Thursday, 25 September 2014

Job opportunity?

Just a quick post to point you jobseekers towards an opportunity you might have missed.  It's here on the Directgov site: Trainee Cafe Apprentice.  Yes, for £2.73 per hour for a 40-hour week you can train to make sandwiches and wash pots in a sandwich shop.  And you'll get an NVQ2 in Customer Service.  Is this one of the wonderful new private sector jobs the government is boasting about?


  1. Following the link back to the source, we can find other wonderful "employment" opportunities. eg:

    It uses the same "zero to hero" rhetoric along with the carrot of leading to a full time position - Sorry, but I don't know of anyone who would get out of bed for £2.68 to do web design. Also on "offer" from the same recruitment company are apprenticeships for warehouse operatives, customer services (call centre), telemarketing, and making pallets.

    taking the p and exploiting the young is about the only way of describing these so called "apprenticeships".

  2. This sounds like the sort of gruesome idea promoted so eagerly by that no woper Esther McVey. Anything to destroy a young person’s self-confidence (whilst the employer weasels out of paying the NMW and is also permitted to promote casual labour via the “zero hour” nonsense) is a “superb ‘career’ opportunity” according to the fiction peddled by McVey.

    Since when has doing the washing up been a “career?” Do I have multiple such “careers” behind me, given that I’m now in my late 50s? How about a dose of Real Life, Ms McVile?

  3. So you can be a 'superhero'....!!!???!!! So a naff job title is substitute for a half decent wage it would appear. Does a matching cape, tights and boots come as standard? I have heard examples of people being given the choice of a fancy job title or a promotion, but this takes the biscuit. And the cookie, wafer and cracker too!

    Of course we have no idea how long this 'apprenticeship' will last. Two, three, or six months? Even longer? Even though the job description promises a F/T position at the completion of said training, the candidate will still have to pay for his or her own transport, lunch money, and probably uniform. All out of £2.73 ph or less than £110 for a 40hr week!!!

    What has happened to the concept of starting a job as a trainee on a probationary basis for two or three months whist still receiving the going rate for the job? I know there are still many in Britain who are against the NWM. However, something is not right when the NMW starts not just becoming the norm but indeed an aspirational wage too!

    1. I am an employer who has given many young people the chance under the apprenticeship scheme but I have been frequently let down by under 24's that I have given a chance to. Unfortunately young people want as much money as possible but want to do very little for it.

      I will not pay NMW to a young person as they are not skilled enough for the role in work skills and personality traits without many hours of guidance.

    2. Is it not odd that I managed to leave school at 16 (because I'd had enough - I went back into education later) and walked straight into a proper job? I needed to be taught the job (nobody would have been pretentious enough to call it training) and the employer wanted to send me on shorthand and typing courses. I left after 9 weeks for a better job. And I wasn't unusual. Young people who have worked hard at school to gain the GCSEs they're told they need probably do think they deserve more than £2.73 an hour.

    3. Anon, do you actually think that the NMW £3.72 for those under 18, £5.03 for those 18-20 and £6.31 for over 21's is as you put it '' much money as possible...''?

      You say young people are not deserving of the NMW as they're not skilled enough. Well, just what do YOU do to bring people up the the desired spec you require? And why can you not offer decent training alongside at least the minimum rate for the role?

      Or does this say something about how you run your business?

    4. People or young people are often portrayed as "unwilling to work",but what is far more prevalent in reality is that many employers are "unwilling to pay" a realistic or fair wage.And their reasons for not wanting to pay a fair wage can be often patronising or insulting to people or young people.

    5. Your experience as an employer suggests that the apprenticeship system is not working. I suggest you make your feelings known to your local MP and David Cameron, who wants to extend the scheme.

      The problem with the apprenticeship scheme is that the motivation underpinning it is political, it is not a genuine attempt to provide young people with worthwhile training.

      The scheme is being used by politicians to fix the unemployment figures and by employers to cut labour costs.

      Added to this is the trend of Job Centre staff, Work Programme staff and recruitment agencies to force the unemployed to apply for vacancies.

      As a consequence many of the candidates will be unmotivated and may not have worked or been unemployed for a long time. As such, they may require a level of attention and patience that many employers are not willing to give, especially when there is a surplus of labour.

      This lack of belief in the scheme on the part of employers, which you describe, mistrust on the part of the unemployed, miserable wages and overt political interference has given rise to a scheme which does not work.

  4. This is the kind of thing they're getting post GCSE kids to do, because it's now compulsory to either have an apprenticeship or be doing further education courses at school or college until you're 18. It's not for over 18s I'd have thought. All about massaging the unemployment figures, no young unemployed people any more.......

  5. This is a clear abuse of the apprenticeship system. It was not designed to provide an opportunity for employers to hire cheap labour but to provide exceptional training in a sustainable, well-paid career. Working as a kitchen assistant is not a career opportunity. Low-paid, service sector jobs should be exempt from the system.

  6. Voice of the Work Programme26 September 2014 at 05:42

    Sounds like an ideal job for a Young Person with no work history, no work ethic, no references and offering double the amount of JSA the person would have got in one week.

    1. Yes, that really does sound like the voice of the Work Programme.

    2. this the same Voice of the WP who defended the wretched and failing scheme at every opportunity on the Indus Delta forums?

      Besides, how do you encourage work ethic? We have a system that encourages those at the top of the pay scale earning tens of £millions by suggesting their large salaries attract such individuals and encourage stellar performances (such as the banking crisis of 2008 of course). Yet those at the bottom are supposed to be encouraged by further stripping away their earnings, spending power and dignity.

      And in your world, is it justifiable to exploit someone simply because they do not have a work history? Double the amount of JSA a jobseeker gets? Not if you're 24+ it's not. And it's not even double the rate at the lower end of the JSA scale for those aged under 25.

      And if this position is so good and so beneficial to any applicant, why has it been suddenly removed from the Universal Jobmatch system?

      I think you need to go away and do your homework.

    3. Sounds like an ideal opportunity for an Employer with no staff cohesion and no morals to deprive 60% of the NMW the person would have got in one week.

    4. 'Yet those at the bottom are supposed to be encouraged by further stripping away their earnings, spending power and dignity.'

      Great point. As you say their is a clear contradiction in the language used to justify the obscene salaries of bankers and executives versus those on low-pay.

      By encouraging low-pay the Tories and organisations like A4e are actually undermining the principle that if you work hard you will be rewarded - hence, their use of the principle of the work ethic i.e. work is it's own reward.

      Yet, as you say, they only apply this principle to the working poor, NOT themselves.


    5. The success of capitalism between 1950 and 1975 (broadly) was because real wages increased and people had more disposable income. By encouraging low-pay the Tories are actually hindering the prospect of economic growth and a recovery that will benefit everyone.

  7. My son started his "apprenticeship" over 2 years ago,at first his employer was given £2275 from the DWP after 6 Months.he gained his qualification,pucker! He stayed on and here is where the problems started,more apprentices started (it is a Pub) we live in an area of high unemployment,they offered him 16 hours a week at minimum wage and his pay slips showed this,but he was required to work 40+ hours and was given £40 in cash on top,he had 2 choices.quit and go on the dole and try to compete for a job being taken up by "apprentices" or suck it up and at least have some money!

    Trapped on Benefits? Trapped in Work! Employers consider "Cheap" Labour the norm and are hooked on it.

  8. Eh making sandwiches and washing up is behind the scenes activity with no or little contact with the public so why a customer services certificate at the end? lol I don't see the connection!

  9. I would do a job like this but it would have to be NMW, and it cannot be night shifts, for personal reasons. So when I need a little job to tide me over, nothing too technical, nothing requiring skilled qualifications as such... I cannot take it because they are now apprenticeship jobs. I'm pushed out of the market. A 36 year old cannot take these jobs.

  10. Har! IDS has upset some of the UK’s staunchest allies in the EU, according to theTorygraph this motning:

    We all know IDS’ charming habit of blaming other people whenever he gets something wrong.

    If I were the ERSA, I’d urge the WP providers to ‘discover’ that they have “helped” very few EU migrants. As I understood it at the time, migrant EU labour was largely responsible for the construction etc of the stadia etc for the London Olympics.

  11. I just turned 28. I was in the Intelligence Corps of The British Army for six years before retiring [because of a woman, of course] in 2012. Since then, I've worked as an analyst, mainly for oil companies, helping to plot 'safe' shipping routes all over the world.

    It's well paid work but very sporadic. It's usually an eight month contract here, six months there. I'm lucky enough to have a house and a small amount of savings but from time-to-time I claim JSA in the interim when things are slow. The amount of tax I pay is astronomical when I'm working, so it's something I feel I'm entitled to [not that anybody isn't entitled of course- social security is for everyone or for none of us].

    At an appointment with the Jobcentre in August I was told to apply for a Customer Service apprenticeship with my local Shoezone.The wages were similar to what Historian described but at the end of six months, there was the offer of a 'guaranteed interview' and shiny new NVQ in customer service.

    I did try to argue that I didn't think it was appropriate given my work history and the fact that I'd been only claiming for a month or so, but as most people reading this blog will know, logic does not work at the Jobcentre. Ultimately, I refused and of course, I was sanctioned.

    Luckily I dropped into some work a few weeks later and it all worked out. The final sting in the tail is that when I was told to apply, my local branch of Shoezone was having an enormous closing down sale. So it's unlikely I would have ever finished my useless apprenticeship anyway.


    See who IDS is dining with



Keep it clean, please. No abusive comments will be approved, so don't indulge in insults. If you wish to contact me, post a comment beginning with "not for publication".