The most interesting bit is the last sentence of the story.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-31550473


So what do you get paid these days if you go to college when you leave
school?

--
Adam

In article , ARW
writes
The most interesting bit is the last sentence of the story.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-31550473

I'm sure, "To support our hard-working apprentices . . . " had you
rolling on the floor like you were having a fit. Did anyone try to force
a stick between your teeth?

So what do you get paid these days if you go to college when you leave
school?

An excellent analogy, the NUS seems to forget that a wet behind the ears
'student' apprentice is about as productive as a bantam chick, that the
pay they receive reflects the training they are receiving and that they
get more pay as they become more productive.

I wonder how many would sign up if they had zero pay, had to pay for
their college courses and had to pay back 'apprentice' loans.

--
fred
it's a ba-na-na . . . .

On 22/02/2015 16:53, ARW wrote:
The most interesting bit is the last sentence of the story.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-31550473


So what do you get paid these days if you go to college when you leave
school?

There was a time when apprentices had to pay for the privilege of being
an apprentice and learning a useful skill.

--
Colin Bignell

"Nightjar .me.uk" "cpb"@ insert my surname here wrote in message
...
On 22/02/2015 16:53, ARW wrote:
The most interesting bit is the last sentence of the story.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-31550473


So what do you get paid these days if you go to college when you leave
school?

There was a time when apprentices had to pay for the privilege of being an
apprentice and learning a useful skill.

When would this be and for which apprenticeship?
I was an indentured apprentice heating and ventilation engineer in 1966. I
was a slave and got paid peanuts.

On Sunday, 22 February 2015 19:31:20 UTC, Mr Pounder wrote:
There was a time when apprentices had to pay for the privilege of being an
apprentice and learning a useful skill.
When would this be and for which apprenticeship?
I was an indentured apprentice heating and ventilation engineer in 1966. I
was a slave and got paid peanuts.

Probably up until the early 20th Century.

An Apprenticeship Indenture is a legal document binding a child (usually around the age of 12 or 13 but sometimes as young as 7) to a master or mistress for seven or more years. A sum of money (premium or consideration) was usually paid to the master, and in exchange he (or more rarely, she) agreed to train the child in their trade or profession, and to supply them with appropriate food, clothing and lodging for the duration of the apprenticeship.. An indenture needed the signature of a Justice of the Peace in order to become legally enforceable.

http://www.londonlives.org/static/IA.jsp

Owain

On 22/02/2015 19:31, Mr Pounder wrote:
"Nightjar .me.uk" "cpb"@ insert my surname here wrote in message
...
On 22/02/2015 16:53, ARW wrote:
The most interesting bit is the last sentence of the story.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-31550473


So what do you get paid these days if you go to college when you leave
school?

There was a time when apprentices had to pay for the privilege of being an
apprentice and learning a useful skill.

When would this be and for which apprenticeship?...

It became a legal requirement in 1768, although it had been common
practice for some time before that, and it applied to all
apprenticeships. I presume it ceased to be a legal requirement in 1814,
when it also became legal to practice a trade without first having
served a seven year apprenticeship. However, my late father had to pay a
fee to be apprenticed as a surgical instrument maker in the 1930s.

--
Colin Bignell

wrote in message
...
On Sunday, 22 February 2015 19:31:20 UTC, Mr Pounder wrote:
There was a time when apprentices had to pay for the privilege of being
an
apprentice and learning a useful skill.
When would this be and for which apprenticeship?
I was an indentured apprentice heating and ventilation engineer in 1966. I
was a slave and got paid peanuts.

Probably up until the early 20th Century.

An Apprenticeship Indenture is a legal document binding a child (usually
around the age of 12 or 13 but sometimes as young as 7) to a master or
mistress for seven or more years. A sum of money (premium or consideration)
was usually paid to the master, and in exchange he (or more rarely, she)
agreed to train the child in their trade or profession, and to supply them
with appropriate food, clothing and lodging for the duration of the
apprenticeship. An indenture needed the signature of a Justice of the Peace
in order to become legally enforceable.

I still have the copy of my Indentures.
Would you really like me to .............. (scanner is ****ed) photograph
it, upload to Dropbox and send here???!!!!!

"Nightjar .me.uk" "cpb"@ insert my surname here wrote in message
...
On 22/02/2015 19:31, Mr Pounder wrote:
"Nightjar .me.uk" "cpb"@ insert my surname here wrote in message
...
On 22/02/2015 16:53, ARW wrote:
The most interesting bit is the last sentence of the story.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-31550473


So what do you get paid these days if you go to college when you leave
school?

There was a time when apprentices had to pay for the privilege of being
an
apprentice and learning a useful skill.

When would this be and for which apprenticeship?...

It became a legal requirement in 1768, although it had been common
practice for some time before that, and it applied to all apprenticeships.
I presume it ceased to be a legal requirement in 1814, when it also became
legal to practice a trade without first having served a seven year
apprenticeship. However, my late father had to pay a fee to be apprenticed
as a surgical instrument maker in the 1930s.

Fair enough.
In 1966 this would have been unheard off. My father would/could not have
paid one old penny for my apprenticeship.
He was one of those silly people who did not live in a scum council house,
thus he never had much money.
OT - he hated council house scum. Like father - like son.

On 22/02/2015 16:53, ARW wrote:
The most interesting bit is the last sentence of the story.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-31550473


So what do you get paid these days if you go to college when you leave
school?

Lefties like the NUS forget that.

When I left school 61 years ago I entered a 5 year apprenticeship. I
was away from home so spent the first year in a company hostel. This
meant lunch in the works canteen and catching a bus to and from the
works. First year wages were £5:17:6 (£5.875). The hostel charged
£5:6:0 (£5.30) Lunch was 1/- (5P) per day and bus fares 1/- (5P) per
day. I quickly got my bicycle down which saved the bus fares. That
left me with 1/6 (7.5P) pocket money per week.

The money did improve as I gained experience but after the first year I
had to pay commercial rates for digs.

Of course, the previous generation had to pay for the privilege of an
apprenticeship so I considered myself lucky.


--
Old Codger
e-mail use reply to field

What matters in politics is not what happens, but what you can make
people believe has happened. [Janet Daley 27/8/2003]

"ARW" wrote in message
...
The most interesting bit is the last sentence of the story.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-31550473


So what do you get paid these days if you go to college when you leave
school?

Surely this isn't how it works

the 2.73 (or whatever) is the pay rate for the time that the Apprentice
actually works for the employer.

I know that they need to be overseen but they must be doing some useful work
during that period

Do they also get paid for the tim whilst at college, I really don't know

tim

I know that they need to be overseen but they must be doing some
useful work during that period

But from the employer's point of view you need to subtract from the
value of the work they do the cost of telling/supervising/checking up on
them - especially the cost of the time of their "masters". Given the
latter are likely to cost an awful lot more per hour than the NMW
employers would be far less likely to take on apprentices if they had to
pay them the NMW when they are under 19 or in their first year. Of
course that may well be too difficult for the NUS to understand. Or of
course they might just say that employers should be compelled to take on
apprentices.

Do they also get paid for the tim whilst at college, I really don't
know
Yes they are (well, should by law) be paid.

--
--
Robin
reply to address is (meant to be) valid

On 23/02/2015 13:18, Robin wrote:
I know that they need to be overseen but they must be doing some
useful work during that period

But from the employer's point of view you need to subtract from the
value of the work they do the cost of telling/supervising/checking up on
them - especially the cost of the time of their "masters". Given the
latter are likely to cost an awful lot more per hour than the NMW
employers would be far less likely to take on apprentices if they had to
pay them the NMW when they are under 19 or in their first year. Of
course that may well be too difficult for the NUS to understand. Or of
course they might just say that employers should be compelled to take on
apprentices.

Do they also get paid for the tim whilst at college, I really don't
know
Yes they are (well, should by law) be paid.


I do, all expenses incurred by travelling to/from college are also covered.

--
Dazza

In article ,
fred writes:
In article , ARW
writes
The most interesting bit is the last sentence of the story.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-31550473

I'm sure, "To support our hard-working apprentices . . . " had you
rolling on the floor like you were having a fit. Did anyone try to force
a stick between your teeth?

So what do you get paid these days if you go to college when you leave
school?

An excellent analogy, the NUS seems to forget that a wet behind the ears
'student' apprentice is about as productive as a bantam chick, that the
pay they receive reflects the training they are receiving and that they
get more pay as they become more productive.

I wonder how many would sign up if they had zero pay, had to pay for
their college courses and had to pay back 'apprentice' loans.

College and apprenticeship are not good analogies.

Graduates are not work-ready when they come out of college (although
just how much that applies depends on the grad and the job). They
enter employment, and it takes about 2 years before they are being
productive - genuinely worth their salary. During that 2 year period,
there's still an apprenticeship but not by that name, where they
are learning and consuming the resources of supervisors/mentors,
and costing more than they can generate in value to the company.

In today's pressure on costs, that's a significant reason new grads
are now finding it difficult to find jobs. The company and the grad
really need to be committed to each other for at least 5 years, or
the company will not make back their investment in the person.
Indeed, it could be their competitor who benefits if the grad leaves
before then but stays in the same business.

Some companies do understand this, and providing they have a 5+ year
view and they know how to retain good staff (which doesn't necessarily
mean paying high salaries), they can take on grads and benefit.

--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]

On 22/02/2015 21:51, Mr Pounder wrote:
....
In 1966 this would have been unheard off. My father would/could not have
paid one old penny for my apprenticeship.
He was one of those silly people who did not live in a scum council house,
thus he never had much money.


My father didn't live in a Council house. That didn't stop him from
progressing from a skilled manual worker to Director of a company owned
by one of the multinationals.

--
Colin Bignell

"Nightjar .me.uk" "cpb"@ insert my surname here wrote in message
...
On 22/02/2015 21:51, Mr Pounder wrote:
...
In 1966 this would have been unheard off. My father would/could not have
paid one old penny for my apprenticeship.
He was one of those silly people who did not live in a scum council
house,
thus he never had much money.


My father didn't live in a Council house. That didn't stop him from
progressing from a skilled manual worker to Director of a company owned by
one of the multinationals.

Very good and well done.
Your point was ........?

"tim....." wrote in message
...

"ARW" wrote in message
...
The most interesting bit is the last sentence of the story.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-31550473


So what do you get paid these days if you go to college when you leave
school?

Surely this isn't how it works

the 2.73 (or whatever) is the pay rate for the time that the Apprentice
actually works for the employer.

I know that they need to be overseen but they must be doing some useful
work during that period

Do they also get paid for the tim whilst at college, I really don't know


Has anyone actually read the last sentence of the link?

It says "In the meantime, apprentices are earning an average of £6.79 to
£11.63 an hour depending on their level of apprenticeship" and then compare
them with the minimum wages for U18s, 18 to 20 year olds.

And yes of course they get paid to attend college and they also get paid to
attend other training courses.

--
Adam

"Mr Pounder" wrote in message
...

"Nightjar .me.uk" "cpb"@ insert my surname here wrote in message
...
On 22/02/2015 16:53, ARW wrote:
The most interesting bit is the last sentence of the story.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-31550473


So what do you get paid these days if you go to college when you leave
school?

There was a time when apprentices had to pay for the privilege of being
an apprentice and learning a useful skill.

When would this be and for which apprenticeship?
I was an indentured apprentice heating and ventilation engineer in 1966.

Where is asbestosis when you need it most:-)



--
Adam

Has anyone actually read the last sentence of the link?

waves

It says "In the meantime, apprentices are earning an average of £6.79
to £11.63 an hour depending on their level of apprenticeship" and
then compare them with the minimum wages for U18s, 18 to 20 year olds.

Didn't seem to me to conflict with apprentices being more of a cost than
a benefit at first. I thought you had amply demonstrated that with
tales of the wear and tear they impose on you and the need to weed
vigorously

It also struck me the dear old NUS didn't seem to appreciate what a good
advert it was for apprentices:

"Apprentices earn on average nearly double the NMW before the end of
their apprenticeships. After that of course they can get a lot more."

ISTM that's a better deal than many graduates get struggling with unpaid
or minimum wage internships. OTOH I don't suppose apprentices get 3
years of swilling cheap beer and lying in bed until noon when they fancy
it. But well done gremlin_95 if you managed it
--
Robin
reply to address is (meant to be) valid

On Monday, 23 February 2015 20:12:17 UTC, Robin wrote:
It also struck me the dear old NUS didn't seem to appreciate what a good
advert it was for apprentices:

Apprentices aren't usually members of the NUS though.

Returning officers are paid by the government £6,458 for a National UK Referendum (per election, not per annum)[1] in addition to their normal salary which is usually Chief Exec of the council.

However the NUS would like to pay their Chief Returning Officer ... nil.

It's nice to see unions campaigning against low pay.

Owain


[1] http://www.wycombe.gov.uk/do-it-onli...icer-fees.aspx

[2] http://www.nus.org.uk/en/who-we-are/...rning-officer/

On Monday, February 23, 2015 at 1:15:59 PM UTC, Robin wrote:

I know that they need to be overseen but they must be doing some
useful work during that period

But from the employer's point of view you need to subtract from the
value of the work they do the cost of telling/supervising/checking up on
them - especially the cost of the time of their "masters".

and generally the company is worse off with the apprentice than without. Newbies take several times as long to do jobs, screw them up routinely, and generally waste time in as many ways as possible. You cant just leave them to it.


NT

On 24/02/2015 05:57, wrote:

and generally the company is worse off with the apprentice than
without. Newbies take several times as long to do jobs, screw them up
routinely, and generally waste time in as many ways as possible. You
cant just leave them to it.

**** poor training then!
You can't expect anyone coming across something new to be as good as
someone familiar with the problem/job (it does happen but only because
the expert isn't).

On Tuesday, February 24, 2015 at 9:05:23 AM UTC, Dennis@home wrote:
On 24/02/2015 05:57, wrote:

and generally the company is worse off with the apprentice than
without. Newbies take several times as long to do jobs, screw them up
routinely, and generally waste time in as many ways as possible. You
cant just leave them to it.

**** poor training then!
You can't expect anyone coming across something new to be as good as
someone familiar with the problem/job (it does happen but only because
the expert isn't).

No harry, it would take remarkable training to get an apprentice to do a job as fast & well as someone that knows their trade, and do it quick enough that overall there was no loss in productivity compared to the experienced tradesman working alone.


NT

In message , Robin writes
OTOH I don't suppose apprentices get 3
years of swilling cheap beer and lying in bed until noon when they fancy
it.
Is that where Adam is going wrong?
--
bert

fred writes:

In article , ARW
writes
The most interesting bit is the last sentence of the story.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-31550473

I'm sure, "To support our hard-working apprentices . . . " had you
rolling on the floor like you were having a fit. Did anyone try to force
a stick between your teeth?

So what do you get paid these days if you go to college when you leave
school?

An excellent analogy, the NUS seems to forget that a wet behind the ears
'student' apprentice is about as productive as a bantam chick, that the
pay they receive reflects the training they are receiving and that they
get more pay as they become more productive.

I wonder how many would sign up if they had zero pay, had to pay for
their college courses and had to pay back 'apprentice' loans.

That's a very good point.

'Deferred gratification' is all very well, but at that age you want
sex, booze, drugs (nowadays), and so on.

Presumably university students find a way to satisfy their needs!

--
Windmill, Use t m i l l
J.R.R. Tolkien:- @ S c o t s h o m e . c o m
All that is gold does not glister / Not all who wander are lost

writes:

On Monday, February 23, 2015 at 1:15:59 PM UTC, Robin wrote:

I know that they need to be overseen but they must be doing some
useful work during that period

But from the employer's point of view you need to subtract from the
value of the work they do the cost of telling/supervising/checking up on
them - especially the cost of the time of their "masters".

and generally the company is worse off with the apprentice than without. Newbies take several times as long to do jobs, screw them up routinely, and generally waste time in as many ways as possible. You cant just leave them to it.

If you're able to take the long view (though which company can,
nowadays), a future without anyone educated through and beyond
apprenticeship is no future at all for anyone.


--
Windmill, Use t m i l l
J.R.R. Tolkien:- @ S c o t s h o m e . c o m
All that is gold does not glister / Not all who wander are lost

(Andrew Gabriel) writes:

In article ,
fred writes:
In article , ARW
writes
The most interesting bit is the last sentence of the story.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-31550473

I'm sure, "To support our hard-working apprentices . . . " had you
rolling on the floor like you were having a fit. Did anyone try to force
a stick between your teeth?

So what do you get paid these days if you go to college when you leave
school?

An excellent analogy, the NUS seems to forget that a wet behind the ears
'student' apprentice is about as productive as a bantam chick, that the
pay they receive reflects the training they are receiving and that they
get more pay as they become more productive.

I wonder how many would sign up if they had zero pay, had to pay for
their college courses and had to pay back 'apprentice' loans.

College and apprenticeship are not good analogies.

Graduates are not work-ready when they come out of college (although
just how much that applies depends on the grad and the job). They
enter employment, and it takes about 2 years before they are being
productive - genuinely worth their salary. During that 2 year period,
there's still an apprenticeship but not by that name, where they
are learning and consuming the resources of supervisors/mentors,
and costing more than they can generate in value to the company.

In today's pressure on costs, that's a significant reason new grads
are now finding it difficult to find jobs. The company and the grad
really need to be committed to each other for at least 5 years, or
the company will not make back their investment in the person.
Indeed, it could be their competitor who benefits if the grad leaves
before then but stays in the same business.

Some companies do understand this, and providing they have a 5+ year
view and they know how to retain good staff (which doesn't necessarily
mean paying high salaries), they can take on grads and benefit.

Others may be forced to take the short view and hire already-trained
personnel from other countries.

(UKIP and the more extreme Tories may not like that, but they can't eat
their cake and have it. They're the sort who babble about 'no such
thing as a free lunch', but somehow think that can't apply to their own
endeavours).

--
Windmill, Use t m i l l
J.R.R. Tolkien:- @ S c o t s h o m e . c o m
All that is gold does not glister / Not all who wander are lost

On Sunday, March 1, 2015 at 4:16:18 AM UTC, Windmill wrote:
writes:

On Monday, February 23, 2015 at 1:15:59 PM UTC, Robin wrote:

I know that they need to be overseen but they must be doing some
useful work during that period

But from the employer's point of view you need to subtract from the
value of the work they do the cost of telling/supervising/checking up on
them - especially the cost of the time of their "masters".

and generally the company is worse off with the apprentice than without. Newbies take several times as long to do jobs, screw them up routinely, and generally waste time in as many ways as possible. You cant just leave them to it.

If you're able to take the long view (though which company can,
nowadays), a future without anyone educated through and beyond
apprenticeship is no future at all for anyone.

Sure, but its not the individual company's job to provide for everyone else. Apprenticeship can work out well, but its damn expensive for an employer. The reality that ex-apprentices sometimes go elsewhere doesn't help.


NT

"Windmill" wrote in message
...
fred writes:

In article , ARW
writes
The most interesting bit is the last sentence of the story.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-31550473

I'm sure, "To support our hard-working apprentices . . . " had you
rolling on the floor like you were having a fit. Did anyone try to force
a stick between your teeth?

So what do you get paid these days if you go to college when you leave
school?

An excellent analogy, the NUS seems to forget that a wet behind the ears
'student' apprentice is about as productive as a bantam chick, that the
pay they receive reflects the training they are receiving and that they
get more pay as they become more productive.

I wonder how many would sign up if they had zero pay, had to pay for
their college courses and had to pay back 'apprentice' loans.

That's a very good point.

'Deferred gratification' is all very well, but at that age you want
sex, booze, drugs (nowadays), and so on.


What do you mean by "but at that age"? Are you suggesting that at some point
in my life I will not want them?

--
Adam

On Sunday, 1 March 2015 09:14:37 UTC, ARW wrote:
'Deferred gratification' is all very well, but at that age you want
sex, booze, drugs (nowadays), and so on.
What do you mean by "but at that age"? Are you suggesting that at some point
in my life I will not want them?

Not a case of not wanting, but requiring more effort that a nice mug of cocoa in front of t'telly.

Owain

wrote in message
...
On Sunday, 1 March 2015 09:14:37 UTC, ARW wrote:
'Deferred gratification' is all very well, but at that age you want
sex, booze, drugs (nowadays), and so on.
What do you mean by "but at that age"? Are you suggesting that at some
point
in my life I will not want them?

Not a case of not wanting, but requiring more effort that a nice mug of
cocoa in front of t'telly.


I have no intentions of sitting down in front of a TV with a cup of cocoa if
there is sex, alcohol and drugs on offer elsewhere.

--
Adam

On 01/03/2015 14:15, ARW wrote:

I have no intentions of sitting down in front of a TV with a cup of
cocoa if there is sex, alcohol and drugs on offer elsewhere.


Sod the drugs and alcohol.

"Huge" wrote in message
...
On 2015-03-01, ARW wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Sunday, 1 March 2015 09:14:37 UTC, ARW wrote:
'Deferred gratification' is all very well, but at that age you want
sex, booze, drugs (nowadays), and so on.
What do you mean by "but at that age"? Are you suggesting that at some
point
in my life I will not want them?

Not a case of not wanting, but requiring more effort that a nice mug of
cocoa in front of t'telly.


I have no intentions of sitting down in front of a TV with a cup of cocoa
if
there is sex, alcohol and drugs on offer elsewhere.

Your time will come, believe me.


I have no doubt about that. And after working in the hospice last week I
know how lucky I am.



--
Adam

In article ,
Huge wrote:
On 2015-03-01, ARW wrote:
"Huge" wrote in message
...
On 2015-03-01, ARW wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Sunday, 1 March 2015 09:14:37 UTC, ARW wrote:
'Deferred gratification' is all very well, but at that age you want
sex, booze, drugs (nowadays), and so on.
What do you mean by "but at that age"? Are you suggesting that at some
point
in my life I will not want them?

Not a case of not wanting, but requiring more effort that a nice mug of
cocoa in front of t'telly.


I have no intentions of sitting down in front of a TV with a cup of cocoa
if
there is sex, alcohol and drugs on offer elsewhere.

Your time will come, believe me.


I have no doubt about that. And after working in the hospice last week I
know how lucky I am.

Amen to that.

It's interesting to see how the attitude to retirement etc changes as you
get closer to that time. I'm of an age where most of my pals have.

They generally start off by saying they don't want to retire ever. Work
until they drop, etc.

But things seem to change as they get older - and most have retired early,
if they get the chance.

--
*A bartender is just a pharmacist with a limited inventory.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Huge" wrote in message
...
Your time will come, believe me.


I have no doubt about that. And after working in the hospice last week I
know how lucky I am.

Amen to that.


And I acted like a **** in the hospice. The resident in the room I was
working in could not talk - and he had a problem as the bedside light would
not turn off meaning that he could not sleep properly. I suggested removing
the tube and he gave me a thumbs up. Staff overulled my suggestion.

So I "accidentally" smashed the tube whilst testing the ballast. What a pity
these are special order tubes.

--
Adam

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Huge wrote:
On 2015-03-01, ARW wrote:
"Huge" wrote in message
...
On 2015-03-01, ARW wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Sunday, 1 March 2015 09:14:37 UTC, ARW wrote:
'Deferred gratification' is all very well, but at that age you
want
sex, booze, drugs (nowadays), and so on.
What do you mean by "but at that age"? Are you suggesting that at
some
point
in my life I will not want them?

Not a case of not wanting, but requiring more effort that a nice mug
of
cocoa in front of t'telly.


I have no intentions of sitting down in front of a TV with a cup of
cocoa
if
there is sex, alcohol and drugs on offer elsewhere.

Your time will come, believe me.


I have no doubt about that. And after working in the hospice last week
I
know how lucky I am.

Amen to that.

It's interesting to see how the attitude to retirement etc changes as you
get closer to that time. I'm of an age where most of my pals have.

They generally start off by saying they don't want to retire ever. Work
until they drop, etc.

But things seem to change as they get older - and most have retired early,
if they get the chance.

I've seen some who were forced to retire who hate it.

Mostly those who don’t have anything to
do except what they used to be paid to do.

"ARW" writes:

"Windmill" wrote in message
...
fred writes:

In article , ARW
writes
The most interesting bit is the last sentence of the story.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-31550473

I'm sure, "To support our hard-working apprentices . . . " had you
rolling on the floor like you were having a fit. Did anyone try to force
a stick between your teeth?

So what do you get paid these days if you go to college when you leave
school?

An excellent analogy, the NUS seems to forget that a wet behind the ears
'student' apprentice is about as productive as a bantam chick, that the
pay they receive reflects the training they are receiving and that they
get more pay as they become more productive.

I wonder how many would sign up if they had zero pay, had to pay for
their college courses and had to pay back 'apprentice' loans.

That's a very good point.

'Deferred gratification' is all very well, but at that age you want
sex, booze, drugs (nowadays), and so on.


What do you mean by "but at that age"? Are you suggesting that at some point
in my life I will not want them?

Sorry to have to say this, but it's true: eventually it becomes mostly
theoretical.
--
Windmill, Use t m i l l
J.R.R. Tolkien:- @ S c o t s h o m e . c o m
All that is gold does not glister / Not all who wander are lost

"Dennis@home" writes:

On 01/03/2015 14:15, ARW wrote:

I have no intentions of sitting down in front of a TV with a cup of
cocoa if there is sex, alcohol and drugs on offer elsewhere.


Sod the drugs and alcohol.

Ah youth!

--
Windmill, Use t m i l l
J.R.R. Tolkien:- @ S c o t s h o m e . c o m
All that is gold does not glister / Not all who wander are lost

"Dave Plowman (News)" writes:

In article ,
Huge wrote:
On 2015-03-01, ARW wrote:
"Huge" wrote in message
...
On 2015-03-01, ARW wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Sunday, 1 March 2015 09:14:37 UTC, ARW wrote:
'Deferred gratification' is all very well, but at that age you want
sex, booze, drugs (nowadays), and so on.
What do you mean by "but at that age"? Are you suggesting that at some
point
in my life I will not want them?

Not a case of not wanting, but requiring more effort that a nice mug of
cocoa in front of t'telly.


I have no intentions of sitting down in front of a TV with a cup of cocoa
if
there is sex, alcohol and drugs on offer elsewhere.

Your time will come, believe me.


I have no doubt about that. And after working in the hospice last week I
know how lucky I am.

Amen to that.

It's interesting to see how the attitude to retirement etc changes as you
get closer to that time. I'm of an age where most of my pals have.

They generally start off by saying they don't want to retire ever. Work
until they drop, etc.

But things seem to change as they get older - and most have retired early,
if they get the chance.

Or maybe they've just convinced themselves that it was what they
wanted.

--
Windmill, Use t m i l l
J.R.R. Tolkien:- @ S c o t s h o m e . c o m
All that is gold does not glister / Not all who wander are lost

On 07/03/2015 22:42, Windmill wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" writes:

In article ,
Huge wrote:
On 2015-03-01, ARW wrote:
"Huge" wrote in message
...
On 2015-03-01, ARW wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Sunday, 1 March 2015 09:14:37 UTC, ARW wrote:
'Deferred gratification' is all very well, but at that age you want
sex, booze, drugs (nowadays), and so on.
What do you mean by "but at that age"? Are you suggesting that at some
point
in my life I will not want them?

Not a case of not wanting, but requiring more effort that a nice mug of
cocoa in front of t'telly.


I have no intentions of sitting down in front of a TV with a cup of cocoa
if
there is sex, alcohol and drugs on offer elsewhere.

Your time will come, believe me.


I have no doubt about that. And after working in the hospice last week I
know how lucky I am.

Amen to that.

It's interesting to see how the attitude to retirement etc changes as you
get closer to that time. I'm of an age where most of my pals have.

They generally start off by saying they don't want to retire ever. Work
until they drop, etc.

But things seem to change as they get older - and most have retired early,
if they get the chance.

Or maybe they've just convinced themselves that it was what they
wanted.

Maybe the management and culture changed such that it ceased being a
pleasant place to work?

For about the first 40 years of my working life I, and most of my
colleagues, were really hoping that we would be allowed to continue
working after retirement. Management was relaxed as long as the job was
done. We worked hard and long hours when needed without any pressure
from above. When the work was light we relaxed. In the early 90s there
were changes at the top. Gradually the culture changed. Management
became increasingly demanding and reluctant to accept that there might
be genuine reasons for someone not wanting to work evenings/night or
over the weekend. There were threats, in the limit, of the sack. It
stopped being a pleasant place to work.

When I was 62 an "early retirement" offer (voluntary redundancy) was
made to all over 60s. Many of us jumped at the opportunity. 15 years
later I am still in touch with many of them and we all consider it was
the best thing to have done, yet had the culture been that of the 80s or
earlier I doubt many would have taken it up.


--
Old Codger
e-mail use reply to field

What matters in politics is not what happens, but what you can make
people believe has happened. [Janet Daley 27/8/2003]

On Sun, 08 Mar 2015 22:31:41 +0000, Old Codger wrote:

Maybe the management and culture changed such that it ceased being a
pleasant place to work?

It's certainly happening where I work.

For about the first 40 years of my working life I, and most of my
colleagues, were really hoping that we would be allowed to continue
working after retirement. Management was relaxed as long as the job was
done. We worked hard and long hours when needed without any pressure
from above. When the work was light we relaxed.

Exactly. And the job was enjoyable.

In the early 90s there were changes at the top.

Last five years here. I should probably say no more.

stopped being a pleasant place to work.

At times, yes.

When I was 62 an "early retirement" offer (voluntary redundancy) was
made to all over 60s. Many of us jumped at the opportunity. 15 years
later I am still in touch with many of them and we all consider it was
the best thing to have done, yet had the culture been that of the 80s or
earlier I doubt many would have taken it up.

I was eight months too young for the last one. I'm now weighing up the
optimal point..

--
My posts are my copyright and if @diy_forums or Home Owners' Hub
wish to copy them they can pay me £30a message.
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
*lightning surge protection* - a w_tom conductor