10 months in and 90 left to go ... the reality is starting to kick in :)

skint_spice

Another one here that wouldn't be able to apply for my old job - who cares about the years of experience eh? grrr!!!

I go to college with folk that regularly miss days for no good reason and chat all the way through some lectures... lectures they moan about later as they don't get it... mmm...

elantan

Yep skinty it is so annoying when that happens in class and lectures etc, how in earth can they expect to learn anything, it's very disrespectful to other students and the tutors


The whole qualifications and job situation is so annoying as well, it's gonna to get to a stage where people will need masters in order to get jobs cleaning streets

Butti

elantan wrote: »

The whole qualifications and job situation is so annoying as well, it's gonna to get to a stage where people will need masters in order to get jobs cleaning streets

That's reassuring El. So if this job doesn't work out!

skint_spice

Have you got previous experience though Butti? Previous experience, masters & experience of project management essential

ZTD

elantan wrote: »

which would indicate that after tax and national insurance I earn £4 an hour ... That's very sobering

That's about right. I remember going through an exercise with Skinty about how much she'd lose if she went on strike. I said because of all the deductions, it would be about half her gross wage minus a tenner. Which worked out about right.

Yes you have this headline gross wage - but it's just propaganda. I'm waiting until there's so many deductions, that it would pay me to go on strike. You might be laughing, but there are people near benefit threasholds for whom it is a reality.

rising_from_the_ashes wrote: »

It's so frustrating as loads of employers are now putting "Educated to Degree Level" as job requirements* - think it's to try to cut down on the number of people applying .... but I still can't justify spending that sort of money

It's not *just* to cut down on people applying - especially in IT, but is a reflection on HR's and the managers' own inabilities to determine suitable candidates.

You have a case where HR don't know about IT, and the managers who have been employed specificially because they "can manage and not know the job" don't know the job either. These people then have to determine if candidates are suitable.

The IT alphabet soup gives HR the confidence to say "they must know the job". Which is garbage, but people will accept any crutch when they're out of their depth. I happen to work with a number of very talented people, for whom I have to sprint to keep up with. One of them interviewed a contractor who we later employed. This contractor said to me a couple of months later in conversation: "I went in and within 20 seconds knew I couldn't bullshit him like I had everybody else."

Having said that, we (i.e. me and my coworkers) have to curb our natural thoughts that a lot of letters after their name means they're useless... :rotfl:

rising_from_the_ashes wrote: »

* lady I worked with saw her old job advertised stating "degree" on it - she'd done it for 10+ years and left school with o'grades .... it's a really unfair way to cut out loads of potentially fab employees!

It also leads to employing the completely incapable. Who then employ the completely incapable. I think companies are starting to realise this, but don't know what to do about it.

rising_from_the_ashes wrote: »

*rant over*:o

You should say things when they're valid. No hiding here...

elantan wrote: »

I fully back your rant, having paid quite a bit myself for courses I know how frustrating it is, I used to sit in class with people that had theirs paid that just couldn't be !!!!!d in turning up and wonder to myself " would they be like this of they had paid the fee"

Yes. They would. Many people view university as an attendence certificate, which to be fair, it often is.

elantan wrote: »

I did full time uni for two years only went in 9 hours a week to uni .... Thought that was pretty shambolic as well... What course is 9 hours full time ?

A profitable one.

elantan wrote: »

How is 9 hours a full time uni course ?

The university gets the fees and the student gets the degree - who loses in that scenario?

elantan wrote: »

But then in second year we did a class with duplo bricks . So I don't exactly think it was a very good example I what university is like

No...I think it probably was a good example. Universities love group work. Because it's cheap.

elantan wrote: »

The whole qualifications and job situation is so annoying as well, it's gonna to get to a stage where people will need masters in order to get jobs cleaning streets

It's not clearing the streets. It's an MSc in Refuse Management.

Butti wrote: »

That's reassuring El. So if this job doesn't work out!

Then you need to get yourself employed at Tescos and be working towards your MSc in Asset Integrity, and yellow-sticker the stuff with the bust boxes.

skint_spice wrote: »

Have you got previous experience though Butti? Previous experience, masters & experience of project management essential

Also don't forget the IT. You may need to answer a phone.

elantan

Can't do the whole quote thing a) cause I can't and b) cause I'm on the phone

I would say though z for people ( like me) it wasn't about getting a certificate, for me it was about learning, it was about an education, I spose like an idiot I hoped that by going to uni I would come out of it having learned about a few things other than duplo bricks .... It was very silly of me in hindsight

I never went to uni to get a job, I went to uni for an education and yet that education was geared at getting a job and not an education

Butti

I went to uni to learn and to enjoy learning and I did. I did 12 hours but was expected to do another 2 hrs for each hour at unit. That is 36 hours in total and theoretically more hours than than my full time job!

ZTD

elantan wrote: »

Can't do the whole quote thing a) cause I can't

Bet you can...

elantan wrote: »

and b) cause I'm on the phone

I hate phones too. Like looking at the world through a loo roll...

elantan wrote: »

I would say though z for people ( like me) it wasn't about getting a certificate, for me it was about learning, it was about an education, I spose like an idiot I hoped that by going to uni I would come out of it having learned about a few things other than duplo bricks .... It was very silly of me in hindsight

Ignore hindsight. Hindsight is always 20/20, always predicts the past with 100% accuracy and is therefore completely useless. The only things of value, are things that can predict the future with a better accuracy than throwing a coin.

So no - it wasn't silly. You made a logical choice given the information available to you at the time. You rolled the dice, and it came up double-zero. That wasn't predicatable.

elantan wrote: »

I never went to uni to get a job, I went to uni for an education and yet that education was geared at getting a job and not an education

There are two co-existing purposes for education. One is to know/be able to do more. The other is to demonstrate how much more you know/you can do.

They are both important. You could teach me to sing, but the second part would illustrate what a waste of time/bad idea that was.

That, and the bleeding from the ears.

However, the "bit of paper" has taken on more and more importance - previous post was *why* I think it has.

In consequence, there has been a gradual "inflation" (i.e. of things becoming gradually worthless) of educational grades. Whereas years ago, a really bright schoolkid could get an A, now they can get an A* and how long before it's an A** or a A*** ? Same level of achievement - just the qualification has lost its ability to seperate differing levels of ability.

So that job has to go up a level - to A level. Which has suffered the same fate. So that job goes up to another level - to degree level. Which is in the midst of suffering the same fate.

"Everyone's a winner baby." - which means everyone is a loser. There's no difference between everyone being first, and everyone being last.

So whereas once, some could get straight A's at O-level, and everyone knew they were bright, and would employ them for that, people now have to get a first class honours. At the price of tens of thousands of pounds.

Nobody is any better off, except for those organisations issuing the qualification - whatever it may be.

Going back to the other side, actually learning for learning's sake - the simple answer is "avoid qualifications". This takes the money out of the equation, which takes much of the agenda away too. Use t'internet... for example: http://ocw.mit.edu/index.htm - there are many, many other resources. Read, learn, and even more importantly - challenge and reject. Just because something is written by someone with letters after their name doesn't mean they aren't talking utter shite...

Though be more discriminating that I am. I know such much crap now, even I can't believe it...

ZTD

Butti wrote: »

I went to uni to learn and to enjoy learning and I did. I did 12 hours but was expected to do another 2 hrs for each hour at unit.

Two hours doing what?

Butti

ZTD wrote: »

Two hours doing what?

Reading, researching and writing. Very little arithmetic!

I thought grade inflation was mainly affecting schools because they are being judged primarily on that. If employers start restricting jobs to first they will be shooting themselves in the foot. I think one person got a first on our course, one out of about 40!