Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Dave Beans

What A Lovely Job Advert

Recommended Posts

http://www.indeed.co.uk/cmp/Light-&-Airey-Cleaning-Services/jobs/End-Tenancy-Cleaner-fc8fe3ab05a45641


IMMIDIATE START - £8 PER HOUR, WEEKLY PAY.

We are currently looking for people to work as part of our End of Tenancy Cleaning Team carrying out cleans across Bristol. The role will involve working as part of a team carrying out end of tenancy cleans to a high standard for Estate Agents, private tenants and landlords.

This is a bank position, zero hour’s contract applicants will be contacted when required and be offered work for that week. YOU MUST BE ABLE TO GET TO WORK LOCATIONS

We currently have a number of jobs booked throughout June and July in the Clifton area as well as other ongoing contracts. We are also looking for suitable applicants to work on a new contract through July until the end of August in Central Bristol.

If you are serious about work and interested in this role please apply stating your availability and we will call you to tell you more about the work and provide you with dates for upcoming cleans.

ALL APPLICANTS WHO APPLY JUST FOR BENEFIT REASON AND FAIL TO TURN UP WILL BE REPORTED TO JOBCENTREPLUS.

So, your doing dirty work for landlords, on a zero hour contract, (I bet with no travel pay), and you'll be grassed up by them as well...what a cracking company to work for...

Edited by Dave Beans

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This type of thing used to be cash in hand.

Lots of students clearing out this time of year. The road in Clifton I work down has been a sea of to-let signs over the past few weeks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't expect landlords to do there own cleaning can you?

Think the reporting to JPC is just to stop people applying purely to fulfill their job seekers agreement with no intention of turning up. Though its more likely those not seriously interested will turn up and flunk the interview if they are not really interested.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the tenants left the property tidy then there wouldnt be any need for this would there?

£100 for a clean that isnt even needed in some cases I would wager.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

£100 for a clean that isnt even needed in some cases I would wager.

and the vast majority (80/90%?) of that £100 going to the estate agents chosen cleaning company rather than to the cleaning workers.

Edited by billybong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't expect landlords to do there own cleaning can you?

Think the reporting to JPC is just to stop people applying purely to fulfill their job seekers agreement with no intention of turning up. Though its more likely those not seriously interested will turn up and flunk the interview if they are not really interested.

I think there would be some obligation / pressure put on people to apply by the job centre. So a damned if you do/damned if you don't scenario.

It amazes me that people can be treated this way - with such contempt. These used to be pin money jobs for people, a little pocket money for students; not the life depends on it roles they have become. There is something very, very wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there would be some obligation / pressure put on people to apply by the job centre. So a damned if you do/damned if you don't scenario.

It amazes me that people can be treated this way - with such contempt. These used to be pin money jobs for people, a little pocket money for students; not the life depends on it roles they have become. There is something very, very wrong.

So should someone who is able to work, and receiving benefits, have the right to refuse this job and carry on receiving benefits?

Edited by doomed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry I really do not see the problem with this job advert, could someone please explain what I am missing?

I agree. Nothing wrong with the advert.

It's certainly a cruddy job. With cruddy Ts & Cs (although, if the zero hours works both ways (ie you can decline work when you chose or have something else lined up), it's not at all bad).

But, either there will be takers for the job or there won't be - and the employer will have to lick their pencils and come up with a juicier offer.

Some people would say "this sort of job should be banned". I don't buy that. If the job is so cruddy no one wants it then banning is unnecessary. If, OTOH, people do want it then banning renders people unemployed who would otherwise have an income.

But, there is a problem - it's just not with the job advert. It's with a benefits system that subsidises such dreadful Ts & Cs. If there were no subsidy to fill in the zero hours then employers would have offer better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So should someone who is able to work, and receiving benefits, have the right to refuse this job and carry on receiving benefits?

Supposing an individual takes this job, on a zero hours contract, and then gets 5 hours one week, 7 the next, 3 the one after that. The income isn't going to be enough to live on.

Which is why you're not currently obliged to apply for zero hours jobs if you're on JSA.

It was supposed to be one of the advantages of Universal Credit that people could be forced to take zero hours jobs, because benefits would top up their income in real time from month to month. But UC isn't going to happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry I really do not see the problem with this job advert, could someone please explain what I am missing?

Because every possible externality has been shoved onto the worker. No guaranteed hours. Pay for own transport. No continuity. No holidays, sick pay, pension, whatever.

And I'd bet that it will include things like 'You have 4 hours to clean this house top to bottom and if it's not good enough you won't get paid' so you end up taking 8 hours to do it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lets all apply. We could have a flash mob crummy job application. Let them grass us up to the job centre espesially if we already have one or retired or self employed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lets all apply. We could have a flash mob crummy job application. Let them grass us up to the job centre espesially if we already have one or retired or self employed

This advert is probably from a small business who would be unable to afford to take on a full time employee. I fail to see why it should not be able to offer employment on the terms offered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This advert is probably from a small business who would be unable to afford to take on a full time employee. I fail to see why it should not be able to offer employment on the terms offered.

Without sounding awful, but you were the poster could not find a problem with the ad in the first place, that's okay

Perhaps some people including me on here are in sympathy with "British values" you just don't dob. I also think "If you can't run a business ethically then you can't run a business

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So should someone who is able to work, and receiving benefits, have the right to refuse this job and carry on receiving benefits?

Its not work...its a job with a call out if you are needed with no retainer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its not work...its a job with a call out if you are needed with no retainer.

Pretty much.....

As the unemployment rate falls then zero hours contracts will fall away.

They only get away with it because some people are desperate for work.

As a concept where work will be offered (if we have some) to well I will take it (if I have nothing better to do) then I sincerely hope it comes back to bite some employers in the ****.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If a business cannot afford to offer a full-time position, fair enough.

It's not the part-time nature of these sorts of jobs that's the issue though, it's the appalling terms. If most people applying will be those forced to apply (which the end of the advert suggests), then it's not the sort of contract that would exist in a free market, and its fairness is somewhat debatable.

If a business cannot afford to offer fair employment rights to workers, that's not fair enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because every possible externality has been shoved onto the worker. No guaranteed hours. Pay for own transport. No continuity. No holidays, sick pay, pension, whatever.

And I'd bet that it will include things like 'You have 4 hours to clean this house top to bottom and if it's not good enough you won't get paid' so you end up taking 8 hours to do it.

People get paid for the value that they generate. If the employees get paid more than the value that they generate, the business will go bankrupt. Cleaning is a low value skill and is usually done by younger people (with lower skill) for a short time until they build up more skills and move on to bigger and better jobs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People get paid for the value that they generate. If the employees get paid more than the value that they generate, the business will go bankrupt. Cleaning is a low value skill and is usually done by younger people (with lower skill) for a short time until they build up more skills and move on to bigger and better jobs.

No. This is basically incorrect at the moment.

IF we had full employment, THEN people would get paid according to the value generated. Indeed, you can actually see this in the 1950-70 full employment period - wages and productivity rise in lockstep.

However, what we have now is a large pool of unemployed. Which means that wages can fall with no real lower bound - any lower bound then gets set by law, not market forces. Now, in a proper market, surplus labour would simply starve to death and resolve this problem (Well, there would be a revolution and the whole thing would be turned upside down, but I digress..)

But still, in the current situation there can be a huge disconnect between pay and value generated, which gives disproportionate returns somewhere down the line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If a business cannot afford to offer a full-time position, fair enough.

This is a business (BTL) that can't afford to employ even a low cost cleaner full time. It deserves to go bust. However, the ever-generous taxpayer runs a benefit system that effectively provides slave labour. It's yet another subsidy of BTL (alongside the biggies of HB and very low interest rates).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This job is so rubbish it should be in a category where it's acceptable to claim benefits and do the job at the same time.

As someone said it should be cash in hand like the good old days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   209 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.