Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#1
According to The Guardian, of all people, the coalition has exceeded its target of establishing 203,200 training places for people aged 19.
257,000 positions were created in the last year.
The number of apprentices aged over 25 has quadrupled to 121,000 and this suggests some long term unemployed are being included.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#2
is that under or over the age of 19?
irrespective of the answer then yes the more people that are in training the better.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#3
At 19 I believe, school leavers who are not at Uni or other further education.
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
#4
I must anthologise, for what I am about to do...
...Actually give you a link so you can see for yourself where the truth lies. (truth lies, get it?
)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2011/aug/14/increase-in-apprentices-over-25?INTCMP=SRCHIgnorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#5
You clearly prefer Labour spin Tom, but all that does is underline their failures over the last 13 years.
DT1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 15 Apr 2008
- Posts: 1,116
#6
This is of course very good. I do have some reservations about some elements though.
Firstly I would say surely apprenticeships would go up if there are no jobs. Young people leaving school DO want to work and if there are no job opportunities other than apprenticeships then this is what they would do. I would like to see the figures compared with the same age group going into full time employment in the past.
With so many young people now scared of further education due to the cost, we are also seeing a new wave of intelligent young people who will be told by their working class parents not to get themselves in such a ludicrous amount of debt. These places will be filled by young people that may not be a bright but have money. As Roger rightly points out on another thread it is this higher education that can lead to higher wages (see what they've done!).
The minimum wage on an apprenticeship is £2.50 and the article from the Guardian points out that the increase is in short term apprenticeships in 'cleaning and service industries' (retail) and that our ethical and caring friends at Tesco and McDonalds are among the biggest apprentice employers.
The cynic in me would suggest that these companies are using these positions to fill lower paid positions under the title of 'apprenticeship'. Although I believe experience is essential for young people, I think anyone running a cleaning apprenticeship is taking advantage, especially if there is no job at the end, just another 'apprentice' to fill the gap. You could also make the point that these jobs could be filled properly by the same person!
And before we go down the route of Tim Leahy (ex CEO of Tesco) suggesting that young people are not leaving school with the right skills: cleaning and shelf stacking have never been taught in schools, but we have managed up until now!!!
Right I'm off to get my 6yr old to do an apprenticeship cleaning my car right now. When he refuses to do it for £2.50, I always have my 4yr old to take his place.
On a serious note it is much better than anyone sitting idle. But as I say I have my reservations.
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
#7
Yes that is very good news to hear,the younger ones need that kind of kick off in their working life.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#8
Quite right Vic.
Far too many are going to university and this is a far better route into work for many. My own sons included are far better off doing this and no, they are not doing 'cleaning and retail', besides what is wrong with that anyway?
What appals me is this snobbish attitude of so many that the only worthwhile jobs result from university and the exaggerated importance shown to paper qualifications rather than character and personality.
Guest 640- Registered: 21 Apr 2007
- Posts: 7,819
#9
Very good post there from our DT. Love the line about the 6 year old apprentice etc
The real benefits in higher education is probably not even the education itself (although Im sure it is) but in the sound surefire knowledge that your earnings for the rest of your life will be staggeringly more than the individual who doesnt go to university. Thats a real incentive and one that should appeal to BarryW.
The figures confirming this are released every so often, I dont remember the exact percentages off the top of my head but they are large.
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
#10
Barry, I am not in the least fussed by this spin or that, but I was more disappointed than surprised to discover what has happened to the meaning and significance of the word 'apprenticeship'.
I know many people who have made a decent fist of the six month construction skills training schemes of the early seventies;brick laying, carpentry, plastering etc. [not plumbing or electrics]
It is not the time scale that is the issue, but the paucity of opportunity. It all looks more of a crash-diet instead of a fattening-up for future effort, but I suppose the incessant weighing will take care of that.
If only 'work experience' had been the term used rather than so much effort to hype and spin this into something which,alas, it is not.
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
DT1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 15 Apr 2008
- Posts: 1,116
#11
Barry, I agree far too many have gone to university in the past. But those that are still not fit for university but can afford it will still go, where those that are suitable but from poorer backgrounds will not. Unless of course people who are rich are naturally more academic, which we know isn't true, Prince Charles being living proof.
Apprenticeships are wonderful, but as Tom rightly points out this is 'work experience'. This is still good news but we must make clear, we are not giving young people new skill sets, just good work experience. Barry you talk of you sons and I seem to remember you mentioning one of them training in Electrical Engineering at Megger. This IS an apprenticeship, good luck to them. They will obviously do well because of the conscientious parenting that you have given them.
My Mum, who has worked in retail, cleaning, as a hairdresser's receptionist and a dinner lady (as she still is) will tell you no 'apprenticeship' is required. She has of course been outstanding at all of them, as she is an outstanding woman, but is under no illusion that vast amounts of training is required. She often recalls having to use a phone for her first job, something she had never done before. My grandad going to one phone box and her to another to practise. ( under our current government this would be called an apprenticeship). My mum will also tell of useless lazy youngsters that come to work with her, a cultural problem we have!
My Dad did do an apprenticeship, as a panel beater. A dying art now, this actually gave him skills that were transferable, as does (should) further education. This is what we want and university places and apprenticeships should be given to those most suited not those with money. We need cleaners, people working in retail and receptionists but paying them £2.50 and saying it is an apprenticeship is patronising, my mum will tell you that and she hasn't got a paper qualification to her name.
Yes it is true Paul, graduates do earn more money on average, but then to think Doctors, Engineers, Architects, Lawyers and many other professionals have to have degrees, it is obviously the case. I would like to live in a country where these professions are filled with the best, not just the privileged.
Barry, I'm not sure where I wrote that 'worthwhile' jobs are the result of university. I will stand by the fact (Roger's point) that higher paid jobs ARE the result of further education. I think that it is your confusion that 'worthwhile' equates to 'highly paid'.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#12
PaulB what you say about the earning potential of Uni is based on old historical figures and relate to the days when very few went there. With so many now going this impact will be considerably watered down. Some of the highest earning people I know actually never went to Uni, including my highest earning client, and two (like me) left school at 15 with no formal qualifications at all....
I now have a degree level qualification myself but I do resent having had to study for it because it provides little or no added benefit for me, my business or my clients and has cost me a lot of time and money for no reason other than to tick some boxes for the regulator. It is incredibly difficult to do when running a business and, I have to say, I did the minimum amount of study needed to get the points, it was all I have time for. My 22 years plus experience and good regulatory record count for nothing in this and if I had not done the exams, on the 1st January 2013, I would suddenly no longer be able to do the job I have been doing for all these years. A lot of older IFAs are leaving the industry as a result I hope it will at least provide me with some compensation for the last couple of years extra and often pointless study!!!
I have said all along - personality, drive, character are all better 'qualifications' than some bit of paper. Of course some jobs do require advanced and specialist education doctors, scientists and so on but many courses, no. Someone with a business degree may know nothing about real-life business and may not be able to run a whelk stall while there are many people running good businesses without a qualification to their name.
We need only see how a certain forumite cannot even be considered as a river warden to see what complete over-the-top nonsense qualification requirements are these days. This has to change a common sense must get back into the equation. Local authorities and government departments are among the worse offenders.
DT1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 15 Apr 2008
- Posts: 1,116
#13
Yes Barry is right PaulB, historically the gap between graduates and non garduates was bigger but it still stands. I apologise for the the crudeness of these stats as a social standing is not factored in.
http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=1166
Barry, common sense is exactly what this is about. There is no point in offering an apprenticeship in any job that is common sense. Apprenticeships and degrees should offer specialist knowledge, that's the point.
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
#14
whats this more docterd figures,in which one wonders why and how,its quite simple really.it works this way,say 50 people where claiming jobseekers allowance so that makes 50 people unemployed right,well if 25 went on goverment coures/aprentaships that would class them as finding work so 25 people less climing dole money.but they would be getting benifits of the state in another form.if you multiply the 25 thats on courcses/aprentaships you would get the 250,000 or so as claimed in post 1.