Why are tradesmen so unreliable

We had a very small extension to our kitchen plus the fitting of the new kitchen. Builder promised is a turnkey finish. He started work at the beginning of May and finally finished just in time for Christmas! It wasn't a turnkey finish, we had to cal him back several times in the new year to finish off little bits.

It's not surprising people have difficulty finding skilled and reliable tradespeople and this will continue until attitudes change and people stop believing that the only worthwhile qualification is a degree. Students will not want to pursue those careers as long as so many people think they are inferior to degree courses.

Doodledog

Can you back any of that up, or is it a series of further opinions?

Which degrees are irrelevant? Who is measuring interpersonal skills and how? Would the school leavers develop such skills if they went onto further or higher education?

Student loans are not being repaid because the structure of them means that most people don’t pay off the capital - the repayments go on the interest. That needs to be changed, I think.

What is ‘graduate work’?

Interpersonal skills, many school leavers see the adult world as hostile where they are instructed to do boring repetitive work all day. They don't relate to the adults they are working alongside, this is a big reason why apprentices fail, they won't concentrate to learn a skill, so the employer finds a migrant to do the work.

Irrelevant Degrees. Any that do not lead to a reasonable chance of employment, the rest are just recreational qualifications, and should not qualify for student loans.

Loans carry interest if a student gets a graduate work they can easily repay the loan interest, it's those that don't, that are the problem, reduce the number of marginal graduates. They are the ones that should be training for a technical skill.

They are the whole point of going to university is to earn a higher salary and a better lifestyle. So aiming for a professional income above the median wage.
Median wage also includes many workers with technical skills, the threshold for repaying student loans is close to that level so why would you give a loan to those with less prospects.

David, can’t you see that all you are doing is listing your opinions? They may be based on your experience of your workplace (which you may have retired from some time ago?) or just from general prejudice. Why would someone want to do boring repetitive work all day when they could do something interesting? Exploring interests can mean that people have fuller lives outside of work even if their daily lives are more routine than they would like- why deny them that?

You regularly ignore the non-subject based aspects of education. Graduates learn to think outside of their own experience, to mix in a range of circles and to gain the interpersonal skills you mention. Few 16 year olds have them - they need a bit of maturity, and if they are doing boring repetitive work in their home town with others doing the same they are less likely to acquire them than if they leave home and mix with others from all over the world.

You clearly misunderstand how the loan system works, and you still haven’t explained what you mean by ‘graduate jobs’.

I am not saying that everyone should go to university. What I am saying is that nobody should be denied the opportunity to go, and particularly not so that they can fulfil a quota of people doomed to a life doing as they are told in boring repetitive work.

"You regularly ignore the non-subject based aspects of education. Graduates learn to think outside of their own experience, to mix in a range of circles and to gain the interpersonal skills you mention. Few 16 year olds have them - they need a bit of maturity, and if they are doing boring repetitive work in their home town with others doing the same they are less likely to acquire them than if they leave home and mix with others from all over the world."

Yes I am not putting great value on the non subject experience, because I believe the first priority should be to support yourself, pay the rent is probably the biggest part amongst many other living costs, not to mention the wellbeing of the economy.

Sending half the school leavers to university is very wasteful when there there are no jobs for them, it would be much more useful for them to go to technical college to learn a skill.

As for mixing with others around the world, many of my friends children migrated immediately after a working gap year, because opportunities and lifestyle were better. Most return broke and need what ever work they can get, yes the experience was great but they have lost a year in the jobs market and a host of new graduates chasing what jobs there are.

Loans carry interest if a student gets a graduate work they can easily repay the loan interest...

That just isn't true. Loans start earning interest from the day they are paid which meant that my son had 4 years of interest payments on top of a very large loan. He is paying the required amount from his earnings. Even though he pays every month, it isn't credited to his loan account until the end of the year so he pays interest on an amount he has already paid for. On top of that, when he earns more, he has an extra 2% interest charged. He might earn that amount relatively quickly but he has to work in the City and pay huge rents in order to live. Obviously his pay is weighted for the London area but his loan and interest isn't.

Allira

It's not surprising people have difficulty finding skilled and reliable tradespeople and this will continue until attitudes change and people stop believing that the only worthwhile qualification is a degree. Students will not want to pursue those careers as long as so many people think they are inferior to degree courses.

Hear, hear.
I hosted German sixth form students from our local college for a year at a time. They were astonished at how tradespeople were looked down upon in the UK. They are highly respected professions in Germany.

Allira

It's not surprising people have difficulty finding skilled and reliable tradespeople and this will continue until attitudes change and people stop believing that the only worthwhile qualification is a degree. Students will not want to pursue those careers as long as so many people think they are inferior to degree courses.

And it will only get better for trades people when AI really comes on stream. Both Mr P and myself are indentured trades people. Both did a 6 year apprenticeship.
At one time we were both earning more than teachers.

DGS, who does not live in the UK, has just left school with the qualifications to go to university but has chosen to take up an apprenticeship - five years training + college but he will be paid instead of getting into debt.

Some of DS's friends here took up apprenticeships years ago; they are highly trained professionals and run their own business. One of their employees is a graduate, he is very good at his job but isn't very ambitious himself.

icanhandthemback

^Loans carry interest if a student gets a graduate work they can easily repay the loan interest...^

That just isn't true. Loans start earning interest from the day they are paid which meant that my son had 4 years of interest payments on top of a very large loan. He is paying the required amount from his earnings. Even though he pays every month, it isn't credited to his loan account until the end of the year so he pays interest on an amount he has already paid for. On top of that, when he earns more, he has an extra 2% interest charged. He might earn that amount relatively quickly but he has to work in the City and pay huge rents in order to live. Obviously his pay is weighted for the London area but his loan and interest isn't.

You are wasting your time, icanhandthemback. The idea that there are 'graduate jobs* (still undefined) and that a degree is wasteful' unless a graduate gets one of these mysterious jobs and is therefore able to pay back her or his loan within a short space of time is so deeply embedded in those who write off education as 'Mickey Mouse' that they won't be shifted.

The Student Loan system is dreadful, and desperately needs an overhaul. As Martin Lewis pointed out to Kemi Badenoch, tinkering with the interest rates will make no difference to the vast majority of graduates, as they never pay off the capital - not because of low wages, but because of the structure of the system.

That is a separate issue though. The idea that people should be prevented from getting an education because educating them is 'wasteful' is denying people opportunities, and the motive of doing so in order to force them into roles where they will be told by others to carry out boring and repetitive tasks is abhorrent.

We know that graduates do, on average, earn more than those who do not go to university (although we can all point to friends and family who buck that trend on either side).
(https://ifs.org.uk/publications/impact-undergraduate-degrees-lifetime-earnings)

Graduates are more likely to have secure employment with a career structure that allows for promotion. Ironically, given the comments upthread, they are taught interpersonal skills, as well as how to meet simultaneous deadlines, work in groups and alone, lead others and more - all things that are useful in the workplace. Yes, there will be school leavers who can do all those things, and it is true that not all graduates master them, but course leaders have to show how employability is addressed across courses, and this is checked by validation committees and external examiners. If courses have professional accreditation the professional body examiners will insist on them too, on pain of losing their kitemarks.

This thread has wandered off course, and I am in no way saying that getting a trade is an inferior choice. As has been said, many people make good money and have very satisfying work as 'tradies'. They are far more likely to survive the AI revolution than, say, accountants, whose skills will soon be relatively easily be carried out by computers. What I am arguing against is the 'either/or' mentality that separates people into those worthy of higher education and those not, and the notion that people's lives 'should' be ruled by the economy, with places in HE being restricted so that wages are depressed - it smacks of Stalinism or Mao's China.

"You are wasting your time, icanhandthemback. The idea that there are 'graduate jobs* (still undefined) and that a degree is wasteful' unless a graduate gets one of these mysterious jobs and is therefore able to pay back her or his loan within a short space of time is so deeply embedded in those who write off education as 'Mickey Mouse' that they won't be shifted."

Nobody has said degrees are wasteful those that have commented have said too many marginal students are taking degrees that are not relevant to employment. Those would be much better off gaining a technical qualification, learning a skill, not wasting £50000+ taking a degree course.

What is graduate employment let's define it.

A professional who uses advanced skills to design, develop or discover new ideas, carry out complex procedures, operations and advanced administration. Clearly we don't need to send 50% of students to university to fill those posts.

For everyday administration where you are following an established work routine you are a technician, you are obliged to work within rules set by those above you.

Any other offerings?

Tradesmen don't like small jobs. If you want a brand new kitchen, then fine. If you want someone to change a lightbulb that you can't reach, forget it.

So is a teacher a professional? A ranking police officer? How does a barrister fill your brief? That definition doesn't stand.

There is a definition of a 'professional' (ie someone who does a job that requires postgraduate qualifications, has a professional body with the power to expel members for not adhering to a laid down code of conduct, has a licence to practise and certification from the professional body). That is not the same as a 'graduate job' - all professionals are graduates, but not all graduates are professionals.

How to 'those above' the technicians acquire their skills?

You are still missing the point that you are tying yourself in knots defending something that is just an opinion. Words such as 'need' and 'wasteful' are entirely subjective, but you state them as though they are objective facts and then repeat them, seemingly in the hope that doing so will wear down those with opposing views. That might work in some workplaces, but will not alter the fact that whilst some employers insist on a degree before considering an applicant, that does not make a job 'a graduate job'. Graduates can clean windows, but a degree is not a requirement to do so.

Whether you like it or not, people go to university for personal development as much as to learn work-based skills (although many personal skills are relevant to the workplace), and it is not possible for anyone other then the graduates themselves to decide whether or not they have 'wasted' their money or whether their sills and abilities are 'needed'.

Doodledog

So is a teacher a professional? A ranking police officer? How does a barrister fill your brief? That definition doesn't stand.

There is a definition of a 'professional' (ie someone who does a job that requires postgraduate qualifications, has a professional body with the power to expel members for not adhering to a laid down code of conduct, has a licence to practise and certification from the professional body). That is not the same as a 'graduate job' - all professionals are graduates, but not all graduates are professionals.

How to 'those above' the technicians acquire their skills?

You are still missing the point that you are tying yourself in knots defending something that is just an opinion. Words such as 'need' and 'wasteful' are entirely subjective, but you state them as though they are objective facts and then repeat them, seemingly in the hope that doing so will wear down those with opposing views. That might work in some workplaces, but will not alter the fact that whilst some employers insist on a degree before considering an applicant, that does not make a job 'a graduate job'. Graduates can clean windows, but a degree is not a requirement to do so.

Whether you like it or not, people go to university for personal development as much as to learn work-based skills (although many personal skills are relevant to the workplace), and it is not possible for anyone other then the graduates themselves to decide whether or not they have 'wasted' their money or whether their sills and abilities are 'needed'.

Not sure about teachers, teacher follow rigid guidelines, Ranking police officer certainly, Barrister would have studied Law so yes because it's not following set administration procedure.

You are trying to say that only graduates develop personal advancement which is a very elitist view, clearly personal development is not needed in employment because many posts are going to be replaced by AI where any decision making or is programmed in the device. The graduate will programme the device serving thousands of users.

You are really struggling to justify graduates when AI can replace them, it's even been suggested that AI can replace teachers, leaving the role as just, classroom assistants.

AI is going to change things that is for sure. Having trained to be an economist graduate with a specialism in programming to work the data, my son now finds himself in a position where the firm he works for (along with other firms in the same business) are looking at AI to do many of the jobs in his company. He is very aware that he will become obsolete when AI is in place. Less than 3 years after graduation with huge debt, he's worried about being obsolete even though he took a subject which was likely to give a good income with a clear pathway in professional development. He hasn't got the funds to train for another pathway. Any decisions on future education surely has to focus on where people can earn a decent living with the state funding behind that. Whether that is a trade or a different sort of profession, I fear that education for education simply for personal development is going to be a privilege most can't afford with the state being unable to afford it either.

Nobody has said degrees are wasteful those that have commented have said too many marginal students are taking degrees that are not relevant to employment. Those would be much better off gaining a technical qualification, learning a skill, not wasting £50000+ taking a degree course.

Which degrees are not relevant to employment? Is there a list?

Presumably you mean any degree which is not strictly vocational, eg medicine, accountancy, teaching, engineering?

Why would someone who wishes to take a degree not relevant to employment be technically minded and have an aptitude for technical, practical work?

And what exactly is a marginal student please?

Allira

And what exactly is a marginal student please?

Obviously only slightly better than a bottom feeder in the Murky Pond of Student Life

Allira

And what exactly is a marginal student please?

Anyone that gets a a university place with C or D at A level they should be technicians

As for employment try finding paid employment with an Art or Environmental degree, there are many graduates chasing very few jobs.

David49

Doodledog

So is a teacher a professional? A ranking police officer? How does a barrister fill your brief? That definition doesn't stand.

There is a definition of a 'professional' (ie someone who does a job that requires postgraduate qualifications, has a professional body with the power to expel members for not adhering to a laid down code of conduct, has a licence to practise and certification from the professional body). That is not the same as a 'graduate job' - all professionals are graduates, but not all graduates are professionals.

How to 'those above' the technicians acquire their skills?

You are still missing the point that you are tying yourself in knots defending something that is just an opinion. Words such as 'need' and 'wasteful' are entirely subjective, but you state them as though they are objective facts and then repeat them, seemingly in the hope that doing so will wear down those with opposing views. That might work in some workplaces, but will not alter the fact that whilst some employers insist on a degree before considering an applicant, that does not make a job 'a graduate job'. Graduates can clean windows, but a degree is not a requirement to do so.

Whether you like it or not, people go to university for personal development as much as to learn work-based skills (although many personal skills are relevant to the workplace), and it is not possible for anyone other then the graduates themselves to decide whether or not they have 'wasted' their money or whether their sills and abilities are 'needed'.

Not sure about teachers, teacher follow rigid guidelines, Ranking police officer certainly, Barrister would have studied Law so yes because it's not following set administration procedure.

You are trying to say that only graduates develop personal advancement which is a very elitist view, clearly personal development is not needed in employment because many posts are going to be replaced by AI where any decision making or is programmed in the device. The graduate will programme the device serving thousands of users.

You are really struggling to justify graduates when AI can replace them, it's even been suggested that AI can replace teachers, leaving the role as just, classroom assistants.

Ok, so in your world a teacher is not a professional, but has a graduate job? You can't be a teacher without a degree. I'm not (and have not been) a teacher, but my understanding is that whilst they follow guidelines such as the National Curriculum they plan and deliver their own lessons, schemes of work and so on, well outside of 'rigidity'.

Is there a profession more rules-bound than law? Police officers and barristers both follow the 'rigid guidelines' that make you unsure of a teacher's professional status, yet you see them as professionals. How does that work? Even judges have to follow legislative guidelines, yet few would say that they are anything other than professionals.

I am not 'trying to say' anything. I am saying that again, your views are based on opinion and prejudice, rather than objectivity.

I don't think that only graduates experience personal development. I have not said anything of the kind, as that is not what I think. I am saying, for the zillionth time, that the fact that not all degrees lead directly into work based on the subject of study does not mean that education has been 'wasted'.

There are cultures in which it is considered 'wasteful' to educate women, as all they are going to do with their lives is have children and keep house - isn't that the same logic you are using to deny education to those who are 'only' going to follow guidelines?

@MT62 - I disagree; nothing to do with Brexit where I live - never known of a foreign tradesman, ever. It's a supply and demand issue and I'm sure they do cherry pick the jobs they want. The least they can do is let you know that they don't want the job if it's too small and not keep you hanging around, sadly nothing we can do about it.

David49

Allira

And what exactly is a marginal student please?

Anyone that gets a a university place with C or D at A level they should be technicians

As for employment try finding paid employment with an Art or Environmental degree, there are many graduates chasing very few jobs.

Anyone that gets a a university place with C or D at A level they should be technicians

So someone with a C in eg Art, a D in eg Latin should become a ^technician?

Why?

Police and lawyer have to interpret the law and are influenced by politics it's not just applying the law, so the senior ranks who decide the policy, or a barrister arguing a case do, but only 5 or 10% of graduates get to that level, a police chief might have several hundred officers following policy they he set.

You are proposing that the current system is fine, where virtually anyone can go to university and study the subject of their choice, whether or not there are employment prospects. There is plenty of evidence the current system is failing.

Im saying that is very wasteful both for the government and the 40% and growing graduates that cant get higher wages in the professions. Why saddle them with debts of £50000 when a decent technical training would be better for them and the national economy.

Choice, David49.

Or are you suggesting that schools, colleges and universities should collaborate and decide which pupils should train in which disciplines according to what the country needs and what they consider to be the pupils' aptitudes?

Allira

David49

Allira

And what exactly is a marginal student please?

Anyone that gets a a university place with C or D at A level they should be technicians

As for employment try finding paid employment with an Art or Environmental degree, there are many graduates chasing very few jobs.

Anyone that gets a a university place with C or D at A level they should be technicians

So someone with a C in eg Art, a D in eg Latin should become a ^technician?

Why?

No jobs as artists, it's not a problem as a secondary A level but if you try to make a living as an artist you will starve. Only a few are going to get jobs where they use art skills. There are plenty stacking shelves to feed the family including some I know.
Getting any job is difficult today graduates often omit qualifications to get a lesser job.