Name and Shame Job Bridge

Sup08 wrote: »

I came across this thread today and I am very sceptical about the Jobsbridge programme and know that employmers will and I'm sure are already abusing this way of getting cheap labour.
Even a recent debate/discussion between the Minister Joan Burton and Senator Mary Ann O’Brien requesting that it be easy for a company to extend the six months intern ship to 9 months if a project runs over schedule and the company 'NEEDS' the intern to finish the project.
My question would be;"If the company needs the intern for an extra 3 months, surely this means they need to employ someone, all be it on a 3 month contract with full pay/holiday entitlements and not extend the intern ship for cheap labour?"
.

Be interesting to know how many interns are busting their guts for Lily O'Briens chocolates, be also interesting to know what increase in profits they are hauling in since the started cashing in on their free labour.

This is just one massive example of the wealthy using a position of power to help themselves to bigger profits, taking advantage of the desperate youth of this country.

The rich get more greedy, the poor get more desperate.

They should be bloody ashamed of themselves.

allibastor wrote: »

i also really don't know why a company would need a person for 9 months of free work. if after six months they are unable to do the job, or have not made an impact they should be gone, in 9 months many people should be very good at what they do and not be on free labor.

I'm in an internship for which there is no paid position. The last person who had my job was an intern too. Therefore whether or not i can do the job has little bearing. I am making an impact in my job whereby i'm doing things for the institution that havent been done before and breaking new ground for them.
But once my internship is over, that's it. Its back to job hunt.

Sup08 wrote: »

So the last person that did your job was an intern too, HELLO!!
That means they need someone full time and are just using the internship for cheap labour instead of filling the position that you and the last intern have occupied for FREE!
Coffe and Roses come to mind.

Coffee and Roses?
The money simply isnt there to hire a person to do the job full-time. Im willing to bet there are more people in this thread and/or in jobbridge that are in the same boat

JohnMarston wrote: »

Coffee and Roses?
The money simply isnt there to hire a person to do the job full-time. Im willing to bet there are more people in this thread and/or in jobbridge that are in the same boat

The thing is that if they want to hire someone to do a full time for dole then they are out of luck as such a scheme does not exist.

If the government wants to modify jobs bridge to allow the above then they should do so but the reality is that in many companies, the money is there but it is cheaper to use jobsbridge incorrectly to try to make more profit.

Since that is what companies are trying to do and everything comes down to the bottom line, it would be abused left, right and centre which is why I'd be against the government doing it.

As it stands though, you have to abuse jobsbridge to do this so exactly the type of person doing it is exactly the type of chancer who is just doing it to expand the bottom line.

There are probably a few genuine cases but if a company is that close to the edge that they can't hire someone even part time for a role they need to keep the business functioning then the future for that company even in the short term doesn't look good to me.

Jobsbridge seems to be used to keep dying companies on life support with free workers. This is an artifical distortion in the market and such companies might take down healthy rivals by exploiting jobsbridge which is extremely unfair to rival businesses.

There are just a lot of additional problems caused by what jobsbridge is doing that effects healthy businesses and genuine jobseekers trying to get out of the unemployment.

How many hours does an intern have to do per week for the dole plus 50 euros.?

Sup08 wrote: »

Exactly they cant afford someone so the get them for free abusing this system. It should be scrapped until it can be monitored correctly.

thebman wrote: »

The thing is that if they want to hire someone to do a full time for dole then they are out of luck as such a scheme does not exist.

If the government wants to modify jobs bridge to allow the above then they should do so but the reality is that in many companies, the money is there but it is cheaper to use jobsbridge incorrectly to try to make more profit.

Since that is what companies are trying to do and everything comes down to the bottom line, it would be abused left, right and centre which is why I'd be against the government doing it.

As it stands though, you have to abuse jobsbridge to do this so exactly the type of person doing it is exactly the type of chancer who is just doing it to expand the bottom line.

There are probably a few genuine cases but if a company is that close to the edge that they can't hire someone even part time for a role they need to keep the business functioning then the future for that company even in the short term doesn't look good to me.

Jobsbridge seems to be used to keep dying companies on life support with free workers. This is an artifical distortion in the market and such companies might take down healthy rivals by exploiting jobsbridge which is extremely unfair to rival businesses.

There are just a lot of additional problems caused by what jobsbridge is doing that effects healthy businesses and genuine jobseekers trying to get out of the unemployment.

I know what you're saying lads, and i agree. They are in charge of my monthly compliance check which i think i was supposed to have a hand in filling it out.
Bear in mind also that i'm not working for a struggling private sector company, it is a public sector institution which doesnt have the worry of bankruptcy or things like that

Sup08 wrote: »

As I posted earlier, a Senator requested at a meeting that a Company/Person employing/training the intern on a 6 month intern-ship should be able to extend that period for a further 3 months to the maximum 9 months if a project runs over it's due date.
Well surely that means, a member of the Oireachtas is clearly stating that she or a company she owns, only got the intern to complete a project that otherwise would have cost her department/office a wage had the intern-ship option been unavailable and wanted to "Finish a project" because it over ran. That is a clear case of abuse of the system.

In my case, this project i'm involved in is ongoing, meaning it doesnt have an end. The last guy before me was involved in getting a number of facets of the project off the ground. I've been continuing and improving that work.

Three months at most. They also had two other lads in the building as interns doing work too

Sup08 wrote: »

Th amount of interns is governed by the amount of employees in the company, but only by location and not overall. So a supermarket can't send all interns to one store based on the company size overall but by each store size.
If you have directly taken over from a previous Intern and the elapsed time is less than 6 months then that is a clear violation of the Intern-ship and must be reported.
There is a case for interns to be replaced if they leave before their full term has finished, but the company must apply to Jobsbridge for a new Intern and this is dealt with on a case by case basis.

If they have an ongoing project that never ends and keep getting interns to work on such project, is it training or a job?

If they look to replace me immeadiately after my term is up, im reporting them.
What i believe happened is that the intern previously doing my job was supposed to have a nine month contract but there was a mix-up and he was only paid for 6. He stayed on and was given a stipend before he left. I must have been there at least 3 and a half weeks before he left.

TLDR; there was definitely not a 6 month period in between internships for that position

It is definitely a job. Im supposedly being trained. I gave my boss an objective statement when i started and then he urged me to pursue skillnet courses so i recieved 'training' during my time

JohnMarston wrote: »

If they look to replace me immeadiately after my term is up, im reporting them.
What i believe happened is that the intern previously doing my job was supposed to have a nine month contract but there was a mix-up and he was only paid for 6. He stayed on and was given a stipend before he left. I must have been there at least 3 and a half weeks before he left.

TLDR; there was definitely not a 6 month period in between internships for that position

If the organisation is big enough they can hire as many as they want (no six month wait). If an organisation has greater then 10 employees and if an intern(presuming they only have one) leaves after 4 months they can advertise for another straight after has they haven't reached their limit, or if they had less then 10 employees be really sneaky and change the job description for a "different" intern position. And if all else failed advertise it as a WPP. What a great system.

There are about 15 or 16 people in here where i work. The last interns left here about 4 months ago and 2 months ago respectively. I am the only one in here now. Im going to assume that, as per Sup08s post above, because they havent reached their quota of interns in the building, they can advertise for another intern to replace me come November

I had two interviews last week for the same company. OK, it's for Jobbridge roles, but something is better than nothing, even though I'm deeply cynical about the Jobbridge concept. And the company did tell me that there was a strong possibility the roles would be made permanent. I'm still waiting to hear about these roles.

This morning I received a call from the same company offering me an interview. Again it's a Jobbridge role! Of course, I'll go and give it my best shot. But can't help thinking this a a no-cost way of trialling people without the cost and hassle of getting in contractors.