Cameron, No dole for under 25's

[L00b]

Learn what?

For a great many no doubt, to read and write properly, and to cope with basic maths, for a start.

 

I'd love to see stats correlating educational level with entire classes of age in the UK. The acid test in France used to be at the induction into the National Service, at which time these skills were assessed (basically, all lads of a class of age, minus the odd few dispensed/conscience objectors). Every year without fail, the proportion of people lacking such basic skills (reading/writing/algebra) was an eye opener. I'm talking 20% plus. In any class of age, there is always going to be a proportion of really thick/non-functional people. Sorry if it sounds mean, but that's just life.

 

Next, for as many as possible, one or more foreign languages to at least A-Level standard for improving their employability not only here but overseas.

 

And, for many still, practical and trade skills directly relevant to employers. The sort of courses which output turnkey (moderately specialised) employees ready to get on with things from the get-go.

 

If you consider European economic migrants coming to the UK, how is it so many come here and find employment (I'm not talking about stacking shelves or flipping burgers here) without much difficulty? Because they come out of educational systems per the above.

 

I should know, I was one.

[Cyclone]

If they've reached 18 without learning to read or write adequately, what makes you think that potentially another 7 years of education would solve the problem?

 

Re: useful skills, I'm pretty sure that such courses already exist, so that's not a change from the existing system.

[Mecky]

If they've reached 18 without learning to read or write adequately, what makes you think that potentially another 7 years of education would solve the problem?

 

Re: useful skills, I'm pretty sure that such courses already exist, so that's not a change from the existing system.

 

That's about the size of it. I suspect the 1m claiming benefits will suddenly disappear overnight

[L00b]

If they've reached 18 without learning to read or write adequately, what makes you think that potentially another 7 years of education would solve the problem?

I don't know, I am not an education specialist. Do you?

 

Or are you suggesting that we should let them get on in life as illiterates, unable to read Wonga's small print and understand (even dimly) what 1000% APR means?

Re: useful skills, I'm pretty sure that such courses already exist, so that's not a change from the existing system.

The existing system looks like it's failing, from here.

 

We've hired 5 people this year, 2 of which as admin/support. We'd have loved to take on young(er) ones (not an ageist comment at all, it's simply that the job -even for an audio secretary- needs a lot of training for a long time, and from experience younger elements are much easier to train than 'time-served' ones new to the business). All NVQ'd and HND'd and RSA'd etc. that they were, they all failed our (very-) simple written tests at interview time.

 

Moreover, a lot of such courses are not free. E.g. HNCs/HNDs. They should be.

[alchresearch]

But how much has been put in place to facilitate it? Kids have to stay in education until they're 18 from next year, but can someone tell me, do they have to stay in school (in which case where are they going to go? Where are the extra classrooms? Extra teachers?) or does it mean college?

 

I can't speak for Sheffield but in Cheshire we've had a few new sixth form colleges and re-instated sixth forms in schools and converted academies. There's a lot of funding and competition available to grab them.

 

The places are there (here).

[Mecky]

I wonder how this ties in with wanting to keep people at school until they pass their exams? Maybe they'll start to deliberately fail people to keep them at school and off the unemployment register? Don't ever rule anything out.

[truman]

Greedy employers are going to have field day with all this, instead of paying the rubbish minimum wage they will now jump on the bang wagon and get kids to work for about £60 a week under a so called apprenticeship, in other words apprentice warehouse op, or apprentice street cleaner or apprentice pot wesher. Summery, kids off the dole workin for nowt and no qualification, grown ups still standing in the dole ques, Capalist Cameron looking after the rich gaffers as per usual.

 

How much different is it to this..?

 

 

 

As opposed to Ed Balls plan?

 

"under the jobs guarantee, government will ensure there is a job for every adult who is long-term unemployed and people out of work will be obliged to take up those jobs or face losing benefits."

[Mecky]

How much different is it to this..?

 

Very. Labour's scheme is to get people working with employers which is better for the economy whereas the tory idea is making them work for their dole money and knowing the tories, probably kicking in the head at the same time too. Labour's idea won't be without problems but appears much better than the tory option. As I said earlier, if I was an employer I wouldn't employ anyone who didn't want to work for the business, who harbour resentment and such but it gives people the chance of picking up skills wheres under the tory option they'd just be picking up paper.

[Cyclone]

I don't know, I am not an education specialist. Do you?

Do I know. No. But benefitting from my education, I am able to make a prediction.

BTW - do you think the person who is pushing this change through parliament is an education specialist? Is the secretary for education even an education specialist?

 

Or are you suggesting that we should let them get on in life as illiterates, unable to read Wonga's small print and understand (even dimly) what 1000% APR means?

I'm suggesting that simply mandating more of the same will not solve the problems with reading and writing for someone who has reached the age of 18 in that state.

The existing system looks like it's failing, from here.

And this is tinkering at the edges. It will not fix it.

 

We've hired 5 people this year, 2 of which as admin/support. We'd have loved to take on young(er) ones (not an ageist comment at all, it's simply that the job -even for an audio secretary- needs a lot of training for a long time, and from experience younger elements are much easier to train than 'time-served' ones new to the business). All NVQ'd and HND'd and RSA'd etc. that they were, they all failed our (very-) simple written tests at interview time.

 

Moreover, a lot of such courses are not free. E.g. HNCs/HNDs. They should be.

 

HNC/D are financed in the same way as a degree (or so it appears after a quick google), so this is a larger issue than the one in question here.

[truman]

Very. Labour's scheme is to get people working with employers which is better for the economy whereas the tory idea is making them work for their dole money and knowing the tories, probably kicking in the head at the same time too. Labour's idea won't be without problems but appears much better than the tory option. As I said earlier, if I was an employer I wouldn't employ anyone who didn't want to work for the business, who harbour resentment and such but it gives people the chance of picking up skills wheres under the tory option they'd just be picking up paper.

 

So you'd agree then that if someone refused a job then their benefit should be stopped? That's what Ed Balls said...work or lose your benefits.. Where will the jobs come from Mecky..and how much will they pay?