Public works projects with the Unemployed

Consonata

I was thinking about this recently that why doesn't the government set up projects such as road rebuilding, improving our railway infrastructure, Internet connectivity etc. by staffing them with people that are currently on the dole. There are a lot of people on the dole who have been on it for a long time with little or lots of effort to find a new job. If you were able to put on your CV that you were a part of a civil engineering project such as that, surely that would help your employment opportunities.

Give me your thoughts.

coolemon

Consonata wrote: »

I was thinking about this recently that why doesn't the government set up projects such as road rebuilding, improving our railway infrastructure, Internet connectivity etc. by staffing them with people that are currently on the dole. There are a lot of people on the dole who have been on it for a long time with little or lots of effort to find a new job. If you were able to put on your CV that you were a part of a civil engineering project such as that, surely that would help your employment opportunities.

Give me your thoughts.

There are enough of these free labour schemes as it is. Between doing vital jobs like cutting roadside hedging and jobsbridge graduates doing donkey work there will be no paid jobs.

Here is an idea.

If something needs to be done.

Pay someone a legal and decent wage for it.

That will end unemployment quicker than displacing paid employment.

coolemon

And btw. I did 9 months of a Jobsbridge. And I displaced a paying job.

Ya Basta. Enough.

newacc2015

coolemon wrote: »

There are enough of these free labour schemes as it is. Between doing vital jobs like cutting roadside hedging and jobsbridge graduates doing donkey work there will be no paid jobs.

Here is an idea.

If something needs to be done.

Pay someone a legal and decent wage for it.

That will end unemployment quicker than displacing paid employment.

If someone is out of the workforce for more than a few months they are deskilled in the eyes of an employer. No will employee anyone who is deskilled regardless of their previous experience and education. An employer is more likely to choose a candidate with less experience but recently employed than someone with plenty of experience and long term unemployed.

http://www.brookings.edu/about/projects/bpea/papers/2014/are-longterm-unemployed-margins-labor-market

The best to end unemployment is not higher, "decent wages" but actually get them with recent work experience. Here is an academic paper on it and some anecdotal story.

Consonata

newacc2015 wrote:

The best to end unemployment is not higher, "decent wages" but actually get them with recent work experience.

I agree. I would believe that if people were taking part in community service or large scale public works projects that are also essential, such as rebuilding our water infrastructure, it would help them find better employment if they so desired.

coolemon

newacc2015 wrote: »

If someone is out of the workforce for more than a few months they are deskilled in the eyes of an employer. No will employee anyone who is deskilled regardless of their previous experience and education. An employer is more likely to choose a candidate with less experience but recently employed than someone with plenty of experience and long term unemployed.

http://www.brookings.edu/about/projects/bpea/papers/2014/are-longterm-unemployed-margins-labor-market

The best to end unemployment is not higher, "decent wages" but actually get them with recent work experience. Here is an academic paper on it and some anecdotal story.

I finished my 9 months of free labour in January. I have an honours degree. 10 months on and I am still unemployed.

Whatever reference I got is becoming more and more obsolete as time goes by. The "recentness" of my last "employment" is becoming less and less recent.

What is being advocated here is a vicious circle of free labour. If I do not obtain employment within a certain period after my time of free labour then I need to do more free labour to get more recent work experience. And in the process displacing more and more paid employment opportunities.

Its a scam to depress wages and working conditions.

I didn't need work experience to do what I did in the 9 month free labour scheme. An unemployed person doesn't need work experience to dig trenches on a railway line.

Pay people to do it for **** sake.

coolemon

Consonata wrote: »

I agree. I would believe that if people were taking part in community service or large scale public works projects that are also essential, such as rebuilding our water infrastructure, it would help them find better employment if they so desired.

Pay them a decent wage for it then.

If they want to find "better employment" with their new found reference and work experience then they can do that off their own bat.

You don't not need to pay them to give them a reference, work experience or for them to find better employment, "if they so desire".

La Fenetre

The wealthy won't remain as wealthy, unless labour is valued as low as you can possibly get away with, while the wealthy pay themselves as much as they can possibly get away with.

FishOnABike

I think these schemes are the worst of all worlds.

The schemes distort the labour market by providing some employers with free labour, allowing them undercut competition. Possibly threatening the viability of competitors (and the real jobs they supply) in the process.

For the employee, they are put into a labour limbo. Paying graduate positions are replaced by jobsbridge internships paying less than a similar graduate position would previously have paid. Other jobsbridge positions are low paid but participants are excluded from supports such as family income supplement. Are they working or not? The government seems to want to have it both ways.

My view is that they are no more than a cynical method to massage the employment / unemployment figures.

mickdw

The way I see it, pay a proper wage and do away with free labour to businesses.
I do agree that the unemployed should work for their money though so they should be put to work on general community activities that would never to funded in any other way whether it be sports, art, tidy towns, help the elderly etc. Pay them a proper wage also for this so 20 hours for the basic dole payment. If someone is claiming 400 euro in dole, give them longer hours then allow them to take on other work as they wish to supplement income without immediately losing the payment. Review every 5 years.
In short, make everyone work for dole at about 10 euro per hour and make it more attractive to seek a different job that pays better.
Would make it rather easy to police fraud too.

keane2097

Worked great in Shawshank Redemption

newacc2015

coolemon wrote: »

I finished my 9 months of free labour in January. I have an honours degree. 10 months on and I am still unemployed.

Whatever reference I got is becoming more and more obsolete as time goes by. The "recentness" of my last "employment" is becoming less and less recent.

What is being advocated here is a vicious circle of free labour. If I do not obtain employment within a certain period after my time of free labour then I need to do more free labour to get more recent work experience. And in the process displacing more and more paid employment opportunities.

Its a scam to depress wages and working conditions.

I didn't need work experience to do what I did in the 9 month free labour scheme. An unemployed person doesn't need work experience to dig trenches on a railway line.

Pay people to do it for **** sake.

What good is your degree if you havent worked in the last 5 years? Its entirely the point of the academic journal. Your skills or education are futile, when you havent worked recently. Did you even look at my link. Its an American Journal, so you there is no jobbridge slant on it.

You may not have gained skills on that internships. But you can now show future employers that you can still work 9 - 5 without any issues. Do you seriously think if you hadnt worked in the last number of years. That an employer would still think they you can work in a workplace? Personally I dont think so. You lose norms and efficiency if you have been out of the work force for a while.

Why would an employer take on someone who hasnt worked for years over someone who left their job last week with most up to date skills? They wouldnt. Thats why internships are important

Whats your degree? In that time have you upskilled or changed industry, as your degree might not be suitable for the economy in 2015

coolemon

newacc2015 wrote: »

You may not have gained skills on that internships. But you can now show future employers that you can still work 9 - 5 without any issues.

Patronising ****e.

Pay them well and a monkey will work 9-5 without any issues.

The next step in this neoliberal race to the bottom will be a FETAC course on how to work 9-5 without any issues.

BoJack Horseman

Consonata wrote: »

doesn't the government set up projects such as road rebuilding, improving our railway infrastructure, Internet connectivity etc.

Government agencies are doing this already.

johnnyskeleton

coolemon wrote: »

Patronising ****e.

Mod note:

Please read the charter before posting again and be civil to other posters. And less of the cussing please!

La Fenetre

newacc2015 wrote: »

Why would an employer take on someone who hasnt worked for years over someone who left their job last week with most up to date skills? They wouldnt. Thats why internships are important

Important for what ? In other words to replace someone with the most up to date skills on the cheap, until the intern asks for a decent wage, and then you can get another intern in to replace them.

newacc2015

coolemon wrote: »

Patronising ****e.

Pay them well and a monkey will work 9-5 without any issues.

The next step in this neoliberal race to the bottom will be a FETAC course on how to work 9-5 without any issues.

Employers dont want to touch anyone who has been unemployed for a while. If a Princeton Study verifies that, what more proof do you need. Its nothing to do with pay levels. Its due to the mindset of employers, which is entirely understanding

Godge

coolemon wrote: »

I finished my 9 months of free labour in January. I have an honours degree. 10 months on and I am still unemployed.

Whatever reference I got is becoming more and more obsolete as time goes by. The "recentness" of my last "employment" is becoming less and less recent.

What is being advocated here is a vicious circle of free labour. If I do not obtain employment within a certain period after my time of free labour then I need to do more free labour to get more recent work experience. And in the process displacing more and more paid employment opportunities.

Its a scam to depress wages and working conditions.

I didn't need work experience to do what I did in the 9 month free labour scheme. An unemployed person doesn't need work experience to dig trenches on a railway line.

Pay people to do it for **** sake.

It is an opportunity for people to get their foot in the door and impress an employer. If they fail to impress an employer and don't get kept on, that is a pity but on the other hand there are many who do get kept on.

Dughorm

newacc2015 wrote: »

Employers dont want to touch anyone who has been unemployed for a while. If a Princeton Study verifies that, what more proof do you need. Its nothing to do with pay levels. Its due to the mindset of employers, which is entirely understanding

This is one study of the US Employment Market.

How does this enable you to apply those conclusions to Ireland?

Godge

Dughorm wrote: »

This is one study of the US Employment Market.

How does this enable you to apply those conclusions to Ireland?

Long-term unemployed numbers are not decreasing except when they become pensioners or move to disability benefit.

Dughorm

Godge wrote: »

Long-term unemployed numbers are not decreasing except when they become pensioners or move to disability benefit.

In usa or Ireland?

Two totally different labour markets . One Can't draw conclusions about one based on studies of the other

hmmm

I think most decent unemployed people would jump at a bit of work if they could get it, just to get them out of bed. It shouldn't be chain-gang work, but we should incentivise people to do things such as charity work.

If you're work-shy, then of course this is an outrage and an infringement on your "rights".

Consonata

Consonata wrote: »

I was thinking about this recently that why doesn't the government set up projects such as road rebuilding, improving our railway infrastructure, Internet connectivity etc. by staffing them with people that are currently on the dole. There are a lot of people on the dole who have been on it for a long time with little or lots of effort to find a new job. If you were able to put on your CV that you were a part of a civil engineering project such as that, surely that would help your employment opportunities.

Give me your thoughts.

These are complicated engineering projects that require specific skilled people at all levels - giving a man a shovel and sending him to dig a ditch hasn't been practical since the JCB was developed.