british jobs for british workers.

Originally Posted by Stuart C

I disagree. Why? Simple. The main reason for not using Western labour is cost. Companies (be they Sky, VM, any of the banks etc) outsource their call centres because it appears cheaper. Car manufacturers tend to move production to countries where it is cheaper. Beyond the obvious physical differences, it is actually the same concept. Why do you think a lot of manufacturers are looking to build factories in China? It isn't because they are trying to help the Chinese. Why do you think Ford Dagenham has largely closed down and Ford have moved production of the cars it used to produce to eastern bloc countries? Because it is cheaper.

On the other hand, Dell in the US found that moving their business support call centres to India to be a a disaster. in the end it cost them tens of millions of dollars in lost customers, because people phoning for support couldn't understand the cust. support agents.... Once the contract period was up, Dell moved its US call centres back to the US and thus clawed back some of its lost market share.... I'd say thats a triumph of the customer v's a companies bottom line....

[Flyboy]

Originally Posted by BBKing

IIRC we're a net investor abroad - we spend more money investing in foreign companies than they do investing in ours. Obviously any move to increase protectionism invites other countries to go 'We-eell, perhaps it might be a good idea to SLAP A MASSIVE TAX ON ALL UK INVESTMENTS' or similar. I'm not sure this is necessarily the answer.

If you want my opinion, which you probably don't, we need to stop treating skill, professionalism, loyalty and craftsmanship as undesirable attributes to be hammered out of our workforce.

Have we really done that, if so who is most to blame? Is it the consumer, the workforce or the employer?

---------- Post added at 16:29 ---------- Previous post was at 16:23 ----------

Originally Posted by ginge51

Who should be blamed for this mess???
Labour, simply put, it's them who need to lose there jobs for what they have brought this country since they've been in power.
I've been looking now and i\'d say I've applied for over 12 jobs in 3-4 months, i cannot get a job at all, it's that bad.
All the immigrants get the job before us British do.
It's a joke, all this mess is because of all these foreigners coming to our country and taking our jobs ffs.
Send the men home, but gladly leave you're women here

But that is simply not true. I recently filled a position in my company, there were five candidates. Of the six people I interviewed for the position, two of them, who had been unemployed for six months and three years respectively, were only interested in me signing their form for the Jobcentre. Of the other two, one had been unemployed for three weeks and the other six weeks. The one who had been unemployed for less than a month, was fired because he ripped his last employer off and the other lost his job, because he was no good at it. The remaining unsuccessful candidate was pipped at the post by the young man who eventually got the job, because he had a little more experience in the right areas and his references reflected my judgement. Two of the candidates were European migrants. The successful applicant was originally from Shirley.

[Rainman]

Originally Posted by Rainman

We have to protect our British industry for British workers.
Don't forget the British workers now owns 90% of RBS because the Admin:edit lost all our money mostly investing abroad. Now RBS used the British tax payers money to help Kraft to buy Cadbury's only to shut it down. The very workers who paid tax to bail out RBS that lent Kraft the money to buy Cadbury lost their jobs.
And those British workers tax money paid to open a new factory in Poland.
We must be Admin:edit mad


Admin edit (Chris): The forum swear filter is there for a reason, please do not try to circumvent it with selective use of *s.

Sorry Chris I will not use swear words again, And I didn't know Sunlight taste so good

If we all want cheaper services and goods like it seems oh wait a minute im talking pigmuck wait a minute wrong thread lets not blame any chemists daughters oh jesus i do ramble I say british jobs for people who can do the jobs the best.

[Escapee]

Originally Posted by BBKing

If you want my opinion, which you probably don't, we need to stop treating skill, professionalism, loyalty and craftsmanship as undesirable attributes to be hammered out of our workforce.

Your opinion is agreeable and welcome.

---------- Post added at 17:15 ---------- Previous post was at 17:09 ----------

Originally Posted by Flyboy

Have we really done that, if so who is most to blame? Is it the consumer, the workforce or the employer?[COLOR="Silver"]

---------- Post added at 16:29 ---------- Previous post was at 16:23 ----------

[/

I believe the initial blame can be placed with government, they have pushed the view that degrees are everything and everyone must have one. This has resulted in companies ignoring those candidates without a degree, next it will be everyone needs a masters, then a phd etc.

I work with engineers in their late 20s and early thirties, and the majority have very little experience of real engineering. True they can explain the theory behind splitting the atom, but it's best to keep them well away from a screwdriver.

[Flyboy]

Originally Posted by Escapee

Your opinion is agreeable and welcome.

---------- Post added at 17:15 ---------- Previous post was at 17:09 ----------



I believe the initial blame can be placed with government, they have pushed the view that degrees are everything and everyone must have one. This has resulted in companies ignoring those candidates without a degree, next it will be everyone needs a masters, then a phd etc.

I work with engineers in their late 20s and early thirties, and the majority have very little experience of real engineering. True they can explain the theory behind splitting the atom, but it's best to keep them well away from a screwdriver.

I think you have misunderstood the posts on this. As BBKing wrote:

Originally Posted by BBKing

If you want my opinion, which you probably don't, we need to stop treating skill, professionalism, loyalty and craftsmanship as undesirable attributes to be hammered out of our workforce.

And I replied:

Originally Posted by Flyboy

Have we really done that, if so who is most to blame? Is it the consumer, the workforce or the employer?

I would have thought that if there is an increase in educated candidates for jobs, then skill, professionalism, loyalty and craftsmanship are not being hammered out of the workforce. How can these graduates get experience, if they refused the work in the first place, because thy don't have the experience?

So, is the answer the employer? Are they the ones who are refusing to honour achievement?

[Escapee]

Originally Posted by Flyboy

I think you have misunderstood the posts on this.



I would have thought that if there is an increase in educated candidates for jobs, then skill, professionalism, loyalty and craftsmanship are not being hammered out of the workforce. How can these graduates get experience, if they refused the work in the first place, because thy don't have the experience?

My point is:

The emphasis is on qualifications and not experience, I look at some of these engineers with degrees in their 20's and 30's and think how I was not that naive or lacking in engineering skills at the same age.

As an example, my manager really came up with a right corker. I didn't know if I should shed a tear or laugh. He was comparing my skills (HNC and C&G) to those of a Chartered engineer about 5-10 years younger with a masters degree, who has recently been promoted to a level higher than myself.

His quote went like'

'See, if I have a difficult engineering issue that needs thorough investigation by a competent engineer and a 100 page report I get you to do it. If however I need a 2 page report detailing why a connector has fallen off a cable I get xyz to do it'

I get the pat on the back, the manager even laughs about the incompetence of the chartered engineer with a masters degree. But I am really the butt of the joke, because the useless Chartered Master degree engineer gets the promotion.

[G UK]

The emphasis is on qualifications and not experience, I look at some of these engineers with degrees in their 20's and 30's and think how I was not that naive or lacking in engineering skills at the same age.

I'd qualify that as being those who were full time students. I did my degree part time whilst working in Engineering Full Time since leaving school at 16 and completing my apprenticeship.

Its quite an eye opener seeing the lazy full time students moaning about there assignments when you are doing the same assignments whilst also working full time and then going back into work the next day and seeing some recently graduated, now with a piece of paper think they should be in a management position after doing a "graduate scheme".

Unfortunately most technical roles where I work now require a degree but many graduates believe that these roles are below them, within a few months (nowhere near enough time to learn the job) the grads tend to move on with a tick in a box saying they have done the role. Unfortunately that leaves the roles open and having to be filled by contractors who are expensive and therefore eventually outsourcing takes over.

What should be happening is that people should be encouraged to train by working these roles from leaving school and be given the chance to develop through promotion within the role, this gives a high level focused competence and expertise. Add to this focused degrees for more advanced technical subjects as they should be and you end up with a highly capable workforce at all levels rather than every man and his dog having a degree and therefore expecting to be high up the tree.

[Escapee]

Originally Posted by G UK

I'd qualify that as being those who were full time students. I did my degree part time whilst working in Engineering Full Time since leaving school at 16 and completing my apprenticeship.

Its quite an eye opener seeing the lazy full time students moaning about there assignments when you are doing the same assignments whilst also working full time and then going back into work the next day and seeing some recently graduated, now with a piece of paper think they should be in a management position after doing a "graduate scheme".

Unfortunately most technical roles where I work now require a degree but many graduates believe that these roles are below them, within a few months (nowhere near enough time to learn the job) the grads tend to move on with a tick in a box saying they have done the role. Unfortunately that leaves the roles open and having to be filled by contractors who are expensive and therefore eventually outsourcing takes over.

What should be happening is that people should be encouraged to train by working these roles from leaving school and be given the chance to develop through promotion within the role, this gives a high level focused competence and expertise. Add to this focused degrees for more advanced technical subjects as they should be and you end up with a highly capable workforce at all levels rather than every man and his dog having a degree and therefore expecting to be high up the tree.

I agree entirely with what you are saying.

I believe the culture in this country has been created by the government and schools. The careers advice appears to be 'Leave school, go to university, gain a degree and when you have the piece of paper you can be a brain surgeon CEO earning as much as you like'

We have a number of graduates, I have had some of them working on a program that I have been leading. One of them is very good and really keen to learn, the majority seem to have an attitude that they know better and are assigned to bring value with their superior qualifications. The 'attitude' that they are above the basics, means they will never learn the basic engineering skills.

Some of these graduates like the ones I mentioned in their 20's and 30's with degrees are almost unemployable, but again due to our work with the government the company needs to have lots of chartered engineers with masters degrees or phd on the books.

We find these highly qualified engineers usually end up with tasks that are minimum risk. One of them has recently been promoted to principle engineer, I would actually question the term engineer being used in his job title. He was very embarrassed when he told me of his promotion, his first words were 'don't laugh'

Business in this country especially engineering is in a very screwed up state.

[Flyboy]

Originally Posted by Escapee

I agree entirely with what you are saying.

I believe the culture in this country has been created by the government and schools. The careers advice appears to be 'Leave school, go to university, gain a degree and when you have the piece of paper you can be a brain surgeon CEO earning as much as you like'

We have a number of graduates, I have had some of them working on a program that I have been leading. One of them is very good and really keen to learn, the majority seem to have an attitude that they know better and are assigned to bring value with their superior qualifications. The 'attitude' that they are above the basics, means they will never learn the basic engineering skills.

Some of these graduates like the ones I mentioned in their 20's and 30's with degrees are almost unemployable, but again due to our work with the government the company needs to have lots of chartered engineers with masters degrees or phd on the books.

We find these highly qualified engineers usually end up with tasks that are minimum risk. One of them has recently been promoted to principle engineer, I would actually question the term engineer being used in his job title. He was very embarrassed when he told me of his promotion, his first words were 'don't laugh'

Business in this country especially engineering is in a very screwed up state.

But those graduates in their thirties went to school in the nineteen nineties, it was a very different government then.

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by Flyboy

But those graduates in their thirties went to school in the nineteen nineties, it was a very different government then.

When do you think they graduated, given that they're being refered to as graduates still?

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by G UK

I'd qualify that as being those who were full time students. I did my degree part time whilst working in Engineering Full Time since leaving school at 16 and completing my apprenticeship.

Its quite an eye opener seeing the lazy full time students moaning about there assignments when you are doing the same assignments whilst also working full time and then going back into work the next day and seeing some recently graduated, now with a piece of paper think they should be in a management position after doing a "graduate scheme".

Funnily enough, I was a full time student. I *did* however work hard and between my degree and the part time job I needed to finance it, I rarely worked for less than 45 hours a week..

We still get students moaning about how much work they do (and some do work very hard), but we get a lot that leave everything to the last minute, then come in and bitch that our facilities are overloaded when the courseworks are due in. They are, but to get over that problem, we'd need to buy ten times the amount of equipment we have, and the bulk of that equipment would only be used for 2 or 3 weeks a term.

Unfortunately most technical roles where I work now require a degree but many graduates believe that these roles are below them, within a few months (nowhere near enough time to learn the job) the grads tend to move on with a tick in a box saying they have done the role. Unfortunately that leaves the roles open and having to be filled by contractors who are expensive and therefore eventually outsourcing takes over.

What should be happening is that people should be encouraged to train by working these roles from leaving school and be given the chance to develop through promotion within the role, this gives a high level focused competence and expertise. Add to this focused degrees for more advanced technical subjects as they should be and you end up with a highly capable workforce at all levels rather than every man and his dog having a degree and therefore expecting to be high up the tree.

The problem is we have had years of society telling us to get a degree for a better job, and years of various governments (at least the last 20 years) encouraging Universitys to take on as many students as possible, so the universitys have been actively encouraging the idea that you need a degree to get on.

The trouble is, it leaves us with a society where you need a degree to do basic jobs, and with people who have a degree thinking that because they have the degree, they don't need a basic job.

[Xaccers]

Bring back the tripartite school system but do it properly this time.
Academicaly minded kids go off to grammar schools, technically/vocationally minded (engineers, mechanics, electricians, plumbers etc) go to technical schools, and the rest go to secondary schools to get a decent education and life skills, with the allocation assessment not based on a single exam but a long term assessment so no one can be coached into an inappropriate selection, making it based on ability and potential ability rather than social background.
Fewer pupils at each school, smaller classes and better contact between teachers and pupils to get the educational support they need.
Of course you'd also need primary schools to actually educate pupils which may pose a problem.

[Maggy J]

Originally Posted by Xaccers

Bring back the tripartite school system but do it properly this time.
Academicaly minded kids go off to grammar schools, technically/vocationally minded (engineers, mechanics, electricians, plumbers etc) go to technical schools, and the rest go to secondary schools to get a decent education and life skills, with the allocation assessment not based on a single exam but a long term assessment so no one can be coached into an inappropriate selection, making it based on ability and potential ability rather than social background.
Fewer pupils at each school, smaller classes and better contact between teachers and pupils to get the educational support they need.
Of course you'd also need primary schools to actually educate pupils which may pose a problem.

More vocational training is definitely the way to go..and less emphasis on the status of academic education..Everyone should be encouraged to get the education that benefits them best.

Sadly it will cost a pretty penny to supply such a dream and with the short termism that exists between the different parties due to elections every 5 years things are not likely to change.It will only change if education is removed from the political arena and given to a multi political party committee who can ensure that well thought out long term policies prevail.

[Flyboy]

Originally Posted by Xaccers

When do you think they graduated, given that they're being refered to as graduates still?

Which brings us to my alternate point; how do you expect them get the experience, if they are not employed by those companies who would give them the experience?