Should there be a clause for students availing of subsidised education?

My name is URL

People are starting to leave the country in ever increasing numbers. Should there be a stipulation put in place for newly placed students which requires them to work for a set amount of time in the country after they graduate, before emigrating?

Is it fair if someone who has no intention of staying in Ireland after graduation is awarded a place in college ahead of somebody who is willing to stay and help the country recover? The person willing to stay may have missed out by just a few LC points.

Would such a clause be legal, fair and beneficial to the country as a whole?

'Smart economies' rely on those graduating to stay put after all. And I'm only talking about new students, not people who graduated in the 80's and have worked here until recently

Iwasfrozen

We wouldn't be allowed to. Article thirteen of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights:

(1) Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state.
(2) Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country

So you can't stop people leaving the country.

mikemac

They will have the education they received for the rest of their lives.
Just because they emigrate now when they graduate doesn't mean they'll never come back.

Even if they return ten years later, that will be decades of working in Ireland and contributing.

During the Celtic Tiger lots of emigrants returned and it'll happen again some day.

Playboy

If there were well paying jobs then people wouldnt leave. I had to leave to get work... best thing I ever did. So much more opportunity in other countries.

Red_Marauder

My name is URL wrote: »

Is it fair if someone who has no intention of staying in Ireland after graduation is awarded a place in college ahead of somebody who is willing to stay and help the country recover? The person willing to stay may have missed out by just a few LC points.

Willing to stay?

Emigration is not a question of will, but one of necessity. Furthermore, the country doesn't need people who are willing to stay and do nothing. What 23 year old future captain of industry or CEO would be content to sit on his hands "waiting" for things to change for him? Not a very successful one. Successful people go where they need to go to make the world work for them, they don't wait.

It's not about who we need to "wait" here, it's about who we can attract to come here.

My name is URL

Red_Marauder wrote: »

Willing to stay?

Emigration is not a question of will, but one of necessity. Furthermore, the country doesn't need people who are willing to stay and do nothing. What 23 year old future captain of industry or CEO would be content to sit on his hands "waiting" for things to change for him? Not a very successful one. Successful people go where they need to go to make the world work for them, they don't wait.

It's not about who we need to "wait" here, it's about who we can attract to come here.

I'm sure that lots of people leave out of pure necessity, but not all do. There's still a healthy number of people who are stuck in the mindset that they're entitled to whatever they can grab. They start college knowing that they're going to leave once they finish, regardless of whether jobs are available or not.

I've nothing against anyone leaving the country for their own reasons.. but when they do so after availing of a subsidized education and other opportunities presented to them by the country, while disenfranchising someone who would stay provided there were jobs, then it's hardly fair.

Iwasfrozen

My name is URL wrote: »

I'm sure that lots of people leave out of pure necessity, but not all do. There's still a healthy number of people who are stuck in the mindset that they're entitled to whatever they can grab. They start college knowing that they're going to leave once they finish, regardless of whether jobs are available or not.

I've nothing against anyone leaving the country for their own reasons.. but when they do so after availing of a subsidized education and other opportunities presented to them by the country, while disenfranchising someone who would stay provided there were jobs, then it's hardly fair.

It's not about what's fair. You can't keep people from leaving the country.

How would you stop graduates going on holiday and not returning? Ban them from going on holiday? And what if they went anyway, would you issue extradition charges to other countries?

Not only is it in breach of ones human rights. It's impractical and unenforceable.

Nijmegen

You can't stop them from leaving. But you can make them pay. For example companies that have employee education grants will make the employee pay back fees or part thereof if they do not complete the course, or if they leave the company within a certain timeframe after completing the education.

But the problem is that emigration of graduates is - and always has been - a practical government policy in times of fallow.

My name is URL

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

It's not about what's fair. You can't keep people from leaving the country.

How would you stop graduates going on holiday and not returning? Ban them from going on holiday? And what if they went anyway, would you issue extradition charges to other countries?

Not only is it in breach of ones human rights. It's impractical and unenforceable.

You wouldn't need to stop people leaving.. if they sign a contract prior to being granted a place in college, which stipulates that if they are not willing to work here for a few years after graduation (provided there are jobs) that they should forfeit their placement to somebody else.

If you skip the country in breach of any legal contract, it isn't against human rights laws when you're held accountable

Iwasfrozen

My name is URL wrote: »

You wouldn't need to stop people leaving.. if they sign a contract prior to being granted a place in college, which stipulates that if they are not willing to work here for a few years after graduation (provided there are jobs) that they should forfeit their placement to somebody else.

If you skip the country in breach of any legal contract, it isn't against human rights laws when you're held accountable

Ok but how long do you think people should stay here, and how do you determine if there are jobs or not?

Also I think it would be very hard to enforce this. How do you stop people going on holiday and not returning? Do you confiscate the passport of everyone who signed the contract or do you issue extradition charges after the person has left?

Also would this be mandatory or would we have a choice? I think I'd rather pay for my own education then spend any longer then necessary in this country.

Byron85

My name is URL wrote: »

People are starting to leave the country in ever increasing numbers. Should there be a stipulation put in place for newly placed students which requires them to work for a set amount of time in the country after they graduate, before emigrating?

Is it fair if someone who has no intention of staying in Ireland after graduation is awarded a place in college ahead of somebody who is willing to stay and help the country recover? The person willing to stay may have missed out by just a few LC points.

Would such a clause be legal, fair and beneficial to the country as a whole?

'Smart economies' rely on those graduating to stay put after all. And I'm only talking about new students, not people who graduated in the 80's and have worked here until recently

It would encourage people to go to third level education outside of Ireland. Whilst they would have to pay fees for their education, England being an example, the upshot would be that they'd be getting a better education and they wouldn't be forced to stay in a country that's not circling the drain, but is well on its way down the drain.

piby

I'm most likely going to be leaving because in my area there are few opportunities so it's a case of necessity not desire. I think the proportion of graduates who are leaving out of desire is far smaller than those who have to go, to the point that it's almost negligible.

Somebody might leave and get 10 years great experience with company A which they then put into practice with (Irish) company B when they return. It's very difficult to quantify the economic returns I think it's unreasonable and unfeasible to try implement such a scenario.

silverharp

You cant micro manage a situation like this, people are not cattle to be viewed as assets and not free to leave until they have somehow proven that they have paid more in they they have taken out. There is no obligation for someone on welfare to ever do anything positive "for the country" , why a different standard here?

SeanW

Ok, OP this is a flawed idea for a few reasons.

1. These people don't want to leave, generally speaking most who leave college intending to emigrate only do so because they don't expect to find work in their own land.
2. As mentioned above, people aren't cattle, if young people must eventually leave, why not give them the best shot at success wherever they might have to go?
3. Graduate employment is much tighter than regular employment in more senior positions as in many fields graduates have to be "taken on" more so than actually given productive work straight off the bat. So if someone graduates and leaves, any hypothetical job here they passed up on will go to a graduate wishing to stay, and if the leaver comes back they'll have a better chance of a career to come back to, alongside the one who stayed.