There are no jobs in this town, and "jobsbridge" is a contributory factor.

abouttobebanned

I'm currently working for a company on a contractual basis so am obviously keeping an eye out for other positions for the future.

However, I'm getting sick of seeing the words "The intern will gain practical experience...bla bla bla"

Take a look at the "job" that I have attached, and tell me it isn't disgraceful.

I know there is a large thread on this elsewhere on boards, but i want to talk about how it's particularly effecting this region.

mike65

Well I'd say it effecting Waterford as it is everywhere else, esp urban areas. Apart from being a way of employing someone for nothing it must be having a wider effect regarding wages. The above example is of course exactly the sort of position that should be specifically excluded.

hardybuck

I also feel strongly about some of the 'jobs' posted. Even those that might offer development opportunities are actually real jobs that are being sucked out of the system.

I suggest emailing the local TD's. I think Paudie Coffey is on a Government committee in this area.

Cabaal

mike65 wrote: »

Well I'd say it effecting Waterford as it is everywhere else, esp urban areas. Apart from being a way of employing someone for nothing it must be having a wider effect regarding wages. The above example is of course exactly the sort of position that should be specifically excluded.

Fully agree,

Essentially that job advertised is what used to be for many a student summer job and now its effectively gone and for those that now apply for it they get feck all money.

Shame on any business that use this scheme in this manner and even bigger shame on FG for coming up with it

Musicman2000

Cabaal wrote: »

Fully agree,

Essentially that job advertised is what used to be for many a student summer job and now its effectively gone and for those that now apply for it they get feck all money.

Shame on any business that use this scheme in this manner and even bigger shame on FG for coming up with it

Agree as well there is an awful lot of companies abusing this scheme in Waterford and around the whole country. Why take on someone when you can get someone to work for nothing.

hardybuck

What annoys me is that a lot of very large companies are using the scheme. I'm talking about the likes of Merck, Deloitte, Pfizer etc.

While the candidate will probably have good opportunities to develop in the large organisation, many of these companies are doing very well and can easily afford the meagre salary that would be on offer a full time role in the same area.

SME's who may normally never be able to attract quality graduates should be able to benefit most from this scheme.

Musicman2000

hardybuck wrote: »

What annoys me is that a lot of very large companies are using the scheme. I'm talking about the likes of Merck, Deloitte, Pfizer etc.

While the candidate will probably have good opportunities to develop in the large organisation, many of these companies are doing very well and can easily afford the meagre salary that would be on offer a full time role in the same area.

SME's who may normally never be able to attract quality graduates should be able to benefit most from this scheme.

The chances of getting a job out of the scheme are slim as I found out in Limerick, once your time is up, they will just take on another person from the scheme instead of hiring. They all use the crap excuse its experience.

ziedth

I honestly think that it should be only jobs like in Advertising or Retail management. Jobs that you need experience to get into but maybe don't have enough at the moment.

Having this scheme for jobs that are usually less then say €10 an hour or entry level positions is frankly a disgrace and I have have little time for any company that does it.

abouttobebanned

90% of marketing jobs are now jobsbridge. So many small businesses who need someone to push their social marketing etc have now been given a cheap option.

Meanwhile, hundreds of marketing graduates join the dole queue.

Nypd

It really is a load of old B@*%#ks

Dum_Dum

See - there's loads of jobs in this country... it's just that employers don't want to pay any wages for them.

BlaasForRafa

abouttobebanned wrote: »

Take a look at the "job" that I have attached, and tell me it isn't disgraceful.

I know there is a large thread on this elsewhere on boards, but i want to talk about how it's particularly effecting this region.

Is that for real or is it off waterfordwhispersnews? :mad:

CantGetNoSleep

I was at a small roundtable with Joan Burton a few weeks ago and asked her about this. Half way through her bullsh1t answer about "how it costs money to make space for an employee in your organisation" etc (which was pretty difficult to understand in the first place given the piece of 2 be 4 that appeared to be stuck up her ass) I stood up and left the room in the most awkward and noticeable way possible, knocking a chair "accidentally" on my way. At least that clown knows what I think of her and her governments absolutely sh1t work for free scheme.

If there is ever a revolution in this country (which is not entirely impossible), and all politicians including FF, FG, Labour, Greens and PDs are stripped of all income and pensions, I will make and investment to make space for her cleaning up sh1t in the most disgusting way I possibly can

Max Powers

abouttobebanned wrote: »

I'm currently working for a company on a contractual basis so am obviously keeping an eye out for other positions for the future.

However, I'm getting sick of seeing the words "The intern will gain practical experience...bla bla bla"

Take a look at the "job" that I have attached, and tell me it isn't disgraceful.

I know there is a large thread on this elsewhere on boards, but i want to talk about how it's particularly effecting this region.

That is pathetic alright but lets face it, who in their right mind is gonna work as an intern in a chipper. Some companies including massive corps like tesco have tried to capitalise on this. Just goes to show that this a previous govts cant manage a p-up in a brewery, how the hell are they to manage a country, they cant, thats why we need the EU to tell them what to do

wellboytoo

That's taking the Mickey alright, my interpretation at the time they announced this was, that it was for newly qualified professionals who had no experience and so could not get them a job.
This is an immoral and crooked use of an internship.

witless1

Musicman2000 wrote: »

once your time is up, they will just take on another person from the scheme instead of hiring.

From chatting to people who went through the whole process that is the one glaringly obvious flaw within the scheme, no punishment on the employer and no real incentive to take you on as they can take in a new slave person looking for experience instead. If the scheme barred an employer for even 6 months out of it if they fail to keep the person on then it might be worthwhile. A person would be more inclined to stay with them gaining experience and then getting a position out of it if they knew the system worked like that.

Bards

wellboytoo wrote: »

That's taking the Mickey alright, my interpretation at the time they announced this was, that it was for newly qualified professionals who had no experience and so could not get them a job.
This is an immoral and crooked use of an internship.

... And an immoral use of the pension tax robbed from the private sector


Traitors the lot of them:mad:

gman2k

Do what I do, see an exploitative position, go onto their Facebook page and shame them in front of their friends/ staff, customers etc. It's not much, but it's something.

BTW, the idea of the scheme is to drive down the cost of labour in this country, nothing else. It helps make companies more profitable, and lowers wage demands for new applicants. It's beyond obvious that it's keeping people on Social Welfare, and that the Labour Party - The LEFT!!!!!! are the ones pushing it the most.
Jesus, they are going to be annihilated in the next local and general elections.

I encourage other people to name and shame employers using this scheme, and unlike another poster above, there is NO job, repeat, NO job that anyone should work a 40 hour week for and get an 'extra' €50. If there is genuine work to be done, then one has to get paid for it.
If you work for free, you will never be short of work in this short lifetime.

Nypd

It makes me mad thinking about this, not only is the normal joe soap paying for the mistakes of bankers and politicians, now they expect us to work in a chipper for free !!
whoever rubber stamped this needs to be removed from their position.
It's a joke :mad:
Rant over !

okiss

I live in a different part of the country and I agree with you. I have seen a number of strong, well known companies in my area using job bridge.
At the moment one of my friends is looking for work but they told me that the extra €50 a week would hardly cover there travel expenses if they took up this "kind offer" to work 40 hours a week for €50.
Why can the gov give a incentive to employers to take some one off the dole even for a few days a week that is not exploiting people who are out of work at the moment. If a person has some more money they will spend it which will lead to more tax/vat ect paid. Other business would be in a position to stay open, keep on staff or take on more staff which would put more money into circulation.

Partizan

gman2k wrote: »

Do what I do, see an exploitative position, go onto their Facebook page and shame them in front of their friends/ staff, customers etc. It's not much, but it's something.

BTW, the idea of the scheme is to drive down the cost of labour in this country, nothing else. It helps make companies more profitable, and lowers wage demands for new applicants. It's beyond obvious that it's keeping people on Social Welfare, and that the Labour Party - The LEFT!!!!!! are the ones pushing it the most.
Jesus, they are going to be annihilated in the next local and general elections.

I encourage other people to name and shame employers using this scheme, and unlike another poster above, there is NO job, repeat, NO job that anyone should work a 40 hour week for and get an 'extra' €50. If there is genuine work to be done, then one has to get paid for it.
If you work for free, you will never be short of work in this short lifetime.

Nail on the head gman. As well as forcing down wages (cost of labour) it is also facilitating job displacement as companies instead of recruiting workers for a fair wage will instead hire the job bridge people for €50 per week while the State picks up the tab maximising profit for the firm(s) involved. After the 9 month period, the poor sods are simply replaced by others and so the cycle continues. The firm(s) involved in many cases have no intention of taking on potential full time employees and simply repeat and rinse when the placement is up.

It is simply exploitation.

daenerysstormborn3

Dum_Dum wrote: »

See - there's loads of jobs in this country... it's just that employers don't want to pay any wages for them.

This.

They basically want employees but don't want to pay them and cry that they have no money to pay them. Surely when this system was introduced they could've put some sort of qualifying terms into place.

I have seen numerous positions advertised that pretty much match word for word what I do in my job everyday - which is fairly full on and involves a lot of responsibility - for €50 extra a week. Surely the people running these schemes have a responsibility to keep an eye on these websites and do spot checks on employers. I know some places put up a job and when they actually take someone on the responsibilities differ from the advert but a lot of them are not even hiding what they're doing.

witless1 wrote: »

From chatting to people who went through the whole process that is the one glaringly obvious flaw within the scheme, no punishment on the employer and no real incentive to take you on as they can take in a new slave person looking for experience instead. If the scheme barred an employer for even 6 months out of it if they fail to keep the person on then it might be worthwhile. A person would be more inclined to stay with them gaining experience and then getting a position out of it if they knew the system worked like that.

This is a good idea. If an employer is happy to keep someone for 9 months (I think that's the normal term for these positions) without one complaint but then suddenly the term expires and they get rid of them surely that could be investigated.

AdMMM

Absolutely disgraceful!

I'm about to be one of those Marketing Graduates and despite absolutely immersing myself into any project that I could and gaining valuable experience and references, I feel like I'm kicking **** up a hill as far as securing an interview is concerned. I've already resigned myself to the fact that I'll have to leave Waterford as most of the jobs that I have been applying for are in Dublin.

An internship programme in this industry would be worthwhile and I know that I wouldn't mind working with an SME and gaining experience while also helping them grow. I know I mightn't get a job out of it but I would get experience and in this industry, experience is everything! However, seeing chippers exploit the system completely undermines any benefits it may bring!

gman2k

https://www.facebook.com/supermacsofficial
https://twitter.com/#!/supermacsire
Supermacs official page is the place to let them know - Family Restaurant? Hope you don't have a family to feed on €50 a week....

gman2k

Woodlands Hotel
Receptionist http://tinyurl.com/csahmxt
https://www.facebook.com/WoodlandsClaire

danjo-xx

CantGetNoSleep wrote: »

If there is ever a revolution in this country (which is not entirely impossible), and all politicians including FF, FG, Labour, Greens and PDs are stripped of all income and pensions, I will make and investment to make space for her cleaning up sh1t in the most disgusting way I possibly can

funny you should say that, maybe it's not just a concidence after all that we are fast approaching the 100 anniversary of the 1916 rising, maybe we could bring it forward a bit.

abouttobebanned

To save some time, here are all the waterford ones.

du Maurier

abouttobebanned wrote: »

90% of marketing jobs are now jobsbridge. So many small businesses who need someone to push their social marketing etc have now been given a cheap option.

Meanwhile, hundreds of marketing graduates join the dole queue.

It's called JobBridge, not JobsBridge as far as I'm aware. The latter is thrown around the other threads as if that's what it was actually called;)

Does anyone see this scheme as a springboard to permanent employment with someone else, as in, a full-time, relatively well-paid position, due to the initial experience they have gained for the 9-12 months?

Most employers don't really want to take someone on that isn't working or hasn't really worked in the field they graduated from without a little bit of experience. At least garnering a number of months in relatively poorly paid scheme shows that the potential candidate is willing to do this to find something better after and that they are eager to put themselves out there to secure a future employment in a field that they're interested in.

It's also there to plug gaps in CVs, to be honest. I can't see why someone wouldn't do it if they were out of work for a long time. It's an indicator to a a potential employer that they were keen to get back in employment, whatever it might have been.

This is the side of the scheme that I think is beneficial. Hope I don't get lambasted for this view:)

Hoffmans

du Maurier wrote: »

It's called JobBridge, not JobsBridge as far as I'm aware. The latter is thrown around the other threads as if that's what it was actually called;)

Does anyone see this scheme as a springboard to permanent employment with someone else, as in, a full-time, relatively well-paid position, due to the initial experience they have gained for the 9-12 months?

Most employers don't really want to take someone on that isn't working or hasn't really worked in the field they graduated from without a little bit of experience. At least garnering a number of months in relatively poorly paid scheme shows that the potential candidate is willing to do this to find something better after and that they are eager to put themselves out there to secure a future employment in a field that they're interested in.

It's also there to plug gaps in CVs, to be honest. I can't see why someone wouldn't do it if they were out of work for a long time. It's an indicator to a a potential employer that they were keen to get back in employment, whatever it might have been.

This is the side of the scheme that I think is beneficial. Hope I don't get lambasted for this view:)

i think its more of an indicator that somone has lost their pride if they feel happy to become a 50bux slave for some big business or corporation, teva and the whitfield clinic were recently looking for jobridge slaves why would anyone go in and work the same hours alongside somone on say 700€ a week for a bullseye

abouttobebanned

So...you do this JOBBRIDGE thing for 9 months and then the company lets you go. The company then takes on another JOBBRIDGE candidate. The previous one thinks that he now has a better chance of securing employment...but guess what...all the companies that he's now well equipped to work for, are not taking on any paid employees. Just JOBBRIDGE!

daenerysstormborn3

It's not just working the same hours, sometimes it's doing the exact same tasks as someone getting a proper wage while you struggle to get by on your pittance because the company employing you are riding the system.

du Maurier

Hoffmans wrote: »

i think its more of an indicator that somone has lost their pride if they feel happy to become a 50bux slave for some big business or corporation, teva and the whitfield clinic were recently looking for jobridge slaves why would anyone go in and work the same hours alongside somone on say 700€ a week for a bullseye

I'm not trying to argue with that sentiment per se, but I'm trying to provide some kind of rational thought process for someone who might be in a position like that. They MUST start somewhere, to eventually eke out those 700 euro pw jobs. One has to always think that 'this is temporary' but it's providing me with some kind of platform (however small) to get me to where I want to be.

I mean if the intern is doing the same job as well as the person earning the green this doesn't generally go unnoticed. There is an element of luck too (an employer liking you and willing to offer you a job), as well as showing initiative, but that goes with the territory.

Also, even though a lot of companies terminate an intern's stint after their 9-12 months and hire another, apparently many others keep them on permanently. Hired interns looking for permanency must also strive hard to progress when they get the opportunity, get in with their employer and prove their worth in the hope of being kept on.

You might see it as somewhat unfair, unbalanced or an unwieldy scheme, but it does provide some openings that could lead to something fruitful.

old gregg

@ du Maurier:
I think that in an environment where employers were more than likely to operate in an ethical manner and the jobs were of a nature where the intern was going to actually gain new valuable skills and experience then your argument is sound.

Sadly in many cases the above scenario does not obtain. The employer is exploiting someone who desperately wants to better themselves. Tossing burgers and chips for slave wages is not acceptable no matter how it's dressed up.
I suppose the answer is to have some policing of each vacancy and a ban on employers using it to recruit repeatedly for the same position.

du Maurier

However there is a line to be drawn. I do find it a frightful abdication of responsibility and ethically redundant to offer this scheme to folks whereby the skills requirements are very basic ie shelf-stocking etc. Essentially the intern isn't learning anything pertaining to what their qualifications suggest. So it should be tailored more to go hand in hand with a person's qualifications (which is does provide) but not just allow any business that applies to acquire cheap labour.

du Maurier

old gregg wrote: »

@ du Maurier:
I think that in an environment where employers were more than likely to operate in an ethical manner and the jobs were of a nature where the intern was going to actually gain new valuable skills and experience then your argument is sound.

Sadly in many cases the above scenario does not obtain. The employer is exploiting someone who desperately wants to better themselves. Tossing burgers and chips for slave wages is not acceptable no matter how it's dressed up.
I suppose the answer is to have some policing of each vacancy and a ban on employers using it to recruit repeatedly for the same position.

Good point, which I was coming to as per below. I agree with this sentiment here.

du Maurier

abouttobebanned wrote: »

So...you do this JOBBRIDGE thing for 9 months and then the company lets you go. The company then takes on another JOBBRIDGE candidate. The previous one thinks that he now has a better chance of securing employment...but guess what...all the companies that he's now well equipped to work for, are not taking on any paid employees. Just JOBBRIDGE!

I don't think that would necessarily be the black and white of it, with respect. A Jobbridge candidate may not necessarily be solely a graduate or someone with little experience. They may have lost their job (with plenty of experience behind them) for a brief period of time and are looking to be perceived as being actively seeking any kind of work so it reflects well on them to an employer. It's really only a temporary measure for this kind of candidate which bumps up their CV and perceived enthusiasm, and perhaps, eventually leading to a interview for a full-time, paid job.

9 months (or more) working for little could actually be a clincher for a prospective candidate in an interview, rather than the person who declined the penuriously paid internship and waited in hope for a fully paid role.

Twoelles

Job bridge is an abomination.

The theory behind it is looks like it provides a fantastic opportunity for people to get experience in the field they want to work in but in practice its EXPLOITATION!
How can they implement something and then not regulate it in any way! It is a complete disgrace and a waste of tax money.

There are NO admin jobs because they are all job bridge and what a farce that it! admin and reception jobs take no more that a few weeks to train in, if you cant manage it after that then you might as well give up, and yet i see these all the time been offered as 'internships'.

Even the definition of intership is:
"Internship is a system of on-the-job training for white-collar and professional careers"

It makes me so mad

Sikie

Taking on graduates is a risky business lots of potential on paper but no experience. Jobbridge provides a method for those with intiative to demonstrate to potential employers that they have what it takes. At the end of the day somebody has to apply for a position and it is up to them to ensure that taking a position will further their career goals.

letsbet

Sikie wrote: »

Taking on graduates is a risky business lots of potential on paper but no experience. Jobbridge provides a method for those with intiative to demonstrate to potential employers that they have what it takes. At the end of the day somebody has to apply for a position and it is up to them to ensure that taking a position will further their career goals.

If companies are wary of taking on graduates then they can put them on probation like a lot of companies do. I don't think people have problems with genuine cases where a job would otherwise not have been created. A lot of the companies being talked about are simply exploiting the person and also exploiting us taxpayers. Some of these companies and nothing short of disgraceful but like most things in this country they won't be held accountable for it.

Sikie

At the moment to survive productivity needs to growing at 7-10% per annum to restore lost competitiveness from the period from the celtic tiger era. If sales are not growing by 10% then there is no jobs in fact there is a threat to existing job. Jobbridge does create space to allow people to gain skills which would not have existed as contrary to popular opinion the positions would never have been created due to the pressure to restore competitiveness.

Nypd

It's another tactic by an ill equipped government to massage the live register figures.
The majority of the people of Ireland are prepared to work, do you not think we have had enough piss taken out of us by our peers.
This just adds insult to injury !
Become an intern for 9 months to learn how to shake a basket of chips :mad:

gman2k

Sikie wrote: »

At the moment to survive productivity needs to growing at 7-10% per annum to restore lost competitiveness from the period from the celtic tiger era. If sales are not growing by 10% then there is no jobs in fact there is a threat to existing job. Jobbridge does create space to allow people to gain skills which would not have existed as contrary to popular opinion the positions would never have been created due to the pressure to restore competitiveness.

Sounds just like Labour spin if you ask me.
If an intern is productive, whether by typing letters, answering phones, dealing with clients, stacking shelves, frying burgers, they are doing work that needs to be done.
If they were not doing it for free, someone else would need to do it, i.e. get paid at least a minimum wage for a weeks work.
In my own job, I see my employer advertising for interns to the exact same work that I do.
Many of us are locum relief in the company I work for, so if my employer gives unpaid work to an intern, then people like me will get less hours and less pay.

Darkest Horse

Sikie wrote: »

Taking on graduates is a risky business lots of potential on paper but no experience. Jobbridge provides a method for those with intiative to demonstrate to potential employers that they have what it takes. At the end of the day somebody has to apply for a position and it is up to them to ensure that taking a position will further their career goals.

That's how it works in theory. That's not playing out in practice and it's causing negative knock on effects in the labour market in general. It's a well meaning but poorly conceived scheme and it needs to be changed.

Stark

Sikie wrote: »

At the moment to survive productivity needs to growing at 7-10% per annum to restore lost competitiveness from the period from the celtic tiger era. If sales are not growing by 10% then there is no jobs in fact there is a threat to existing job. Jobbridge does create space to allow people to gain skills which would not have existed as contrary to popular opinion the positions would never have been created due to the pressure to restore competitiveness.

Sounds like IBEC speak. Ireland's already made substantial progress in regaining competitiveness. I also doubt that the local chippy has to compete internationally.

Sully

From what I recall, the Minister said that she wasn't happy with these type of advertisements and wanted her office notified of such so it can be investigated. Its not a problem here in Waterford alone.

Partizan

Sully wrote: »

From what I recall, the Minister said that she wasn't happy with these type of advertisements and wanted her office notified of such so it can be investigated. Its not a problem here in Waterford alone.

The trouble with the Job-bridge Scheme is that it is open to exploitation by unscrupulous companies like Supermacs (due to lack of regulation) who use it to exploit workers and drive down labour costs in order to maximise profits. There is no onus on the likes of Supermacs to keep these workers but instead after 9 months will leave them go and take on another unemployed individual for €50 a week. It is slavery.

In the US, the system of internships is selective, i.e. highly skilled, well sought after by graduates and regulated which results in many instances of the graduates being appointed.

jayteecork

Partizan wrote: »

The trouble with the Job-bridge Scheme is that it is open to exploitation by unscrupulous companies like Supermacs (due to lack of regulation) who use it to exploit workers and drive down labour costs in order to maximise profits. There is no onus on the likes of Supermacs to keep these workers but instead after 9 months will leave them go and take on another unemployed individual for €50 a week. It is slavery.

In the US, the system of internships is selective, i.e. highly skilled, well sought after by graduates and regulated which results in many instances of the graduates being appointed.

Actually, they don't even have to pay the extra €50.

Avox

Even The Munster Express are taking advantage of this :eek: See Here.

I can certainly say I won't be buying their paper again if that's how they treat the people of Waterford.

daenerysstormborn3

Can't believe that Avox. I find it hard to believe they can't afford to take on a member of staff on a proper wage, even minimum wage.

RumMonkey

And this after the Munster forced 12 people to take statuatory redundancy in December because he wanted to outsource the work to Belfast and other places.

Tim the Enchanter

pixiebean22 wrote: »

Can't believe that Avox. I find it hard to believe they can't afford to take on a member of staff on a proper wage, even minimum wage.

The Munster is struggling big time. Id say its only a matter of time now. More and more people giving up on it. Not enough of a population to keep 2 regional papers in circulation.