|
|
Post by nia2311 on Jun 27, 2012 22:07:04 GMT
Brindle, that is great for your daughter, I hope she can develop her career from this good start.
|
|
kayjayem
Happy to help....a lot
Posts: 10,046
|
Post by kayjayem on Jun 27, 2012 22:25:36 GMT
The overwhelming majority of school leavers who do not continue with academic education either go to apprenticeships (£96 a week), or into entry level, generally unskilled employment. Nowadays there is a min wage for this age group of around £3.50 an hour. So, working a 40hr week on £3.50 gives you a net take home pay of £140 a week. Now take off tax and NI and you haven't got a lot more than the apprentice on £96 a week. 40 hrs @ £3.50 would give a GROSS pay of £140 per week, and forgive me if I'm wrong, I haven't done wages for a couple of years, at that rate you would not be liable for any tax or NI(or at least very little). I agree this is very little but historically I think this has always been the same. |
|
|
|
Post by nia2311 on Jun 27, 2012 22:33:26 GMT
Oooo just about, kayjayem, you are right. I have to say I haven't kept pace with the increased personal allowance either, but the current personal allowance gives a weekly income of £143.75 tax free.
Last year it was £124 a week, so it has recently increased you are right. BUT you would be liable for NI contributions on £140 a week. The current NI threshold is £102 a week, so 2% NI would be taken anyway.
Historically, when I left school, the tax free allowance only gave you about £98 a week before you became liable for tax, when there was the old 10p rate. That is why apprenticeship wages are set where they are - historically they were designed to be JUST below the threshold for NI and tax.
And yes, my original post should have said GROSS pay. I am tired.
|
|
|
|
Post by sometime on Jun 27, 2012 22:43:39 GMT
lets face facts... the dole bluegrass don't want to work, are happy sitting on their fat lazy arses and getting every benefit they can, dossing about and nothing will change till our government cracks down. May be true in some cases but the kids of 4th generation dole dossers were the kids I employed on piece work not dirty but laborious and boring they are all now in full time paid work supporting their own families not bad coming from families that had never worked. Sorry but I do believe that there are people out there that given the opportunity would chose work over benefits given half a chance. It is the chances these young people need |
|
|
|
Post by nia2311 on Jun 27, 2012 23:16:28 GMT
Well, anyone looking for a job? Just read the eteach weekly bulletin for the North West and there are literally hundreds of jobs for teaching assistants, from level 1 right up to level 4. I am gob smacked how many vacancies there are for TAs in a time when school funding is being slashed. If you fancy being overworked and underpaid, that is the job for you!
|
|
|
|
Post by nia2311 on Jun 27, 2012 23:23:09 GMT
May be true in some cases but the kids of 4th generation dole dossers were the kids I employed on piece work not dirty but laborious and boring they are all now in full time paid work supporting their own families not bad coming from families that had never worked. Sorry but I do believe that there are people out there that given the opportunity would chose work over benefits given half a chance. It is the chances these young people need And on the flip side, I have seen plenty of young people throw opportunities back in the faces of the people who offer them. I have had Apprentices jack it all in because they don't like getting up at 6am, because their employer refused to sanction 3wks holiday, or because "someone looked at them funny." All true. This is the best one of the lot. I had a girl (hairdressing apprentice) who told me a great long sob story about why she had been AWOL from college all morning. Her mother was very ill, she had to drive her to A&E at the last minute etc etc, so she couldn't come to college. Unfortunately, I'd rung the home phone number first, and spoken to the surprised mother who was in A1 health. Even when confronted with this, the student tried to persist with her original lie! Her reward - her hairdressing employer revoked the placement, as apparently her punctuality there was appalling (they hadn't told us) and she lost her hairdressing apprenticeship because she fancied going into Bury one day, instead of college. We tried to find alternative placements, but placements are not ten a penny, and she didn't exactly get a glowing reference from the other one.... What more can you do?? Placement near home pre-organised for you, all you have to do is come to college one day per week (employer is paying you for this day). And STILL they don't get on with it. |
|
|
|
Post by sometime on Jun 27, 2012 23:23:47 GMT
EEERRRRRR no thanks I cannot imagine anything worse than having anything what so ever to do with modern undisciplined children. Never minded being overworked and underpaid but dont fancy anything whatsoever to do with schools and kids now thanks again
Wonder if they will get 200 applicants for each of those jobs
Perhaps the apprenticeships are not good enough to capture the kids and the money not enough to keep them sorry but I would be interested in the real reason for them not taking them up. Either that or the kids are just too old when they start them and already have preconceived ideas about what they expect
|
|
|
|
Post by nia2311 on Jun 27, 2012 23:28:41 GMT
EEERRRRRR no thanks I cannot imagine anything worse than having anything what so ever to do with modern undisciplined children. Never minded being overworked and underpaid but dont fancy anything whatsoever to do with schools and kids now thanks again Wonder if they will get 200 applicants for each of those jobs ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D The poor folk who get these TA jobs will be used as replacement teachers. They are paid less than half of what a class teacher is paid, and term time only, yet they are put in front of classes to cover planning/prep time, absences, meetings etc. It is not fair on the TAs who didn't sign up for that, and its not fair on the kids who are lacking a qualified teacher. But to anyone who says there are no jobs - there are. Quite a lot actually. |
|
|
|
Post by nia2311 on Jun 27, 2012 23:33:24 GMT
Perhaps the apprenticeships are not good enough to capture the kids and the money not enough to keep them sorry but I would be interested in the real reason for them not taking them up. Either that or the kids are just too old when they start them and already have preconceived ideas about what they expect I am referring to students aged 16-18. If you take a job in construction, you WILL have to be ready for pick ups at 6am, its the industry. They are told that from day one. But a lot quit because they don't like getting up early, or they are sacked for being constantly late/hungover/drunk. Apprenticeships put you onto the lowest of the low rungs in the given industry, on-the-job training, but the student's ideas of what that entails is not the same as the employer. Hairdressers have visions of being allowed to do a full cut, colour and perm on Day Two. They get shirty if asked to sweep the cuttings up. They are told clearly what their role will entail, but so many quit because either they can't hack the hours or the labour, or they have delusions of grandeur and don't want to do the basic jobs. It is a problem throughout the country. |
|
|
|
Post by sometime on Jun 27, 2012 23:39:45 GMT
What kind of drop out rate do you have on those though I would expect a small percentage unable or unwilling to comply with the rules. The same sort of percentage of kids at 14-16 who dont want to go to school or a larger percentage. If larger then there is something wrong with the system.
What is the penalty for non compliance
|
|
|
|
Post by sometime on Jun 27, 2012 23:43:40 GMT
Must admit the only thing that would come a close second to having anything to do with modern kids would be dealing with mucky heads and feet. But that is my thing I have worked at all sorts from cleaning toilets on building sites to cleaning up vomit in pubs but there are some things I would draw the line at
Perhaps it is time to be a bit clearer on the actual requirement of some jobs and the compulsion behind some of them I imagine there are lots of little girls/boys that think being a hairdresser is very glamorous and lots of boys/girls that think construction is laying bricks and being in charge of designing houses what are the recruitment people doing to improve the preconceived ideas and aspirations of the target groups
Did try not to stereotype and be sexist
|
|
|
|
Post by amumwithapony on Jun 28, 2012 5:24:38 GMT
I can only speak for the construction industry Sometime. If we take a labourer on we are looking for someone to labour. Someone to sweep up, move stuff from one place to another, help the fixers and be a gofer. They will be picked up at 6am (foc) and dropped off home about 5pm. Up to around 3 hours of their working day will be sat in a car. They will get 3 breaks a day, and finish early on a friday. But be paid for the full day (8 hours). For that we usually pay around £8 an hour. We have a bloke at the minute who is a labourer but he is on £10 an hour as he manages the other labourers and can be trusted by the company we sub contract to. Hes not even with our fixers at the moment and is a highly valued labourer. But at 54 he is not interested in learning a trade as such. He just wants a job and is happy with his role. On the other hand we are looking at setting a young lad on to teach him a trade so he can eventually 'fix'. He'll be expected to do all the above and learn what the others do. We've had about 4 people ask about it. Told all of them to get their CSCS card done (health and safety requirement for working on sites these days) and not one has done that. Those signing on get it paid for. For those that arent it costs about £25 I think? We know that we will have about 3 do the job before we find the right one. Young people do not appreciate 6am starts and 5 pm finishes. They dont like 8 hours of hard graft and certainly don't enjoy following the strict rules on building sites. They don't like carrying the boards around and they don't enjoy putting in rockwool. But thats how it is in the real world. We've heard some wonderful excuses for men not turning up as well. 'Can't work today, my Mrs says I've to look after the baby whilst she does the shopping' 'Can't work today, I'm ill' Fair do's, but don't be stood in the pub at 5pm when the rest of them call in for a beer.  'Can't work today, the cat is ill' It was his mums cat and looked fine in the window sill when the lads drove past. 'Cant work today, I havent any boots/hats/hi vis vest' Had them yesterday, and will have them tomorrow no doubt  'Can't work today, its too hot/cold/windy/wet' And these are all young men, usually with families to support, not 17/18 year old school leavers. We ran into someone who used to work for us a few months ago. Nice lad, good at his job. Newly married with a baby. Asked him what he was doing. Working for Asda, delivering shopping. Doing around 16 hours a week. OH felt sorry for him and offered him his old job back (40 hours, £10 an hour). The answer? 'Not worth it mate, I 'earn' more now with tax credits and housing benefit top up for doing 16 hours than doing 40'. This was before they increased the rule to 24 hours is it to be able to get tax credits. When a grown man with a new family would rather rely on the state to subsidise his wages than work an honest weeks work to earn good money there is something wrong with the system. I do agree that a minimum wage job is not enough for a single person to support themselves. You need 2 of you working to have a reasonable standard of living on that wage. Everything is so expensive and everyone wants to have their own place. People are marrying later and there are more single households than ever before. But my understanding of minimum wage is that as an adult if you are earning less then around £160 a week you get Working Tax Credit at about £40 a week to help? Even if you don't have children or dependants. Surely for a 1 bedroomed flat you can afford your rent, bills and to eat? You may not be able to run a car, have foreign holidays and the latest flat screen TV but who said you have to have all these things? They are luxury items that in years gone by only the well off could afford. Usually people a generation on. Who have worked, raised families and are now reaping the rewards of a steady income. Lots of young people think they NEED these things and if they can't afford them by working, whats the point of working? |
|
|
|
Post by Erinx on Jun 28, 2012 6:32:22 GMT
How is that fair on the honest hard working people kjm? When there's such strong competition for jobs yet people on benefits just get one?
It wouldn't work. Don't get me wrong I don't want to see people spend their life on benefits but just handing them a job that other people have worked so hard to get isnt the answer.
|
|
|
|
Post by brindlerainbow on Jun 28, 2012 6:50:33 GMT
Im a teaching assistant ( level 3 ) and have been in the same school for 8 years. I live in Devon where wages are not brilliant compared to the home counties. Im not under paid and certainly not over worked!!!  . This week for example - Monday was sports day and I spent the afternoon scoring though had to helps tidy up all the equipment at the end of the day and I got home 15 mniutes later thatn usual, Tuesday was swimming so spent the morning in the pool with 3 non swimmers splashing about, Wednesday was a very busy morning as I had to work in KS1 which I very rarely do as im a KS2 TA, this morning all the stuff I have ordered for next term has arrived, books,stationary etc so I will spend the morning unpacking that and just getting stuff ready for next term and I don't work on Fridays!!! Yes I am often used as a substitute teacher but I love my job. I get paid much less than a teacher but I have absolutey no desire to be a teacher!! It pays better than working in a shop or factory and I get paid 12 months of the year not just in term time. I would definately recommend it as a job  |
|
|
|
Post by cayo on Jun 28, 2012 7:04:45 GMT
I would be all for the long term unemployed doing some work for thier benefit but however it was done i feel it would ultimatley lead to the loss of proper jobs so it would have to done with great care i would only want to see them to work for councils / community and nhs ect and absolutley not work for any profit making company and only have to work enough hours to cover what they get in benefits at the going hourley rate for the job and that the job given them was well with in travellling distance for them and wouldnt cost them to get to out of their benefit ,done correctley and fairley everyone would benefit with hopefully minimum job loses due to the scheme .we have a minimum wage in this country so work handed out should be done accordingley |
|
|
|
Post by nia2311 on Jun 28, 2012 12:36:03 GMT
Brindle - my MIL is a Level 2 TA and she is most definitely underpaid and overworked. I think she earns about £7000 a year, term time only, she is full time. She often covers Yr 6 classes (this is the one she is attached to) but she doesn't have any qualifications herself, other than the TA course and the numeracy/literacy you have to do along with that. She often feels out of her depth and under-valued. And when the school also expects all the TAs to stay behind for long meetings that sometimes last till 7 or 8pm, I can see her frustration. I am sure not all schools are the same, but I have seen an awful lot of TAs being used to fulfill roles intended for qualified teachers. I expect my son to be taught by a teacher, with TAs being employed to support the teacher and support certain children in the class. TAs should not be "teaching" per se.
|
|
|
|
Post by brindlerainbow on Jun 28, 2012 13:51:30 GMT
Nia it sounds like your MIL is being taken advantage of!! poor woman, Occasionally I will have to stay late maybe till 5 - 6 O'clock if we have a training session eg first aid,autism etc, this will be maybe once or twice a year and I always get paid for those extra hours. I am in a small school with only 45 children, 24 are in KS2 where I work. Next Tuesday I am taking the year 3 & 4's as the teacher is out. I will follow the lesson plan and they will have started the topic on Monday with the teacher so will know what they are doing. It is often less disruptive for the children to have me supervising the class as they know me, than a supply teacher who they don't know and who doesn't know them and their little quirks!! For instance last week we had a supply teacher for yr 3/4 he was very pleasant, was an older chap who had spent most of his teaching life in a private girls school but had recently moved to Devon hence doing supply. In class we have an autistic boy who has his own 1 to 1 person. He was being a bit defiant but his helper is well used to his behaviour and how to deal with him. Supply teacher stepped in told him off and insisited he apologised to his helper. Child got extremely agitated as he couldnt understand the instruction, became very disruptive, the whole class got disrupted and the lesson was spoilt and resulted in 15 upset children. If I had been overseeing the class this wouldn't have happened as I know the autistic boy very well and how to deal with him. So in some cases I think it can be better for a TA to supervise a class depending on the circumstances. Children often get anxious if they are being taught by a complete stranger. I know in bigger schools the HLTA's cover the PPA time
|
|
|
|
Post by chalky284 on Jun 28, 2012 15:34:21 GMT
Perhaps we should go back to the days when being on benefits was seen as a bad thing in all communities, brought shame on the family! Create workplaces that recycle, clean streets, teach reading and writing, handy man skills for the community to to use for free. Those wanting benefits can work there to earn their benefits. It would be educational and constructive!?
|
|
|
|
Post by cayo on Jun 28, 2012 17:07:32 GMT
Perhaps we should go back to the days when being on benefits was seen as a bad thing in all communities, brought shame on the family! Create workplaces that recycle, clean streets, teach reading and writing, handy man skills for the community to to use for free. Those wanting benefits can work there to earn their benefits. It would be educational and constructive!? yeah and while we are at it why dont we stone them and have them digging roads with thier babies strapped to their backs ,slavery but with benefits |
|
|
|
Post by chalky284 on Jun 28, 2012 17:16:09 GMT
Perhaps we should go back to the days when being on benefits was seen as a bad thing in all communities, brought shame on the family! Create workplaces that recycle, clean streets, teach reading and writing, handy man skills for the community to to use for free. Those wanting benefits can work there to earn their benefits. It would be educational and constructive!? yeah and while we are at it why dont we stone them and have them digging roads with thier babies strapped to their backs ,slavery but with benefits Hmmm stoning could ease the stress of those who work!?? And I could do with someone to do some digging in my garden, I'm off to write to Mr Cameron........... ;D P.S that was a joke |
|
|
|
Post by sageandonion on Jun 28, 2012 19:02:47 GMT
But surely if those people fit enough thought they had to work for their benefit they would make more effort to get a job they preferred. There are plenty of jobs in my area. What could be wrong about earning benefit, gaining experience and respect into the bargain.
|
|
kayjayem
Happy to help....a lot
Posts: 10,046
|
Post by kayjayem on Jun 28, 2012 21:21:58 GMT
How is that fair on the honest hard working people kjm? When there's such strong competition for jobs yet people on benefits just get one? It wouldn't work. Don't get me wrong I don't want to see people spend their life on benefits but just handing them a job that other people have worked so hard to get isnt the answer. Because they wouldn't be "real" jobs as such. It would be a way of getting the people on benefits to actually do something for it. they would only get the basic benefit. It wouldn't affect hardworking people at all because it wouldn't really be a bona fide job |
|
|
|
Post by sometime on Jun 28, 2012 21:37:58 GMT
What would happen if they didnt do the work and remained work shy exactly who do you think would be the ones to suffer
|
|
|
|
Post by eaxpayer on Jun 28, 2012 21:51:47 GMT
Taxpayers Sometime!!
sageandonion, for once we seem to be singing from the same hymn sheet ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by sometime on Jun 28, 2012 21:58:43 GMT
You are quite correct the taxpayer would suffer even more because they would be supporting many more children in care, more people in prison and more people in health care. All of which are far more expensive than benefits
|
|
|
|
Post by taxpayer on Jun 28, 2012 22:07:26 GMT
Home is where all this starts!  Morals, values................................................. |
|
|
|
Post by sometime on Jun 28, 2012 22:11:11 GMT
yes but these values have been eroded over 30 years they will take at least that long the reinstate
|
|
|
|
Post by taxpayer on Jun 28, 2012 22:37:37 GMT
Laws and peoples rights..................
It is not just one area of life that has caused this..........
It is a breakdown in everything
|
|
dazycutter
Happy to help
The reason a dog has so many friends is that he wags his tail instead of his Tongue.
Posts: 7,933
|
Post by dazycutter on Jun 28, 2012 23:15:47 GMT
yes but these values have been eroded over 30 years they will take at least that long the reinstate Agreed, buts this government should make a start and not be a soft option. I do think those on job seekers should contribute to the community in some way. It may even possibly give them a modicum of self worth as well |
|
|
|
Post by amumwithapony on Jun 29, 2012 5:34:24 GMT
Those that worry about the children of the unemployed, work shy, bone idle folk who continually sponge off the tax payer should worry about them and what will happen if their parents have to start 'working' for their benefit.
But the reason there are sooo many children who live in poverty and are neglected in the first place is because their parents, in some cases, chose to have them even though they couldn't support them properly as they get a house, a higher rate of HB and a higher income if they are parents.
So if you take away the 'perks' of having children at 16/17/18 to benefit financially from these children.
So you will reduce the number of children born in those situations.
I'm not a social worker so wouldn't like to guess at figures but I would imagine Social Services deal with more children from a non working back ground than children where 1 or more parents work?
So we have to break the cycle of breed/claim benefits/breed some more to actually HELP the children that are as yet unborn.
And by reducing the amount born each year in this sort of situation, it will help the children already, through no fault of their own, born into a benefits culture. There will be more resources, more money and less people competing for jobs.
Its a cycle and the only way to make things better is to break the cycle.
|
|
. This week for example - Monday was sports day and I spent the afternoon scoring though had to helps tidy up all the equipment at the end of the day and I got home 15 mniutes later thatn usual, Tuesday was swimming so spent the morning in the pool with 3 non swimmers splashing about, Wednesday was a very busy morning as I had to work in KS1 which I very rarely do as im a KS2 TA, this morning all the stuff I have ordered for next term has arrived, books,stationary etc so I will spend the morning unpacking that and just getting stuff ready for next term and I don't work on Fridays!!! Yes I am often used as a substitute teacher but I love my job. I get paid much less than a teacher but I have absolutey no desire to be a teacher!! It pays better than working in a shop or factory and I get paid 12 months of the year not just in term time. I would definately recommend it as a job 
