indeed.co.uk/m/viewjob?jk=f6 … job_alerts
Sent from my HUAWEI VNS-L31 using Tapatalk
Sadly, yes. And it’s going to get worse as the government pushes these apprenticeships harder and harder. Personally I want no part of it as it is paramount to exploitation IMO.
Anyone with an ounce of common sense should do the sums. Train independently and pay with an interest free card (some available up to 4 years). Then you’re a free agent to earn the market wage straight away. And no, that’s not enough either. But I cant do anything about that.
Apprenticeships are yet another method of massaging the unemployment figures to make them look better and they shouldn’t assume that we’re all fooled.
Just my take on it.
Pete 
Yeah its probably a bit of exploitation but it’s getting young people in the industry with time and knowledge with plenty of experience thrown in, and in time they will be able to choose who they work for. Better than most new drivers who are taught test routes and are flung into it after no time at all and are causing havoc due to inexperience.Is it because they are by passing your training school you don’t agree, in my opinion it is experience that people need to be competent, because most people think it’s easy like driving a big car and that’s why so many incidents occur.Thoughts please!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
They are bypassing us simply because we’ve refused to work with the scheme which ends up as no more than a brokerage for the trainer.
The way it SHOULD work, and I’m perfectly well aware that it rarely does, is that folks should complete their training, pass their test and then have on the job training with their new employer. If that was in place then most of the problems would be solved.
Pete
It’s not that bad.
I’ve seen warehouse/forklift operative apprenticeships.
Does the add actually state that they will pay for your training? Maybe I read it wrong but it didn’t seem to state they would pay for it only that you would get a level 2 apprenticeship in hgvs.
Boris1971:
Yeah its probably a bit of exploitation but it’s getting young people in the industry with time and knowledge with plenty of experience thrown in, and in time they will be able to choose who they work for. Better than most new drivers who are taught test routes and are flung into it after no time at all and are causing havoc due to inexperience.Is it because they are by passing your training school you don’t agree, in my opinion it is experience that people need to be competent, because most people think it’s easy like driving a big car and that’s why so many incidents occur.Thoughts please!Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
So it’s OK to exploit youngsters as long as it gets them into the industry? If their driving the same vehicle as me, doing the same drops, same times etc then why shouldn’t they be paid the same? Equal pay for women was a huge thing so why discriminate against age? Who decides when they are experienced drivers? Would that be when someone sitting in an office has ticked all their boxes on their spreadsheet?
Sent from my HUAWEI VNS-L31 using Tapatalk
Do you not think your worth a little bit more than someone who has just jumped behind the wheel of a truck EddieMD? Should work and Does work are worlds apart Peter, what actually happens is people are turning up with 16hrs practical experience. Does that say you refuse to work with them due to ego? £9.98 after 15 months training with further increments is not toooo bad, will be better prepared and SAFER. Don’t get over PC , exploiting the new and the young has been happening since time begin, no need to stop now.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Boris1971:
Do you not think your worth a little bit more than someone who has just jumped behind the wheel of a truck EddieMD? Should work and Does work are worlds apart Peter, what actually happens is people are turning up with 16hrs practical experience. Does that say you refuse to work with them due to ego? £9.98 after 15 months training with further increments is not toooo bad, will be better prepared and SAFER. Don’t get over PC , exploiting the new and the young has been happening since time begin, no need to stop now.Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I don’t think I’m worth anymore than anybody to be perfectly honest with you, my heads not that far up my own a#+e. It’s because of attitudes like that, that exploitation even happens. If someone’s doing the same job as me there’s no reason they shouldn’t be getting the same poppy. Why would anyone want to get into an industry where you’re exploited because you can be and paid less than the next guy for doing the same job…that sounds like a great idea to encourage people into it
What honestly makes you think it’s going to be safer by doing this…? There’s absolutely no reason it shouldn’t be any safer without this
Sent from my HUAWEI VNS-L31 using Tapatalk
The reality is you’ll pass then be chucked out on road by yourself after a few weeks.
Be better if it was on the job actual training once you’d passed and you was out with an experienced driver.
We have mentors where I am and I’ll be out with one this week if I pass my pre mentor assessment. Just done a weeks induction/training. I’ve already got the licence mind.
Then I’ll have a final assessment to see if I’m ready to go out on the road by myself after a week with a mentor.
But for me looking at that advert I see it has an opportunity. An opportunity to work for a semi decent company and gain a licence I don’t have to pay for.
Money ain’t the greatest but for 15 months with it rising upon passing tests it’s not that bad.
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
I don’t think it is about heads in dark smelly places, but if you have experience Eddie, you ARE worth more to employers whether u like it or not, less risk, insurance premiums and damage ratios etc, would u let a plumber with 16 hrs experience rip your bathroom apart and pay him top whack, probably not I’m guessing! It not exploiting because we don’t live in utopia.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Boris1971:
I don’t think it is about heads in dark smelly places, but if you have experience Eddie, you ARE worth more to employers whether u like it or not, less risk, insurance premiums and damage ratios etc, would u let a plumber with 16 hrs experience rip your bathroom apart and pay him top whack, probably not I’m guessing! It not exploiting because we don’t live in utopia.Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Experience is vital but this job is hands on and to get that experience you’re going to be doing exactly the same job as any other driver, same graft, same hours etc…yes every job should have job specific training with someone who knows the job but not for 15 months at a lesser rate. I’m not looking for eutopia but if you’re happy to see people treated like this and do nothing thinking it’s just the way it is then absolutely no other is going to change and the guys that take this job are going to be “exploited” till the next intake are treated the same, then some other company is going to do exactly the same till it ends up just another industry where exploitation is the norm
Sent from my HUAWEI VNS-L31 using Tapatalk
Eddie you have a very black and white view of it.
Unfortunately employers want people with experience and are willing to pay more for it and what they want more is people over the magic age of 25. Its not personal they just want cheaper insurance premiums. I learnt that the hard way being 23 and trying get a job with zero experience.
To be honest I think this is fair. Statistically young drivers are involved in more accidents its fact; so why would I employ a young guy when I can employ a older guy who will have a greater chance of not having a accident. Even if the young guy is the better driver it is irrelevant. An employer knows if he hires 10 staff over the age of 40 statistically his trucks have less chance of getting involved in a accident.
Seeing as how its still an employers market I can’t see the model changing, you may not think it is fair but you should be able to appropriate the rational behind it. Why would a small employer risk an accident hiring a new pass when they can just get an old hand; financially for them it makes no sense. I suppose the government could add incentives to the employer but I can’t see that happening and I don’t think it would help.
adam277:
Eddie you have a very black and white view of it.Unfortunately employers want people with experience and are willing to pay more for it and what they want more is people over the magic age of 25. Its not personal they just want cheaper insurance premiums. I learnt that the hard way being 23 and trying get a job with zero experience.
To be honest I think this is fair. Statistically young drivers are involved in more accidents its fact; so why would I employ a young guy when I can employ a older guy who will have a greater chance of not having a accident. Even if the young guy is the better driver it is irrelevant. An employer knows if he hires 10 staff over the age of 40 statistically his trucks have less chance of getting involved in a accident.Seeing as how its still an employers market I can’t see the model changing, you may not think it is fair but you should be able to appropriate the rational behind it. Why would a small employer risk an accident hiring a new pass when they can just get an old hand; financially for them it makes no sense. I suppose the government could add incentives to the employer but I can’t see that happening and I don’t think it would help.
I’m not entirely disputing those points but what I am saying is that it’s an employers market because we let it be. Insurance companies set these conditions because they can, employers set those conditions because they can and this ad just goes to show they can do what they want and get away with it because we just accept it and are willing to let them do it because they can. Everyone complains about pay and conditions in this industry but this kinda attitude is the very reason those conditions and pay are the way they are.
Sent from my HUAWEI VNS-L31 using Tapatalk
I personally don’t see the issue here, as while the rates are not great, they aren’t that far below normal rates! 
What we need to remember here is that these potential drivers are entering the game with nothing, and as such why should they be on the same rate as those that payed for their own licence? So applicants have a choice; pay for your own licences and get a better rate, or do an apprenticeship where your training costs are being deducted from that rate.
No one is breaking their arm, and I think this offer is a lot better than some ‘apprenticeships’ that don’t meet, or need to comply with minimum wage! 
It’s also worth remembering that once the firm has put the candidate through their licences, there isn’t much stopping the candidate doing a bunk and leaving the firm in the lurch. So would you really expect the firm to not have recouped most of their costs up front? 
In principle I have no problem with apprenticeships even if the trainee is paid a little less than the other drivers, if, and I emphasise the word if, it’s a proper apprenticeship and the trainee will get proper on the job training it surely has to be a good thing that will help people to get into the industry.
I think someone would have to apply and get more details to decide whether or not this particular scheme is good or bad, but in principle I’m all for proper training rather than the way things are with most new drivers, where they spend a few days learning to pass the HGV driving test then get thrown a set of keys and expected to know what they’re doing.
According to that advert the contract is for 15 months, and if I’m reading it right in that time you will go from a car licence to cat C+E and get what for many people will be a reasonable wage, if that includes proper on the job training I’d have to say it seems like a reasonable deal.
To be honest if I was just starting out and lived in the area I would most likely want to find out more about the offer.
If I pass my CE in a couple of weeks first time I will have spent near 3k all in, theorys, medical C test first time. Fail each test once and your getting towards 4k. Call 15 months 65 weeks and 3k is 45 quid a week on wages and 4k is 60. Easily works out at a quid an hour depending on the working week. Suddenly those rates seem a lot better.
If your stuck on minimum wage/zero hours I don’t think that seems to bad an offer. Yes want a lot more details but given I saw 1 advert like this at 14k a year don’t think it is the worst out there.
I am able to pay for my training myself but know a lot can’t so might be worth 15 months of low pay to give better prospects going forward
I’ve read the add twice now am I being dumb or does it actually state anywhere that they actually front the cost for the licences. You would think they would include that in there. It states you will be working to achieve your licences but do they not pay for it?
The way I’m reading it seems to me that they expect you to pay for it and will give you a pay rise upon completion of cat c and c+e
Just going by the unit titles of the apprenticeship all of that can be achieved without requiring a HGV licence.
Peter Smythe:
Anyone with an ounce of common sense should do the sums. Train independently and pay with an interest free card (some available up to 4 years)
What about those with terrible credit ratings and no possible way of borrowing anything?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
paulweller84:
Peter Smythe:
Anyone with an ounce of common sense should do the sums. Train independently and pay with an interest free card (some available up to 4 years)What about those with terrible credit ratings and no possible way of borrowing anything?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Contact peter smythe he does credit .
Can’t see what’s wrong with this. From what I’ve read too many people are not given enough training in the day to day stuff of securing load, driving, tacho etc, so an apprenticeship has to be a good thing. Not everyone will do well just having the keys and a fuel card chucked at them.
And given that training providers only train to pass a test, I would have thought this type of thing would be welcomed certainly by people looking to get into the industry anyway. Any apprenticeship pays less than the going rate, but that’s part of the deal when they pay for training and ongoing development, surely?
I still can’t believe that HGV instructors don’t have to be approved like car or motorbike ones do, but that’s another subject…