Scraping the barrel a bit for positive news?

#1
Local headlines have the fact that a well known local crisp factory is taking on 58 staff.

58?

Really?

A whole 58 people being taken into the dynamic, soar away world of crisp making?

I'm not saying this is not good news (for about 58 people anyway) but in the headlines?

We are truly fucked.
 
#2
Local headlines have the fact that a well known local crisp factory is taking on 58 staff.

58?

Really?

A whole 58 people being taken into the dynamic, soar away world of crisp making?

I'm not saying this is not good news (for about 58 people anyway) but in the headlines?

We are truly fucked.
B_B, without in any way wishing to detract from your post, perhaps it would be better linked into this thread:

http://www.arrse.co.uk/current-affa...job-scheme-turns-out-useless.html#post4916621

I'm not surprised that there is a 3% success rate if there as few as 58 jobs available; wasn't a new branch of Costa's overwhelmed with job applications the other day?
 
#5
B_B, without in any way wishing to detract from your post, perhaps it would be better linked into this thread:

http://www.arrse.co.uk/current-affa...job-scheme-turns-out-useless.html#post4916621

I'm not surprised that there is a 3% success rate if there as few as 58 jobs available; wasn't a new branch of Costa's overwhelmed with job applications the other day?
The Memsahib has just advertised a basic manual job where she works (better pay and conditions than average) and received 129 applicants. The job requires a clean full licence so her first exercise was to weed out those who had not indicated if they held a licence or not! I pointed out that maybe since the job required a licence maybe they just assumed that was taken as read. "I've got to shortlist 6 out of 129 applicants, I don't have time and I'm not going to risk them not having one". Fair one I suppose.
 
#6
A whole 58 people being taken into the dynamic, soar away world of crisp making?

A few days ago 1900 people applying for 8 jobs in a coffee shop was headline news.
 
#7
The Memsahib has just advertised a basic manual job where she works (better pay and conditions than average) and received 129 applicants. The job requires a clean full licence so her first exercise was to weed out those who had not indicated if they held a licence or not! I pointed out that maybe since the job required a licence maybe they just assumed that was taken as read. "I've got to shortlist 6 out of 129 applicants, I don't have time and I'm not going to risk them not having one". Fair one I suppose.
Just randomly throw out 50 of them, they will be the unlucky ones and you really don't want unlucky people working for you so it all evens out in the end.
 
#8
The Memsahib has just advertised a basic manual job where she works (better pay and conditions than average) and received 129 applicants. The job requires a clean full licence so her first exercise was to weed out those who had not indicated if they held a licence or not! I pointed out that maybe since the job required a licence maybe they just assumed that was taken as read. "I've got to shortlist 6 out of 129 applicants, I don't have time and I'm not going to risk them not having one". Fair one I suppose.
About ten years ago now there was a study done (in scotland) on long-term unemployed youth to determine whether there was a single training/education element that could be delivered by Government which would make them more employable.

There was.

It's called a "driving licence"

It's still almost impossible to get funding to learn to drive in most places (unless you're disabled) as part of a "back-to-work" training package. In fact there was a case of a client advisor (also in Scotland) being sacked for paying for lessons for a couple of youngun's from a contingency fund which exists to support training.

It's one of the best examples of the fact that there is no real intent behind any of these schemes to make the "trainees" more employable. They exist for their own sake and are an industry in themselves.
 
#10
58 people = 58 families = quite a lot of people I suppose, particularly as it's local news rather than national.

I'll now go and hug a tree.
 
#11
The Memsahib has just advertised a basic manual job where she works (better pay and conditions than average) and received 129 applicants. The job requires a clean full licence so her first exercise was to weed out those who had not indicated if they held a licence or not! I pointed out that maybe since the job required a licence maybe they just assumed that was taken as read. "I've got to shortlist 6 out of 129 applicants, I don't have time and I'm not going to risk them not having one". Fair one I suppose.
The requirement for a driving licence is an interesting one in terms of employment law;a recent Home Office promotion trawl for promotion from EO to HEO indicated that all applicants were required to hold a full, clean driving licence. Within 5 days, the Department dropped this requirement under pressure from both Trade Unions whose case was that this requiremnt could not be sustained in employment law without offering successful candidates the opportunity to learn to drive. The Department had no wish to pay for driving lessons and so backed down.
 
#12
It's one of the best examples of the fact that there is no real intent behind any of these schemes to make the "trainees" more employable. They exist for their own sake and are an industry in themselves.
A bit like Equality & Diversity and Health & Safety - they exist to generate economic activity and employment from enforcing legislation.
 
#13
About ten years ago now there was a study done (in scotland) on long-term unemployed youth to determine whether there was a single training/education element that could be delivered by Government which would make them more employable.

There was.

It's called a "driving licence"

It's still almost impossible to get funding to learn to drive in most places (unless you're disabled) as part of a "back-to-work" training package. In fact there was a case of a client advisor (also in Scotland) being sacked for paying for lessons for a couple of youngun's from a contingency fund which exists to support training.

It's one of the best examples of the fact that there is no real intent behind any of these schemes to make the "trainees" more employable. They exist for their own sake and are an industry in themselves.
Quite right. I've always cited the case that HGV (or modern equivalent) or other licence holders have to pay for their own training but everyone else is up in arms that students might be expected to pay for their own. Both are designed to get the individual trained up to slot into employment but the student is expected to be paid for.

Maybe the Government should incentivise companies to take on drivers and give them the training they need for the job. To the same standard as DVLA but the licence obtained through the DVLA is pertinent to that one firm only. They cannot use it to moonlight and they cannot use it for their own or recreational purposes. If someone did have the full DVLA licence they could apply for a job anywhere. If the Government gave grants to those firms who took part in the scheme then they would be training people and once trained the individual couldn't just bin the job and move to another company. Perhaps the licence could become transferable to another employer after 3 years or so?
 
#14
The requirement for a driving licence is an interesting one in terms of employment law;a recent Home Office promotion trawl for promotion from EO to HEO indicated that all applicants were required to hold a full, clean driving licence. Within 5 days, the Department dropped this requirement under pressure from both Trade Unions whose case was that this requiremnt could not be sustained in employment law without offering successful candidates the opportunity to learn to drive. The Department had no wish to pay for driving lessons and so backed down.
I believe the way around this is to advertise for the applicant to have a driving licence and access to a motor vehicle.
It's a bit like advertising a post as available only to those with a third level education (legally iffy) or as available only to those with a third level education with qualification in a related discipline (which is quite acceptable & the "related discipline" definition is pretty much down to the employer).
 
#15
Quite right. I've always cited the case that HGV (or modern equivalent) or other licence holders have to pay for their own training but everyone else is up in arms that students might be expected to pay for their own. Both are designed to get the individual trained up to slot into employment but the student is expected to be paid for.

Maybe the Government should incentivise companies to take on drivers and give them the training they need for the job. To the same standard as DVLA but the licence obtained through the DVLA is pertinent to that one firm only. They cannot use it to moonlight and they cannot use it for their own or recreational purposes. If someone did have the full DVLA licence they could apply for a job anywhere. If the Government gave grants to those firms who took part in the scheme then they would be training people and once trained the individual couldn't just bin the job and move to another company. Perhaps the licence could become transferable to another employer after 3 years or so?
Nah. They'll all just stay on the dole.
 
#17
58 jobs at TAYTO though. Truly mans chrisps. Only available in England and Wales in err specialist shops. They shun health concerns about salt and E numbers with abandon. Mmmm salty, Mmm chemically cheesie/ prwanie/baconie.

One day I'm going to drop a good old fashioned acid tab and visit here;

Tayto Crisps

Funky.
 

DieHard

LE
Book Reviewer
#19
I suppose where you live and what else is in your local news as to wether its a headline or not.
It is better than the Luton and Dunstable papers, there headlines are usually about muggings.. murders and divesity.
They do however have quite a few pages of situations vacant.
Pity 90% of them are for teaching staff or care workers.
I had thought of retraining for care work and possibly university to teach history
So if you are an unemployed teacher or care worker, then there is plenty of work for you in luton.
At one time when vauxhall was at full flow, people of luton were almost all working and relativity well off.
Last job i applied for was the prison service just over ten years ago, there were about 3000 applicants for the eastern region going through the system, on my training course there were 20 of us and 3 dropped out.

There is a new morrisons that had about 2000 applications, and my daughter says that at her part time mc'd job they get about 10 cv's a week dropped in.

Sent by Crapatalk. Sitting on my bog having a dump.
 
#20
The work around could not be used because only Departmental vehicles can be used for the role.
You can focus on a requirement to work strange hours then (regardless of whether it actually exists) a very large employer not a million miles away from RAF Aldergrove has had a base requirement for everyone from the bog cleaners to the CEOs to have access to car for decades. It used to be "own a car".... That was challenged and nixed.

edit:- And... Come to think of it, my ex-boss lost his job on the basis of being unable to drive.
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top