Thursday, November 17, 2011

17/11/2011: INTO is correct on JobBridge Scheme

INTO has issued a direction to its members not to co-operate with the Government's JobBridge scheme. The details are reported here.

While I extremely rarely find myself in agreement with INTO, this time around I think their position is compelling. If JobBridge scheme were to be used in the case of teaching staff, then this means that there are:

  1. Teaching positions unfilled (otherwise how can a JobBridge position materialise), 
  2. Teachers with incomplete qualifications who can benefit from on-the-job training, and
  3. There are no teachers who are fully qualified and are unemployed.
It appears that this is not the case. Per INTO, there are unemployed qualified teachers (violating 3 above) and there are, supposedly, no vacancies to employ these qualified teachers (condition 1 violated). In this environment.

If there are positions that are unfilled in the presence of unemployed teachers, these unemployed teachers should be hired with normal pay to do their jobs. 

If there are no positions unfilled, and the schools want to create new positions, there should be no discrimination between those coming into the new jobs that are identical to existent jobs in terms of responsibilities.

The JobBridge scheme should not be used to employ people doing normal work at lower pay. It should only be used to provide skills training in very limited set of circumstances where apprenticeships are suitable. In fact, we need a real apprenticeship schemes, not a JobBridge scheme.


Tim Nelligan said...

Absolutely 100% correct, Constantin.

TrueEconomics said...

Thanks, Tim. I know as a person working in schools, you would be more aware of the mess that's going on there! It's ridiculous that we are taking money from pensions to support this bizarre arrangement where people are hired to perform existent work and are being paid 50/week supplement to welfare.

Dave Ó Mathúna said...

Precise analysis and to the point! Well done Constantin

Anonymous said...

It's a farcical and nauseating in equal measure.

In addition to the point about where the money comes from to pay for this hair brain "scheme":

1) It undermines the social contract
2) It's not a real apprenticeship program. After 6/9 months? Next intern please.
3) It's riddled with fraudulent position

Robert said...


I was at the Teaching Council Conference in Cork recently and, good Lord, if ever there was a Bertie QUANGO stuffed with the cronies of the unions and politicans. . This was it. Less than one third present were classified as "Registered Teachers".

On to my point - This is a QUANGO desperately seeking powers (Section 30, TC Act) to make itself relevant out of its irrelevance. One of its future roles which I have discovered it envisages for itself is taking actual qualified teachers from the Colleges and running "Induction Courses" at. . . yes you've guessed it. . . .a significantly reduced rate of a teacher qualifying today (I hear 50 %).