Is there a lack of ordinary jobs in your area?

falko89

scooby088 wrote: »

Ideally I search local really as I can say I am lucky where I live there are about 6 towns and a city, but I apply for jobs I can do not the jobs I can't do. Even when you find something and apply there's the competition of other applicants, travelling costs. And then there isn't much chance of getting a reply I have rejigged my cv many times and still not getting many interviews let alone replies.

I cannot afford to relocate and wouldn't really want to, i am settled in this area and quite like it. But as i have said i am lucky where I live but also unlucky at having to compete with all the other unemployed, I cannot get by on the temporary and adhoc nature of some of the vacancies and then there are the jobs advertised as full time yet only give you 20 hours per week go figure that one out.

I can relate, I applied for a job in Tesco, full time they said, when I got to the interview 21 hours a week, Temporary would suit me ok if it was for 6 months or something not a month or two like a lot offer, adhoc no use to me at all.

jfh7gwa

falko89 wrote: »

when I got to the interview 21 hours a week....if it was for 6 months or something not a month or two like a lot offer, adhoc no use to me at all.

I'm sorry, but why on earth not?

By refusing to take temp roles or ad hoc work, you've again limited yourself. Think of the employment opportunities in your area (under your own set of variables e.g. how far you can commute each day, what your salary potential is)... and then know that you've limited yourself further. It seems like utter madness, some of the attitudes of job seekers I'm seeing here sometimes.

When you've accepted a 21 hr a week job, you're in a prime (advantaged) position to nab extra shifts ad hoc, and see internal vacancies for adding more hours - or to take on a second job of course. Plus you get real, recent experience to show your next employer. And you add to your network, perhaps (need cover at the last minute... "Oh we had a really good temp worker here last week, I'll call them to see if she's available..."). That kept me going for about 4 years back in the 90s when I was in a bit of a muddle, job wise.

falko89

jfh7gwa wrote: »

I'm sorry, but why on earth not?

By refusing to take temp roles or ad hoc work, you've again limited yourself. Think of the employment opportunities in your area (under your own set of variables e.g. how far you can commute each day, what your salary potential is)... and then know that you've limited yourself further. It seems like utter madness, some of the attitudes of job seekers I'm seeing here sometimes.

When you've accepted a 21 hr a week job, you're in a prime (advantaged) position to nab extra shifts ad hoc, and see internal vacancies for adding more hours - or to take on a second job of course. Plus you get real, recent experience to show your next employer. And you add to your network, perhaps (need cover at the last minute... "Oh we had a really good temp worker here last week, I'll call them to see if she's available..."). That kept me going for about 4 years back in the 90s when I was in a bit of a muddle, job wise.

For the simple reason I now look after my baby daughter all day, A call at 8am for a job can not be done unless I can bring daughter with me, my parents etc all work so it would take me a couple of days to organise a baby sitter. And part time work, by the time you factor in the cost of travel your better of on JSA, thats the problem, even with 40hrs work min wage we are hardly any better of if at all but I'd rather be out working, its 40hrs or nothing, limiting myself or not I am not putting myself into poverty over it.

Prudent

There is a real lack of ordinary jobs in my area. From last spring onwards my daughter spent 6 months looking for a job. She applied for anything and everything she had the qualifications to do. Few were advertised and there were lots of applicants. She widened her and got a job 400 miles away in London. After over a year of looking here one of her friends followed her down and had a job within a few days. Its very poor in this part of central scotland.

ktothema

falko89 wrote: »

For the simple reason I now look after my baby daughter all day, A call at 8am for a job can not be done unless I can bring daughter with me, my parents etc all work so it would take me a couple of days to organise a baby sitter. And part time work, by the time you factor in the cost of travel your better of on JSA, thats the problem, even with 40hrs work min wage we are hardly any better of if at all but I'd rather be out working, its 40hrs or nothing, limiting myself or not I am not putting myself into poverty over it.

This is my problem too. I have some childcare so can undertake part time if I can get it at a drop of a hat. But for full times roles I can't arrange extra childcare quickly and they're not interested if they have to wait too long. It also makes relocating almost impossible for the same reasons.

Dunroamin

falko89 wrote: »

For the simple reason I now look after my baby daughter all day, A call at 8am for a job can not be done unless I can bring daughter with me, my parents etc all work so it would take me a couple of days to organise a baby sitter. And part time work, by the time you factor in the cost of travel your better of on JSA, thats the problem, even with 40hrs work min wage we are hardly any better of if at all but I'd rather be out working, its 40hrs or nothing, limiting myself or not I am not putting myself into poverty over it.

So, you're not actually available for work and shouldn't be claiming JSA!

scooby088

Dunroamin wrote: »

So, you're not actually available for work and shouldn't be claiming JSA!

arranging child care at short notice when no one else can do it doesn't make him unavailable for work and i am sure you wouldn't suggest him leave the baby with a stranger just off the street.

falko89

scooby088 wrote: »

arranging child care at short notice when no one else can do it doesn't make him unavailable for work and i am sure you wouldn't suggest him leave the baby with a stranger just off the street.

Exactly, I can get childcare, If I get a job I can go back to my old baby sitter, just takes a couple of days to organise and providing she has room.

jfh7gwa

falko89 wrote: »

And part time work, by the time you factor in the cost of travel your better of on JSA, thats the problem, even with 40hrs work min wage we are hardly any better of if at all

"hardly better off"?!!

What about instilling a work ethic in your children?
Contributing towards the household's upkeep directly, rather than asking other folk to subsidise it (plenty of folk think NMW is good enough to work for)?
Playing more than a short game - job progression, keeping your foot in the door with experience or being the first to hear about internal job vacancies that you can apply for?

falko89 wrote: »

its 40hrs or nothing, limiting myself or not I am not putting myself into poverty over it.

Forgive me, but I didn't realise working involved so much choice. I've been a total numpty all these years, clearly :rotfl:

falko89

jfh7gwa wrote: »

"hardly better off"?!!

What about instilling a work ethic in your children?
Contributing towards the household's upkeep directly, rather than asking other folk to subsidise it (plenty of folk think NMW is good enough to work for)?
Playing more than a short game - job progression, keeping your foot in the door with experience or being the first to hear about internal job vacancies that you can apply for?



Forgive me, but I didn't realise working involved so much choice. I've been a total numpty all these years, clearly :rotfl:

Doesnt matter now anyway as I got a job today through the most popular way around here, word of mouth.