Andrew Gabriel wrote:
In article ,
GB writes:
On 07/09/2013 17:46, ARW wrote:
GB wrote:
On 07/09/2013 15:33, ARW wrote:

And we will just get another three and start again.


I find it hard to believe that it makes commercial sense to have
such a high turnover. It takes time to train them, and even just
having to process the payroll for them costs money. Selecting
fewer, better ones, and nurturing them more, would make more sense
to most organisations.

Are you an expert on choosing 16 year olds suitable for the trade?


Nope. Does your firm take all comers? If the firm is actually
selecting the ones you moan about, maybe you should alter the
selection process. Or motivate them more in some way?

Jamie Oliver was recently saying it's very difficult to find
students with a suitable work ethic.

What sort of interview or vetting do you do before you accept
them? What sort of qualifications do they need before they start?

Maths and English are normally a must.

They are all pretty much the same at interview. 16 years old and wishing
they were still in bed and that their Mother could take the interview for
them. These are not the A* students you have to interview:-). You only find
out what they are like when they start. The obvious rubbish can be spotted
and rejected at interview but generally you are looking at clones.

Remember the 35 year old apprentice? He passed all his exams but after a
year on the tools he was no better than when he started. He could not be
left on his own unless it was simple tasks and you were constantly covering
old ground eg if he had not wired a timed fan up for 2 months then you would
have to show him how to do it again.

And there those that have already done a year at college, they seem to be
the worst when it comes to work ethic.

--
Adam