Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The Jobbridge Scandal

Options
1…9899101103104…195

Comments

  • Options
    #3002
    KyussBishop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,797 ✭✭✭KyussBishop


    Bambi wrote: »
    Being banned from the politics forum on boards is probably the best endorsement of a poster there is. Long and proud history of dubious mods on that forum :)
    Heh :) Ah even though I disagree with them, I can see where the mods were coming from and I don't really have any bad feelings over it; just an irreconcilable difference in views; I think it's a well moderated forum.


  • Options
    #3003
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 15,814 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    Considering that something like 59% of people don't conplete their internship, then those figure are a lot less impressive. 65.8% of 31% isn't exactly an overwhelming success now is it. But sure you'll be telling us that all those people dropped out because they got great jobs and not due to the scheme being a failure.


  • Options
    #3004
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #3005
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 15,814 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    So what your saying us that all those 63% left early as they got jobs. I'm sure that was the case.


  • Options
    #3006
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #3007
    yankinlk
    Registered Users Posts: 2,734 ✭✭✭yankinlk


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Considering that something like 59% of people don't conplete their internship, then those figure are a lot less impressive. 65.8% of 31% isn't exactly an overwhelming success now is it. But sure you'll be telling us that all those people dropped out because they got great jobs and not due to the scheme being a failure.

    why is it not possible they asked participants, not just those that completed the full 9 months, for feedback!?

    anyone who was succesful in my job did not do the full 9 months, cause dun dun dun they got another job. seriously, negative for negative sake is all that goes into this thread.


  • Options
    #3008
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 15,814 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    But people are overwhelmingly dissatisfied with it. You only need to read peoples personal experiences tp see that. I know of people on a course who were told by those running it that if they gave negative feedback then their payment would be affected. And guess what, very few gave anything but a glowing write up even though they hated it. The reason being that most of them were terrified of losing any of their payment. We have had multiple people in this thread talk about how they complained and were met with a "we don't care" from FAS and the DSP so is it so hard to believe that many people just ticked good to save themselves any future hassle.
    yankinlk wrote: »
    why is it not possible they asked participants, not just those that completed the full 9 months, for feedback!?

    anyone who was succesful in my job did not do the full 9 months, cause dun dun dun they got another job. seriously, negative for negative sake is all that goes into this thread.

    The thing is that there is no proof that the scheme is a success. There is no evidence that those people who secured a job outside of the hose organization did so thanks to jobsbridge.

    Those of us who criticise the scheme recognize it's value and what could be done with it if handled correctly but we also see the faults. The other side refuse to acknowledge any faults and talk about what a success it is. D


  • Options
    #3009
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #3010
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 15,814 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    Yet again you take something someone wrote out of context to try and prive your point. Can you point out where I said that?

    If people are so satisfied with it then where are they? Why are there not more people in here singing it's praises.


  • Options
    #3011
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #3012
    runawaybishop
    Registered Users Posts: 9,504 ✭✭✭runawaybishop


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    No they don't. I've only seen one person mocking anyone, and that was you mocking the unemployed for claiming they were poor.


  • Options
    #3013
    Xenji
    Registered Users Posts: 11,505 ✭✭✭✭Xenji


    Instead of going on statistics of a report that will be 2 years old in November as it only goes as far as November 2012 with it's statistics, maybe the government should get another Indecon report done so we can compare figures to how the scheme was received in 2011/2012 to how it is received now.


  • Options
    #3014
    darkpagandeath
    Closed Accounts Posts: 24,465 ✭✭✭✭darkpagandeath


    Xenji wrote: »
    Instead of going on statistics of a report that will be 2 years old in November as it only goes as far as November 2012 with it's statistics, maybe the government should get another Indecon report done so we can compare figures to how the scheme was received in 2011/2012 to how it is received now.

    There is probably a very good reason why one has not be put out yet as if it contained anything they could spin I'm guessing it would be out already.


  • Options
    #3015
    osarusan
    Registered Users Posts: 16,588 ✭✭✭✭osarusan


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.
    Agreed, the Indecon report is the most valid instrument we have.

    Since we're agreed on that, can you recall the report's statistics on the % of companies who reported that, if the scheme had not been in place, they would have offered paid employment instead? I asked you to find these when you commented that anybody talking about exploitation is a quasi-Marxist moaner, or words to that effect.

    Also, since you agree with the validity of the report, why do you argue that the live register is a valid control group for evaluating the success of JobBridge, when the report itself explains why it is not a valid control group at all?

    As I said earlier, you haven't (or hadn't then) read the report, and were working off the stats from the indo article. When asked for other figures, you spoke vaguely about 'many' or 'a lot'.


  • Options
    #3016
    Dyr
    Registered Users Posts: 23,246 ✭✭✭✭Dyr


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    Not true

    And this is the second time you've being called on this, so no excuses.


  • Options
    #3017
    DBDH
    Registered Users Posts: 4 ✭DBDH


    While the Indecon report is the only data/research that we have on JobBridge, it's worthwhile remembering that it only represents the results from 2,364 respondents (out of 4,401 surveys distributed).

    Out of these 2,364 respondents, 60% had attained a Primary Degree or a Masters - educational qualifications that usually increase job opportunities.
    Out of these 2,364 respondents, 72% had previously been employed on a full time basis. (see page 12 of report)
    Would the high percentage of this educated, experienced demographic participating in the research skew the results (as they theoretically were better placed to gain employment with/without JobBridge)?

    While we can go round and round dissecting the figures in the report, it should only be used as an indicator of the situation, while considering the profile of the respondents - especially in light of the fact that, as of March 26th, 27,282 people have commenced a JobBridge internship since the scheme started.

    Politicians will always be selective in the headline statistics they can use to promote their scheme, that's why this "60% found employment within 5 months of finishing an internship" is a convenient soundbite.


  • Options
    #3018
    osarusan
    Registered Users Posts: 16,588 ✭✭✭✭osarusan


    DBDH wrote: »
    While the Indecon report is the only data/research that we have on JobBridge, it's worthwhile remembering that it only represents the results from 2,364 respondents (out of 4,401 surveys distributed).

    Out of these 2,364 respondents, 60% had attained a Primary Degree or a Masters - educational qualifications that usually increase job opportunities.
    Out of these 2,364 respondents, 72% had previously been employed on a full time basis. (see page 12 of report)
    Would the high percentage of this educated, experienced demographic participating in the research skew the results (as they theoretically were better placed to gain employment with/without JobBridge)?

    While we can go round and round dissecting the figures in the report, it should only be used as an indicator of the situation, while considering the profile of the respondents - especially in light of the fact that, as of March 26th, 27,282 people have commenced a JobBridge internship since the scheme started.

    Politicians will always be selective in the headline statistics they can use to promote their scheme, that's why this "60% found employment within 5 months of finishing an internship" is a convenient soundbite.
    Fair point, and the very reason why the jobbridge re-employment rates can't be simply compared to the live register re-employment rates.

    The Indecon report recognises this (that the general make-up of jobbridge applicants does not mirror the make-up of those on the live register), and attempts to weight the figures accordingly.

    what would be interesting to know is if the make-up (in terms of age, experience, qualifications) of those sent surveys mirrors the make-up of Jobbridge applicants as a whole.


  • Options
    #3019
    chinacup
    Registered Users Posts: 539 ✭✭✭chinacup


    runawaybishop wrote: »
    No they don't. I've only seen one person mocking anyone, and that was you mocking the unemployed for claiming they were poor.

    In fairness, that's not entirely true. I was called a troll, that it didn't say much about me for wanting to work in a cafe, I was being paid by FG and labour to troll, I was probably Joan Burton herself and I'm a "useful idiot", for sharing my experience. One poster said they really enjoyed me being backed into a corner..
    I would call that mocking!


  • Options
    #3020
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #3021
    runawaybishop
    Registered Users Posts: 9,504 ✭✭✭runawaybishop


    arf91 wrote: »
    In fairness, that's not entirely true. I was called a troll, that it didn't say much about me for wanting to work in a cafe, I was being paid by FG and labour to troll, I was probably Joan Burton herself and I'm a "useful idiot", for sharing my experience. One poster said they really enjoyed me being backed into a corner..
    I would call that mocking!

    Grand so, permabear was mocking the unemployed for being poor and people were mocking you for offering yourself up for an internship in a restaurant waitressing.

    Permabear stated that numerous people were mocked, this is untrue.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #3022
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #3023
    Ann Landers
    Closed Accounts Posts: 817 ✭✭✭Ann Landers


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    Why did it not include a control group in the first place? Seems like a big oversight.


  • Options
    #3024
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #3025
    osarusan
    Registered Users Posts: 16,588 ✭✭✭✭osarusan


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.
    Indeed. But that figure rises to just over 10% for larger companies. That is to say, just over 1 in 10 larger companies are using interns where they would otherwise have paid somebody to do the job. Yet you dismiss any criticism of this as
    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.


  • Options
    #3026
    osarusan
    Registered Users Posts: 16,588 ✭✭✭✭osarusan


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.
    In response to my questions about a control group, you cited seasonally adjusted live register rates of 6.9% to highlight the superior figures for jobbridge:
    Permabear wrote: »
    Of course there is. The seasonally adjusted live register was 400,700 at the end of January 2014, representing an annual decline of just 6.9 percent.
    What was the purpose of this, if not to suggest they act as a control group? 6.9% is far removed from any weighted statistics in the report, as you now know.
    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.
    I posted some figures from the report which indicate this a while ago.


  • Options
    #3027
    billy the squid
    Registered Users Posts: 12,811 ✭✭✭✭billy the squid


    terryduff12 wrote: »
    Already on a tus scheme, for doing it im getting taxed because I claim for 3 others. never Said at interviews I would be taxed only that I would get an extra 20, getting less now because of the tax. My question is when I off this and get hounded to do jobsbridge or gateway how does payment Work do ya get 50 euro off employer or is it all one payment into bank, 22 months on gateway is a long time with no raise.

    consider your self lucky. blind pensioners are banned from jobbridge and their income is still taxed.


  • Options
    #3028
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #3029
    osarusan
    Registered Users Posts: 16,588 ✭✭✭✭osarusan


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.
    The report indicated a displacement rate of between 3 and 4 percent. Not a high figure in my opinion, but yet another one you either didn't know, or pretended not to know, so you could offer another lower figure.


  • Options
    #3030
    osarusan
    Registered Users Posts: 16,588 ✭✭✭✭osarusan


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    But, conveniently, you forgot to add the numbers for those hosts who responded that they were 'fairly likely' to have offered employment in the absence of the scheme, the extra 22.5% makes a total of 29% of companies who were highly or fairly likely to have offered jobs.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #3031
    runawaybishop
    Registered Users Posts: 9,504 ✭✭✭runawaybishop


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.
    No, only you have inferred this. People have stated time and time again they would have no issues with the scheme if it was properly regulated.


Advertisement