a rich Tory? Doesn't it make him ... "correct"?
If the supermarkets are closing for a day, say at Christmas, there is mass panic, queues, stock piling, etc. just imagine if the shelves were not stocked for a month!
But we could last a month with no geologists, I think.
JJ
I view it this way - if I lost my job, I would want to get back into work as soon as possible, but doing what I do, there's no point me stacking shelves because I'm over-qualified. In that sense I would view myself as 'too good' to stack shelves.
It's a job that would waste the skills that I've got.
However, if I'd left school with no qualifications and no specific skills, then I certainly wouldn't be 'too good' to stack shelves. With the right attitude it could lead to a management position down the line.
I view it this way - if I lost my job, I would want to get back into work as soon as possible, but doing what I do, there's no point me stacking shelves because I'm over-qualified. In that sense I would view myself as 'too good' to stack shelves.
It's a job that would waste the skills that I've got.
However, if I'd left school with no qualifications and no specific skills, then I certainly wouldn't be 'too good' to stack shelves. With the right attitude it could lead to a management position down the line.
/but she was being paid (JSA) for the work/
No she wasn't
There was no change made to her payments between the time she was at Poundland and the time she wasn't.
People are paid Job Seekers Allowance while they seek a job - the clue is in the name!
So what is the purpose of the enforced, inappropriate unpaid labour.
To help the unemployed person?
To help Poundland?
Or to help the government look like they are doing something useful?
We don't know if this experience was a factor in this particular young woman getting a job stacking shelves in a supermarket
But if anyone thinks that helping a Geology Graduate get such a job is a success that is a damning commentary on youth employment, the current economy and perhaps explains why most UK universities have seen an average 17% shortfall in their business plans this year.
Which is rather serious when you look at how much they've invested in infrastructure.
No she wasn't
There was no change made to her payments between the time she was at Poundland and the time she wasn't.
People are paid Job Seekers Allowance while they seek a job - the clue is in the name!
So what is the purpose of the enforced, inappropriate unpaid labour.
To help the unemployed person?
To help Poundland?
Or to help the government look like they are doing something useful?
We don't know if this experience was a factor in this particular young woman getting a job stacking shelves in a supermarket
But if anyone thinks that helping a Geology Graduate get such a job is a success that is a damning commentary on youth employment, the current economy and perhaps explains why most UK universities have seen an average 17% shortfall in their business plans this year.
Which is rather serious when you look at how much they've invested in infrastructure.
she never said or that is what i read, that she was too good to stack shelves, but that she was not getting paid for the amount of time spent at poundland, which was the basis for the case and the ruling, others are in the same predicament, and may have a case for over turning decisions made about pushing them into unsuitable, non paying jobs.
