Re: Workfare judged illegal : Tue Feb 26, 2013 11:38 am  

JerryChicken wrote:

Its also at the direction of the leasing company (whoever they use), the optimum time to turn the cars into cash being in the year when the initial hit on depreciation has happened and whilst the mileage is low enough to keep the car in the highest second hand value column - ex-mobility cars at three years old with average 6k per annum on the clock are absolute bargains, they've been driven gently (in the main), not owned by idiots, and are usually spotless - I picked up a Focus once at 3 years old with 6k on the clock, I viewed it before it had been valeted and when we lifted the bonnet it looked as though it was still in the showroom, absolute bargain.

Another good source was always Benfields who picked up all of the Jersey and Guernsey rental Fords every winter, registered just nine months earlier they had spent six months being driven by holidaymakers who could never drive more than a dozen miles in any direction, and yet the rental company had taken the first years depreciation

Yep same here, last year I bought a 3 year old 1.6 Astra with 16k mileage ex-motability for £5k, just had it MOT'd and serviced and its still virtually good as new.

Re: Workfare judged illegal : Tue Feb 26, 2013 11:50 am  

Him wrote:

Yep same here, last year I bought a 3 year old 1.6 Astra with 16k mileage ex-motability for £5k, just had it MOT'd and serviced and its still virtually good as new.

I look after mine pretty well too. I've lost a wheel trim so will be forking out to buy a set of 4 Citroen ones from the dealership. You get a "good condition" bonus if you return the car pristine, if not, they bill you for any work/damage done, so it actually pays you to keep it in good condition.

[DaveO]

Re: Workfare judged illegal : Tue Feb 26, 2013 11:56 am  

Mintball wrote:

It is well worth listening to the recording of that – very good indeed.

Just listened to it and it shows perfectly the comments made in the blog:

".....it rarely seems worth my while to let them read their PR notes out loud, answer any questions but the ones I ask and glide glibly over any attempts to root the exchange in reality."

Re: Workfare judged illegal : Tue Feb 26, 2013 11:58 am  

Big Graeme wrote:

A steady stream of employees they can evaluate and employ the best of, recruitment costs are a considerable part of the business expenses.

They don't need to use agencies to recruit at that level - suggest that is a red herring. Is this the best environment with which to evaluate people if you are basically force-feeding them in these roles?

Re: Workfare judged illegal : Tue Feb 26, 2013 11:58 am  

DaveO wrote:

Just listened to it and it shows perfectly the comments made in the blog:

".....it rarely seems worth my while to let them read their PR notes out loud, answer any questions but the ones I ask and glide glibly over any attempts to root the exchange in reality."

Absolutely.

Re: Workfare judged illegal : Tue Feb 26, 2013 12:03 pm  

Hull White Star wrote:

Are you not aware the car is leased and still under manufactureres warranty for 3 years? After that time the car deprectiates, comes out of warranty and would cost the charity a lot of money. Another reason we get an "extravagance".

The car doesn't start to depreciate at Yr 4!! its biggest years of depreciation are years 1-3

Re: Workfare judged illegal : Tue Feb 26, 2013 12:05 pm  

Hull White Star wrote:

I've lost a wheel trim so will be forking out to buy a set of 4 Citroen ones from the dealership.

Tut-tut!

You'll be getting a horse next.

Re: Workfare judged illegal : Tue Feb 26, 2013 12:29 pm  

Sal Paradise wrote:

... I personally think they should get the minimum wage for participation - I have also said that on this thread - but then what is the incentive to the employer?...

I think you have hit the nail on the head.
Unless it costs the employer less than minimum wage (or, more likely, nothing) there is no incentive other than altruism (which I think we can discount from this argument).
Hence, the whole scheme is either conspiracy (to provide the private sector with publicly-funded labour) or cockup (the private sector cashing-in on the notion about having to work for your benefits), it certainly doesn't stand up to scrutiny.

[DaveO]

Re: Workfare judged illegal : Tue Feb 26, 2013 12:35 pm  

Sal Paradise wrote:

They don't need to use agencies to recruit at that level - suggest that is a red herring. Is this the best environment with which to evaluate people if you are basically force-feeding them in these roles?

So you are suggesting from an employers perspective workfare isn't any use at evaluating staff because of the compulsion involved? If so wouldn't that reduce the likelihood of them being taken on by their workfare employer and wouldn't it also mean any other employer ought to consider compulsory involvement in workfare by the potential employee equally useless as any indicator of how they may pan out in the real world of work?

Re: Workfare judged illegal : Tue Feb 26, 2013 3:18 pm  

Sal Paradise wrote:

The car doesn't start to depreciate at Yr 4!! its biggest years of depreciation are years 1-3

Which is why it is only leased for 3 years!!! Motobility need to get the best value possible to continue to run as a charity. What would be the point in leasing a car for 10 years from them and then they get a low price for the car. They simply couldn't continue to operate.