Always hard with these viral things to know who to acknowledge, but the brilliant Legend drink driving ad has crossed over to the campaign. The National Party welfare announcement as the Herald editorial acknowledges this morning ” needs the jobs first”. It’s not a comprehensive reform. It is shuffling around of names of benefits, work testing the mothers of one year olds- and all without a plan to actually create the jobs that will get people off benefits.
Since 2010 National have been promising there are 170,000 jobs going to be created, but they never come, instead we have an additional 60,000 people on benefits since they took office. Its seems the only jobs out there are John’s ghost jobs.
Some needs to tell dishonest John….”its the jobs stupid”
As soon as I heard the policy on Tuesday 1st I looked at the Dominion-Post Situations Vacant column (p C13). There were only three job ads and they all were for prostitutes.
So??
Just so happens Key and English already have those jobs — all three between them.
Made by this guy: http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=590336518
Bleepin make lactating mothers seek work!
!
Paula Bennett said on Breakfast this morning that 43,000 new jobs had been created in last 12 months and yet 69,500 more people on benfits in last 3 years. This massive discrepincy must be challanged
We all know we are being lied to here – Change the government on Nov 26
There are currently 14,548 NZ jobs on seek.co.nz
There a jobs available, maybe not as many as some may like. The most significant issue, is that it is likley there is a mismatch between capability acquired and capability required.
It is bollocks to say there are no jobs.
Irrespective of the spin, this poster in of itself is extremely funny.
“69,500 more people on benfits in last 3 years.”
Isn’t WFF a benefit too, mostly claimed by those that are employed? In fact you can have a household income of up to $80k and still be eligible for WFF.
Perhaps more people have become aware of what benefits they are eligible for, which has led to the increase in numbers.
I recently found myself without a job and looked in situations vacant. I did find lots of jobs there but most required skills I don’t have. Situations vacant does not mean people are not trying to get jobs.
C’mon Trace, you’re a lawyer!! You have all sorts of research skills, negotiating skills specialised knowledge, etc etc.
Situations vacant…..New Government required please.
tracey – what’s the rest of the story?
Have you secured employment?
If you did, is it meaningful / does it pay the bills?
If you havn’t landed a job, have you starting training to improve your prospects over time?
Alternatively, are you waiting for a job that suits your skills to appear?
Heres the numbers – no indication of WFF just basic benefits
Current beneficiaries (at at June 2011)
Unemployment 56,264
DPB 113,429
Sickness 58,009
Invalids 84,836
Other 15,279
Total 327,817
When National took over (as at June 2008)
Unemployment 17,710
DPB 96,440
Sickness 46,271
Invalids 82,879
Other 15,017
Total 258,317
K1W1 says
“It is bollocks to say there are no jobs.”
327,817 beneficiaries into 14,548 NZ jobs is not very good odds. May as well say there are no jobs as a first approximation.
“… mismatch ….” Tired Tory twaddle. How come the so called mismatch has got worse since National got in?
The last time the terms of trade were this good there were only 700 unemployed so no reason for there to be more than a thousand or two now. National have just made a complete botch of economic management.
“327,817 beneficiaries into 14,548 NZ jobs is not very good odds”
Which explains why in my area every advertised job receives at least 100 applications, with entry level ones getting over 1,000 applications. And that’s not rumour as I have been asking people how many applicants they received.
Spending hundreds of millions of dollars on renaming the benefits does nothing for the real problem.
@ George, Tory twaddle aye, well, Annette King agrees with it – check out Close-up from last night. Does 2nd in command of the Labour Party also speak ‘Tory twaddle’? Both Annette and Paula spoke well on Close-up and stuck to a real debate about issues and ironically they agreed on most points.
It takes time to obtain the required competencies, you cannot just wave a magic stick. I spent 6 years at uni to upskill myself, that is 2 political terms.
Also, a large number of the 300K beneficiaries could actually have part-time employment so they are not all unemployed.
Quit name calling and stick to a real debate about the issues and how to resolve them. Goff should do that too…and explain where the money is coming from to fund his proposed spending in the next 3 years.
The rest of my story is, I am working for myself and have also got a contract with a firm. I didn’t apply for the dole and have never done so when out of work, so am sure there are others out of work who also have not added tot he official statistics.
I put my hand on my heart about situations vacant. I have not practise din a law firm since the mid 1990′s so am not seen as desirable other than by those who know my work. Most firms are looking for 3-4 years experience, sot hey can work them like dogs, but still pay them at the lower end.
My partner was out of work for a year in 2009 and was twice turned down for a job because they said “the job is beneath you and you will just leave when something better comes along”
I didn’t try for minimum wage jobs because it didn’t come tot hat BUT situations vacant was mainly for those in accounts/finance/nursing/trades and so on.
“and explain where the money is coming from to fund his proposed spending in the next 3 years.” why is it ok for National to borrow 14b but not for Labour to borrow 16b. Is it just the extra 2bn borrowing that upsets everyone? Yea right
Well yes, there ARE plenty of jobs out there: if you don’t mind 1: going door-to-door trying pedal stuff that no-one wants, 2: slaving in takeaway joints or restaurants for seven days a week with less than minimum wages and no contract (aka under-the-table), 3: trying to juggle two or more part-time and/or casual jobs, both employers of which want you to committ to them but don’t like to return the favour, 4: working graveyard shifts, 5: neglecting the kids and missing out on their school plays, sport, etc, 6: responding to rubbishy job ads that don’t say what they mean, and mean what they say, 7: not receiving any reply from most of the job ads that you respond to.
Everybody had to start somewhere Mark. We didn’t all start work as Managing Directors. Everybody who is halfway good, and works hard will soon be recognised.
Mark says:
The arrogance of statements like this appall me. What’s wrong with working in a takeaway shop? It’s honest work, and someone has to do it. It’s better than being paid even less, sitting on your arse all day smoking weed.
That’s the problem with Labour, you’re too precious. Labour supporters seem to bag our great country constantly, but they’re lucky they even get any money from the rest of us.
Hammo, finish the quote which you selectively and deliberately shortened in order to deceive. The quote went on, “for seven days a week with less than minimum wages and no contract……..”
Working for less than minimum wages is akin to slavery, which features low recompense and power imbalances. Certainly, less than minimum wages is not honest as far as the employer goes. And yes, someone has to pay decent, honest wages or we all collectively end up on our arses.
What goes around, comes around- money and karma included.
@ehoa LOL
@Tracey – Agreed!
Sorry about yer employment troubles 
@Mac1 Slaves wages suck!
There are no real jobs for those that are currently out of work and are seeking employment, because many Human Resource staff believe that it is ok to discriminate based on employment status in New Zealand.
HR target those who are currently in work for their selections. The only thing that it is achieving is to churn job market by those switching jobs, but it doesn’t bring in anyone who has been unemployed or underemployed, switching from out of work independent contractor to employed, or some other non-employed status. This does nothing to improve the out of work, (and unofficially out of work) numbers.
I have contracted for a number of years, and I have also worked part time while contracting, but I have suffered too much over the past three years from very little or no work at times. People who have worked for themselves are having to go find employment, typically through no fault of their own, but have fallen on hard times due to the economic downturn. These people could of become employers if the economy was better, but instead they have become job seekers. These job seekers now find it very difficult due to their previous “self employed” status. I now believe that when you have worked for yourself that you become unemployable in the eyes of HR staff.
I have a bachelors and masters degree, and 15 years experience in my field and seek employment using the education and skills that I have acquired. I have applied for positions from entry to senior, or related to non directly related jobs, but I have had no luck. 2 interviews, and I have lost count over how many applications now that get turned down. HR uses the response of “relevant experience” to turn down people that do have experience and skills, but not the type the employer had in mind, meaning, your education and self employed experience doing the same work – even with references means nothing.
The excuses I have been given are either either over qualified, don’t have the right type of experience, not experienced enough for a certain role. It becomes demoralizing, depressing and stressful. I see why many just give up searching after a while. It is also difficult when you don’t get interviews when you have applied for roles in your specific area of research in your field. Some of these I put down to HR ‘target hire’ practices as well.
I still keep an eye out for very basic jobs to pay the bills, but it depends on the job listings and the skill requirements that they list. I think this is why so many graduates also give up on their search and decide to leave the country, because the WINZ staff give them the presentation where they say “If we can’t find you a job in McDonald’s, we will find you one in Burger King”. That is also no joke – It was said by a presenter in a WINZ presentation I went to a few months ago! I avoided having to take up the benefit as I didn’t want to deal with them and thought I would try and stick it out for longer.
No one can easily switch to other fields anymore, because everything is so dependent on retraining, the right certification, or other buzzword requirements, rather than looking at what similar skills you have. I have done more manual type work before, but in my area I see that even these current jobs require some form of certification, and I have also looked at other roles not in my main field, but things I could do, but they still require 2 – 3 years experience.
I really don’t want to be told I should go retrain after getting a masters degree that I have spent thousands of dollars on and paid back. I refuse to waste more money and to take on any debt related to education in the hope that I may get a “ghost job”. I do not want to take on anymore education debts without work guarantees.
It does not make things easy when you face discrimination based on employment status.
There have been a number of articles published online about the unemployed being discriminated against while seeking work in the current economy.
A search on job sites for “currently employed” showed a number of listings on two main New Zealand job sites.
One of the grounds in section 21 of the Human Rights Act 1993 (NZ) prohibits unlawful discrimination in relation to:
‘(k) Employment status, which means—
(i) Being unemployed; or
(ii) Being a recipient of a benefit under the Social Security Act 1964 or an entitlement under the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Act 2001:’
The grounds in s.21 are incorporated into section 19 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990.