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
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

WPP1 / WPP2

1246711

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 12,382 ✭✭✭✭AARRRGH


    Guell72 wrote: »
    Im not arguing anymore. If you cant figure it out. Dont bother trying. Seriously.
    I give up. Thats the last you'll hear from me on it.
    Other posters, sorry for the off topic posts.

    So funny. Keep digging. :)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 20 Immanuel_CAN


    BostonB wrote: »
    miec I can appreciate the frustration. It sound like its not set up to cater for those who would travel. Perhaps they need to revise it again. It would be something to lobby the politicians for. If you did a FAS course you'd get a travel allowance, so I don't see why the WPP shouldn't aswell.

    As for working for the dole. People have been arguing for that for years. Also you've been working in college for nothing. Unless you have a grant. Which is more? a grant or dole? I don't know tbh. Many will have no grant in college. So thats working for free too.

    Before the celtic tiger it wasn't unusual to go to college and still have no job at the end of it. Those days are here again. It an unfortunate new reality. Indeed a lot of immigrants came here for that reason.

    travel expenses or not it is a half cocked hair brained scheme set up by a gaggle of gombeens, the only people who will benefit from this are the people who are already in the best position economically and as such are in a position to expolit labour in this way.

    at the very least these companys getting free labour should be matching social welfare payments for the first 6 months so the person could at least afford a very basic standard of living.

    its just the same old same old, politicians and big business very comfortable bedfellows exploiting the ordinary man and woman.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 95 ✭✭__________


    AARRRGH - the point I was trying to make is, if you are an employer obviously you would be hugely in favour of a scheme like this. Free staff! Woo! Someone working for me, creating profits for my company, and I don't even have to pay them?????? What's the catch!!?? That's what these employers think.

    Also if you're looking for an argument, I'll quote a post I made not more than 2 pages ago:
    I didn't deem it necessary to explain, thought it was very straight-forward but apparently I was mistaken.

    If companies can hire people into a particular job for €0 (e.g. IT admin), and even on the slight chance they are offered a full time position at the end (which is unlikely considering the type of companies who participate in this scheme - those who have no money) the position would be for minimum wage which the staff would be happy with considering it's almost double the rate of their current income, a 100% pay rise, who wouldn't take it in their position.

    So now another company needs an IT admin, why would they start someone on €30k/year when they can get staff for free for the first 9 months and then mimimum wage after ?

    If enough companies get involved (which they will as companies are always trying to cut costs) , the average salary for that position will drop.

    I don't want the profession I'm involved in, after spending 4 years in college and nearly another 4 years in the workplace, being replaced by someone who will work for quite literally nothing. It reminds me of something out of a south park episode plot.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 12,382 ✭✭✭✭AARRRGH


    __________ wrote: »
    AARRRGH - the point I was trying to make is, if you are an employer obviously you would be hugely in favour of a scheme like this. Free staff! Woo! Someone working for me, creating profits for my company, and I don't even have to pay them?????? What's the catch!!?? That's what these employers think.

    OK - you didn't make your point very well.

    I think most people would agree it's better to have opinions from both sides of the fence than have everyone reading from the same page. You learn nothing that way.

    WPP1/WPP2 is great for people who have no chance of getting a job, which these days means most graduates.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 12,382 ✭✭✭✭AARRRGH


    Also, as someone with a background in finance and an interest in economics, things like WPP1 are exactly what this country needs to start getting Ireland competitive again.

    As a country we're currently way too expensive to do business in, so anything which reduces wages and makes the place more attractive to foreign employers is a good thing.

    I understand in a selfish small minded way many people will hate that, but if you can see past yourself and look at the bigger picture you'll see it is a good thing.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33 sarahzxe


    Hey does anybody know wat the story is with signing on if u take one these placements do ustill have 2 sign on every month??? And how exactly do u collect ur dole from post office if ur working fulltime do they put in2 ur bank account?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 856 ✭✭✭miec


    As a country we're currently way too expensive to do business in,

    The reason why Ireland was too expensive to do business in was down to bad economics by the government, the same government that has now introduced the WWP sheme.

    The reasons why Ireland was too expensive for businesses was due to spiralling mortgages caused by the governement, spiralling insurance costs caused by the government, spiralling energy costs / transport/etc all caused by the government. The recession that we are in was caused by the world economic crisis and worsened by our government.

    The WPP scheme devalues the jobs industry, companies are going to make sure they have an employee who is paid by the government, who at this moment has spirialling debt, now I cannot understand how this can benefit the economy, we need economic policies that ensure businesses can be self sufficient not reliant on social welfare receipients to do the work. If there was no WPP schemes, those companies advertising now would have to pay somoene to do the work, which would reduce the dole queues, bring in tax to the revenue and so forth. As it stands the person doing the work is still being paid their dole, they pay no tax, they are too skint to spend money on clothes, going out etc. It is all counter productive. Additionally, wages have dropped dramatically, most jobs I see now are pre-2000 wage levels so companies are already saving money there on wages.

    The only benefit to the WPP scheme is that it allows the government to pretend that not as many people are on the dole queue and companies get free workers and the WWP1 (graduate schemes) as I have shown are largely trying to get people with experience, therefore, many of the inexperienced graduate will not be able to get their foot in the door.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 12,382 ✭✭✭✭AARRRGH


    miec wrote: »
    The only benefit to the WPP scheme is that it allows the government to pretend that not as many people are on the dole queue and companies get free workers and the WWP1 (graduate schemes) as I have shown are largely trying to get people with experience, therefore, many of the inexperienced graduate will not be able to get their foot in the door.

    That's absolutely not true. The company I work for are going to be hiring a number of graduates with no experience. These graduates will be given jobs which have been created specifically for them, so no one is losing a job or been denied a job because of it.

    The other company I know who uses WPP people has a similar policy.

    The reality is we are returning to an 80's style Ireland (that's an optimistic prediction), so without schemes like WPP all these graduates would still be sitting on the dole with no experience in 9 months time. This at least gives them some hope, and shock horror, helps employers save some money.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,264 ✭✭✭mood


    AARRRGH wrote: »
    That's absolutely not true. The company I work for are going to be hiring a number of graduates with no experience. These graduates will be given jobs which have been created specifically for them, so no one is losing a job or been denied a job because of it.

    The other company I know who uses WPP people has a similar policy.

    The reality is we are returning to an 80's style Ireland (that's an optimistic prediction), so without schemes like WPP all these graduates would still be sitting on the dole with no experience in 9 months time. This at least gives them some hope, and shock horror, helps employers save some money.

    I'm glad to hear you employer is doing it as intended.

    There are so many companies looking for people with 3 yrs experience and more. One company I was in contact with regarding a work placement wanted experience and no training would be provided and no opportunity to learn for co-workers etc.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 12,382 ✭✭✭✭AARRRGH


    mood wrote: »
    I'm glad to hear you employer is doing it as intended.

    There are so many companies looking for people with 3 yrs experience and more. One company I was in contact with regarding a work placement wanted experience and no training would be provided and no opportunity to learn for co-workers etc.

    These employers probably have no money though, so wouldn't be able to hire people without this scheme. So they probably aren't really denying anyone a real job or being evil...


  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    You could argue that govt interference in the jobs market is propping up businesses that should fail if the free market were allowed run its course. This would bring about a quicker correction. Instead the govt is delaying the inevitable. Any business that needs the Govt to pay its workforce isnt viable....


    Lets not draw out the recession longer than it has to we want jobs in our lifetimes please! :mad:


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 18,056 ✭✭✭✭BostonB


    You could argue that govt interference in the jobs market is propping up businesses that should fail if the free market were allowed run its course. This would bring about a quicker correction. Instead the govt is delaying the inevitable. Any business that needs the Govt to pay its workforce isnt viable....


    Lets not draw out the recession longer than it has to we want jobs in our lifetimes please! :mad:

    Unless its a bank....


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 12,382 ✭✭✭✭AARRRGH


    You could argue that govt interference in the jobs market is propping up businesses that should fail if the free market were allowed run its course. This would bring about a quicker correction. Instead the govt is delaying the inevitable. Any business that needs the Govt to pay its workforce isnt viable....


    Lets not draw out the recession longer than it has to we want jobs in our lifetimes please! :mad:

    Yeah I agree with that. Our Government's policy seems to be to drag the recession for as long as they can rather than make any difficult decisions, such as leave the euro.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 589 ✭✭✭loctite


    AARRRGH wrote: »
    These employers probably have no money though, so wouldn't be able to hire people without this scheme. So they probably aren't really denying anyone a real job or being evil...


    No, just abusing the scheme........If they can't afford to hire new staff, then they shouldn't.


    Your resentment towards those who are unemployed is appalling. Unemployment is at catastrophic levels, and you seem to think that those who are unemployed don't want to work?? Get a grip of yourself.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 12,382 ✭✭✭✭AARRRGH


    loctite wrote: »
    No, just abusing the scheme........If they can't afford to hire new staff, then they shouldn't.

    I don't think you understand what the scheme is. Read this from FAS. It is about giving the employee experience. There is nothing abusive about a broke employer using it to get free staff. Bottom line, they both benefit.

    loctite wrote: »
    Your resentment towards those who are unemployed is appalling. Unemployment is at catastrophic levels, and you seem to think that those who are unemployed don't want to work?? Get a grip of yourself.

    What an utterly moronic accusation. For you to have come to that conclusion based on my support of the WPP scheme is beyond simple.

    I suggest you search for my posts on this forum and you will see I spend a large amount of my free time trying to help people find work and be successful.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 589 ✭✭✭loctite


    AARRRGH wrote: »
    What an utterly moronic accusation. For you to have come to that conclusion based on my support of the WPP scheme is beyond simple.

    Enough of your insults......If you wish to insult peoples' intelligence do it elsewhere.

    AARRRGH wrote: »
    I suggest you search for my posts on this forum and you will see I spend a large amount of my free time trying to help people find work and be successful.
    AARRRGH wrote: »
    Yes, I know it's easier to sit at home **** all day while on the dole

    These types of posts must be so inspiring to those who are really down on their luck??


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 12,382 ✭✭✭✭AARRRGH


    loctite wrote: »
    Enough of your insults......If you wish to insult peoples' intelligence do it elsewhere.

    Excuse me, you made the ridiculous accusation that I resent the unemployed and think the unemployed don't want to work. Frankly, only an idiot could come to that conclusion.

    loctite wrote: »
    These types of posts must be so inspiring to those who are really down on their luck??

    Of course, the ol' take the quote out of context trick. Nice and childish of you.

    No one wants to read this crap so stop making dumb accusations.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 589 ✭✭✭loctite


    AARRRGH wrote: »
    No one wants to read this crap

    Precisely.....


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,885 ✭✭✭✭28064212


    sarahzxe wrote: »
    Hey does anybody know wat the story is with signing on if u take one these placements do ustill have 2 sign on every month??? And how exactly do u collect ur dole from post office if ur working fulltime do they put in2 ur bank account?
    From the Fás FAQs on the WPP:
    Do I have to leave my placement to sign on during WPP?
    No. DSFA have made provision for those on WPP to sign by post. Please arrange this with your local social welfare office.
    Not sure about collecting the dole, my placement is right beside the post office, so no problem for me to collect it in person. I'm sure the welfare office will be able to tell you though

    Boardsie Enhancement Suite - a browser extension to make using Boards on desktop a better experience (includes full-width display, keyboard shortcuts, dark mode, and more). Now available through your browser's extension store.

    Firefox: https://addons.mozilla.org/addon/boardsie-enhancement-suite/

    Chrome/Edge/Opera: https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/boardsie-enhancement-suit/bbgnmnfagihoohjkofdnofcfmkpdmmce



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 856 ✭✭✭miec


    Another example of the WPP scheme being abused

    _____________
    Painter Maintenance (WWP2)

    Description:
    Area of activity: Painting of the hotel and general maintenance duties. Elements of Experience: painting experience. Person Specification: previous painting experience.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 43 Libero


    I follow the jobs page frequently for my area and I have seen paid positions converted into WPP's. Infact, it was a laundrette. Forgive me for being cynical, but I don't think anyone needs to work for 9 months unpaid in a laundrette to gain experience that will be practically worthless.

    This should not have been allowed to happen and is complete abuse. Less than 1 month ago they were willing to pay the staff, but now they are not. Plain and simple this is an abuse of the program.
    In that case, the employer is taking a gamble that the old, paid workers won't take a case for unfair dismissal.

    28064212 has pointed out that it would be a fairly open-and-shut case, though I think it would be easier to bring home if one's old post was replaced by a paid employee (like-for-like employment shows that the post wasn't extinguished).

    Unfortunately, 28064212 hasn't pointed out that there are always factors that prevent badly treated workers from enforcing their rights, even where clearly wronged. For a start, they might not keep an eye on their old place of work, and so would not be aware that their redundancy was to facilitate an unpaid WPP worker. The waiting times and legal jargon can also discourage.

    Anyhow, for a bad employer who chooses to gamble, the downside isn't all that severe. Awards for unfair dismissal are capped by statute.

    And yes, all of this is relevant to the question of whether the WPP scheme is open to abuse. It's not realistic to claim that prohibiting something in statute effectively deals with the threat of it happening in practice.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,626 ✭✭✭maninasia


    AARRRGH wrote: »
    OK - you didn't make your point very well.

    I think most people would agree it's better to have opinions from both sides of the fence than have everyone reading from the same page. You learn nothing that way.

    WPP1/WPP2 is great for people who have no chance of getting a job, which these days means most graduates.

    At the expense of 1) a paid job for the existing staff 2) the opportunities that would have been paid for by employer but now employed by state at tax expense 3) the opportunity cost of wasted funds in a non-productive effort, these funds could be used to help to expand industry/reduce costs for industry and encourage hiring in a natural more efficient way.

    And by the way, I work in business management myself so I know how these things work. I guess only half the companies will be above board with this scheme.

    It is a costly, wasteful and un-productive effort in the main, open to abuse as has been categorically pointed out here and even allegedly admitted here by Fas staff.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 18,056 ✭✭✭✭BostonB


    If people here can decide a job is bogus from simply looking at the description, you'd think those jobs could be easily dropped from the scheme by whomever is policing it, and the company blacklisted fom the scheme. would revenue not know when people stop working in a company, so they could check and see if people lost a job to the WPP.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,626 ✭✭✭maninasia


    The aim of giving new graduates experience is good. But the scheme needs to be thought out and policed to stop abuse.

    For instance if a company contributes 60-70% of the cost for a NEW position and the government chips in the rest as long as the company commits for a period of two years (following a 2 mth probation). Something like that is more appropriate, forcing the company to commit funds to the training and longer term employment of the new hire.

    Now if I can figure this out in 10 minutes surely somebody in government can too!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,264 ✭✭✭mood


    maninasia wrote: »
    The aim of giving new graduates experience is good. But the scheme needs to be thought out and policed to stop abuse.

    For instance if a company contributes 60-70% of the cost for a NEW position and the government chips in the rest as long as the company commits for a period of two years (following a 2 mth probation). Something like that is more appropriate, forcing the company to commit funds to the training and longer term employment of the new hire.

    Now if I can figure this out in 10 minutes surely somebody in government can too!

    You would think but then it's the Irish Government and FAS! That said there seem to be some that look like they will give a person training etc but these are few and far between.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 856 ✭✭✭miec


    I will say that there are a good number of WWP1 positions that are genuine or at least advertised in a genuine manner, I just wanted to give a balanced view but I don't think it is a viable option as outlined already.
    you'd think those jobs could be easily dropped from the scheme by whomever is policing it, and the company blacklisted fom the scheme. would revenue not know when people stop working in a company, so they could check and see if people lost a job to the WPP.

    No one is policing it and the jobs are posted up by FAS, I copied those examples of jobs that are abusing the system from the fas.ie website so I doubt very much that any genuine policing is going on.
    For instance if a company contributes 60-70% of the cost for a NEW position and the government chips in the rest as long as the company commits for a period of two years (following a 2 mth probation). Something like that is more appropriate, forcing the company to commit funds to the training and longer term employment of the new hire.

    Excellent idea.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,124 ✭✭✭Amhran Nua


    maninasia wrote: »
    For instance if a company contributes 60-70% of the cost for a NEW position and the government chips in the rest as long as the company commits for a period of two years (following a 2 mth probation). Something like that is more appropriate, forcing the company to commit funds to the training and longer term employment of the new hire.
    I think they use something similar in Germany?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,535 ✭✭✭Raekwon


    maninasia wrote: »
    For instance if a company contributes 60-70% of the cost for a NEW position and the government chips in the rest as long as the company commits for a period of two years (following a 2 mth probation). Something like that is more appropriate, forcing the company to commit funds to the training and longer term employment of the new hire.

    Yeah that's an excellent idea. Unfortunately the words "excellent idea" and "FAS" will never share the same sentence.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 169 ✭✭Guell72


    I found out today that my company was contacted and asked to re-word their ads. By re-word i mean to hide the fact that they require experienced workers in the ads and leave asking for experience until they call people for interview. They were not asked to take them down or to not abuse the system.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,264 ✭✭✭mood


    Guell72 wrote: »
    I found out today that my company was contacted and asked to re-word their ads. By re-word i mean to hide the fact that they require experienced workers in the ads and leave asking for experience until they call people for interview. They were not asked to take them down or to not abuse the system.

    We should have a name and shame thread!


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 169 ✭✭Guell72


    mood wrote: »
    We should have a name and shame thread!

    Im not going to name my employer now. I might if I no longer work for them though :D


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,626 ✭✭✭maninasia


    Raekwon wrote: »
    Yeah that's an excellent idea. Unfortunately the words "excellent idea" and "FAS" will never share the same sentence.

    A similar scheme was used to pretty good effect in Taiwan (economy has recovered already so not neccessary now for younger people/new grads, however it is in operation to encourage employers to employ older people) and probably other countries such as Germany etc.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 925 ✭✭✭billybigunz


    Guell72 wrote: »
    I found out today that my company was contacted and asked to re-word their ads. By re-word i mean to hide the fact that they require experienced workers in the ads and leave asking for experience until they call people for interview. They were not asked to take them down or to not abuse the system.

    Get those email records and you could take down this scheme. That is scandalous.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,885 ✭✭✭✭28064212


    Guell72 wrote: »
    I found out today that my company was contacted and asked to re-word their ads. By re-word i mean to hide the fact that they require experienced workers in the ads and leave asking for experience until they call people for interview. They were not asked to take them down or to not abuse the system.
    And by "by re-word I mean" you mean that's what you took it to mean. Even though if the ad says no experience required, how many people with experience do you think are going to apply?

    Boardsie Enhancement Suite - a browser extension to make using Boards on desktop a better experience (includes full-width display, keyboard shortcuts, dark mode, and more). Now available through your browser's extension store.

    Firefox: https://addons.mozilla.org/addon/boardsie-enhancement-suite/

    Chrome/Edge/Opera: https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/boardsie-enhancement-suit/bbgnmnfagihoohjkofdnofcfmkpdmmce



  • Closed Accounts Posts: 169 ✭✭Guell72


    28064212 wrote: »
    And by "by re-word I mean" you mean that's what you took it to mean. Even though if the ad says no experience required, how many people with experience do you think are going to apply?

    Editing post ... Probably best to remove what i posted here.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 169 ✭✭Guell72


    Get those email records and you could take down this scheme. That is scandalous.

    Im told it was a phone call.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 12,382 ✭✭✭✭AARRRGH




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 194 ✭✭Frenzy


    sarahzxe wrote: »
    Hey does anybody know wat the story is with signing on if u take one these placements do ustill have 2 sign on every month??? And how exactly do u collect ur dole from post office if ur working fulltime do they put in2 ur bank account?

    I've been working under the WPP1 scheme for the last month. You need to go to the social welfare office and tell them you're on the scheme and ask to transfer you payments to your account. If you're work placement is outside your social welfare offices area they will transfer it to your account but if not they might move your post office. Totally depends on who you talk to.

    Also ask to be put you on the 'sign on by post' scheme. I had to go in 4 times and filled out the same forms every time so be prepared for a good bit of hassle. My social welfare office didn't have a clue what to do when I said I was on the WPP1 obviously not many people partaking in my area.

    If you have a medical card you may be entitled to get travel expenses as you are not getting paid.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,264 ✭✭✭mood


    Frenzy wrote: »
    I've been working under the WPP1 scheme for the last month. You need to go to the social welfare office and tell them you're on the scheme and ask to transfer you payments to your account. If you're work placement is outside your social welfare offices area they will transfer it to your account but if not they might move your post office. Totally depends on who you talk to.

    Also ask to be put you on the 'sign on by post' scheme. I had to go in 4 times and filled out the same forms every time so be prepared for a good bit of hassle. My social welfare office didn't have a clue what to do when I said I was on the WPP1 obviously not many people partaking in my area.

    If you have a medical card you may be entitled to get travel expenses as you are not getting paid.

    How are you finding the placement?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 194 ✭✭Frenzy


    Yeah its going really well. It's a really great office to have on my CV and I don't feel like I'm being used (architectural graduate intern positions are the norm in most european countries so its just a culture that ireland will have to get used to) Its a small office and we're working on (if goes ahead) a great project but obviously I would prefer to get a bit more money so I could afford to move out. If work picks up (depending on projects going ahead) I'll be in a good position to be employed full time but at the moment nobody knows.

    It wasn't a position advertised on the FAS site. I applied directly to architect's offices and gave them information on the scheme to give them another option if they wanted to employ me as I really need experience to get my professional qualifications and currently there really is no other way of doing it.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,113 ✭✭✭lukin


    I haven't the time to read the whole of this thread so apologies if this has been answered already: I see a lot of the WPP1 schemes are short-term (6 months, 9 months). Does this mean these are contract positions?
    Surely this is grossly unfair as if I am offered a job with a salary while working for nothing, I can't take the job?
    I know little about the scheme but there should be something to prevent companies who use it from making you sign a contract (maybe there is already).


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,264 ✭✭✭mood


    lukin wrote: »
    I haven't the time to read the whole of this thread so apologies if this has been answered already: I see a lot of the WPP1 schemes are short-term (6 months, 9 months). Does this mean these are contract positions?
    Surely this is grossly unfair as if I am offered a job with a salary while working for nothing, I can't take the job?
    I know little about the scheme but there should be something to prevent companies who use it from making you sign a contract (maybe there is already).

    I assume you can leave when ever you wish if offered a job or whatever. It's not like the company are paying you or anything! But maybe someone who actually did or is doing a WPP can tell us for sure.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,291 ✭✭✭eclectichoney


    mood wrote: »
    I assume you can leave when ever you wish if offered a job or whatever. It's not like the company are paying you or anything! But maybe someone who actually did or is doing a WPP can tell us for sure.

    Yes - Fás are only too delighted if you find a job before the placement is up!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,113 ✭✭✭lukin


    Yes - Fás are only too delighted if you find a job before the placement is up!

    That's a relief. One other thing, I have applied for a WPP1 job and been called for an interview but I am actually still employed. I will be finished for sure in three weeks but my boss has told me I can leave straight away if a pemanent job comes up soemwhere else.
    What happens if I am offered the job?If I hand in my notice straight away will I be OK?Can the employer find out from FAS that I am still working?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,264 ✭✭✭mood


    lukin wrote: »
    That's a relief. One other thing, I have applied for a WPP1 job and been called for an interview but I am actually still employed. I will be finished for sure in three weeks but my boss has told me I can leave straight away if a pemanent job comes up soemwhere else.
    What happens if I am offered the job?If I hand in my notice straight away will I be OK?Can the employer find out from FAS that I am still working?

    As far as I know if you leave a job of your own accord you don't get the dole for about 6 weeks so it's not a good idea to leave you current job early. What would you live on? I also thought you had to be unemployed 3 or 6 months to even be able to apply for a WPP!

    Also you need to stop thinking of it as a job because it isn't. On a WPP you get paid your dole and possibly rent allowance but nothing else. I would also get it in writing that the company will give you a proper reference after the WPP is completed.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,113 ✭✭✭lukin


    mood wrote: »
    As far as I know if you leave a job of your own accord you don't get the dole for about 6 weeks so it's not a good idea to leave you current job early.
    Ive only got a few weeks left in my current job so if it's a choice between
    working for a few weeks and then having nothing or leaving early and having experience but dole then it's an easy choice. I think I can persuade my employer to say he let me go rather than I left as they don't really need me anymore, my work there is pretty much done.
    mood wrote: »
    What would you live on? I also thought you had to be unemployed 3 or 6 months to even be able to apply for a WPP!
    from the FAS website:
    Anyone who is unemployed is eligible to apply for the Work Placement Programme.

    If you are a graduate with a level 7 qualification you can apply for both the graduate placements (WPP1) and the non-graduate placements (WPP2). Otherwise, you can apply for all non-graduate placements (WPP2).
    mood wrote: »
    Also you need to stop thinking of it as a job because it isn't. On a WPP you get paid your dole and possibly rent allowance but nothing else. I would also get it in writing that the company will give you a proper reference after the WPP is completed.

    That's a good idea but I would hope at the end of my placement they would keep me on (and pay me obviously). It's an IT job, sorry placement, so at worst the experience will help me get a paid job.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 957 ✭✭✭oppiuy


    I have post this in a different thread but i think its an example of abuse that this thread is talking about

    OK so update on this situation.

    In a different department 23 people have been made redundant until July and 23 Fas "workers" have been brought into our department for "training".

    And we have been asked to take an hour cut of 2.5 per week while these guys are here. Met management and the union on Friday who said it had been accepted without consultation with any worker.

    I pressed them on 2 things. why let these folk go when they could have moved departments?
    why are we still taking these people in who are effectively working. Union basically laughed and said its just giving others an opportunity. And they weren't effecting hours, pay or productivity.

    I asked what happens next if some people don't agree to the hour reductions and my reply was that they weren't sure but that it would probably happen anyway. Ive refused and I'm happy to push them as far as i can on this. I know from other threads and links to the citizens info page that they can make my position redundant, at this stage i cant really afford for that to happen but would be prepared to meet that end as i think i need to make a stand somewhere.

    What im really looking for is maybe some advise on what to do next. I will be handing in the forms of acceptance tomorrow and will make sure they understand that i have not accepted the change and why.
    I think i will probably need to clarify these reasons and make it clear they cannot change my terms of employment without my consent..

    What do you think i should do or say.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 925 ✭✭✭billybigunz


    oppiuy wrote: »
    I have post this in a different thread but i think its an example of abuse that this thread is talking about

    OK so update on this situation.

    In a different department 23 people have been made redundant until July and 23 Fas "workers" have been brought into our department for "training".

    And we have been asked to take an hour cut of 2.5 per week while these guys are here. Met management and the union on Friday who said it had been accepted without consultation with any worker.

    I pressed them on 2 things. why let these folk go when they could have moved departments?
    why are we still taking these people in who are effectively working. Union basically laughed and said its just giving others an opportunity. And they weren't effecting hours, pay or productivity.

    I asked what happens next if some people don't agree to the hour reductions and my reply was that they weren't sure but that it would probably happen anyway. Ive refused and I'm happy to push them as far as i can on this. I know from other threads and links to the citizens info page that they can make my position redundant, at this stage i cant really afford for that to happen but would be prepared to meet that end as i think i need to make a stand somewhere.

    What im really looking for is maybe some advise on what to do next. I will be handing in the forms of acceptance tomorrow and will make sure they understand that i have not accepted the change and why.
    I think i will probably need to clarify these reasons and make it clear they cannot change my terms of employment without my consent..

    What do you think i should do or say.

    Make it political. Get some FG or labour politician who would take on your cause. Your employer would back than fairly quick I reckon if it was making any kind of news.


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Make it political. Get some FG or labour politician who would take on your cause. Your employer would back than fairly quick I reckon if it was making any kind of news.

    Alert the media that workers are being laid off to be replaced by this Fas scheme work for free crap. Do it now:

    joe@rte.ie (Joe Duffy)
    drivetime@rte.ie

    morningireland@rte.ie

    lastword@todayfm.com

    therighthook@newstalk.ie

    here is a list of politicians:
    http://www.thepropertypin.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=14604&hilit=blitzkrieg
    Do contact some opposition members even possibly some FF or Green backbenchers. This could be brought up in the Dail.

    Do it for all of us dude! :mad:


  • Advertisement
Advertisement