Job seekers are being exploited

CURRENTLY there is an employer’s market in operation with respect to hiring procedures in local restaurants and bars throughout Co Cork.

Given the desperate nature of those unemployed in search of securing elusive employment, contracts workers are willing to agree to anything to get a foot in the door.

Subsequent to the 14% unemployment rate, a plethora of eligible and qualified workers must dig deep into their skill set in order to attain viable employment.

We have all heard the horror stories of solicitors working in McDonalds and nurses going unpaid, but in an unprecedented move we now face a new dilemma, the unpaid “trial days”. The new hiring practice on the market includes a “trial day” which, unbeknownst to the employee, is without pay.

This day sees the potential employee’s skills pitted against the other job seekers’ skills, when they are placed together in the relative working environment.

They are offered limited instruction by management and expected to perform. In accordance with section 14 of the National Minimum Wage Act, 2000 an individual in the employ of a company is entitled to a minimum amount of remuneration for any labour performed.

The standard practice for employment goes something like this; after passing a set of interviews, the job seeker is invited to attend a probationary period in which they are trained. The duration of these probationary periods can run from 30 days to six months.

The probationary period is contractual, offering a concise list of expectations from the employer to the employee. But certain employers seem to feel they have a right to test the potential of an employee against another’s, without pay.

In one woman’s experience, she recounts being placed against two young women, 16 and 19.

The unfortunate and unsuccessful candidate was over 40 years old and a stranger to the people of the town.

The feedback from the management on the night to all three of the candidates was positive and encouraging.

On the second day our participant was reassured of her abilities going out the door after a hard night’s work.

The following day, management phoned to say that someone else had applied for the job that very morning.

Subsequent to this application she was thanked for her contribution to the restaurant and dismissed without any offer of remuneration.

The implications of this practice are astronomical.

They could advertise for new help every other week, bring them in for their “trial days”, continue to make a profit and quite possibly go undetected by the law.

This practice needs to be highlighted so other job-seekers looking to contribute to society and hoist themselves off the live register are not open to this blatant and obvious exploitation.

Lorraine Wall

Bantry

Cork