Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
leicsmac

Tesco in furore over 'unpaid' job

Recommended Posts

It's the goverment encouraging companies to do this. If it was a mistake then the person responsible for drafting up the ad should be fired. The ad would be seen by more than one person before going to print and the 'mistake' should have been noticed.

I don't mind doing shelf stacking but I want paying for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It all seems a bit odd, you don't get paid but you will still get your full benefits, I guess it is an incentive to get companies giving people work and experience and a greater chance of employment, but this should not be for companies like Tescos to exploit, it should be for smaller companies to take a risk free gamble on an unemployed chap. I think that the possibility of doing it for 6 months though will lead to exploitation and abuse. It should be a month at most, that is enought ime to decide if you want to keep someone on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just a way for companies to replace staff with free labour and the government should know better.

If there is a place for nightshift shelf stackers it should be a paid job, not a freebie by the benefits office forcing someone to work for very little.

I will place a bet that whoever got placed on one of these was told if they quit they would lose their benefits.

When i was laid off i did a couple of courses whilst looking for a job.

One of these courses could have lead to a job but what most of the peeps who joined and then left the course did not know was that if they failed to finish the course they lost their right to claim job seekers allowance.

Only me and four others finished the course, though i got my old job back shortly after anyway, i bet those peeps that did not finish were really screwed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not a bad idea if it wasn't so easily exploited. Typical left wing fluff really. Reasonable intentions but stupidly naive.

Odd you would accuse this government of implementing left-wing policies, maybe the Lib dems have had some influence after all.

To be honest I'm not sure where it lies on the political spectrum, but it is so easy to exploit I really do worry about this government's ability to actual think and understand the world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not a bad idea if it wasn't so easily exploited. Typical left wing fluff really. Reasonable intentions but stupidly naive.

Oh look, you don't know what you're talking about again. Funny that.

It's a rehash of a Labour scheme that was implemented and well policed to provide work (that's work, not slave labour) to the long term unemployed.

Incidentally, Labour's scheme (FJF) made it mandatory for fund recipient companies to be providing a service with benefits to the community and not just stacking shelves for a multi-national. It was not abused.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So it's work experience then. You work nights at Tesco and still get paid Jobseekers' at £53.45 per week for under-25s and £67.50 for over-25s.

It's not a bad idea for young people aged between say 17-19 with no working experience at all, if their not working like 40hrs and only doing 1 night a week but for any one else it's pointless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who pays the benefit money, Would it be Tesco or the government ?

If it's Tesco you can see why both parties would welcome it. Tesco get some poor sod working no doubt 30hrs+ for under £70 and the government save money not paying job seekers. It's a win win situation for them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh look, you don't know what you're talking about again. Funny that.

It's a rehash of a Labour scheme that was implemented and well policed to provide work (that's work, not slave labour) to the long term unemployed.

Incidentally, Labour's scheme (FJF) made it mandatory for fund recipient companies to be providing a service with benefits to the community and not just stacking shelves for a multi-national. It was not abused.

Is that the same fjf that was scrapped after about a month after having been used by about eight people? It was not abused because nobody knew it existed and then it didn't exist.

I must admit I don't know where this New idea came from, I just assumed it was lib dem because its so crap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FJF was used by ****ing loads of people. JCP pushed it on to everyone claiming JSA for six months or more under the age of 24, or twelve months and more if older. It was scrapped by the Tories after the election to be rebranded as their own idea, Work Program. Which, essentially, was about free labour for private corporations.

It'd help if you knew what you were talking about before you gobbed off. Pipe down eh?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, and the sandwich selection in Tesco is shit now. Why'd they get rid of Chorizo and Chicken?

Madness

And yet we also live in a world where the Tesco's 'they' put chicken in rice and call it sushi.

Chicken!? Yeh you heard me, sister.

Chicken fvcking sushi.

Total bastards.

Yeah, and the sandwich selection in Tesco is shit now. Why'd they get rid of Chorizo and Chicken?

Madness

And yet we also live in a world where the Tesco's 'they' put chicken in rice and call it sushi.

Chicken!? Yeh you heard me, sister.

Chicken fvcking sushi.

Total bastards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh look, you don't know what you're talking about again. Funny that.

It's a rehash of a Labour scheme that was implemented and well policed to provide work (that's work, not slave labour) to the long term unemployed.

Incidentally, Labour's scheme (FJF) made it mandatory for fund recipient companies to be providing a service with benefits to the community and not just stacking shelves for a multi-national. It was not abused.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...