WPP1 / WPP2

AARRRGH

Guell72 wrote: »

Im not arguing anymore. If you cant figure it out. Dont bother trying. Seriously.
I give up. Thats the last you'll hear from me on it.
Other posters, sorry for the off topic posts.

So funny. Keep digging.

Immanuel_CAN

BostonB wrote: »

miec I can appreciate the frustration. It sound like its not set up to cater for those who would travel. Perhaps they need to revise it again. It would be something to lobby the politicians for. If you did a FAS course you'd get a travel allowance, so I don't see why the WPP shouldn't aswell.

As for working for the dole. People have been arguing for that for years. Also you've been working in college for nothing. Unless you have a grant. Which is more? a grant or dole? I don't know tbh. Many will have no grant in college. So thats working for free too.

Before the celtic tiger it wasn't unusual to go to college and still have no job at the end of it. Those days are here again. It an unfortunate new reality. Indeed a lot of immigrants came here for that reason.

travel expenses or not it is a half cocked hair brained scheme set up by a gaggle of gombeens, the only people who will benefit from this are the people who are already in the best position economically and as such are in a position to expolit labour in this way.

at the very least these companys getting free labour should be matching social welfare payments for the first 6 months so the person could at least afford a very basic standard of living.

its just the same old same old, politicians and big business very comfortable bedfellows exploiting the ordinary man and woman.

__________

AARRRGH - the point I was trying to make is, if you are an employer obviously you would be hugely in favour of a scheme like this. Free staff! Woo! Someone working for me, creating profits for my company, and I don't even have to pay them?????? What's the catch!!?? That's what these employers think.

Also if you're looking for an argument, I'll quote a post I made not more than 2 pages ago:

I didn't deem it necessary to explain, thought it was very straight-forward but apparently I was mistaken.

If companies can hire people into a particular job for €0 (e.g. IT admin), and even on the slight chance they are offered a full time position at the end (which is unlikely considering the type of companies who participate in this scheme - those who have no money) the position would be for minimum wage which the staff would be happy with considering it's almost double the rate of their current income, a 100% pay rise, who wouldn't take it in their position.

So now another company needs an IT admin, why would they start someone on €30k/year when they can get staff for free for the first 9 months and then mimimum wage after ?

If enough companies get involved (which they will as companies are always trying to cut costs) , the average salary for that position will drop.

I don't want the profession I'm involved in, after spending 4 years in college and nearly another 4 years in the workplace, being replaced by someone who will work for quite literally nothing. It reminds me of something out of a south park episode plot.

AARRRGH

__________ wrote: »

AARRRGH - the point I was trying to make is, if you are an employer obviously you would be hugely in favour of a scheme like this. Free staff! Woo! Someone working for me, creating profits for my company, and I don't even have to pay them?????? What's the catch!!?? That's what these employers think.

OK - you didn't make your point very well.

I think most people would agree it's better to have opinions from both sides of the fence than have everyone reading from the same page. You learn nothing that way.

WPP1/WPP2 is great for people who have no chance of getting a job, which these days means most graduates.

AARRRGH

Also, as someone with a background in finance and an interest in economics, things like WPP1 are exactly what this country needs to start getting Ireland competitive again.

As a country we're currently way too expensive to do business in, so anything which reduces wages and makes the place more attractive to foreign employers is a good thing.

I understand in a selfish small minded way many people will hate that, but if you can see past yourself and look at the bigger picture you'll see it is a good thing.

sarahzxe

Hey does anybody know wat the story is with signing on if u take one these placements do ustill have 2 sign on every month??? And how exactly do u collect ur dole from post office if ur working fulltime do they put in2 ur bank account?

miec

As a country we're currently way too expensive to do business in,

The reason why Ireland was too expensive to do business in was down to bad economics by the government, the same government that has now introduced the WWP sheme.

The reasons why Ireland was too expensive for businesses was due to spiralling mortgages caused by the governement, spiralling insurance costs caused by the government, spiralling energy costs / transport/etc all caused by the government. The recession that we are in was caused by the world economic crisis and worsened by our government.

The WPP scheme devalues the jobs industry, companies are going to make sure they have an employee who is paid by the government, who at this moment has spirialling debt, now I cannot understand how this can benefit the economy, we need economic policies that ensure businesses can be self sufficient not reliant on social welfare receipients to do the work. If there was no WPP schemes, those companies advertising now would have to pay somoene to do the work, which would reduce the dole queues, bring in tax to the revenue and so forth. As it stands the person doing the work is still being paid their dole, they pay no tax, they are too skint to spend money on clothes, going out etc. It is all counter productive. Additionally, wages have dropped dramatically, most jobs I see now are pre-2000 wage levels so companies are already saving money there on wages.

The only benefit to the WPP scheme is that it allows the government to pretend that not as many people are on the dole queue and companies get free workers and the WWP1 (graduate schemes) as I have shown are largely trying to get people with experience, therefore, many of the inexperienced graduate will not be able to get their foot in the door.

AARRRGH

miec wrote: »

The only benefit to the WPP scheme is that it allows the government to pretend that not as many people are on the dole queue and companies get free workers and the WWP1 (graduate schemes) as I have shown are largely trying to get people with experience, therefore, many of the inexperienced graduate will not be able to get their foot in the door.

That's absolutely not true. The company I work for are going to be hiring a number of graduates with no experience. These graduates will be given jobs which have been created specifically for them, so no one is losing a job or been denied a job because of it.

The other company I know who uses WPP people has a similar policy.

The reality is we are returning to an 80's style Ireland (that's an optimistic prediction), so without schemes like WPP all these graduates would still be sitting on the dole with no experience in 9 months time. This at least gives them some hope, and shock horror, helps employers save some money.

mood

AARRRGH wrote: »

That's absolutely not true. The company I work for are going to be hiring a number of graduates with no experience. These graduates will be given jobs which have been created specifically for them, so no one is losing a job or been denied a job because of it.

The other company I know who uses WPP people has a similar policy.

The reality is we are returning to an 80's style Ireland (that's an optimistic prediction), so without schemes like WPP all these graduates would still be sitting on the dole with no experience in 9 months time. This at least gives them some hope, and shock horror, helps employers save some money.

I'm glad to hear you employer is doing it as intended.

There are so many companies looking for people with 3 yrs experience and more. One company I was in contact with regarding a work placement wanted experience and no training would be provided and no opportunity to learn for co-workers etc.

AARRRGH

mood wrote: »

I'm glad to hear you employer is doing it as intended.

There are so many companies looking for people with 3 yrs experience and more. One company I was in contact with regarding a work placement wanted experience and no training would be provided and no opportunity to learn for co-workers etc.

These employers probably have no money though, so wouldn't be able to hire people without this scheme. So they probably aren't really denying anyone a real job or being evil...

You could argue that govt interference in the jobs market is propping up businesses that should fail if the free market were allowed run its course. This would bring about a quicker correction. Instead the govt is delaying the inevitable. Any business that needs the Govt to pay its workforce isnt viable....


Lets not draw out the recession longer than it has to we want jobs in our lifetimes please! :mad:

BostonB

Deleted User wrote: »

You could argue that govt interference in the jobs market is propping up businesses that should fail if the free market were allowed run its course. This would bring about a quicker correction. Instead the govt is delaying the inevitable. Any business that needs the Govt to pay its workforce isnt viable....


Lets not draw out the recession longer than it has to we want jobs in our lifetimes please! :mad:

Unless its a bank....

AARRRGH

Deleted User wrote: »

You could argue that govt interference in the jobs market is propping up businesses that should fail if the free market were allowed run its course. This would bring about a quicker correction. Instead the govt is delaying the inevitable. Any business that needs the Govt to pay its workforce isnt viable....


Lets not draw out the recession longer than it has to we want jobs in our lifetimes please! :mad:

Yeah I agree with that. Our Government's policy seems to be to drag the recession for as long as they can rather than make any difficult decisions, such as leave the euro.

loctite

AARRRGH wrote: »

These employers probably have no money though, so wouldn't be able to hire people without this scheme. So they probably aren't really denying anyone a real job or being evil...

No, just abusing the scheme........If they can't afford to hire new staff, then they shouldn't.


Your resentment towards those who are unemployed is appalling. Unemployment is at catastrophic levels, and you seem to think that those who are unemployed don't want to work?? Get a grip of yourself.

AARRRGH

loctite wrote: »

No, just abusing the scheme........If they can't afford to hire new staff, then they shouldn't.

I don't think you understand what the scheme is. Read this from FAS. It is about giving the employee experience. There is nothing abusive about a broke employer using it to get free staff. Bottom line, they both benefit.

loctite wrote: »

Your resentment towards those who are unemployed is appalling. Unemployment is at catastrophic levels, and you seem to think that those who are unemployed don't want to work?? Get a grip of yourself.

What an utterly moronic accusation. For you to have come to that conclusion based on my support of the WPP scheme is beyond simple.

I suggest you search for my posts on this forum and you will see I spend a large amount of my free time trying to help people find work and be successful.

loctite

AARRRGH wrote: »

What an utterly moronic accusation. For you to have come to that conclusion based on my support of the WPP scheme is beyond simple.

Enough of your insults......If you wish to insult peoples' intelligence do it elsewhere.

AARRRGH wrote: »

I suggest you search for my posts on this forum and you will see I spend a large amount of my free time trying to help people find work and be successful.

AARRRGH wrote: »

Yes, I know it's easier to sit at home **** all day while on the dole

These types of posts must be so inspiring to those who are really down on their luck??

AARRRGH

loctite wrote: »

Enough of your insults......If you wish to insult peoples' intelligence do it elsewhere.

Excuse me, you made the ridiculous accusation that I resent the unemployed and think the unemployed don't want to work. Frankly, only an idiot could come to that conclusion.

loctite wrote: »

These types of posts must be so inspiring to those who are really down on their luck??

Of course, the ol' take the quote out of context trick. Nice and childish of you.

No one wants to read this crap so stop making dumb accusations.

loctite

AARRRGH wrote: »

No one wants to read this crap

Precisely.....

28064212

sarahzxe wrote: »

Hey does anybody know wat the story is with signing on if u take one these placements do ustill have 2 sign on every month??? And how exactly do u collect ur dole from post office if ur working fulltime do they put in2 ur bank account?

From the Fás FAQs on the WPP:

Do I have to leave my placement to sign on during WPP?
No. DSFA have made provision for those on WPP to sign by post. Please arrange this with your local social welfare office.

Not sure about collecting the dole, my placement is right beside the post office, so no problem for me to collect it in person. I'm sure the welfare office will be able to tell you though

miec

Another example of the WPP scheme being abused

_____________
Painter Maintenance (WWP2)

Description:
Area of activity: Painting of the hotel and general maintenance duties. Elements of Experience: painting experience. Person Specification: previous painting experience.

Libero

I follow the jobs page frequently for my area and I have seen paid positions converted into WPP's. Infact, it was a laundrette. Forgive me for being cynical, but I don't think anyone needs to work for 9 months unpaid in a laundrette to gain experience that will be practically worthless.

This should not have been allowed to happen and is complete abuse. Less than 1 month ago they were willing to pay the staff, but now they are not. Plain and simple this is an abuse of the program.

In that case, the employer is taking a gamble that the old, paid workers won't take a case for unfair dismissal.

28064212 has pointed out that it would be a fairly open-and-shut case, though I think it would be easier to bring home if one's old post was replaced by a paid employee (like-for-like employment shows that the post wasn't extinguished).

Unfortunately, 28064212 hasn't pointed out that there are always factors that prevent badly treated workers from enforcing their rights, even where clearly wronged. For a start, they might not keep an eye on their old place of work, and so would not be aware that their redundancy was to facilitate an unpaid WPP worker. The waiting times and legal jargon can also discourage.

Anyhow, for a bad employer who chooses to gamble, the downside isn't all that severe. Awards for unfair dismissal are capped by statute.

And yes, all of this is relevant to the question of whether the WPP scheme is open to abuse. It's not realistic to claim that prohibiting something in statute effectively deals with the threat of it happening in practice.

maninasia

AARRRGH wrote: »

OK - you didn't make your point very well.

I think most people would agree it's better to have opinions from both sides of the fence than have everyone reading from the same page. You learn nothing that way.

WPP1/WPP2 is great for people who have no chance of getting a job, which these days means most graduates.

At the expense of 1) a paid job for the existing staff 2) the opportunities that would have been paid for by employer but now employed by state at tax expense 3) the opportunity cost of wasted funds in a non-productive effort, these funds could be used to help to expand industry/reduce costs for industry and encourage hiring in a natural more efficient way.

And by the way, I work in business management myself so I know how these things work. I guess only half the companies will be above board with this scheme.

It is a costly, wasteful and un-productive effort in the main, open to abuse as has been categorically pointed out here and even allegedly admitted here by Fas staff.

BostonB

If people here can decide a job is bogus from simply looking at the description, you'd think those jobs could be easily dropped from the scheme by whomever is policing it, and the company blacklisted fom the scheme. would revenue not know when people stop working in a company, so they could check and see if people lost a job to the WPP.

maninasia

The aim of giving new graduates experience is good. But the scheme needs to be thought out and policed to stop abuse.

For instance if a company contributes 60-70% of the cost for a NEW position and the government chips in the rest as long as the company commits for a period of two years (following a 2 mth probation). Something like that is more appropriate, forcing the company to commit funds to the training and longer term employment of the new hire.

Now if I can figure this out in 10 minutes surely somebody in government can too!

mood

maninasia wrote: »

The aim of giving new graduates experience is good. But the scheme needs to be thought out and policed to stop abuse.

For instance if a company contributes 60-70% of the cost for a NEW position and the government chips in the rest as long as the company commits for a period of two years (following a 2 mth probation). Something like that is more appropriate, forcing the company to commit funds to the training and longer term employment of the new hire.

Now if I can figure this out in 10 minutes surely somebody in government can too!

You would think but then it's the Irish Government and FAS! That said there seem to be some that look like they will give a person training etc but these are few and far between.

miec

I will say that there are a good number of WWP1 positions that are genuine or at least advertised in a genuine manner, I just wanted to give a balanced view but I don't think it is a viable option as outlined already.

you'd think those jobs could be easily dropped from the scheme by whomever is policing it, and the company blacklisted fom the scheme. would revenue not know when people stop working in a company, so they could check and see if people lost a job to the WPP.

No one is policing it and the jobs are posted up by FAS, I copied those examples of jobs that are abusing the system from the fas.ie website so I doubt very much that any genuine policing is going on.

For instance if a company contributes 60-70% of the cost for a NEW position and the government chips in the rest as long as the company commits for a period of two years (following a 2 mth probation). Something like that is more appropriate, forcing the company to commit funds to the training and longer term employment of the new hire.

Excellent idea.

Amhran Nua

maninasia wrote: »

For instance if a company contributes 60-70% of the cost for a NEW position and the government chips in the rest as long as the company commits for a period of two years (following a 2 mth probation). Something like that is more appropriate, forcing the company to commit funds to the training and longer term employment of the new hire.

I think they use something similar in Germany?

Raekwon

maninasia wrote: »

For instance if a company contributes 60-70% of the cost for a NEW position and the government chips in the rest as long as the company commits for a period of two years (following a 2 mth probation). Something like that is more appropriate, forcing the company to commit funds to the training and longer term employment of the new hire.

Yeah that's an excellent idea. Unfortunately the words "excellent idea" and "FAS" will never share the same sentence.

Guell72

I found out today that my company was contacted and asked to re-word their ads. By re-word i mean to hide the fact that they require experienced workers in the ads and leave asking for experience until they call people for interview. They were not asked to take them down or to not abuse the system.

mood

Guell72 wrote: »

I found out today that my company was contacted and asked to re-word their ads. By re-word i mean to hide the fact that they require experienced workers in the ads and leave asking for experience until they call people for interview. They were not asked to take them down or to not abuse the system.

We should have a name and shame thread!