P Stoff:
Why is the employer always the bad guy? He offers people the chance to get their license with guaranteed work at the end. He doesn’t drive bent. He runs decent trucks. They can tramp or day work. His rates are comparable with everyone locally. Surely if someone give you a that opportunity, you should by your own morals, give them a couple of years of your services. This gives you the experience new decent employers might require and shows you won’t chop and change every five mins. If I was employer and I discovered he had trained and then done a bunk I wouldn’t employ him.
Why is the employer always the bad guy? Because that is the nature of the market mechanism, to replace good guys with bad guys, replace good pay and conditions with bad, and to reduce all relations to a cash nexus.
To give an alternative perspective though, it’s possible the root of the problem is the nature of some fridge work - shunting between bleak RDCs along bleak motorway routes, with a lawnmower engine droning and spluttering next to your ears all day.
It’s possible the trainees are giving the employer the benefit of loyalty in that they stay as much as six months doing this, whereas the average old hand plucked from the market would be gone within the week.
This is a more likely explanation if they’re moving jobs to go into non-fridge work.
