OSBORNE’S ‘TOUGH LOVE’ RULES WILL END ‘SOMETHING FOR NOTHING’ CULTURE
Unemployed people – including job-hunting graduates – have been warned that they will soon have to do community work including litter picking and cleaning in exchange for their welfare payments, putting an end to the perceived ‘something for nothing’ benefits culture.
The Chancellor George Osborne has outlined new ‘tough love’ plans to impose conditions on jobseekers receiving welfare payments. Yesterday he continued the government’s push to reduce welfare spending by announcing a nationwide scheme to force 200,000 long-term unemployed benefit claimants to either undertake community work, attend a jobcentre every day or go on a full-time intensive programme to tackle the underlying reasons for their failure to find work. He stressed there would be sanctions for those who do not accept the help.
The scheme is the closest the UK has come to a nationwide workfare scheme and is likely to alarm those who were appalled by previous aspects of the government’s temporary work experience scheme, in which Work Programme participants were sent to do unpaid work for big companies including Poundland. Following public outcry and accusations that the scheme was exploitative, many private sector firms removed themselves from the programme. The most controversial ‘compulsory’ element was terminated so that jobseekers no longer lost their benefits if they refused to work unpaid.
The new £300m jobs programme, appealing to the electorate’s demand for stronger welfare measures, will start in April 2014 and will be aimed at 200,000 jobseekers allowance claimants. Osborne said yesterday:
“There’s no option of doing nothing for your benefits. No something for nothing anymore. People are going to have to do things to get their dole and that is going to help them into work — that is the crucial point. This is all activity that is actually going to help them get ready for the world of work.
“For the first time, all long-term unemployed people who are capable of work will be required to do something in return for their benefits to help them find work. But no one will get something for nothing. Help to work — and in return work for the dole.”
Having been transferred from the Work Programme to the ‘Help to Work’ programme, the claimants will be put on one of three schemes. A third will do community work placements; a third will attend a DWP (Department of Work and Pensions) jobcentre every day to search for work (instead of every fortnight) – and a third will be placed on a “mandatory intervention regime” with tough, targeted interventions tackling claimants’ underlying problems. Money will be saved because claimants will lose benefits much more quickly than at present if they are deemed not to be co-operating.
It seems likely that a large proportion of the public will back the idea. A poll conducted for the thinktank Policy Exchange found by a margin of nearly five to one — 56% to 12% — the public supports the introduction of “workfare” for the long-term unemployed compared with the status quo. But already there are concerns about the practicalities of the ‘Help to Work’ programme. Critics have claimed the scheme is likely to put yet more pressure on work providers and jobcentre staff. It is also expected to meet resistance from voluntary bodies reluctant to become involved in workfare that takes jobs from the public sector. It is likely that trades unions will also raise concerns about paid workers being displaced as unpaid benefits claimants are brought in to do their work.
Graduate Fog is also concerned. Having witnessed and tracked the damaging impact of unpaid internships – once considered a helpful initiative for getting young people into paid work – we have seen how carefully unpaid work or work placements must be managed in order for them not to be exploitative.
We also question the results of unpaid work schemes – namely whether they actually lead to jobseekers finding paid, permanent work they promise to. We have also seen how unpaid work distorts workers’ ideas about what their labour is worth to employers, leading them to undervalue their contribution to employers they work for in the future.
Exactly what sort of work will these benefits claimants be doing? If they weren’t doing it, who would be – and will they now be out of a job? Will their hourly rate work out at more or less than the minimum wage? What is the maximum length of time somebody will work for unpaid – and what real opportunities for paid employment lie at the end of it? What if there really are no jobs in the area where the jobseeker lives? And will forcing people to work unpaid inspire them to find paid work – or could it stigmatise and demoralise them further?
*SHOULD JOBLESS GRADUATES BE FORCED TO WORK FOR THE DOLE?
Is it right that anyone unemployed for more than two years should work for their benefits? What do you think of George Osborne’s ‘tough love’ approach to people who can’t find work? Will unpaid work experience boost jobseekers’ chances of finding paid work – or do you fear it could cause more problems than it solves?
I was told go to university and get into 20k of debt as there would be a decent job at the end of it. It turns out there is no job and now I’m being served up schemes where you work for your £50 a week dole money.
I’ve been duped! Never believe anything politicians tell you! Just wish I could turn back time and never go to university. It is a massive Ponzi scam but you don’t realise that until you graduate and they have got the money out of you. 🙁
Human rights article 4,(1) No one shall be held in slavery or servitude.(d) any work or service which forms part of normal civic obligations.
Is it any wonder the government is wanting to renege on the human rights issue (Abu Qatada fiasco) by getting their way, the future for the ordinary British citizen will not be very good.
They will have us all working for next to nothing in no time.
How come they can justify jobs, when millions cannot get back into regular employments anyhow? Can someone answer that.
How can the government say we have no money, yet they spend billions on armaments, answers please.
Are we a corporate resource to be employed for corporate benefit, never and not likely to be.
What they propose is really disgusting.
Social welfare was created to support the poor and not the other way around.
@ grad, did you do an intership(s)? What subject did you study, grade, university? There are many people in your situation, but there are also many getting offers of employment before they finish university because they were proactive.
This graduate managed to get a job cleaning toilets so there is hope for us. No idea how he got round the “overqualified” tag though.
http://www.businessinsider.com/benja-serra-bosch-spains-unemployment-icon-2013-10
It all feels a bit too much like community service, as though people are going to be punished for being out of work.
Catherine: I totally agree. This is the sort of work we make people do as part of their sentence for committing a crime.
Is being unemployed equivalent to a crime now?
Ironically, this will be detrimental to real jobs. Council and private employees are usually the ones to do these jobs. If this becomes a real, nation-wide scheme, I think a lot of them will be forced out of work and replaced by people on the dole. Even if they’re not replaced, it certainly won’t grow any new jobs. If they really want to force people in to work, they need to be paid properly, otherwise it’s just diminishing real jobs and hurting some already vulnerable people.
@Grad
Same here, that’s what I was told when I was in school. I never even wanted to go into university in the first place! Schools only want everyone to go to uni because it looks good on them in the league tables…
@another grad
It may well be a good idea to try and get a job offer before you graduate but this isn’t always possible. Sometimes the opportunities just aren’t there. Plus if you did a degree like mine chances are you won’t have the time or the inclination for an effective job hunt in your final year (and I did actually try). Having said that I do wish I had spent less time chasing a first and more time looking for jobs before graduating and settling for a 2:1. But hindsight is a wonderful thing.
@Rizze
Yep, I always find it wonderful how we spend billions on pointless wars and yet we have problems like this to deal with!
@Catherine
I agree, I already feel guilty enough for not contributing anything to society to help right the wrongs and I feel as if unemployed people are demonised enough as it is.
What about Camoron’s proposals today that people under the age of 25 shouldn’t get benefits and should instead be in employment, education or training? His proposals could have a devastating impact on unemployed graduates, who will in the majority of cases be unable to afford to do further qualifications. No one can force anybody to give them a job, so the only alternative would surely be to turn to crime or starve?!
A4e sucks: Have you considered the other half of the under-25s proposal – namely, that EVERYONE under 25 will be required – employed or not – to undertake at least one year national service?
That’s the plan, chief. National service for everyone.
I am aware of the proposals for National Service. Not that I agree with them, but taking part in some form of National Service which has nothing to do with an individual’s qualifications or aspirations could surely be more of a hindrance than a help to that person’s career ambitions?
Given that no matter how hard they try, the can’t even find every able-bodied unemployed person labour to do even for free, the back-bench MP’s idea for paid (I was surprised – the Act mentions accommodation and pay – it’s unclear whether’s it’s NMW or a new kind of “minimum wage”) compulsory National Service for 18-24 year olds – whether military or not is both bonkers and utterly unnecessary.
Compulsion certainly isn’t necessary: how many volunteers do you think they’d get to a guaranteed year of paid work with accommodation provided? I suspect more than they would know what to do with.
Even if it was military service (and the military wasn’t cutting staff), simply reducing the entrance requirements to the same level as in the 1950s – when most young men were compelled to join – would surely provide them with more manpower than they know what to do with, unless we resurrect the British Empire, or the government becomes authoritarian and needs to suppress unrest?
With this latest workfare scheme, it’s proof the Work Programme (also involving workfare) – which despite temping part-time at present for the same money I get on JSA & HB I’m likely to end up on in January – is an unmitigated failure. As some stats showed, people on it are less likely to find work than if they weren’t on it.
what they also neglect to mention is not all these people have been out of work for 2 whole years: plenty will have been in and out of temp work that hasn’t lasted long enough to reset their “time unemployed” clock – like the 3-week part-time agency job I’ve just done.
As my (employed) brother said: “So basically in answer to the unemployment rate they’re going to make more people unemployed and make them no free labour!?”
I believe this is a good program for long-term unemployed job seekers. I mean what else are you guys going to do all day? Play computer games and watch T.V.? The problem with economy is that everyone expects to have something for nothing. What happen to people learning how to provide for themselves?
I have no sympathy for people who choose to sit at home all day and do nothing. On the other hand, I know there are graduates out there who might be frustrated by this program. But if you are a graduate, this should give you motivation to find your dream job faster.
You must become competitive and let nothing stop you from pursuing your dreams. Do whatever it takes to win!!! If your employer is not paying you minimum wage or offering you a job; then create your own job or move countries where someone will hire you. You must understand, this is the fight of your life. So keep fighting until you get what you want!!!
Most unemployed grads are spending their days on job applications or useful and relevant volunteering. This kind of community service programme will just take away your time and energy that could be put to much better use.
@Chris Well: You seriously think they’ll be jobs left if they keep replacing real workers with the unemployed on sunbsistence-level state subsidies?
Wow, so many disappointed people who all seem to resent working for anything other than the dream job they had in mind when they went to university.
Here’s the thing,taxpayers subsidised education, surely its only reasonable that taxpayers stop subsidising those NEETS who don’t wish to contribute and pay taxes by going on the dole?
Isn’t that common sense? Its also about giving back to society by working and paying taxes and building the economy, a society that those in full time education have so far had limited opportunity to contribute to or repay.
@ Catherine, please define ‘relevant volunteering’. A lot of this website is devoted to ‘volunteering’ jobs that are actually replacing real jobs and should otherwise be paid.
Thanks
@Peter F: I am presently working in a part-time job that pays the same as the dole & Housing Benefit, and would gladly take almost any full-time, minimum wage job.
So don’t you dare accuse me of staying on benefits and holding out for an unrealistic dream job, or pretend that low-level work paying enough to just rent a room with a bit left over is plentiful.
I’ve taken every job I’ve ever been offered in my life, even this present one that it financially makes little sense to take.
@Peter F: How are street cleaners, park gardeners and those caring for the elderly going to find work, when they’re fired and replaced with far cheaper labour (or possibly, a year later, forced to do their old job for the dole)? Do you believe they’ll all magically get higher-paid jobs – maybe some will, but I doubt there’s enough for all of them.
@ Alex W – I referred to NEETS, clearly if you are working you aren’t one. Neither did I say that low level work is plentiful in its payment.
How are street cleaners, park gardeners and those caring for the elderly going to find work, when they’re fired and replaced with far cheaper labour (or possibly, a year later, forced to do their old job for the dole)? Do you believe they’ll all magically get higher-paid jobs — maybe some will, but I doubt there’s enough for all of the.
Well typically they are doing something about it via their unions and the TUC. Only this week there was a march in Manchester.
If you want to improve workers rights, stand up and 1. Bring legal cases, 2. Join a union. 3. Do something.
This site is all about encouraging people to do those very things yet it seems that the spirit of collectivism is dead. Regrettably there’s a lot of individualism and what’s in it for me going on. That won’t solve the problem, neither will inactivity.
This isn’t a black and white issue, neither is it one that will be solved by simply posting on this website.
Hi all
Thanks for all the comments – some really interesting debate here, I’m always so proud to host it on GF!
Just to let you know I’ve just published a new post today including Cameron’s new plan to remove housing benefit, so you might want to transfer some of this discussion over to that?
Has David Cameron declared war on young jobseekers?
Or not – up to you!
Thanks
Tanya
*Peter
I was out of work for 6 months before getting this job, and it ends on Fri and won’t take any time off my “time unemployed” clock at all. Though I’m 26, so maybe I don’t count as a NEET.
Join a union? Do you live in the real world? You realise temp’s assignments can be ended for any reason, right? Including striking and pregnancy in practice.
(Apologies here and now for a long post. I have said a lot here and I am open to any critique on what I have said here, as long as it is constructive.)
Bringing back National Service is nothing new. There has been talk of this happening for five years at least. I do believe it will happen eventually. Whether or not it will be now, I honestly cannot say.
When I saw CostaDel’s post first mentioning it, I was extremely worried. I have always outright said that the last thing I want to do is join the army. I know I wouldn’t last five minutes and I don’t really want to contribute to something that essentially is for killing people just because two people can’t agree on something. I am sure we would be a lot further along as a race if it weren’t for armies and war. But that’s besides the point.
I think people classically associate NS with the army. I always did. However from what I have read, it isn’t necessarily military service. It can also be a year of charity work or helping the elderly. I do feel somewhat better about the prospect of NS given these options.
What I don’t understand however is the idea of it being forced whether or not people are employed. Surely then if a company has a large proportion of its workforce in the affected age bracket they would have loads of people leaving for a year? It sounds to me as if it would force loads of people out of jobs and do the exact opposite of what the government is trying to do. It would surely be damaging to such companies and also to the people who worked so hard to land the jobs in the first place. I doubt they would be given the jobs back after completing the NS. I think if the government are to introduce NS again they would be far better off making it so that people leave school at 18, do it for a year and then go off to uni afterwards or do whatever else they want to do.
What worries me is that most people who are old enough to have done NS before it was abolished in 1960, and maybe a little bit younger, probably want it to be brought back. The bad reputation of today’s youth is likely the main reason why. With the next general election coming up the coalition are obviously going to do their best to impress voters enough to vote for them so that they stay in power and, as Mr Cameron says, finish what they started.
I read somewhere that there is an online petition against the return of NS and the person who submitted the bill actually wants people to sign it, because if it gets to 100,000 signatures then it will be given a debate in Parliament, which would actually make it more likely to be passed. Underhanded tactics, no?
I don’t know if finally landing a graduate job would affect me doing NS or not if it were to return. It depends how the government deals with the issue I described above. It’s in my best interests to get a graduate-level job with halfway-decent pay, become fully independent of my parents, be my own person and finally get my life started and make a real contribution to society. In the long-term that will be far more beneficial than being stuck at home for 12 months doing charity work and then having to start the job hunt all over again with whatever experience I have gained being out of date and less appealing to employers. Pardon me for being selfish but I feel bad enough about being 23 and stuck at home with my parents living off of them while not making any contribution to society at all. I actually want to get my life started and get into work. It just comes down to an employer giving me the chance.
(And for the record, I really hate this term “NEET” that the government keeps throwing around. It just marginalises us more and makes us sound like some kind of outcasts or something)
Join a union? Do you live in the real world? You realise temp’s assignments can be ended for any reason, right? Including striking and pregnancy in practice.
Yep, and you do realise that untill a few years ago temp assignments had no rights, now they do, these rights were won by unions. At least they’re doing something whereas you are doing………….?
This letter was in yesterday’s Metro:
“If the unemployed are made to pick up rubbish, what will happen to those already employed as street cleaners? Or are they also destined for the dole queue?”
That sums it up I think. Anyone else notice that whenever there’s a complex problem to be solved, unpaid or voluntary work or work experience always seems to the miracle answer. Yet if you stop and think it through for 5 mins, it so obviously creates a different problem…
@ Tanya. Agree with you. You’ve also got to stop and think through for 5 minutes what to do with NEETS, rather than ignore the problem and leave it for others (ie. the Gvnt) to sort out.
We can’t have people bumming off society and tax payers – or can we?
*Peter F
I am grateful that agency workers have some rights, and increased rights after three months, and benefited from them working for the public sector through an agency for a year.
But we all know, not every employer obeys the rules as much as the public sector.
Since an agency worker’s assignment can be ended at any time for any reason with no notice, surely you can see how in practice there is not really a way to enforce these rights without risking dismissal with little legal recourse (and possibly months on the dole being vilified as a lazy scrounger) and replacement with another desperate person from the vast reserve army of unemployed.
If my pay hadn’t gone up after 3 months, my only real choice was to ignore it and keep working, or rock the boat and end up out of a job with little chance of a new job for ages. Unfortunately, you can’t eat principles or pay your rent with solidarity.
Even low-paid permanent workers’ rights are now in practice unenforceable, due to the fees now charged for employment tribunals amounting to weeks’ of full-time work.
If unions can think of a serious way of fighting this without just getting young temps fired and thrown on the dole, I would be interested to hear.
Perhaps a true general strike (they can’t fire everyone at once), though that obviously be different to achieve. It’s mainly essential services people miss who can achieve better conditions or fight assaults on their conditions, and unfortunately many are not working in areas truly essential or valued: how many would care if telemarketers went on strike, for instance?
Otherwise, the Tories dreams will eventually come true and the unions will become irrelevant when the last public sector worker has been replaced with an agency worker or private contractor, and the proletariat is completely replaced by the precariat.
@Peter F
And if you support trade unions, why are you taking this policy at face value, or falling for the narrative that NEETs are all useless, illiterate feral youth who need more training. So, so many out-of-work, or in-and-out-of-temp work, under 25s have done everything society demanded of them, come out of uni and been thrown on the scrapheap.
Do you think forcing a 21-year old graduate into further “training” – in reality, probably unpaid work or <£3 an hour apprenticeships or poorly organised A4e courses teaching them how to read and write – will really help anyone, or address the real problem? Or what about a 24-year father of 2, who loses their job and despite paying taxes is sent back to their parents (who may live somewhere like Middlesbrough or the middle of nowhere with virtually no jobs – what happened to "get on your bike"?).
Not to mention the risk of homelessness for young people without a family home to return to, and the increased burden the government wants to impose on long-suffering parents by effectively extending compulsory education and childhood to 25 in a transparent and desperate attempt to fiddle the unemployment figures.
Understood, I know of unions that are winning National Minimum Wage claims. This website urges readers to bring NMW claims.
Do nothing and perish.
Sorry, ought to have posted the above on the other post about getting rid of benefits for under 25s.
Aren’t the vast majority of those NMW claims made by people (either exploited immigrants or unpaid interns) who have already left the job in question, so no longer have the fear of being fired?
@ Peter F
I guess I mean volunteering in something that is relevant to the career that you are pursuing rather than volunteering just to please someone else.
I don’t see it as ethical at all when these positions replace paid jobs nor do I see why you necessarily need this experience rather than being trained on the job but I guess if you are stuck working for free it’s probably slightly less demoralising when it’s potentially useful work experience.
I’d be happy to “get a job” if employers would acknowledge my existence. Unfortunately all they do is send me form rejection letters – that is if I get any response at all…
@Alex
Why does it matter? All you should care about is improving your situation first e.g. Getting your dream job or creating or acquiring assets. There is no point complaining about the system or your life to the Government. Its like shouting “STOP” into a hurricane.All you can do is adapt your situation and act accordingly. In other words, like my father says “Get with the program”.
What did you major in? Liberal arts? When going to university you should have check your country’s job shortage list first and major in that field e.g. medicine, accounting, engineering, law, nursing, dentist. Once graduated you should have moved to area in your country where the shortage is.It sounds to me you are scared of working for tax payers money.
The reason why you do not have your dream job is you not the Government. It is as simple as that.
@Chris Wells: What dream job? I have only very modest, realistic desires. I am not going to live off the state whilst chasing a “dream job” I will likely never get.
At least initially, I want any job I am capable of doing that will pay the rent on a room and leave a bit left over for something approaching a normal life. 30 hours or more on minimum wage would be fine.
I did a Politics with International Relations degree, including a year abroad studying in Germany. I was indoctrinated for years by school and relatives that if I didn’t go to uni I’d end up doing a crap, dead-end job. I part-suspected it may be a scam, but I thought I’d at least get a job doing something, and I at least got the push to cut the apron strings and learn to feed myself.
When I went to uni a couple of years older than 18 in 2007. I had tried a commuting for a Law degree and changed my mind since I didn’t meet anyone not living in, and decided Law wasn’t for me – and thank God, I know so many Law graduates who are nowhere near a legal career, even after endless unpaid work and expensive LPCs I would never have been able to afford.
Retail and admin jobs seemed to be plentiful back in 2007 (at least in Hampshire) I didn’t know a single person who’d gone to uni who didn’t at least have a job doing something.
Since I didn’t want to go back to living with my parents in the sticks, I was lucky enough to go straight from graduating into work: starting at a supermarket at aquarium part-time in June 2011 to start the summer, then from September 2011 until January 2013 (when an temp job ended) I was in continuous full-time work, and I am in part-time work (20 h a week) work again now.
With what money do you propose I move to another area of the country where there is a shortage of the marketable skills I apparently have?
@Chris Wells:
My country? Where do you live, America (since you said “liberal arts”)? And how are you such an expert on Britain’s education system?
And you seriously think Britain’s job shortage list in 2007 bore any relation to it in 2011 at graduation? I remember they were crying out for teachers several years ago and offering golden handshakes. By the time many people and trained to be teachers, many areas had more teachers than they knew what to do with.
Assuming that Mandatory Work Activity would be coordinated by a Welfare To Work Organisation (such as those notorious with the Work Programme), it is always worth referring to the Provider Guidance, accessible via http://www.dwp.gov.uk/supplying-dwp/what-we-buy/welfare-to-work-services/provider-guidance/
According to the MWA Provider Guidance (Sections 3.13, 3.15)
http://www.dwp.gov.uk/supplying-dwp/what-we-buy/welfare-to-work-services/provider-guidance/man-work-guidance.shtml
3.13 It is not necessary (although it’s desirable wherever possible) for the placement to be in the same sector or type of work as the claimant’s job goal, as MWA is designed to help the claimant develop disciplines associated with employment. Claimants cannot choose their placements.
3.15 Placements must be additional to any existing or expected vacancies. You must ensure that employers are not taking advantage of MWA as a source of labour at the expense of employing workers in the open labour market.
Although, on the one hand, if a candidate does not possess the Skills Profile which would allow them to get a job that they have been trained to do, there may be logic at “Volunteering”, there seems conversely little point for a Skilled and Experienced Candidate to be complicit in Tax Fraud. After all, if a candidate is doing a job of work, but are not paid…. then, whereas the employer may save themselves the onorous burden to employ someone to do the job (salary, Tax, National Insurance), the State loses out by continuing to pay Job Seekers Allowance and loses its fair share of productive effort (through Salary Purchases, Tax, National Insurance).
If candidates are forced to do work, for nothing, then if the candidate refuse, they could find themselves in dire financial states.
My thoughts are that, if push comes to shove, you agree to whatever is arranged, negotiate wherever possible (for example, there would be no point for a Qualified Teacher to Clean Toilets), but irrespective, courteously appraise stakeholders that you will be reporting the matter (naming individuals, organisations) to HMRC as a defacto case of Conspiracy to perpetrate Tax Fraud for which they may use their powers to instigate a Criminal Investigation.
http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/tax-evasion/hotline.htm
@Alex
Start acting like a 26 old man rather than a girl complaining for attention. No wonder you do not have your dream job, it is your mindset. If you believe it is impossible to get your dream job “than it is”. On the other hand, if you start acting like a “pure capitalist” and have the mindset that I going to do watever it takes to get my dream job. Chances are you will find your dream job. I have sympathy for poeple who have gave up on their dreams
*I have no sympathy for poeple who have gave up on their dreams
Cut expenditure? What the hell are you fucking talking about? 70% of my income goes on rent!
I never gave up any dreams. And you wouldn’t move back with your parents, even if the alternative was homelessness? Yeah, right.
@Alex
Unlike like you I spend less than I earn and invest the difference. You see Alex I would never put myself in a situation where I would be homeless in the first place. I am very strategic about the decisions I make everyday. I write plans on how to get “what I want” and put them into “action”.I have a winner mindset, not a homeless mindset.
Speaking from experience, if there was an opt in scheme to do work for your benefits, I would have done it. From the ages of 19-24 I was on JSA three times (for at least 6 months each time) and ESA for 9 months. During that period of my life I had lost the will to live, and I was doing absolutely nothing with myself. I was allowed to go in every other Monday and sign for my benefits. If there had been someone to give me a kick up the backside and a way to gain experience it would have benefited me, instead i was allowed to fall through the cracks. For young people I don’t see anything wrong with having to do at least some work each week (a maximum of 16 hours). The only downside would be some of the people who you have to do that work experience with (again speaking from experience…).
This system is basically a box-ticking exercise, to create statistics the government can fall back on. e.g ‘x amount of young people are now on work schemes/earning their benefits’, which shall appeal to taxpayers and people who are employed, because, as we all know, all jobseekers are just scumbags with no interest in work, looking to exploit the system.
The concept seems to make no differentiation between long term bone-idle benefit frauds (who DO exist and ARE out to exploit the welfare system) and young people with serious skills and qualifications who genuinely want to work and earn.
One of the benefits of living at home is I’ve managed to save almost £20,000 over the past 7 years, but it seems rather pointless – not enough for a deposit and no job to support a mortgage, puts me over the threshold for receiving benefits, and its not like I can pay an employer to give me a career. Don’t fancy paying off my student loan as that would be throwing money away. Having no life has taught me to be prudent but living like this is also destroying any ambition i had. Almost wonder why i bothered with uni.
@ AYE AYE
my advice to you is, look what degree you have and look at what other places in the world you can work CAN NZ AUZ
matthew
i cant see the point in this really and its defeating the object!!!!!! its like employers are going to use us and they dont ave to pay a thung for it. and as for people like me looking for work… why doesnt the employer advertise for a vacancy instead of using people. i no loads of firms that are using this like YTS SCHEME and paying youngters pennys. IF EMPLOYERS ARE GOING TO SET ON PEOPLE AND PAY THEM NOTHING THEN OBVIOUSLY THEY NOT GUNNA ADVERTISE THE JOBS AND PEOPLE LIKE ME WILL NOT HAVE ANY WORK TO SEEK FOR IF OUTHER FIRMS START TO USE THIS PATHETIC IDEA. ITS NOT ON REALLY. RANT OVER!!!!!
I’ve been saying this for years, only a mug goes and gets a degree in this day and age unless it’s in medicine or similar specialized field.
You are far better off leaving school with nothing, not even GCSE’s as a lot of employers look down upon the qualification.
As much as I’m not Simon Cowells biggest fan, he is correct when he said
“Be useless at school, and make a fortune from it.”