nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

What do you think of JobBridge?

Warper

What do you think of the current Govt's scheme that if you are out of work for a certain period of time, eg 6 months that you have to work 20 hrs a week for an extra €50 to stop you from getting your dole docked? Of course the primary reason for this is getting people off the live register which is a total underhanded way of falsifying the current state of the unemployment problem.

Personally i think its one of the worst policies the current Govt have come up with. It is basically a cheap form of slave labour enforced upon the unfortunate ones in society that have lost their job or simply can't get a job. It is utterly demeaning paying someone 50 quid a week for 20 hrs labour. Its equivalent to €2.50 an hour, well below the minimum wage. They should pay the person the minimum wage at least. Quite frankly its scandalous.

The fact that practically no one gets a full time job from it also highlights the greedy companies that avail of this form of cheap labour. All in all the whole JobBridge thing sickens me.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

starlit

I've often been asked if such and such a job I had was paid/unpaid in interviews and often asked in online applications depends on company.

Tiddlypeeps

The_Captain wrote: »

It's not an issue of going for a job interview with a different company and being asked whether you were paid or not.

It's more to do with companies treating paid interns as actual employees giving them more responsibilities and having them actually do the job they're paying them to do, which makes that company more likely to keep them on as paid staff after the internship.
The third link below also shows that there's no difference in grades or exam results between paid and unpaid interns, so it's not a case that only the best and brightest are offered paid internships

https://www.naceweb.org/s08012012/paid-intern-job-offer/
https://www.naceweb.org/s05292013/paid-unpaid-interns-job-offer.aspx
http://www.internbridge.com/2012%20Salary%20Report.pdf

Ah, that's different to what I thought you were getting at. I thought you were saying it effects their overall job prospects, not just their prospects with the company they interned with.

The_Captain

Tiddlypeeps wrote: »

I started my career off with a paid internship. I have since done many job interviews and have never once been asked if it was paid or not, I put down no indication either way on my CV as I thought it was irrelevant.

Is it normal for people to ask in interviews if an internship was paid or not? It's quite possible my experience is not the norm.

Do you have a link to the studies you mentioned?

It's not an issue of going for a job interview with a different company and being asked whether you were paid or not.

It's more to do with companies treating paid interns as actual employees giving them more responsibilities and having them actually do the job they're paying them to do, which makes that company more likely to keep them on as paid staff after the internship.
The third link below also shows that there's no difference in grades or exam results between paid and unpaid interns, so it's not a case that only the best and brightest are offered paid internships

https://www.naceweb.org/s08012012/paid-intern-job-offer/
https://www.naceweb.org/s05292013/paid-unpaid-interns-job-offer.aspx
http://www.internbridge.com/2012%20Salary%20Report.pdf

Tiddlypeeps

The_Captain wrote: »

Studies show that taking an unpaid internship does little or nothing to help your employment prospects, while taking a paid internship makes you far more likely to get a job.
Although, if you prefer, you could say that the people most likely to get a job are unlikely to take an unpaid internship.

I started my career off with a paid internship. I have since done many job interviews and have never once been asked if it was paid or not, I put down no indication either way on my CV as I thought it was irrelevant.

Is it normal for people to ask in interviews if an internship was paid or not? It's quite possible my experience is not the norm.

Do you have a link to the studies you mentioned?

The_Captain

Baron Kurtz wrote: »

Exactly. A lot of people on the scratch declare they would do 'anything' to get out of the house, voluntary work etc. Is Jobbridge not this 'anything' and perfectly tailored for this, to staunch the boredom and get back into routine?

Okay, it could be implemented better to be a little more worthwhile financially, but a lot of people baulk at the idea of it when it's presented to them and by that rationale they're talking out of two sides of their mouth.

Going to work is very costly in terms of transport, food, child care etc. Working for free adds a whole lot of cost to your life with no return. A lot of people can't justify doing unpaid work because they simply can't afford it.

Internships might be great for young people with no dependents, but even then it's pointless if you get no job at the end of it.
In the UK and US, where intern schemes are more common, there's a lot of criticism of unpaid internships rather than paid internships.

Studies show that taking an unpaid internship does little or nothing to help your employment prospects, while taking a paid internship makes you far more likely to get a job.
Although, if you prefer, you could say that the people most likely to get a job are unlikely to take an unpaid internship.

KERSPLAT!

Brutal Deluxe wrote: »

IIRC Tesco did actually get some people on it when it was on the news about them doing it.

Besides, there are still examples today of places like that doing it

http://jobseeker.fas.ie/Default.aspx?q=B+fomdowzS8kaDnSlUDk1zaMUPiFEeNrNWjviinu490thmC2C0u+DM1d7/OA0K58pE5X2wN4u0OYwiBUS9Dw6+VQyvztru0KUxMVFgSzABIFHbhHHEBP3Jonba2ax8tSYOLfop/SeWXR1vF3tYJF+9eZqaIbgCyIWGF/Nf+2zWeJVrgnQDTJ7zNLRFjGXaSu8SXBISaRGbVY6kmUnP5ylgBEMh1P5krvvB+BPXSTUeBsY348yjGP1pOghyUw0SGjGCXcZ9c5M/lyCoS1LkYegmHUxG3mQbVmozoUL5YRRPg9uMYji+ijAJHybPbnA2UrrC82vOYNbLDqfdpJaw2bhGQr5SVwh21XL6CxUbw1LP/DvxIYNXYWe2rsmeOGN21WTPlJZwdz8QmQmLVxHjdXDjEWX8QyqxRAovOsNIPDvrbKTWqdRIsriDKnCFh4yO7d0ZGMhGOWc9RNSngDvaP5bEkoXhbSxiD2yVCAiMyamYg=

http://jobseeker.fas.ie/Default.aspx?q=B+fomdowzS8kaDnSlUDk1zaMUPiFEeNrNWjviinu490thmC2C0u+DPyV1clGtU3WkFA40vTHTdefFhNIf6yj2MXu7gSxaYu984bfegAmqDjWAK6CDnStx3yvkt5CaR0R81CHXTrXPo8glphLeI5flIpckKK+25TEYZ4clUyYqxgRiquE7SVkxWCEiaAVJuiAGXMD1twwqWyBit932wdDXIr+vVdlqjgPnXs/G4nF0PlJ9odj/BLd+XfTqUNeOol9SrZHrRcRWL3Apr3L3H9yqJtSKmXSovmYIsJm4hns8v4LK+eiQGyYq28woUHJ7P81VSxo9E9FaJnHyxP5H8uku4kVl8FwIh8dRyNJq1Or54ITvto0Xhp1x1TztKBWz3JYF0/wr3k/c82YfkjP6pA/Boj5WNbnVIotgQ/yTd0NkO9ogYy8dddkicwiJsW+om5BzDcKBkxYD+1aAWuV72ga/awmTqCPe/YHYrF5Oc4poAA=

I was full sure it was pulled before they employed anyone but yeah, there are plenty more just like them I'm sure. This is obviously the bad side of it.

Baron Kurtz

The Backwards Man wrote: »

I was on the dole for a while a few years ago as I had to wait to get vetted.

I would have gladly signed up for such a scheme for NO extra money. There's nothing as demeaning as sitting around on your hole all day doing nothing.

Exactly. A lot of people on the scratch declare they would do 'anything' to get out of the house, voluntary work etc. Is Jobbridge not this 'anything' and perfectly tailored for this, to staunch the boredom and get back into routine?

Okay, it could be implemented better to be a little more worthwhile financially, but a lot of people baulk at the idea of it when it's presented to them and by that rationale they're talking out of two sides of their mouth.

Tombi!

IIRC Tesco did actually get some people on it when it was on the news about them doing it.

Besides, there are still examples today of places like that doing it

http://jobseeker.fas.ie/Default.aspx?q=B+fomdowzS8kaDnSlUDk1zaMUPiFEeNrNWjviinu490thmC2C0u+DM1d7/OA0K58pE5X2wN4u0OYwiBUS9Dw6+VQyvztru0KUxMVFgSzABIFHbhHHEBP3Jonba2ax8tSYOLfop/SeWXR1vF3tYJF+9eZqaIbgCyIWGF/Nf+2zWeJVrgnQDTJ7zNLRFjGXaSu8SXBISaRGbVY6kmUnP5ylgBEMh1P5krvvB+BPXSTUeBsY348yjGP1pOghyUw0SGjGCXcZ9c5M/lyCoS1LkYegmHUxG3mQbVmozoUL5YRRPg9uMYji+ijAJHybPbnA2UrrC82vOYNbLDqfdpJaw2bhGQr5SVwh21XL6CxUbw1LP/DvxIYNXYWe2rsmeOGN21WTPlJZwdz8QmQmLVxHjdXDjEWX8QyqxRAovOsNIPDvrbKTWqdRIsriDKnCFh4yO7d0ZGMhGOWc9RNSngDvaP5bEkoXhbSxiD2yVCAiMyamYg=

http://jobseeker.fas.ie/Default.aspx?q=B+fomdowzS8kaDnSlUDk1zaMUPiFEeNrNWjviinu490thmC2C0u+DPyV1clGtU3WkFA40vTHTdefFhNIf6yj2MXu7gSxaYu984bfegAmqDjWAK6CDnStx3yvkt5CaR0R81CHXTrXPo8glphLeI5flIpckKK+25TEYZ4clUyYqxgRiquE7SVkxWCEiaAVJuiAGXMD1twwqWyBit932wdDXIr+vVdlqjgPnXs/G4nF0PlJ9odj/BLd+XfTqUNeOol9SrZHrRcRWL3Apr3L3H9yqJtSKmXSovmYIsJm4hns8v4LK+eiQGyYq28woUHJ7P81VSxo9E9FaJnHyxP5H8uku4kVl8FwIh8dRyNJq1Or54ITvto0Xhp1x1TztKBWz3JYF0/wr3k/c82YfkjP6pA/Boj5WNbnVIotgQ/yTd0NkO9ogYy8dddkicwiJsW+om5BzDcKBkxYD+1aAWuV72ga/awmTqCPe/YHYrF5Oc4poAA=

Tiddlypeeps

jos22 wrote: »

the states pays the the 188 + 50 euro top on job bridge

employers pays you nothing

kevohmsford wrote: »

JobBridge should be for only people just finished college to gain experience in their chosen field. The whole thing has been abused by companies to get cheap workers.

It think it would be fine for apprenticeship type jobs too, they don't always require a college degree but can provide someone with a trade that will vastly increase their employability.

If it was run correctly it could be a very valuable program. It would benefit graduates that often have a hard time getting that first job and it would benefit start up companies that genuinely don't have the funds to hire someone they can't guarantee will generate enough revenue to cover their wages. More successful start ups = more jobs.

Keep in mind you are only allowed to hire 1 job bridge intern per X employees (I think X is 10, but I haven't looked into it in a while), so this it is not possible to create an entire workforce out of just interns like a lot of people seem to think.

It's crazy how badly it's being run. The rules laid out when applying to get a job bridge intern are really strict. They stress that the company needs to offer decent experience from the position, unskilled jobs are not allowed. Each position is vetted before it's released on the website, so this means the people vetting the positions are for some reason deliberately letting through positions that don't tick most of the boxes.

I don't usually subscribe to paranoid conspiracy theories, but the only thing that makes sense there is that they are being told from higher up to just let everything through regardless. The only thing to be gained from that is reducing the numbers on the live register.

You could argue that maybe they don't have the numbers to throughly vet every position, but some of the positions are so obviously unskilled labour even at a glance that I don't think that argument really holds up.

KERSPLAT!

I know they advertised jobs bridge positions but I was certain they were quickly taken down. Do tesco have JB positions at the moment or have they ever had someone employed under the JB scheme?

My view is, it's good for some bad for others.

Some people straight out of college can't get their foot in the door and this is a way for them to gain experience and knowledge in their relevant field and hopefully gain employment at the same company or use the experience to gain employment elsewhere

The other side is you have the same people out of college who can't get their foot in the door and when they get onto JB they're left filing for 9 months. Or the company is looking for someone experienced in a position they are supposed to be training someone into

Tombi!

In theory, if used right, it could be just another avenue like a CE Scheme.
But it's far, far from being used right.

It's usually 39 hours a week for nine months.

Anyway, you're all forgetting one important thing. It's an additional fifty euro on what you get. So someone that's 18 and only getting 100 a week, gets a whooping 150 a week for 39 hours a week for nine months.

Which, depending on how much dole you get can be anywhere from €3.8 to 6.1 per hour

Now, here's the most fun part about it. It's entirely between you and the employer (BTW, you aren't employed officially, you are still required to look for a job). Unlike a CE Scheme which if you aren't being trained properly, the welfare does intervene (at least from what I've seen).

So basically from talking to people who took part in it (and from what I've read), you can be used as a skivvy and the dole don't really care.
You can make complaints but it amounts to "well you can leave it" without any repercussions for the employeer

At the end of the day: CE Scheme = good. Jobbridge = bad (or as I call it, free labour for Tesco)

kevohmsford

JobBridge should be for only people just finished college to gain experience in their chosen field. The whole thing has been abused by companies to get cheap workers.

shruikan2553

homerjay2005 wrote: »

ah but you see, thats the problem - people see it as getting 188 for nothing, but only 50euro for doing something.

i think its a great scheme and it should be brought in as standard all accross the country. if you dont want to work for your dole, you can f*ck off.

Why don't we have the state pay everyone's wages? Remember, these are private companies.

El_Duderino 09

Warper wrote: »

What do you think of the current Govt's scheme that if you are out of work for a certain period of time, eg 6 months that you have to work 20 hrs a week for an extra €50 to stop you from getting your dole docked? Of course the primary reason for this is getting people off the live register which is a total underhanded way of falsifying the current state of the unemployment problem.

Personally i think its one of the worst policies the current Govt have come up with. It is basically a cheap form of slave labour enforced upon the unfortunate ones in society that have lost their job or simply can't get a job. It is utterly demeaning paying someone 50 quid a week for 20 hrs labour. Its equivalent to €2.50 an hour, well below the minimum wage. They should pay the person the minimum wage at least. Quite frankly its scandalous.

The fact that practically no one gets a full time job from it also highlights the greedy companies that avail of this form of cheap labour. All in all the whole JobBridge thing sickens me.

Well its 238 for 20 hours work so its actually quite an expensive form of slave labour. Calling it slave labour is ridiculous.

Those who recently qualified or graduated from Uni are either going to go on a jobBridge scheme and get some experience of practical work and how to fit into a work environment OR sit on their jaxi and get no experience. It's not perfect but it's better than doing nowt.

homerjay2005

naughtb4 wrote: »

Pretty sure €188 (or whatever)+€50 isnt €2.50 an hour. The whole amount should surely be taken

ah but you see, thats the problem - people see it as getting 188 for nothing, but only 50euro for doing something.

i think its a great scheme and it should be brought in as standard all accross the country. if you dont want to work for your dole, you can f*ck off.

Hermy

I don't agree with internships on principal - barring voluntary/ charity work a person should be paid for their time - although I can see the obvious benefits of a genuine internship to someone pursuing a professional career.
In the case of JobBridge I would much prefer to see the employer contributing - say ~€149 - thus bringing the interns 'wage' up to the minimum.

Having said all that, the fact that this position has been on display on a state run website for the past three weeks highlights all that is wrong with JobBridge.

Catering Assistant

Created on: 16/10/2014 | Updated on: 16/10/2014 | Displayed until 11/11/2014 4 days from now
Based in ROSCOMMON TOWN
Ref. INTE-888593
Description

The intern will gain practical experience in dish washing...

I have complained to Intreo about this sort of thing in the past and all I got was a shrug of the shoulders - apparently there's nothing they can do about it!

ToddyDoody

Jobridge can be ok. For.a graduate needing find experience in a sector. to their degree, who otherwise cant manage to get a foot in the door into the industry, its not the worst. In saying that, its extremely difficult to have worked 5 days a week and be quizzed with suspicion at the end of it by the social welfare department wondering what you did wrong because they didn't keep you on.

shruikan2553

The idea isn't bad, the execution is poor. Too long, too little from employer and it needs to be monitored better.

FloatingVoter

JobBridge is best viewed from the government point of view. Keep live register figures down. Anco, FAS, JobBridge .....all the same. Most experienced hustlers have moved to disability allowance, therefore untouchable and off the books (no offence intended to the vast majority of genuine people in receipt of DA).
Due to Irish Water, plenty of people are getting an idea of what can and can't be put on a balance sheet. It works just the same for employment.
Our glorious leaders (be they FF, FG, Labour SF or theMonster Raving Looney party) would like the unemployed to emigrate, die, reach pension age or somehow or other not be there. JobBridge is just a dreamy little way of making you go off the books for 6 months.
It does provide entry level workers with someone to sneer at. While they're feeling superior they're not noticing their own exploitation. I recently had the benefit of hearing a 30 year old in negative equity and racking up credit card debt joking about having a JobBridge kid with a masters degree making her coffee. Her jokes - unfunny. His sin ? - unemployed and a member of the male race. She is not a nice person and I do hope her house is repossessed soon.

jos22

GarIT wrote: »

I didn't know it was being done but it's not happening enough. Is it a requirement or something you can opt into?

You should be given an option, JobBridge, charity or community work, not working shouldn't be an option.

anyone who is long term employed can picked by department to those scheme
you can't opt in or out.

JobPath another scheme which is being outsourced to FRS where FRS will be contacting people who on dole over a year and booking them in for interviews etc and will be"be performance based, meaning operators will be paid if they secure sustainable employment for people. To ensure people obtain full-time jobs the department will stagger payments to providers."

quote from irish times

[Deleted User]

So subsidising a company and undercutting a fully-paid worker is better than spending less and not filling a position at extra cost to the state? Sounds good.

GarIT

jos22 wrote: »

you do know that they already do this with TUS and Gateway, I think there is at least 10,000 people on TUS working for their dole in charity etc

gateway people are sweeping the streets, cutting grassing and hedges etc

I didn't know it was being done but it's not happening enough. Is it a requirement or something you can opt into?

You should be given an option, JobBridge, charity or community work, not working shouldn't be an option.

jos22

GarIT wrote: »

I understand the mechanics perfectly. I like you also thought that the employer paid the €50.

It's not about the saving, its about equality, if the taxpayer is supporting somebody I think it is much more beneficial that the person is actually working rather than getting the money for nothing. I have no doubt if people had to work for social welfare payments the amount of claimants would reduce, mainly through a reduction in fraud, and a certain sub set of claimants who currently don't look for work at all may begin to look for better work given that they have to work anyway.

This doesn't have to be exclusively JobBridge work, claimants could also work for a charity to claim the dole or work for the state doing community work.

As long as we have litter, graffiti, communal areas, homeless people there are jobs to be created. For example Tidy Towns could easily take on 10k people nationwide, possibly more, I'm sure none of SVP, simon, aware, Age Action, ISPCA would refuse extra help. The charities that operate support phone lines are always looking for help.

Money shouldn't come free to people, even if it is a small amount it is enough to discourage some from working.

you do know that they already do this with TUS and Gateway, I think there is at least 10,000 people on TUS working for their dole in charity etc

gateway people are sweeping the streets, cutting grassing and hedges etc

both of those schemes people are picked by the department and dole is cut if you refuse to do one

GarIT

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

I have a lot of issues with this but I just want to make sure you understand the basic mechanics of job bridge.

On the dole the state pays you 187 a week odd.

On job bridge the state pays you 187 a week odd and the employer pays you an additional fifty euro.

It is not saving the state one cent.

You do grasp this dont you? Your post appears not to.

Also there are 300,000 unemployed. There are not 300,000 jobs to fill, even if everyone worked for free.

I understand the mechanics perfectly. I like you also thought that the employer paid the €50.

It's not about the saving, its about equality, if the taxpayer is supporting somebody I think it is much more beneficial that the person is actually working rather than getting the money for nothing. I have no doubt if people had to work for social welfare payments the amount of claimants would reduce, mainly through a reduction in fraud, and a certain sub set of claimants who currently don't look for work at all may begin to look for better work given that they have to work anyway.

This doesn't have to be exclusively JobBridge work, claimants could also work for a charity to claim the dole or work for the state doing community work.

As long as we have litter, graffiti, communal areas, homeless people there are jobs to be created. For example Tidy Towns could easily take on 10k people nationwide, possibly more, I'm sure none of SVP, simon, aware, Age Action, ISPCA would refuse extra help. The charities that operate support phone lines are always looking for help.

Money shouldn't come free to people, even if it is a small amount it is enough to discourage some from working.

Iwasfrozen

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

Wow. So it costs the state to subsidise slave labour.

It's not slave labour, it's a chance to upskill. Having said that the company should really pay the 50 euro.

B.A._Baracus

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

I have a lot of issues with this but I just want to make sure you understand the basic mechanics of job bridge.

On the dole the state pays you 187 a week odd.

On job bridge the state pays you 187 a week odd and the employer pays you an additional fifty euro.

It is not saving the state one cent.

You do grasp this dont you? Your post appears not to.

Also there are 300,000 unemployed. There are not 300,000 jobs to fill, even if everyone worked for free.

You really built yourself up there to have a hard fall :pac:
As Jos22 said... the state pays the extra 50.

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

Wow. So it costs the state to subsidise slave labour.

Nice try for a save :pac:

Mr. Incognito

jos22 wrote: »

the states pays the the 188 + 50 euro top on job bridge

employers pays you nothing

Wow. So it costs the state to subsidise slave labour.

jos22

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

I have a lot of issues with this but I just want to make sure you understand the basic mechanics of job bridge.

On the dole the state pays you 187 a week odd.

On job bridge the state pays you 187 a week odd and the employer pays you an additional fifty euro.

It is not saving the state one cent.

You do grasp this dont you? Your post appears not to.

the states pays the the 188 + 50 euro top on job bridge

employers pays you nothing

Mr. Incognito

GarIT wrote: »

I think it is a good system, could be implemented better but a positive start.

The taxpayer is not responsible for supporting the unemployed, it is something that is done for a few reasons, humanity, reducing crime rates and other reasons. I'm a fan of the tribal model, if you're too old, too young or unable to hunt the tribe will help you out, but if you are capable of hunting but wont, you starve. We should scrap unemployment benefit where possible, the government should provide a relevant JobBridge job to anyone unemployed as soon as they become unemployed if possible. Where not possible they can receive the dole, turn down a job without a great reason and you get nothing.

JobBridge could be restructured. It should pay minimum wage. Companies that have a conversion rate of interns to job offers of less than 50% should be kicked off the scheme. The interns should cost the company more so they are not abused as much as cheap labour.

That carry on of being allowed wait for something relevant needs to be stopped though. If you have an degree in certain subjects you should be treated as having no degree and be made accept any job, if you have less than a 2:1 you should be treated as if you have no degree. I have actually heard of somebody that was allowed refuse a job because it wasn't relevant to her degree, a scraped pass in Irish & ancient Celtic studies. The reality with a lot of degrees is that no relevant jobs exist.

I have a lot of issues with this but I just want to make sure you understand the basic mechanics of job bridge.

On the dole the state pays you 187 a week odd.

On job bridge the state pays you 187 a week odd and the employer pays you an additional fifty euro.

It is not saving the state one cent.

You do grasp this dont you? Your post appears not to.

Also there are 300,000 unemployed. There are not 300,000 jobs to fill, even if everyone worked for free.

jos22

GarIT wrote: »

I think it is a good system, could be implemented better but a positive start.

The taxpayer is not responsible for supporting the unemployed, it is something that is done for a few reasons, humanity, reducing crime rates and other reasons. I'm a fan of the tribal model, if you're too old, too young or unable to hunt the tribe will help you out, but if you are capable of hunting but wont, you starve. We should scrap unemployment benefit where possible, the government should provide a relevant JobBridge job to anyone unemployed as soon as they become unemployed if possible. Where not possible they can receive the dole, turn down a job without a great reason and you get nothing.

JobBridge could be restructured. It should pay minimum wage. Companies that have a conversion rate of interns to job offers of less than 50% should be kicked off the scheme. The interns should cost the company more so they are not abused as much as cheap labour.

That carry on of being allowed wait for something relevant needs to be stopped though. If you have an degree in certain subjects you should be treated as having no degree and be made accept any job, if you have less than a 2:1 you should be treated as if you have no degree. I have actually heard of somebody that was allowed refuse a job because it wasn't relevant to her degree, a scraped pass in Irish & ancient Celtic studies. The reality with a lot of degrees is that no relevant jobs exist.

it must vary from office to office. the office I used deal with it made it clear that you must apply to any position that you are capable of doing and not a particular job that you want to do and the particular officer in question enforced it too. she was hated by one who choose not to work, but any genuine JSA had no issues with her