The Student Room Group

Why can't employers have the decency to teach and train new employees?

We see it more than anybody'd probably like. "You need X experience or X licenses".

And for those that don't require experience, they still hire the one who does have it without giving others a flying chance!

This really does piss me off.

I mean, come on! Even if it is just for a factory work, assembly line, warehouse, clerical work and retail, they more often than not want experience.

My older family members always say, "I remember when I just phoned up, no CV, no interview and just asked for jobs and then started the following Monday at a job I have never done before".

Pathetic.

Rant over.

Scroll to see replies

Original post by AnEvolvedApe
We see it more than anybody'd probably like. "You need X experience or X licenses".

And for those that don't require experience, they still hire the one who does have it without giving others a flying chance!

This really does piss me off.

I mean, come on! Even if it is just for a factory work, assembly line, warehouse, clerical work and retail, they more often than not want experience.

My older family members always say, "I remember when I just phoned up, no CV, no interview and just asked for jobs and then started the following Monday at a job I have never done before".

Pathetic.

Rant over.


It's called competition; especially nowadays when there are too many graduates who want a fighting chance for one job.
If you watch The Apprentice show on BBC you'll see what I mean - Lord Alan Sugar only has one job...but a few too many candidates to choose from.
It's not just experience thats important though, skills and personalities are too.
For example, not many people can cope in extreme tough situations under pressure. When people get flustered too easily...that's when mistakes happen...and I mean mistakes that could prove costly to the business and not many people learn from those mistakes either.
Also not a lot of people have a good work ethic (and attitude come to think of it). I personally and professionally know a few too many people who come in later after 9:00am and they just slack.

So to be frank, employing someone (a stranger) is really a huge risk to a business.
Reply 2
It was easier to sack non union workers in the past.
Why would they hire an employee with no experience and in need of training, after which they might not even be any good, when they can hire someone with experience that can hit the ground running?

It's not a lack of decency, you seem to be confusing companies with charities.
Original post by AngelsandFairies
It's called competition; especially nowadays when there are too many graduates who want a fighting chance for one job. If you watch The Apprentice show on BBC you'll see what I mean - Lord Alan Sugar only has one job...but a few too many candidates to choose from. It's not just experience thats important though, skills and personalities are too. For example, not many people can cope in extreme tough situations under pressure. When people get flustered too easily...that's when mistakes happen...and I mean mistakes that could prove costly to the business and not many people learn from those mistakes either. Also not a lot of people have a good work ethic (and attitude come to think of it). I personally and professionally know a few too many people who come in later after 9:00am and they just slack. So to be frank, employing someone (a stranger) is really a huge risk to a business.


Original post by Student-95
Why would they hire an employee with no experience and in need of training, after which they might not even be any good, when they can hire someone with experience that can hit the ground running?

It's not a lack of decency, you seem to be confusing companies with charities.


The point they're making is that so many companies ask for experience, where do they expect people to get this experience from if they're all asking for experience? It's madness, how can you gain experience anywhere if they all want experience for you to get the job? A willingness to learn and a personality which signifies you're not a complete idiot should be enough for them to be willing to bother to train you, especially if you've got decent grades and/or a degree.
(edited 6 years ago)
Original post by Glassapple
The point they're making is that so many companies ask for experience, where do they expect people to get this experience from if they're all asking for experience? It's madness, how can you gain experience anywhere if they all want experience for you to get the job? A willingness to learn and a personality which signifies you're not a complete idiot should be enough for them to be willing to bother to train you, especially if you've got decent grades and/or a degree.


Well they don't ALL ask for experience. Lots of places will hire someone without experience so you can build transferable skills and if you're looking for experience in a specific area then internships and placement years also expect most applicants to be without relevant experience. Another avenue is to contact relevant companies and offer to work for free for a bit or see if you can do some shadowing - even if it is for a day or two you're gaining experience which will let you get something better and so on.

Ultimately it's about competition. To get a job, it's not enough to not be a "complete idiot". If they are hiring X applicants then you need to be in the top X and experience is always an advantage.
Original post by Glassapple
The point they're making is that so many companies ask for experience, where do they expect people to get this experience from if they're all asking for experience? It's madness, how can you gain experience anywhere if they all want experience for you to get the job? A willingness to learn and a personality which signifies you're not a complete idiot should be enough for them to be willing to bother to train you, especially if you've got decent grades and/or a degree.


Well as I say, it's called competition; nowadays there are too many people applying for one single job. So therefore the employer can afford to be picky because of the amount of applicants who have applied for that position. There will be people who will have the experience and other people who won't.
To gain experience many people go and do internships, volunteer and temporary work, whilst studying or even in their summer holidays. That's what I did and most people I worked with went through the same pathway - the obvious main motivation of course is financial gain. Most employers know that but the question is from their point of view is what you can actually do for them rather than just thinking about what you want.
A lot of graduates these days just feel like they can pick what they want to do and expect to walk straight into their dream job which I understand as they have worked hard for their degree. They mainly don't want to work in sales, but the thing is how can a business grow without sales? - That is the main ingredient of success and it is how you stay in a job because you're making work for yourself!

People who do this (gain experience) generally have the motivation and determination to move forward with their career after university or college, although this isn't always the case. It just comes to your personality and if your face fits with the company's culture and overall work ethic.
As I have said through different threads in this section of the forum, not a lot of people do have that determination and work ethic combined (or neither!) and this is why employers can afford to be picky as it is finding about the right person for the job.
(edited 6 years ago)
Original post by Student-95
Why would they hire an employee with no experience and in need of training, after which they might not even be any good, when they can hire someone with experience that can hit the ground running?

It's not a lack of decency, you seem to be confusing companies with charities.


Companies did it in past generations. It just appears employers don't trust recruits and that demotivates them from taken what they assume to be a risk in investing in training.

Original post by AngelsandFairies
Well as I say, it's called competition; nowadays there are too many people applying for one single job. So therefore the employer can afford to be picky because of the amount of applicants who have applied for that position. There will be people who will have the experience and other people who won't.
To gain experience many people go and do internships, volunteer and temporary work, whilst studying or even in their summer holidays. That's what I did and most people I worked with went through the same pathway - the obvious main motivation of course is financial gain. Most employers know that but the question is from their point of view is what you can actually do for them rather than just thinking about what you want.
A lot of graduates these days just feel like they can pick what they want to do and expect to walk straight into their dream job which I understand as they have worked hard for their degree. They mainly don't want to work in sales, but the thing is how can a business grow without sales? - That is the main ingredient of success and it is how you stay in a job because you're making work for yourself!

People who do this (gain experience) generally have the motivation and determination to move forward with their career after university or college, although this isn't always the case. It just comes to your personality and if your face fits with the company's culture and overall work ethic.
As I have said through different threads in this section of the forum, not a lot of people do have that determination and work ethic combined (or neither!) and this is why employers can afford to be picky as it is finding about the right person for the job.


And no, the post is not even referring to skilled/graduate/technical jobs. My thread is referring to the most rudimentary jobs that can only take about a few days or a few weeks of training (or perhaps no training at all because I don't think dispatching parcels requires a degree right?). Your typical "millennials feel entitled" attitude is absurd.

I mean, come on, I was looking for work in a tiny little newsagent with only a few employees as my friend said they are in need of another few people. This guy had one till and the job looked very easy and steady as I shadowed a friend when the boss wasn't there. He asked for experience immediately as I expressed my interest for a job that required little-no training.
(edited 6 years ago)
Original post by AnEvolvedApe
Companies did it in past generations. It just appears employers don't trust recruits and that demotivates them from taken what they assume to be a risk in investing in training.



And no, the post is not even referring to skilled/graduate/technical jobs. My thread is referring to the most rudimentary jobs that can only take about a few days or a few weeks of training (or perhaps no training at all because I don't think dispatching parcels requires a degree right?). Your typical "millennials feel entitled" attitude is absurd.

I mean, come on, I was looking for work in a tiny little newsagent with only a few employees as my friend said they are in need of another few people. This guy had one till and the job looked very easy and steady as I shadowed a friend when the boss wasn't there. He asked for experience immediately as I expressed my interest for a job that required little-no training.


I'm just saying from a matter of my personal opinion - everyone is entitled that no?
Well not everyone thinks the same when it comes to jobs. Some may think it's easy. Some may think it's the complete opposite.
Again I highlighted that 'the boss wasn't there' because maybe he/she thinks the million dollar question - 'can I really trust this person handling my business?' Especially when it involves handling money and shutting the doors at the end of the day.
Training people costs time and money. Why spend time and money when they could just find someone who already knows what they're doing?
Because they are not charities. If they have an applicant who already has good experience, most companies would choose them over someone who they have to spend money and time to train.
Original post by It's****ingWOODY
Training people costs time and money. Why spend time and money when they could just find someone who already knows what they're doing?


Where do the people who know what they're doing magically materialise from if no company is willing to train anybody in the first place and give them experience without experience anywhere else?
Original post by Glassapple
Where do the people who know what they're doing magically materialise from if no company is willing to train anybody in the first place and give them experience without experience anywhere else?


Junior, trainee and graduate positions :wink:
Original post by It's****ingWOODY
Junior, trainee and graduate positions :wink:


The OP isn't talking about these positions, they're talking about retail and other relatively unskilled jobs that usually ask for experience. You can't get experience in this area without someone giving you a chance without experience, which is seldom seen in job advertisements for these positions. They usually state you need at least a year's experience in that field which is impossible to get if this is what they're all asking for.
Original post by Glassapple
Where do the people who know what they're doing magically materialise from if no company is willing to train anybody in the first place and give them experience without experience anywhere else?


For low skilled work; from other countries, people who networked their way into the industry, from people already employed in the industry, or just people who beat the odds and managed to land a job despite a lack of experience. There is obviously training going on somewhere since the jobs get filled.
I'm pro-immigration and I voted to stay within the EU and oppose our leaving it but actually I think British companies have had far too easy a time in terms of having access to foreign labour markets whilst being able to pay very little tax.

This is not an anti-competition post so much as it's a pro-human dignity post since a lot of the skilled and experienced workers from eastern Europe willingly accept poor pay and working conditions in return for using our strong currency to have a better life back home. If businesses wish to access foreign labour markets they should meet their social obligations by meeting the cost of health care and boarding for non-citizens hired and people from poorer countries who come here to work should be encouraged to join trade unions and other pro-workers rights groups to prevent their exploitation.

Without trying to come across as a psychopath, human labour is just another resource and it's an intellectual absurdity to argue that it's pro-competition to allow corporations an unlimited access to a resource when you'd never accept that same argument for iron ore or coal. I really do struggle to understand how you can have supposedly pro-capitalist teens who would never say the tax payer should meet the cost of a steel mill's iron ore, but think that the free market would have the tax payer meet the cost of human resources.
(edited 6 years ago)
Original post by D3LLI5
For low skilled work; from other countries


That's Britain all over, sod anyone who was actually born in this country, let's give everything to the foreigners. A lot of pro-immigration liberals complain they're unemployed, this is why.
(edited 6 years ago)
Original post by AngelsandFairies
It's called competition;


How do we get from?

Capitalist: ''Coal is expensive but I need it to run this power station''

Society: ''It's a free market, either pay the market price or develop more efficient methods''

To

Capitalist ''I need skilled engineers to run the factories, but they demand such high wages''

Society: ''Ok we'll willingly accept additional strain on public services and low wages so you can maintain profitability''

Note I'm not against immigration at all, I think just companies need to pay more tax and higher wages rather than thinking they have the right to unlimited workers for every job. If anything I think foreign workers are unfairly scapegoated for many social issues and want to make this clear that they should not be blamed since I'd hate for my theories to be misused.
Original post by Glassapple
The OP isn't talking about these positions, they're talking about retail and other relatively unskilled jobs that usually ask for experience. You can't get experience in this area without someone giving you a chance without experience, which is seldom seen in job advertisements for these positions. They usually state you need at least a year's experience in that field which is impossible to get if this is what they're all asking for.


There are a lot of young people in retail, though. Can't all be asking for experience.
Original post by Glassapple
The OP isn't talking about these positions, they're talking about retail and other relatively unskilled jobs that usually ask for experience. You can't get experience in this area without someone giving you a chance without experience, which is seldom seen in job advertisements for these positions. They usually state you need at least a year's experience in that field which is impossible to get if this is what they're all asking for.


The whole point for employers is that you can. They aren't asking for 'work experience', they are asking for 'experience'. They just want employees that have got of TSR, left their bedrooms and engaged with society who can give evidence that they can carry out those very simple, basic skills like greet strangers, answer questions, help people find things, take money, give change, follow rues, show a bit of initiative, turn up on time.

Why on earth would an employer risk their business employing someone who couldn't give evidence of these skills over someone who could - as people are finding out - they won't!

So as long as people have got involved with all those things that are laid on for them on a plate at school (DofE, YE, NCS, sports team, debating, MUN etc etc) and Uni (hundreds of diverse societies and the ability to start your own) anyone should be able to evidence the skills to do an entry level job. A job application is a competition entry though, not a charity application.

Quick Reply

Latest