Question Time

StevieJ

Is it just me or do other people cringe when the likes of the QT panel talk about demeaning jobs in Poundland? I cannot help but think of those employees who turn up every day to do a job there just to have their efforts undermined

Mrs_Bones

There is nothing at all demeaning about working in Pound land or any other retail place, as long as you are being page the legal minimum wage in this country for the job you are doing.

N1AK

StevieJ wrote: »

Is it just me or do other people cringe when the likes of the QT panel talk about demeaning jobs in Poundland?

Yes I do sure they're not rocket scientists but they're working and contributing to society which is better than nothing.

michaels

StevieJ wrote: »

Is it just me or do other people cringe when the likes of the QT panel talk about demeaning jobs in Poundland? I cannot help but think of those employees who turn up every day to do a job there just to have their efforts undermined

Stevie it is nice to be in 100% agreement with you for once. The whole tenor of the replies was that the graduate in question should obviously consider herself better than a job in retail (and the funny bit being that since the work experience she had got a job in retail). Far from being a poster girl for the nay-sayers I would have thought she should be a poster girl for those in favour of the policy.

I graduated in economics from Cambridge; in the following years I laboured on building sites for 2.50 an hour, packed watercress for £3 per hour and cleaned bathrooms all day for not much more, and also worked shelf stacking in a supermarket. At no time did I feel I was superior to my colleagues or think I was above any of the jobs: I needed employment and I took what was available as in every case the pay far exceeded the £30 odd per week unemployment benefit that was payable.

StevieJ

michaels wrote: »

Stevie it is nice to be in 100% agreement with you for once. The whole tenor of the replies was that the graduate in question should obviously consider herself better than a job in retail (and the funny bit being that since the work experience she had got a job in retail). Far from being a poster girl for the nay-sayers I would have thought she should be a poster girl for those in favour of the policy.

.

My point was nothing to do with the girl in question (I think they should have left her in the museum job) but everything to do with respect for all workers jobs that make an invaluable contribution to society.

Thrugelmir

StevieJ wrote: »

My point was nothing to do with the girl in question (I think they should have left her in the museum job) but everything to do with respect for all workers jobs that make an invaluable contribution to society.

A rather snobbish attitude. Given the poor quality of the elected and often unelected political elite.

The standard of debate on QT is very poor. With most panel members lacking any knowledge of the subject. So resort to blaming each other.

Last nights debate on Horse Meat being a prime example.

A complete mare.

michaels

I have read so it may not be true but that the museum 'voluntary job' wasn't actually a voluntary job but more that she went along each day and unofficially helped out. I do not know whether it was doing the work experience that prompted her to consider the job at Tescos she now has and whether the expereince from poundland that helped her secure an interview but it does not seem to be a bad outcome to me that she has gone from surviving on benefits and spending her day in the museum to being in employment. Again I do not feel any form of employment is unsuitable and I am sure it does not preclude her from seeking alternative employment in a role she would prefer.

Which do you think she should be doing now, working in Tesco or being an unpaid helper in the museum at the expense of taxpayers including many of those who work in supermarkets as shelf stackers?

StevieJ

michaels wrote: »

Which do you think she should be doing now, working in Tesco or being an unpaid helper in the museum at the expense of taxpayers including many of those who work in supermarkets as shelf stackers?

Her choice, but has it not crossed your mind that she may have got the job in Tesco because she made a fuss back when the case was first reported (cause celebre) and not because she worked at Poundland?

grizzly1911

StevieJ wrote: »

Is it just me or do other people cringe when the likes of the QT panel talk about demeaning jobs in Poundland? I cannot help but think of those employees who turn up every day to do a job there just to have their efforts undermined

I was managing some new work into a processing centre, for a big plc, when a head honcho turned up, family - promoted straight in to board level, for a moral boosting visit and for him to understand what actually happened on the floor.

In his tour of the site he made some small talk with the processors asking didn't they find work boring and uninteresting?:wall:

Conrad

I noticed Galloways answer to all ills is to get the cheque books out. Staggering ignorance but the sheeple fell for it of course.

700 more food inspectors didn't spot the horse when it was going on the last 10 years.

michaels

StevieJ wrote: »

Her choice, but has it not crossed your mind that she may have got the job in Tesco because she made a fuss back when the case was first reported (cause celebre) and not because she worked at Poundland?

Now we disagree, I don't think it should be her choice if other people are going without to pay taxes to support 'her choice' not to take a job just because it was not what she wanted to do. Has it not crossed your mind that the reason she decided not to just carry on being a voluntary helper in the museum and took a different job that was not part of her chosen career path was because she realised it was no longer an option merely to rely on the fruits of other people's toil to support herself?