Arguably, it could be that those employers who do the wrong thing (unfortunately it could be the majority) cast a slur on those who do the right thing and consequently, it leads to a bad reputation towards the ethical and moral employers.
I have seen both sides at work, but it seems to me that governments could and should do more to stamp out the corruptive elements of the scheme. Won't hold my breath though.
3BrNBBRz4UYdo+!~~60_7.JPG "chameleon54"){kind=avatar}
@davidc4430 wrote:i will never agree that 'free' labor os ok under the idea well if they get a job the end excuses the means.
no one should be expected to do one minute of unpaid work.
i have no problem with allowing someone to 'observe' but when they are asked to do something that benifits the business (as in creates income) they must be paid.
just because there are 10 (or more) available candidates for a job does not make it ok to think its ok to see who will do the most unpaid work for the job.
IMHO
I,m not sure if you have ever employed young teenagers with little experience David, but IT AINT NO WALK IN THE PARK. It takes many months to train a new employee and in the first weeks, the boss spends more time teaching and assisting the new employee than they ever recieve back in productivity. It is normal for new employees to make costly mistakes which can damage stock & equipment and even the business reputation and brand. But bosses perservere on the understanding that they are helping a young person get started in their industry and with any luck, the employee will repay the boss with further work, once they are more experienced and are actually useful around the place.
Unfortunately it doesnt always work out that way. What regularly happens is the boss spends several years training the employee and then they tick off to a rival company or worse still, start up a business of their own in opposition to their previous employer. This is particularly common in the building trade when apprentices complete their training. ( thats if you can prise a teenager off their phone long enough to teach them the trade.........
)
Work experience is the same. A reputable boss will spend time " setting up " work for the student to do and advise and assist them with the task. Often it is a job that doesnt really need doing, and no-one is paying for it, but it gives the student a chance to try the trade or job, hands on. The headaches involved with taking students on for work experience, far outweighs any commercial gain the employer recieves, but most bosses treat it as a service to the community and a way of introducing potential workers to their industry.
Work isnt something young people just do. Getting out of bed, getting to work on time and putting in effort for a full day is a learned skill. I dont believe most young people are inherintly lazy and dont want to work. On the contrary, most school leavers are keen to find employment, develop a future and make some dollars. Often the ones who dont succeed at work have not had parents or constructive role models with positive attitudes to work, or had the chance to try out work through their school years. Hence we have intergenerational unemployment.
People who have positive attitudes to work and who are willing to co-operate with employers, not only have more succesful careers, they also gain much more personal fullfilment and enjoyment from work than those who aproach employment with an antagonistic, inflexible attitude.
Hi Lurker.
I think Mrs Muffin has got her years wrong.
I think she means young teenagers, not the older ones.
So she's wrong on all counts, so far.
