Youth unemployment: EU Commission proposals for Ireland

Scofflaw

Specific initial suggestions coming from the European Commission about youth unemployment in Ireland:





Might produce an alternative to the intern schemes?

cordially,
Scofflaw

Chucky the tree

A bit depressing we need the EU to tell us what we need to do because our own Government doesn't have many ideas. I hate the internship idea, one of the most bizarre every by the Government really so any other ideas apart from that would be good.

bijapos

I think when you see stuff like this being advertised then its time to get rid of it:

This is the job description:

Area of activity in which placement is offered: Distribution and Customer Service Centre. Participants will gain experience in: Becoming a drivers assistant, delivery and install of large appliances, customer service skills and logistics. Person specification: Good Communication Skills. Attention to Detail. Willing to learn. Applicants must supply suitable character references and be prepared to complete a Garda vetting application form.

Conditions, essentially a full working week and getting €50 a week extra for it.

Days, Hours & Start Date

Days per week: -
Hours per day: -
Hours per week: 39
Start Date: To be Advised
Finish Date: 9 months from start

But the real joke is when you see who you'll be working for:

To apply send CV to martin.lambert@dixonsretail.com

So a 9 month apprenticeship as a co driver in a van, no doubt Dixons could afford to employ someone at the full rate but decided this was cheaper.

I've no idea why neither the previous nor the present government has no introduced a huge public works programme, maybe 24 hours a week for €50 more dole money and get some much needed infrastructure built here, it cant be worse than giving it to Dixons. search the FAS website and theres plenty of other multinationals offering similar jobs.

Nijmegen

Yippee, a high level committee on jobs.

As Michael O'Leary said recently, if you want to create jobs get a load of business people - real business people, from SMEs and CEO ranks, not unions and economists - together at 7am in a corporate park, give them some coffee and a bagel and a load of pens and paper.

Then go and implement what suggestions you get.

Not two day summits in Dublin with plenty of photo ops or high level back and forth committees of civil servants.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Scofflaw

Nijmegen wrote: »

Yippee, a high level committee on jobs.

As Michael O'Leary said recently, if you want to create jobs get a load of business people - real business people, from SMEs and CEO ranks, not unions and economists - together at 7am in a corporate park, give them some coffee and a bagel and a load of pens and paper.

Then go and implement what suggestions you get.

Not two day summits in Dublin with plenty of photo ops or high level back and forth committees of civil servants.

My experience is that the latter and the former are actually indistinguishable, and indeed are often one and the same.

This looks more like a sit down and shake out where Ireland isn't taking proper advantage of EU money and programmes - which is somewhere where teams of civil servants are rather more appropriate - plus, perhaps, planning to have some of those corporate park brainstorming sessions.

cordially,
Scofflaw

waster81

Its lip service they are only talking about this as an aside to the austerity packages

Scofflaw

waster81 wrote: »

Its lip service they are only talking about this as an aside to the austerity packages

I doubt that - what they do may not be useful, but it would be genuine.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

waster81

They have spent billions saving the financial sector

They have spent endless hours discussing how to implement austerity packages

Now if only they had the same will to pump billions into creating the conditions for job creation ( education is key, but they are too busy cutting that ), health of those young people would be nice ( but they are too busy cutting money spent their too )

djpbarry

waster81 wrote: »

...education is key, but they are too busy cutting that...

Spending on education has increased dramatically in Ireland over the last 10 years or so, but standards are still dropping. Throwing money at the problem isn’t the answer - a change in societal attitudes is what’s required.

Tipp Man

djpbarry wrote: »

Spending on education has increased dramatically in Ireland over the last 10 years or so, but standards are still dropping. Throwing money at the problem isn’t the answer - a change in societal attitudes is what’s required.

They have literaly thrown money at teachers in the last 15 years and got absolutely nothing in return. Nothing

The standard of eduction relative to the level of pay of teachers in Ireland is an absolute disgrace

Scofflaw

djpbarry wrote: »

Spending on education has increased dramatically in Ireland over the last 10 years or so, but standards are still dropping. Throwing money at the problem isn’t the answer - a change in societal attitudes is what’s required.

And, I would say, something of a likely outcome of the recession. For most of the last decade you could get a job even if you couldn't use your fingers to count to ten (in some cases that may even have been a plus), so why bother with education?

If good results are seen as critical to getting a job again - as they were 20 years ago - the attitudes to getting good results will change.

cordially,
Scofflaw

djpbarry

Scofflaw wrote: »

For most of the last decade you could get a job even if you couldn't use your fingers to count to ten (in some cases that may even have been a plus), so why bother with education?

If good results are seen as critical to getting a job again - as they were 20 years ago - the attitudes to getting good results will change.

Maybe. However, I do worry about the demands being issued for the government to “create jobs” for those left unemployed following the collapse of the construction bubble – it suggests a lack of acceptance that a lot of people simply don’t have the skills that employers are looking for.

Sleepy

One societal facet of this that I see around me quite regularly (particularly amongst young women and the middle classes), is the notion that one is entitled to their dream career.

We have the scenario where the taxpayer is paying to educate people in law, education, fashion design, media studies, humanities subjects (e.g. art history, women's studies, classics etc.), architecture etc. and then these new graduates going straight onto the dole with no intention of taking the low-skilled positions which are available to them because they have a belief their degree entitles them to a career in the media / as a barrister / teaching / lecturing regardless of the fact there's simply no demand for their skills or that only a tiny minority of people will get to be a columnist for the times, writing their articles in a coffee shop in Ranelagh having gotten out of bed at 9:30 and spent the morning in the gym.

We need to focus our education system towards producing adults who are capable of finding, or (even better) creating, employment.

Perhaps by reducing the number of positions available for students to pursue these lifestyle degrees on the taxpayers' euro whilst increasing availability in the financial, scientific and computing courses could help?

sarumite

djpbarry wrote: »

Maybe. However, I do worry about the demands being issued for the government to “create jobs” for those left unemployed following the collapse of the construction bubble – it suggests a lack of acceptance that a lot of people simply don’t have the skills that employers are looking for.

The government cut 3/4 billion from capital projects. It chose to avoid the politically difficult options of larger cuts to big spending departments as well as consider adjusting tax rates. TThe government could have created jobs that are suitable to those with a construction background with that money.

Tipp Man

Sleepy wrote: »

One societal facet of this that I see around me quite regularly (particularly amongst young women and the middle classes), is the notion that one is entitled to their dream career.

We have the scenario where the taxpayer is paying to educate people in law, education, fashion design, media studies, humanities subjects (e.g. art history, women's studies, classics etc.), architecture etc. and then these new graduates going straight onto the dole with no intention of taking the low-skilled positions which are available to them because they have a belief their degree entitles them to a career in the media / as a barrister / teaching / lecturing regardless of the fact there's simply no demand for their skills or that only a tiny minority of people will get to be a columnist for the times, writing their articles in a coffee shop in Ranelagh having gotten out of bed at 9:30 and spent the morning in the gym.

We need to focus our education system towards producing adults who are capable of finding, or (even better) creating, employment.

Perhaps by reducing the number of positions available for students to pursue these lifestyle degrees on the taxpayers' euro whilst increasing availability in the financial, scientific and computing courses could help?

Great Post and so true

djpbarry

Sleepy wrote: »

One societal facet of this that I see around me quite regularly (particularly amongst young women and the middle classes), is the notion that one is entitled to their dream career.

That is certainly something that is in evidence here in the UK. I remember there being a Newsnight special not too long ago, which featured a bunch of recent unemployed graduates in the studio. Some of them made valid points, but some of the tripe spouted (“I’ve trained to be a whatever, I’m not wasting my education doing something else”) made my blood boil.

Chucky the tree

Sleepy wrote: »

One societal facet of this that I see around me quite regularly (particularly amongst young women and the middle classes), is the notion that one is entitled to their dream career.

We have the scenario where the taxpayer is paying to educate people in law, education, fashion design, media studies, humanities subjects (e.g. art history, women's studies, classics etc.), architecture etc. and then these new graduates going straight onto the dole with no intention of taking the low-skilled positions which are available to them because they have a belief their degree entitles them to a career in the media / as a barrister / teaching / lecturing regardless of the fact there's simply no demand for their skills or that only a tiny minority of people will get to be a columnist for the times, writing their articles in a coffee shop in Ranelagh having gotten out of bed at 9:30 and spent the morning in the gym.

We need to focus our education system towards producing adults who are capable of finding, or (even better) creating, employment.

Perhaps by reducing the number of positions available for students to pursue these lifestyle degrees on the taxpayers' euro whilst increasing availability in the financial, scientific and computing courses could help?

If you give people the opportunity to hang around and wait for their dream job they'll take it. This is why social welfare needs a big reform. Firstly and drastic cut and then introduce a system where people who are out of a job for more then two years get no benefits. I don't really like the idea of taking away someone's opportunity to do a degree they really want but once they do that degree they need to make it work for them or find an alternative.

Godge

bijapos wrote: »

I think when you see stuff like this being advertised then its time to get rid of it:

This is the job description:


Conditions, essentially a full working week and getting €50 a week extra for it.



But the real joke is when you see who you'll be working for:



So a 9 month apprenticeship as a co driver in a van, no doubt Dixons could afford to employ someone at the full rate but decided this was cheaper.

I've no idea why neither the previous nor the present government has no introduced a huge public works programme, maybe 24 hours a week for €50 more dole money and get some much needed infrastructure built here, it cant be worse than giving it to Dixons. search the FAS website and theres plenty of other multinationals offering similar jobs.

So the government should create makey-up jobs building boreens to the middle of nowhere instead of encouraging companies to take on young people and teach them transferable skills.

What is wrong with someone working a full week and getting €50 extra for it when they are actually learning what it is to hold a job. The sense of entitlement from people that they should have a job doing whatever it is they have dreamed about is unreal in the current climate. Those looking for a job should take what they can get and be glad of it. There are thousands of genuine people out there looking for jobs who wouldn't turn their noses up at that job but are not eligible.

I, for one, am delighted that companies are using the internship scheme. They are taking on people they otherwise wouldn't have hired. Those taken on are getting something to put on their cv and getting experience of real life working. Those on the dole complaining about it are those who don't want to work.

bleg

Chucky the tree wrote: »

If you give people the opportunity to hang around and wait for their dream job they'll take it. This is why social welfare needs a big reform. Firstly and drastic cut and then introduce a system where people who are out of a job for more then two years get no benefits. I don't really like the idea of taking away someone's opportunity to do a degree they really want but once they do that degree they need to make it work for them or find an alternative.

I think there has been a 50% cut for social welfare under the age of 22 and 25% under the age of 24 or 25.

antoobrien

Godge wrote: »

So the government should create makey-up jobs building boreens to the middle of nowhere instead of encouraging companies to take on young people and teach them transferable skills.

There are things besides roads (not that either of the M17/18 or M20 projects could be classed as a bothrín) that could be done. How many (viable) schools in towns and cities still have pre-fabs that are being rented? For a small capital outlay, often less than the rent is costing, you get to reduce the current expenditure in subsequent years.

Godge wrote: »

What is wrong with someone working a full week and getting €50 extra for it when they are actually learning what it is to hold a job.

While I agree with you, I also agree with the poster's point about the job in question - the currys/dixons group and the like shouldn't be allowed to exploit schemes like this because they can afford to take on people.

Sleepy

Chucky the tree wrote: »

If you give people the opportunity to hang around and wait for their dream job they'll take it. This is why social welfare needs a big reform. Firstly and drastic cut and then introduce a system where people who are out of a job for more then two years get no benefits. I don't really like the idea of taking away someone's opportunity to do a degree they really want but once they do that degree they need to make it work for them or find an alternative.

I'd agree on a sliding scale of welfare though I'm not sure I could support a complete removal of state support for those who haven't been able to work for over two years e.g. some form of direct provision / food stamp system for those that still haven't found work in that time etc. if only to prevent social policy from literally forcing people into a life of crime.

To clarify in relation to reducing the numbers of places on those courses that's exactly what I mean: provide education for as much of these types of people as our economy could be assumed to have requirement for. We're an island nation of 4.5 million, we've no need of more than a handful of new journalists / sports scientists / physiotherapists / classics scholars per year, no need for more than a 100 teaching grads per year etc. so why not just educate that many. The CAO, whilst imperfect, is at least fair so people would still have the opportunity to do those courses, they'd just have to work their arses off to get the place

Chucky the tree

Sleepy wrote: »

I'd agree on a sliding scale of welfare though I'm not sure I could support a complete removal of state support for those who haven't been able to work for over two years e.g. some form of direct provision / food stamp system for those that still haven't found work in that time etc. if only to prevent social policy from literally forcing people into a life of crime.

To clarify in relation to reducing the numbers of places on those courses that's exactly what I mean: provide education for as much of these types of people as our economy could be assumed to have requirement for. We're an island nation of 4.5 million, we've no need of more than a handful of new journalists / sports scientists / physiotherapists / classics scholars per year, no need for more than a 100 teaching grads per year etc. so why not just educate that many. The CAO, whilst imperfect, is at least fair so people would still have the opportunity to do those courses, they'd just have to work their arses off to get the place

Well there is a limit on every job, so why not put a cap on every course? also just because you do a degree in a certain area means you are stuck in that area for life and it's not possible to get a job outside of it.

Scofflaw

Chucky the tree wrote: »

Well there is a limit on every job, so why not put a cap on every course? also just because you do a degree in a certain area means you are stuck in that area for life and it's not possible to get a job outside of it.

Agreed, said the geologist/environmental scientist working in IT...

cordially,
Scofflaw

hmmm

I agree 100% with the comments on minimum wage, and I also disagree with the jobbridge comments. Where does an 18 year old with no qualifications and no experience get a job? In the past, often they'd have "helped out" someone who was a contact of the family, usually for a very low wage. These weren't jobs that were intended to be for life, these were the jobs that gave a young person their start in life and experience of the work environment.

Now those sort of jobs are hard to come by. Almost no-one is going to take on a clueless 18 year old and pay them minimum wage - it's too high for someone with little or no experience.

Job bridge at least gets us some of the way back towards the starter job. So what if the salary is 50 euro a week more than the dole, it is not meant to be a job for an experienced worker who is expecting to support a family on the wage.

Ultimately however, the very best thing we can do for youth unemployment is to get rid of the minimum wage. A stupid, short sighted and economically naive policy.

The last thing we need is a bunch of civil servants who have no idea of the private sector forming "action teams" and generating pretty reports.

Chucky the tree

hmmm wrote: »

I agree 100% with the comments on minimum wage, and I also disagree with the jobbridge comments. Where does an 18 year old with no qualifications and no experience get a job? In the past, often they'd have "helped out" someone who was a contact of the family, usually for a very low wage. These weren't jobs that were intended to be for life, these were the jobs that gave a young person their start in life and experience of the work environment.

Now those sort of jobs are hard to come by. Almost no-one is going to take on a clueless 18 year old and pay them minimum wage - it's too high for someone with little or no experience.

Job bridge at least gets us some of the way back towards the starter job. So what if the salary is 50 euro a week more than the dole, it is not meant to be a job for an experienced worker who is expecting to support a family on the wage.

Ultimately however, the very best thing we can do for youth unemployment is to get rid of the minimum wage. A stupid, short sighted and economically naive policy.

The last thing we need is a bunch of civil servants who have no idea of the private sector forming "action teams" and generating pretty reports.

You can legally pay them €6.95, which it can be argued is to high aswell. But at the end of the day If dixons need someone to load their lorry they'll pay someone to do it however if they can just hire someone for free they obviously just do that instead.

Sleepy

Chucky the tree wrote: »

Well there is a limit on every job, so why not put a cap on every course? also just because you do a degree in a certain area means you are stuck in that area for life and it's not possible to get a job outside of it.

Of course people end up working in different careers than they study. Some degrees provide you with skills that are transferable across multiple careers, while others are rather self-indulgent areas of study which are being done out of personal interest with no thought of, or only the vaguest notion of a narrow career path that has only a minute number of positions (e.g. lecturing in classics/sociology etc.)

Scofflaw wrote: »

Agreed, said the geologist/environmental scientist working in IT...

cordially,
Scofflaw

A science degree would be a good example of the former class of degree: one that teaches transferable skills. That said, would it not have benefited your career if you'd done a degree in Computer Science rather than Environmental Science? Also, to be fair, there's plenty of work still available in the areas of your study (albeit a lot of it in Australia).

Scofflaw

Sleepy wrote: »

Of course people end up working in different careers than they study. Some degrees provide you with skills that are transferable across multiple careers, while others are rather self-indulgent areas of study which are being done out of personal interest with no thought of, or only the vaguest notion of a narrow career path that has only a minute number of positions (e.g. lecturing in classics/sociology etc.)


A science degree would be a good example of the former class of degree: one that teaches transferable skills. That said, would it not have benefited your career if you'd done a degree in Computer Science rather than Environmental Science? Also, to be fair, there's plenty of work still available in the areas of your study (albeit a lot of it in Australia).

No, on the whole I don't think a degree in CompSci would have been better - possibly I'd be a better programmer, but I'd also probably be a very much poorer business process/culture analyst and communicator. And Computer Science isn't a science, so I would have missed out on the scientific training.

And there never has been much work in Ireland for my primary degree. I graduated in the late Eighties, when there wasn't much work for anything anyway if you were under 25, but Ireland produces about 30 honours graduate geologists every year, and there's an opening for a graduate geologist in Ireland maybe once every two years. We had a short orientation lecture quite early on in the Science stream where it was bluntly pointed out that if you chose Geology as your major, you had to plan on either emigrating or looking for work outside geology.

I don't regret it for an instant. Arts - history, literature, economics, politics - is something you can educate yourself in (and I do), but the sciences require university training, for the lab/field time if nothing else. There's a reason why arts majors were doing 6-8 hour weeks in their final year while we did 6-8 hour days and spent the weekends in the field.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

RichardAnd

There are good points being raised here but in fairness, it's nothing that hasn't been said before. What Permabear says about education is very true but even if we changed our schools on Monday morning, the effects of such a project would not be seen for many years to come. The sad thing here is that if such actions had been taken during the 1980s then Ireland would be in a healthy situation today.

However, one must consider the scope of the problem. It's all well and good to say that we need to improve mathematics and languages but I'm just not sure that the knowledge base is present. For someone to teach maths effectively, they must have a fine grasp of it in their own right. Most teachers I encountered in school knew the curriculum very well but I often wonder, looking back, as to how well they really understood the theories behind the formulas they were discussing.

I'm not when it happened but it seems that modern education is a far cry from what it once was. My grandparents learned latin and greek in school which, whilst not extant languages, are both of far more use than Irish. Personally, I would have loved to have learned latin, studied classics and all the other forgotten aspects of education but that was not to be. Perhaps, going forwards, we should take a look back?

Sleepy

RichardAnd - perhaps with secondary level you have a point regarding the teaching of Maths. At primary level though? If a teacher isn't capable of teaching primary level maths they shouldn't be in the profession, it's hardly complex.

While such moves are indeed long-term, that's something we as a nation need to get used to: planning for long term, sustainable development rather than constantly looking for quick "strokes".

Scofflaw

RichardAnd wrote: »

I'm not when it happened but it seems that modern education is a far cry from what it once was. My grandparents learned latin and greek in school which, whilst not extant languages, are both of far more use than Irish. Personally, I would have loved to have learned latin, studied classics and all the other forgotten aspects of education but that was not to be. Perhaps, going forwards, we should take a look back?

Your grandparents? My school had compulsory Latin and optional Greek. Mind you, we did a full six day week as well...

cordially,
Scofflaw

antoobrien

Scofflaw wrote: »

Your grandparents? My school had compulsory Latin and optional Greek. Mind you, we did a full six day week as well...

cordially,
Scofflaw

Nice to know you went to a boarding school.

I started secondary school in '93. The top class (and only them) had the choice of studying Latin. I don't know if this is still an option, because the numbers taking it were dropping year on year.

Apart from Art & technical drawing there very few "extra subjects" thought because they are after normal school hours This is not necessarily a bad thing because I'm amazed that kids can do 11, 12 13 subjects at any level, I just don't think that's healthy.

RichardAnd

Scofflaw wrote: »

Your grandparents? My school had compulsory Latin and optional Greek. Mind you, we did a full six day week as well...

cordially,
Scofflaw

Yep, my grandparents, did I make you feel old

My parents didn't study latin but then, they would have been schooled in the 70s - early 80s.

Godge

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

You are completely right on the religion and Irish question.

But another point missed by all of the education experts is the role reversal of primary and secondary education.

At primary level, the curriculum has moved away from rote learning and the focus on tables and learning grammar rules has been severely diminished. This has created some of the literacy and numeracy problems that show up in later years. A focus on rote learning at those early ages would be helpful in addressing some of the literacy and numeracy issues.

At second level, the opposite has happened. At a time when students should be literate and numerate and their education should be moving on to focus on critical thinking and analysis, the predicitability of the Leaving Cert (because teachers set it and know what it likely to come up) has resulted in a reversion to rote learning at second level.

Only in Ireland could we see such a mess.

djpbarry

Godge wrote: »

Only in Ireland could we see such a mess.

Rest assured, this is not solely an Irish problem - there are plenty of countries ranked below Ireland in educational standards by the OECD (for example) and there is plenty of evidence here in the UK that primary/secondary education is not all that it could be. Hence the need for a coordinated Europe-wide approach to education.

Scofflaw

antoobrien wrote:

Nice to know you went to a boarding school.

Primarily a day school, oddly enough. Just a bit old-fashioned.

RichardAnd wrote: »

Yep, my grandparents, did I make you feel old

My parents didn't study latin but then, they would have been schooled in the 70s - early 80s.

Well, now you've made me feel old.

cordially,
Scofflaw

BKtje

Personally I think the entire system in Ireland needs to be re-designed.

In Switzerland almost everyone has a "paper" (as it's called here) / diploma of some sort. If you decide to stop before your BAC (needed to go to university) there are plenty of other options.

There are apprenticeships for almost everything which you can start around the age of 16. For example to become a certified "bookseller" (more than just working in your local bookshop) a three year apprenticeship is required. During this apprenticeship you get paid very little wages (by Swiss standards anyway, first year about CHF800 a month up to CHF 1200 in third year with expected earnings of CHF 4500 a month when you're done, though this depends on the apprenticeship, chef's would get more but also work longer hours for example). It's a five day week of around 42hrs a week (though more for some). Two days per week during the "school term" you spend in class learning things related to your apprenticeship (in this case some business, IT, literature, finance etc as well as German and English (where French is your mother tongue) though not anywhere close to university level, just a broad understanding of the relevant concepts). The apprenticeships are federally recognised with an official diploma awarded at the end which allows you to open up your own bookshops etc. It also allows you to enter university through the "backdoor" if you so wish though a preparatory year is required.

In fact, if you do not have a diploma, you would not be allowed to set up your own business in that field (basically they require that you know what you are doing to some extent).

Apprenticeships are limited however by the companies willing to take on the students and such there is competition for these places and limits the number in each field.

I'm not saying it's perfect (far from it) and there is much I still don't understand about it I'm sure but it seems like a better system than in Ireland. It means that much of the population has a broader education than if they just quit school all together at 16.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.