?

Just going off my local supermarkets but the majority of the temporary staff employed over Xmas are either students earning a bit extra, retired people doing a bit extra to top up their pension or people who normally only work part-time somewhere else. They're not really people who are "in and out of work".
As said before, if there is a job to be done at Tesco's (or anywhere else) then pay someone to do it, don't get free labour on the excuse of "improving employability". A 4 week work experience stacking shelves at Tesco does virtually nothing to improve employability unless there is a job at the end of it (which the new Tesco scheme appears to virtually guarantee now). If these work experience places were on Tesco's management then there might be a point to it (actually improving transferable skills). But working for free stacking shelves is unacceptable for a company that makes billions of pounds profits.

The Workfare scheme wouldn't have had anywhere close to the negative publicity it has received if the employers had topped up the JSA to minimum wage levels

Trouble is though this scheme is so discredited already that it will mean nothing to future employers, even the bonus of a decent reference won't happen as employers now don't even give out information beyond start and end dates.

Maybe so, but its better than nowt and at least shows you have got off your backside. I think its too early to judge personally.

I think you underestimate just how unemployable some people are. A lot of people don't even understand the concept of work, I.e turning up on time, wearing the correct uniform, working a shift.

The argument that Tesco make loads of money so should hire extra staff is akin to they make loads of money so its OK to go stealing from their stores. I.e ridiculous. This is a good scheme but should be entirely voluntary.

Not sure how you can blame employers, its the government that have deemed JSA to be a level that is enough to live on.

What is the latest on this? It really all boils down to this corporate social personshality stuff. I do not believe for 1 second that Tesco set out to take advantage of free labour for their own benefit which this scheme. I could perhaps believe they were doing it for their own image but them you may as well slam every private sector business out there who are nearly all up to the same tricks. And then again, at the other end of the scale, they could have been doing it completely unselfishly. Again, possible, especially considering the amount of work they do for charities and communities.

But it winds me up when people who clearly have agendas against companies that are highly profitable complain about this type of thing. No doubt they are the same people who inundate newspaper letters pages with complaints about the bonus culture.

It doesn't even do that. There was one incident (if I recall the details correctly) where a young graduate was doing work experience at a local museum – work experience that had direct relevance to her degree and her career hopes. She had to drop that and go and work in Poundland for X weeks or risk losing her benefit.

Utterly ridiculous.

On a wider note, many of the companies involved – and yes, Philip Green, you are one – were the exact same ones that, in late 2010, wrote an open letter to the chancellor, urging him to make cuts and promising that they would make up the jobs that would be lost.

Now we see what they meant.

If you believe that organisations did not see this as a fre labour pool then your are naive beyond belief.

I have no problem with organisations or individuals making profits, neither do I have a view on how large those profits should be. I do have a problem with the way some of the profits are generated and also what happens with regard to taxation of those profits, once they have been made.

Seeing as you mentioned Tesco, I'll use them as an example but they are by no means the only organisation to benefit at UK taxpayers' expense. By not paying a fair, living wage, many Tesco employees are supported by Working Tax Credits. However you dress it up, this is a company adding to its bottom line, directly through the generosity of the UK taxpayer. At the other end, they have also been found to make use of loopholes to avoid or minimise paying UK taxes. The latest ruse being, after agreeing not to supply CDs and other media VAT-free, by supplying through Jersey, they lay low for a while and then set up shop in Guernsey. I have no doubt that if that loophole is closed, they would then consider Sark, Alderney or they could always have a word with those other stalwarts of British business, the Barclay Brothers and set up shop on Jethou.

Remember the tories and most of their backers were opposed to the minimum wage, the vast majority of people working for minimum wage cannot subsist without taxpayer support through various credit schemes. I find it immoral that some businesses feel they could do better without intervention from the state in how they operate their affairs but are more than willing to accept state subsidies to top up their employees' remuneration.

Employment Minister [url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/feb/23/chris-grayling-work-experience-critics?newsfeed=trueChris Grayling attacks anti-capitalists for criticising Workfare scheme[/url

Sorry Graying but if you think that capitalism and the free market should be subject to government subsidy, then you should resign your position immediately

You say I'm naïve, I say you're cyanical. Nether of us will ever know who is right.

And Mintball, I also saw that story, hence my opinion it should be voluntary.

I doubt that he is cyanical.
Mind you his humour is a bit blue.

I don't underestimate it at all, but if it's just a case of telling the unemployed that you have to turn up on time and be presentable I don't understand why that needs to be done over 4 weeks full time work stacking shelves, plus many of the unemployed know exactly well how to turn up and present themselves and stacking shelves in Tesco isn't going to help them in any way.

I never said that because Tesco make high profits they should hire more people. I said because they make high profits they, more so than anyone, should not be abusing a poorly thought-out scheme by using free labour. If there is a job to be done at Tesco's it should be a fully employed and paid position.
Quite how you compare that with stealing I have absolutely no idea.


It's not a good scheme. It's a terrible scheme that is officially voluntary, except it's not. Many unemployed are forced onto it by Jobcentre staff and it's name is actually not workfare it is called a Mandatory Work Placement.
As mentioned above by other people, many places are not giving references and only giving very basic information. Employers do not see a 4 week work placement at Tesco's stacking shelves as evidence as any kind of skill or commitment on the part of the unemployed person. Especially as most employers know that it is virtually a mandatory and not a completely voluntary scheme.

If it was a scheme that was relevant to the unemployed persons prior experience or job aspirations then it might be better. Like I said before if Tesco's were putting potential managers on a management experience scheme or even on shop floor management experience then it might be ok, but it's not. It's 4 weeks stacking shelves for free for one of the richest companies in the world.
To think of it as anything short of a disgrace is bizarre.
Also Tesco must have thought there was something wrong with it or they wouldn't have changed it.

Oh and I also think Tesco got into the scheme 100% to take advantage of the free/cheap labour available. Why else would they?

Bulls eye!

No time to reply to that whole post, but Tesco, a billion pound company, taking on the unemployed and unemployable to take advantage of free labour? Lol. Have a word with yourself.

You obviously don't know how the scheme works do you?

What? Why is that so hard for you to believe? You hardly need highly skilled and motivated people to stack shelves, so get them to do it for free and call it work experience. Saves each store a decent amount of money.

If it was such a good scheme why did Tesco change it?

Because they attracted so much flack from the media one would assume.

I do know, quite well in fact, do you?

[url=http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/unpaid-work-firms-to-be-kept-secret.17117053Mandatory Work Activity companies to enjoy cloak of anonymity[/url

So, if you engage in a practice that has been rightly condemmed by many and face adverse publicity, the solution is to keep it all a secret.

Looking after their mates again.