Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Internship scheme offers 5,000 work placements to people on the dole

1…5455575960…92

Comments

  • #1682
    christmas2012
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,827 ✭✭✭christmas2012


    ''I thought the job bridge scheme was supposed to provide graduates with the chance to get work experience, but it kind of defeats the purpose if they're only hiring people who already have experience... It seems like the scheme is in place less for providing experience, and more for providing free labour...''


    Interesting thread...I just read through some of it..Safe to say the evidence is all around us,the main objective of jobbridge is to provide free labour,and create unemployment,while cherry picking the lines of applicants to see who has the most experience,when it is them who should be providing the work experience..


  • #1683
    lostboy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 140 ✭✭lostboy


    lol my attempt to explain the definition of employment to someone has resulted in me being called a communist :pac:

    at the end of the day its a scheme to lower unemployment levels which it does, you know, by employing people, giving them money in exchange for work, removing them from the live register.
    christmas2012 wrote: »

    you say(in an earlier post) there is a cooling off period of 6 months
    I didnt.


  • #1684
    AnnyHallsal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,118 ✭✭✭AnnyHallsal


    lostboy wrote: »
    lol my attempt to explain the definition of employment to someone has resulted in me being called a communist :pac:

    at the end of the day its a scheme to lower unemployment levels which it does, you know, by employing people, giving them money in exchange for work, removing them from the live register.

    I didnt.

    It is not employment. It is a "work experience placement." If JobBridge interns were employed a contract would exist between them and their employer, which it doesn't.


  • #1685
    christmas2012
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,827 ✭✭✭christmas2012


    lostboy wrote: »
    lol my attempt to explain the definition of employment to someone has resulted in me being called a communist :pac:

    at the end of the day its a scheme to lower unemployment levels which it does, you know, by employing people, giving them money in exchange for work, removing them from the live register.

    I didnt.

    it is like communism,everybody gets the same rate,and its depressing to work like that.

    it doesnt lower unemployment like you say,the interns/ce workers still get paid of social welfare,it doesnt remove them from the dole,(it might remove them officially from the live register to make the stats look good,and make the government look like there doing something,but welfare still pays you,and the company doesnt)it might make joan burton look like shes doing something,but it hasnt decreased unemployment,in fact it has helped increase unemployment,like i said before tesco could advertise for paid employment but dont because of these schemes..
    that occupies what could be a paid job,therefore decreasing the availability of paid work and thus creating further unemployment for the masses..


  • #1686
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 5,079 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    lostboy wrote: »
    lol my attempt to explain the definition of employment to someone has resulted in me being called a communist :pac:

    at the end of the day its a scheme to lower unemployment levels which it does, you know, by employing people, giving them money in exchange for work, removing them from the live register.

    I didnt.


    You do realise that it is a politicians method of fiddling the unemployment figures and they have you fooled


  • Advertisement
  • #1687
    BASHIR
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 553 ✭✭✭BASHIR


    AnnyHallsal wrote: »
    It is not employment. It is a "work experience placement." If JobBridge interns were employed a contract would exist between them and their employer, which it doesn't.

    There actually is a contract that both the employer and I had to sign.


  • #1688
    christmas2012
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,827 ✭✭✭christmas2012


    but you still dont get paid from the employer so you are not a paid employee,there is NO employment,you are still on the dole..


  • #1689
    BASHIR
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 553 ✭✭✭BASHIR


    Whats your point. We know that. Look it is a real simple concept, I use this internship to gain experience have no gap in my c.v I keep applying for jobs the way I would be if I was sittin on my ass at home doin Fcuk all.

    There are very little jobs around scheme or no scheme.


  • #1690
    AnnyHallsal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,118 ✭✭✭AnnyHallsal


    BASHIR wrote: »
    There actually is a contract that both the employer and I had to sign.

    There is no contract of employment between you and the Host Organisation, which is called a Host Organisation because it is not an employer. That document is called a Standard Agreement. It stipulates both parties understand and agree to the terms of the scheme, completely different to a contract of employment.


  • #1691
    christmas2012
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,827 ✭✭✭christmas2012


    I partook in this free labour scam,as a fas ce worker,i was on my scheme for 2 years,i seen a lot of situations occuring there with my supervisor,i complained,nothing got done,i was then on another scheme for about a year,same thing happening,the abuse is widespread.
    And the jobbridge thing looks like a job scam too from what i have been reading on different blogs and threads,what im saying is that as an individual,if you sign up to this,you are contributing to unemployment,if everybody that came across a ce / or internship advertised,and just said no,we would be in a stronger position looking for actual paid employment,ie if these schemes werent popular they could have been shut down.
    But now we are in a situation where its been forced on us,if you are thinking of doing one,fair enough but if i were you and i saw anything going on (which im sure you will come across) report it anyway,because if enough complaints go in,they cannot just simply turn around and ignore it then..


  • Advertisement
  • #1692
    yore
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,127 ✭✭✭yore


    christmas2012 wrote: »
    ''I thought the job bridge scheme was supposed to provide graduates with the chance to get work experience, but it kind of defeats the purpose if they're only hiring people who already have experience... It seems like the scheme is in place less for providing experience, and more for providing free labour...''


    Interesting thread...I just read through some of it..Safe to say the evidence is all around us,the main objective of jobbridge is to provide free labour,and create unemployment,while cherry picking the lines of applicants to see who has the most experience,when it is them who should be providing the work experience..


    Are you serious that you genuinely think that the main objective[/be] of jobsbridge is "to provide free labour and create unemployment" . That's some crazy conspiracy theory......what mental person dreamed up a scheme and why did they do it? To get free labour and simultaneously cut back of demand for their product.

    The all the people crying about jobsbridge, what do you want? Do you just want the scheme scrapped and let the market, without government intervention or interference, find ye jobs (doing away with minimum wage and or limit dole as I asked previously??...I'm advocating neither but it is a proposal people put forward) or do you want the scheme scrapped but still want the government to be responsible for creating jobs for ye?


  • #1693
    christmas2012
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,827 ✭✭✭christmas2012


    yore wrote: »
    Are you serious that you genuinely think that the main objective[/be] of jobsbridge is "to provide free labour and create unemployment" . That's some crazy conspiracy theory......what mental person dreamed up a scheme and why did they do it? To get free labour and simultaneously cut back of demand for their product.


    Its not some crazy conspiracy theory,its been abused to such ends,where it does create unemployment,for example:christmas staff(some of which could be made full time),are taken on every year by large multinationals,because they have ''job'' schemes such as jobbridge and fas,they dont take on paid workers,thats just one example of how they create unemployment,and go as far as to increase unemployment.I think in the start FAS and ANCO were seen as a means to train people up,but now its been widely abused,and places like JOBBRIDGE actually turn down people who are graduates because they dont have enough experience..Which shows all they are after is free labour,and im sure they use a revolving door system of free labour staff..
    yore wrote: »
    The all the people crying about jobsbridge, what do you want? Do you just want the scheme scrapped and let the market, without government intervention or interference, find ye jobs (doing away with minimum wage and or limit dole as I asked previously??...I'm advocating neither but it is a proposal people put forward) or do you want the scheme scrapped but still want the government to be responsible for creating jobs for ye?


    I would like the scheme scrapped,for one,it would save us billions,two,it would be hard for companies to get free labour,so they would have to start looking at hiring paid staff..I would never suggest scrap the dole,or cut it,i dont know where you got that idea from,im all for social protection,just not abuse of social protection..

    If they are to keep the scheme(something im not in favour of)they should at least have prerequirements put in place,ie you have to hire x amount of ce /intern workers if you take ce /intern workers on..


  • #1694
    planetX
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,441 ✭✭✭planetX


    yore wrote: »
    The all the people crying about jobsbridge, what do you want?

    I'd like to know there would be some employment at the end of it, because the only way I could take up one of these would be to incur some serious debt in order to work full-time. I would do that if I knew that I was training for a job that was there:mad:


  • #1695
    BASHIR
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 553 ✭✭✭BASHIR


    AnnyHallsal wrote: »
    There is no contract of employment between you and the Host Organisation, which is called a Host Organisation because it is not an employer. That document is called a Standard Agreement. It stipulates both parties understand and agree to the terms of the scheme, completely different to a contract of employment.

    Ok yes you are right but it is a moot point really what does it matter we all know who is paying and I agree with you.
    The point I was making was that the company does still have some responsibility for my welfare while I am working for them.
    christmas2012 wrote: »
    I partook in this free labour scam,as a fas ce worker,i was on my scheme for 2 years,i seen a lot of situations occuring there with my supervisor,i complained,nothing got done,i was then on another scheme for about a year,same thing happening,the abuse is widespread.
    And the jobbridge thing looks like a job scam too from what i have been reading on different blogs and threads,what im saying is that as an individual,if you sign up to this,you are contributing to unemployment,if everybody that came across a ce / or internship advertised,and just said no,we would be in a stronger position looking for actual paid employment,ie if these schemes werent popular they could have been shut down.
    But now we are in a situation where its been forced on us,if you are thinking of doing one,fair enough but if i were you and i saw anything going on (which im sure you will come across) report it anyway,because if enough complaints go in,they cannot just simply turn around and ignore it then..

    I am sorry for your bad experience, but I can only give you my experience with the scheme. I think there are companies out there trying to exploit the system and I would hope people can see the obvious scam and not apply. And each ridiculous "job" be reported. But I was already contributing to unemployment. Now I'm doing the same amount of job applications I would if I was at home but gaining valuable experience.


  • #1696
    sunflower27
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,822 ✭✭✭sunflower27


    And a big reason there are no jobs is because those 7,000 internships are offered.

    If they were not available, the jobs would be offered. Not all obviously, but plenty such as admin and receptionist people etc are necessary for companies to be run. Those roles were always filled by paid employees in the past.

    As long as companies can get away with free labour, many will take that option.


  • #1697
    yore
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,127 ✭✭✭yore


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Check this out
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056636577
    MADNESS


    I read that post. It said the poster was applying for state jobs . Perhaps the poster just doesn't have good enough grades or CV to get called for interview. You can't blame the evil shareholders for this one at least


    If your point is 'here is evidence of a scheme being abused so lets scrap it' then sure lets scrap every scheme that isn't 100% abuse free :rolleyes:

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056563525
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056448455
    sunflower27 wrote: »
    As long as companies can get away with free labour, many will take that option.

    Again, people could turn that into "as long as people can get away with free houses/dole/medical card, many will take that option"

    (I don't think these schemes should be scrapped. I'm just pointing out that your arguments, while sounding good at first glance, and looking good on paper, could easily be reversed against you)


  • #1698
    yore
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,127 ✭✭✭yore


    sunflower27 wrote: »
    And a big reason there are no jobs is because those 7,000 internships are offered.
    .


    Suppose we believe all those jobs would still exists if they converted into full paying jobs. Do you think that your own chances of getting the full one would increase or decrease. Because more people would apply. See for example the poster who emmigrated rather than "work for free"

    I know you posted you have gained experience via your own internship. Is there even a small element of "wanting to pull up the ladder behind you" to this?

    Edit: As for "no jobs .... http://jobsearch.monster.ie/jobs/?cy=ie " . You might mean no jobs that you want


  • #1699
    senordingdong
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,673 ✭✭✭✭senordingdong


    seamus wrote: »
    It's a good move as it gives people the chance to get valuable experience and also be exposed to a potential new employer and impress them, resulting in a proper job.

    The potential for abuse is big because there will be many pricks viewing this as a source of cheap labour and making unreasonable demands of the interns.

    They need to prepare informational sessions for potential interns and employers alike, letting them know things like they cannot be asked to do overtime, work more than their set hours per week, etc etc etc.

    A specific service should also be set up for the interns so that if they're having an issue with an employer making unreasonable demands, they have someone in the department of social welfare that they can turn to so the internship can be terminated (if necessary) without affecting the person's entitlements.

    In fact, specific obligations to protect the interns should be put on the employers involved which can result in large fines if they are not followed through.

    I think it would also be fair to limit the hours to 25-30 hours per week. This would allow job seekers to continue to seek jobs and also make it clear that the scheme is not designed to be a "free workers" scheme to replace the need for proper paid staff.

    Great ideas but I wonder if full transperancy was part of the deal.


  • #1700
    stateofflux
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,563 ✭✭✭stateofflux


    the whole scheme is a joke. and it is rife with exploitation. when will irish employers learn that they don't really save in the long run by treating staff like ****. there will be no loyalty, huge staff turnover, and plenty of grenades left behind when the under appreciated staff member jumps ship when something better comes along


  • #1701
    yore
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,127 ✭✭✭yore


    Deleted User wrote: »
    It crowds out real jobs

    It crowds out the resource, i.e. the people.... As do dole payments.


  • Advertisement
  • #1702
    yore
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,127 ✭✭✭yore


    stateofflux wrote: »
    the whole scheme is a joke. and it is rife with exploitation. when will irish employers learn that they don't really save in the long run by treating staff like ****. there will be no loyalty, huge staff turnover, and plenty of grenades left behind when the under appreciated staff member jumps ship when something better comes along


    They are my reasons why not all employers are automatically assumed to be exploiting the scheme. And also why I've said I'd encourage more big multinationals to provide places if I was in charge.

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=78646532&postcount=1665


  • #1703
    christmas2012
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,827 ✭✭✭christmas2012


    it does block jobs honestly what planet are you on?or are you related to a supervisor on the scheme or what?
    can you not see it for what it is - free labour exploitation.


  • #1704
    christmas2012
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,827 ✭✭✭christmas2012


    yore wrote: »
    They are my reasons why not all employers are automatically assumed to be exploiting the scheme. And also why I've said I'd encourage more big multinationals to provide places if I was in charge.

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=78646532&postcount=1665

    so if you were in charge you have no dent on your conscience about creating unemployment in ireland,and at the state we are currently in?:rolleyes:


  • #1705
    yore
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,127 ✭✭✭yore


    christmas2012 wrote: »
    so if you were in charge you have no dent on your conscience about creating unemployment in ireland,and at the state we are currently in?:rolleyes:


    Hold on a second. Please feel free to lay out your preferred solution to the current jobs situation. As I've stated a few times
    There are
    1) about 450,000 people unemployed
    2) an extra 7000 on jobsbridge (not included in the above figure)
    Assuming that jobsbridge is scrapped we immediately have
    1) Best case scenario: 450,000 on the dole (7,000 got taken on to replace jobsbridge posts)
    2) Worst case scenario: 457,000 on the dole

    This is highly simplistic and does not take into account that the jobsbridge might effectively be subsiding some small firms that otherwise would not be viable and removing those jobs might have knock on effects.



    I find amusing some of the stuff that I read from your links to socialist party websites.... some people just can't be pleased. They generally want government intervention and restriction of free markets, yet when the government intervenes to try to help people, they protest about it :confused:


  • #1706
    yore
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,127 ✭✭✭yore


    christmas2012 wrote: »
    so if you were in charge you have no dent on your conscience about creating unemployment in ireland,and at the state we are currently in?:rolleyes:

    I'm fairly sure that the current high levels of unemployment preceded the initiation of the jobsbridge scheme. It was a reaction to, not a cause of the current climate..


    Unless of course there is some conspiracy theory that the evil employers and government colluded to destroyed the economy (and their own turnover/income) with the intended plan to introduce jobsbridge, a free labour scheme, in a few years to force people to work for nothing.


  • #1707
    yore
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,127 ✭✭✭yore


    christmas2012 wrote: »
    it does block jobs honestly what planet are you on?or are you related to a supervisor on the scheme or what?
    can you not see it for what it is - free labour exploitation.



    There are limits to the number of employees that can be taken on under the scheme. I think you can have 1 for 1-10 full time employees, 2 for 11-20 employess etc. Therefore it cannot possibly block all jobs even if it blocks some

    And no, I'm not related to anyone organising/implementing/availing of the scheme as either an employer or employee. I actually don't even know of any of the above.


  • #1708
    yore
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,127 ✭✭✭yore


    I understand that it must be frustrating for good people to find themselves unemployed for whatever reason and to be having difficulty in finding a new job.


    However, constructing straw men to blame for the situation is not a solution. It might be easy to have someone else to blame but that is not going to fix your situation.
    The people who will climb back up fastest, will be those who are positive and take advantage of every opportunity to invest in themselves.


  • #1709
    christmas2012
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,827 ✭✭✭christmas2012


    yore wrote: »
    Hold on a second. Please feel free to lay out your preferred solution to the current jobs situation.

    My preferred solution would be to scrap the scheme,as it blocks what could be a paid job advertised by lets say: supermacs,and tesco,lets remember the fact that these are huge profit guzzling multinationals,that dont need to be subsidised by our government(and how stupid is that,our government are handing out free workers instead of putting pressure on them to hire)..and as rightly pointed out by sunflower:

    sunflower27 wrote: »
    And a big reason there are no jobs is because those 7,000 internships are offered.

    If they were not available, the jobs would be offered. Not all obviously, but plenty such as admin and receptionist people etc are necessary for companies to be run. Those roles were always filled by paid employees in the past.

    As long as companies can get away with free labour, many will take that option.

    if you cant see that companies abuse the system you must be blind to the scenarios that can play out(and often do)!


    I understand being postive and doing all you can to better your situation,i even did one of these schemes..But im not going to be a stupid blind optimist in the face of labour exploitation..When the reality is these schemes raise unemployment levels..


    ''yet when the government intervenes to try to help people, they protest about it''

    The government (do not be fooled) are only helping themselves,it makes them look like they are doing something about actual unemployment,when they are just making the stats look good..when i was on a ce scheme i was taken off the live register,but i was still paid by welfare..this means i am still unemployed,the job it had could have easily been advertised as a paid job,but wasnt,as it was a jobblocker..the government arent doing all they can,if they were,they would put forward the solution of saying: well if you want to qualify for this scheme you have to employ and pay x amount of workers out of the scheme,that would be a working solution,but they dont,which means these quangos are a complete waste of money.I was reading one thread which an applicant for the job bridge internship was turned down as he/she didnt have enough experience.It is clear all they are after is free labour,nothing more..

    Abuse of the system is rife,why do you choose to ignore this?


  • #1710
    lostboy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 140 ✭✭lostboy


    christmas2012 wrote: »
    christmas staff(some of which could be made full time),are taken on every year by large multinationals,because they have ''job'' schemes such as jobbridge and fas,they dont take on paid workers,thats just one example of how they create unemployment,

    so let me get this straight right, they take away temporary employment by employing people temporarily?:rolleyes: theres just as much chance as the interns becoming full time after the period as a temporary christmas worker

    if they have some position to fill after the christmas period do they give it to an intern or go head hunting? if the so called 6 month period exists then they cannot take on another intern to fill the position can they


  • Advertisement
  • #1711
    AnnyHallsal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,118 ✭✭✭AnnyHallsal


    lostboy wrote: »
    so let me get this straight right, they take away temporary employment by employing people temporarily?:rolleyes: theres just as much chance as the interns becoming full time after the period as a temporary christmas worker

    if they have some position to fill after the christmas period do they give it to an intern or go head hunting? if the so called 6 month period exists then they cannot take on another intern to fill the position can they

    Lostboy, it is not employment. Employment necessitates paying people at least minimum wage. JobBridge Host Organisations pay nothing. Get it?


Advertisement