Not worried at all, Gary - I just like to base my discussion on evidence and reality, not statements like and
Anyway, back to reality....
If these schemes are taking the place of permanent jobs, they are wrong - people should be paid the going rate for the job.
If however, these are temporary and are voluntary (where voluntary is where you can drop out in the first week, rather than half-way through and you can't be bothered getting out of bed), and where, in the case of Tesco, one quarter of all the people who took part ended up getting a permanent job, surely this is a good thing.
Regarding the job adverts stating the companies are looking to make these permanent, it has been
reported that these are mistakes by the Job Centre IT system if this is not true, I would have expected the Unions in Tesco, etc, to be up in arms about it, and I would support them in this.
People have to realise that work experience is one of the biggest factors in getting a job, as employers are looking for proof that you can get up in the morning and turn up regularly, as well as have the capabilities to do the work - this is difficult to prove if you have been unemployed for some time, or never had a job. However, it has to be a two-way undertaking, where the person doing the work experience gains some skills and knowledge, as well as getting used to the idea of getting up and turning up. When we give people two to four weeks work experience (not as part of this scheme, but as part of a graduate employability skills programme), it actually reduces our productivity for the time as we spend more time on supervision and coaching than we gain in work throughput.