FAS Work Placement Program

28064212

omukazy wrote: »

I recently took up the wpp programme but i feel **** working alongside people paid over 30 thousand a year... sometimes i dont even wanna wake up in the morning... get up at 6.30 am back at home at 6pm, and i spend 7euros on transport every day , to be honest theresnt any incentive and i might quit soon. I feel exploited.. :mad: i knw i went in there for experience but its not worth it esp for long 9months. Its easy to say one would work for free until you actually do it then u knw what its all about. I feel like a joke at work.

So ****ing quit.

donkey balls wrote: »

It must be a year since they rolled this farce out judging by the original op posting date, Does anyone know of someone who did these schemes and if so did they end up getting a job or did the experience help in any way?:rolleyes:

Yes. I did. ****ing hell, if you're not getting relevant experience, walk away. The company I had my placement with were great and provided excellent experience. Even if I hadn't been kept on after the placement finished, it would have been worth my while doing it.

Where are the people who finished their placement and feel they got shafted? It's a ridiculous question, since anyone is free to leave their placement at any time

RichardAnd

omukazy wrote: »

I recently took up the wpp programme but i feel **** working alongside people paid over 30 thousand a year... sometimes i dont even wanna wake up in the morning... get up at 6.30 am back at home at 6pm, and i spend 7euros on transport every day , to be honest theresnt any incentive and i might quit soon. I feel exploited.. :mad: i knw i went in there for experience but its not worth it esp for long 9months. Its easy to say one would work for free until you actually do it then u knw what its all about. I feel like a joke at work.

This post illustrates the glaring problem with the WPP. Yes the experience will help a person get a job but working 40 hours a week for nothing is not healthy for the person in question and not good for society. It's not even very good for the employer either because an unpaid member of staff will feel under-appreciated, under-motivated and will likely not even respect nor feel grateful to their boss; none of these things will make a good employee.

I'm not a person with strong socialist views, in fact, I'm quite the opposite. However, one aspect of socialism I do agree with is that a person deserves to be paid for a day's work. The WPP needs to be looked at with the aim of getting the employer to contribute something to the WPP employee. Wanting to get paid for a job is not an unrealistic expectation, it's the very reason people work in the first place.

That being said, I have alot of respect for anyone who did take up a WPP placement. Working 9 months for nothing is something I simply wouldn't be able to do.

donkey balls

Did anyone see the RTE news just now they are going to extend these schemes into schools and other public jobs.:eek:

RichardAnd

donkey balls wrote: »

Did anyone see the RTE news just now they are going to extend these schemes into schools and other public jobs.:eek:

I'd heard something to that effect mentioned in the budget. I don't know how they expect a teacher to work for free along side people getting 35-50k a year. Recession or not and putting aside any issues of PS wages, if the government want more staff for the public service then those staff should be paid a fair salary.

Pete_Cavan

donkey balls wrote: »

It must be a year since they rolled this farce out judging by the original op posting date, Does anyone know of someone who did these schemes and if so did they end up getting a job or did the experience help in any way?:rolleyes:

I am working on the WPP and am currently half way through my placement. Finished college last May and there was no chance of me getting a proper paid job in this country so I am glad to have this. Of course it would be nice to get more money but the company I am with give me a few pound every now and then, as any company with an ounce of decency should do for participants. Obviously the programme would be a lot more attractive if the employer had to contribute something but I dont really think it is the biggest issue, I would rather work than sit at home all day for the same money.

IMO the main problems with WPP is there is no guarantee you will get a permanent job out of it. There should be a rule excluding employers from taking on someone new on the WPP unless they have hired the previous participant on a full time basis. This would actually get people into real employment and prevent employers from taking advantage of the programme and taking on people for free which devalues the worth of labour. In the current situation you can just hire a person for free with no job prospects which is akin to slavery. Also I think it is important to ensure that the company has not let a paid employee go in order to use the WPP otherwise employers can sack people and set up a WPP merry-go-round with a new person every nine months.

The WPP should allow workers to progress their career and encourage companies to grow, not exploit workers and allow employers to flout labour laws.

28064212

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

IMO the main problems with WPP is there is no guarantee you will get a permanent job out of it. There should be a rule excluding employers from taking on someone new on the WPP unless they have hired the previous participant on a full time basis. This would actually get people into real employment and prevent employers from taking advantage of the programme and taking on people for free which devalues the worth of labour. In the current situation you can just hire a person for free with no job prospects which is akin to slavery. Also I think it is important to ensure that the company has not let a paid employee go in order to use the WPP otherwise employers can sack people and set up a WPP merry-go-round with a new person every nine months.

The bolded part is already true, see the Application Guidelines here

Stark

Pretty much impossible to enforce that rule though I would think.

28064212

Stark wrote: »

Pretty much impossible to enforce that rule though I would think.

Pretty much impossible to enforce the minimum wage or 'cash in hand' jobs too. Like many laws, it relies on a handful of inspections and reporting from the public

Stark

Most companies have natural staff turnover. How do you prove that someone who was brought on as part of the WPP process replaced someone who would otherwise have been hired as part of the standard replacement process? It's a lot easier to prove that someone has been paid less than the minimum hourly rate or didn't pay tax.

Riskymove

Stark wrote: »

Most companies have natural staff turnover. How do you prove that someone who was brought on as part of the WPP process replaced someone who would otherwise have been hired as part of the standard replacement process?

You could monitor how many normally paid staff are being replaced by placement staff, there should be a limit

I'd heard something to that effect mentioned in the budget. I don't know how they expect a teacher to work for free along side people getting 35-50k a year. Recession or not and putting aside any issues of PS wages, if the government want more staff for the public service then those staff should be paid a fair salary.

AFAIK newly graduated teachers need to work a certain amount of days in a school, paid or unpaid, to become fully qualified...that is the incentive to do it for teachers

28064212

Stark wrote: »

Most companies have natural staff turnover. How do you prove that someone who was brought on as part of the WPP process replaced someone who would otherwise have been hired as part of the standard replacement process? It's a lot easier to prove that someone has been paid less than the minimum hourly rate or didn't pay tax.

Because redundancy is a well-defined process. Did you read the guidelines on the link?

Stark

You mean the part about allowing redundancies as long as no one person is make specifically redundant? It also mentions nothing about natural wastage. Redundancy isn't the only way to leave a company.

28064212

Stark wrote: »

You mean the part about allowing redundancies as long as no one person is make specifically redundant?

There's no direct displacement of an employee allowed, which is what we're discussing

Stark wrote: »

It also mentions nothing about natural wastage. Redundancy isn't the only way to leave a company.

What's "natural wastage"? There are 3 ways for an employee and company to part ways: redundancy, dismissal or the employee leaves. Dismissals and redundancies are subject to very strict guidelines. If the employee leaves, the employer is allowed take on a WPP participant if they so choose.

Stark

28064212 wrote: »

What's "natural wastage"? There are 3 ways for an employee and company to part ways: redundancy, dismissal or the employee leaves. Dismissals and redundancies are subject to very strict guidelines. If the employee leaves, the employer is allowed take on a WPP participant if they so choose.

Which effectively means one less job for someone who could have been hired on a salary and taken off the dole queue.

BeeDI

ThomasCreeby wrote: »

In a time of deep recession I am absolutely baffled how the government can sponsor a program where by companies are paid to take on new staff, who can then work for said companies for periods of up to 12 months while receiving only their dole as compensation for working the guts of a 40 hour week.
Slave labour and the reduction of the minimum wage is already here and its called the FAS Work Placement Program.
I'm 24 years old and I've been unemployed for over a year and frankly I find it disgusting. I'm really sick of logging onto the FAS website and finding that 90% of the jobs they now advertise are WPP schemes.
What I find even more insidious however is that a person can have their Jobseekers Allowance cut if they are not prepared to be forced by the government to work for less than the minimum wage???
This is the type of "innovation" is emblematic of the Irish Government's attitude towards young people trying to find work.
How many of the companies who have signed up for cheap labour are actually that poorly off that they aren't arsed paying a receptionist or an admin?
The whole WPP stinks to high heaven of incompetence and wasted money, not to mention offering zero financial incentive to get people back to work.
Does anyone else think this entire scheme is comically inept at trying to achieve what it set out to or am I alone in thinking its a pile of b*%$cks?

Cheers Boards,

Thomas

Thanks for the heads up. I'm needing to hire a few people for the long term. Must register straight away with FAS, and pick up a spot of free labour. Makes perfect business sense.

28064212

Stark wrote: »

Which effectively means one less job for someone who could have been hired on a salary and taken off the dole queue.

Assuming the company can actually get a WPP participant. Keeping in mind that they can't advertise a vacancy in the same area at the same time. So they have to hope they can find someone suitably qualified to work for free, or else go back to the drawing board and start the hiring process from scratch. And if they do get one, the participant could leave at any time if they get a 'real' job-offer.

Not to mention the fact that there's no way for an employer to actually control it, since it's reliant on people choosing to leave their jobs. And you're making the assumption that an employer will always be hiring someone new to replace anyone who left, which is far from guaranteed in this climate

Stark

28064212 wrote: »

Assuming the company can actually get a WPP participant. Keeping in mind that they can't advertise a vacancy in the same area at the same time. So they have to hope they can find someone suitably qualified to work for free, or else go back to the drawing board and start the hiring process from scratch. And if they do get one, the participant could leave at any time if they get a 'real' job-offer.

I've worked for companies where the policy was to underpay people as much as possible until the employee copped on and either demanded a payrise or left. The loss of the employee and the disruption caused to the business (which was far from insignificant) was considered acceptable risk compared to the money saved by underpaying them for a few months. Imagine when you can get a few months of paying them nothing at all.

Atilathehun

As a registered employer, I just spent 30 minutes on the FAS website and on the WPP in particular. I have three positions to fill.
What strikes me is as follow.

1. Over 80% of CV's with applicants names visible are eastern Europeans.
2. Over 80% of anonomous CV's are eastern European. You see by the education details when you open the CV.

3. I'm curious about why there are so so few Irish CV's on there given the unemployment situation.

4. Just looking around in general at the available skill sets, I have to say, "not a lot" that's relevant. I'd damn well want to be getting a trial run before I'd be able to say a given person on the FAS web site is productively employable!

5. Where are the CV's from the unemployed graduates? Not very many there from what I can see!!

I'm afraid to say, I would pobably get a better selection of applicants if I put a notice up in my local Tesco store.

28064212

Stark wrote: »

I've worked for companies where the policy was to underpay people as much as possible until the employee copped on and either demanded a payrise or left. The loss of the employee and the disruption caused to the business was considered acceptable risk compared to the money saved by underpaying them for a few months. Imagine when you can get a few months of paying them nothing at all.

What do you mean they under-paid them? As in they paid them less than was in their contract? How is that saving them money? All the employee has to do is take them to court.

Regardless, I'm not sure what relevance it has to the WPP. Are you saying some companies break the rules if they can get away with it? I'm sure they do, but that's hardly unique to the WPP

Stark

28064212 wrote: »

What do you mean they under-paid them? As in they paid them less than was in their contract? How is that saving them money? All the employee has to do is take them to court.

Underpaid as in paid less than what it would take to keep an employee based on market rates. You usually get at least a few months out of someone before they realise that they can achieve significantly better salaries elsewhere. Then when they come back giving out, you give them a partial counter offer and take your chances on them taking it or else wish them farewell and go back to the hiring board. Personally I think it is no way to do business (a consequence of the hiring/compensation managers being in a separate department to the managers who have their projects thrown way off track by the loss of qualified employees), but that's how it's done.

28064212 wrote:

Regardless, I'm not sure what relevance it has to the WPP. Are you saying some companies break the rules if they can get away with it? I'm sure they do, but that's hardly unique to the WPP

Responding specifically to your assertion that the risk of having an employee walk out will act as a disincentive to employers taking the piss.

Note that providing free labour to companies regardless of whether or not they need it is a distortion of the market. How are more efficient employers meant to compete against employers with Government subsidised labour? Most Irish companies aren't that hard up that they can't afford to hire someone if they need to. In most cases, if they're not hiring, it's because the demand for services isn't there.

i_love_toast

As a graduate with a very good degree in structural engineering from a top college i would love to have the chance to work in an engineering company for dole money. The last 8 months ive been sitting on my hole with no chance of a job and thank god ive only a month and a half left before I emigrate in January.

For the past 7 months I could of been out there getting experience in my field and giving back to the society that was very good to pay a large part of my college cost for me ( taxes...). However these Work Placement Programme are only offered to tradesmen who got a trade after their leaving cert or went into FAS during the boom years and got to comfortable earning the big buck.

Listen tradesmen, the boom years are over, get over it, Ireland is overloaded with excellently trained and skilled tradesmen and the vast majority will never get to put your skills to work again in Ireland. Either emigrate and put your very recognized and respected FAS degree's to use or stay on the dole for the years to come giving out about how the WPP is slave labor. Its your choice....

28064212

i_love_toast wrote: »

For the past 7 months I could of been out there getting experience in my field and giving back to the society that was very good to pay a large part of my college cost for me ( taxes...). However these Work Placement Schemes are only offered to tradesmen who got a trade after their leaving cert or went into FAS during the boom years and got to comfortable earning the big buck.

Totally different programmes. The WPP is open to anyone

Atilathehun

i_love_toast wrote: »

As a graduate with a very good degree in structural engineering from a top college i would love to have the chance to work in an engineering company for dole money. The last 8 months ive been sitting on my hole with no chance of a job and thank god ive only a month and a half left before I emigrate in January.

For the past 7 months I could of been out there getting experience in my field and giving back to the society that was very good to pay a large part of my college cost for me ( taxes...). However these Work Placement Schemes are only offered to tradesmen who got a trade after their leaving cert or went into FAS during the boom years and got to comfortable earning the big buck.

Listen tradesmen, the boom years are over, get over it, Ireland is overloaded with excellently trained and skilled tradesmen and the vast majority will never get to put your skills to work again. Either emigrate and put your very recognized and respected FAS degree's to use or stay on the dole for the years to come giving out about how the WPS is slave labor. Its your choice....

Are you sure? Plenty of slap it up thumpers, who got seriously dubious FAS certification:( Drive around the country in the evening sun. Watch it shine of gable end walls of boom year houses. The quality of the plastering, is a sight to behold. In most cases, looks like a ploughed field.
As for the plumbing ............ :mad:
Proper trades men are still busy. The cowboys are kicking their spurs. many more cowboys than proper guys though.

i_love_toast

Atilathehun wrote: »

Are you sure? Plenty of slap it up thumpers, who got seriously dubious FAS certification:( Drive around the country in the evening sun. Watch it shine of gable end walls of boom year houses. The quality of the plastering, is a sight to behold. In most cases, looks like a ploughed field.
As for the plumbing ............ :mad:
Proper trades men are still busy. The cowboys are kicking their spurs. many more cowboys than proper guys though.

To be honest I only heard that FAS degree's in trades are well recognized and well received abroad. However this might not be the case?The people who can really tell i suppose are other tradesmen who have seen first hand the "work" by others...

professore

WalterMitty wrote: »

a lot of the work is basic admin stuff. You'd be getting a yearly figure of around 10k from social welfare for doing that while low level clerical workers in public sector doing same /similar work are striking over getting 30+k for them job. They should be gratefull for their jobs. Always happens in reccesions, those with jobs try to keep as much of their pay and conditions as possible even though highly qualified people are sitting on the dole and willing to do the highly paid jobs of those in emplyment, and in particular public sector emplyment.

If you're straight out of school / college with no experience you are worth much less to an employer than someone with experience.

professore

RichardAnd wrote: »

He means you could advertise your skills in web design freelance. In other words, do a few nixers. There are websites where you can bid to do commission work in computing though I do not know any off hand.

Yes there are loads of sites for that :

www.freelanceireland.ie
www.freelancer.com
www.flexitimers.com
www.allfreelance.com

The list goes on ... often the money's not great but better than € 0 per week and you can really get some great experience for your portfolio.

jimmyw

First of all its very easy for someone who is in a "proper" job to say why are them lazy dolers not getting up off their bum and go do this.But if you were actually in this very position you might think different.The thing about this scheme is that you are working the same hours as everyone else, but you are getting far less, plus all the extra expenses you have to pay too.Now if they were to have them work for less hours per week it might be better.The new scheme that's purposed whereby you work 19.5 hours per week plus 20 quid top-up working in the community sounds to me to be a better set-up.Yes you are getting experience, but its open to exploitation by employers.Not all but its still there.

Pete_Cavan

jimmyw wrote: »

First of all its very easy for someone who is in a "proper" job to say why are them lazy dolers not getting up off their bum and go do this.But if you were actually in this very position you might think different.The thing about this scheme is that you are working the same hours as everyone else, but you are getting far less

I look at this the other way. I am getting my job seekers benefit and it is the same amount whether Im on the WPP or not so I may as well go out there and work and get the experience. The way I see it I have nothing to lose but everything to gain from it.

People who take the kind of attitude displayed in the post I quoted are the kind of people who will still be unemployed in ten years time.

jimmyw

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

I look at this the other way. I am getting my job seekers benefit and it is the same amount whether Im on the WPP or not so I may as well go out there and work and get the experience. The way I see it I have nothing to lose but everything to gain from it.

People who take the kind of attitude displayed in the post I quoted are the kind of people who will still be unemployed in ten years time.

I am not saying there are not merits to the scheme, but working the same hours as the other people for less money seems wrong to me.You can still get the experience with less hours.

i_love_toast

jimmyw wrote: »

I am not saying there are not merits to the scheme, but working the same hours as the other people for less money seems wrong to me.You can still get the experience with less hours.

Well if it was 20 hours a week and the employer gave 40e for lunch and travel expenses i suppose peoples opinions might change on it.

but as a poster said a few posts ago, those who turn the nose up at it will be still unemployed in ten years time. If work does pick up and an employer see's that you've been constantly trained and getting work experience there is no doubt in his mind he will be employing you ahead of someone who has been out of work and doing nothing for 3-4 year say...