If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options
School leaving age may be raised
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
Comments
Quite a few people (including me) are still at school but do study a vocational course. I do understand what you're trying to say. (I think)
I think there is a consensus of opinion that prison sentences shouldn`t be decided by politicians, isn`t there ?
I think "I'm With Stupid" is right. They really should look at WHY kids don't want to stay on, rather than just forcing them to.
Well thats better then. I just wouldn't see the point of keeping people who don't want to study for exams in education. It'd do more harm to others than do the individual in question good.
Perhaps this is an admission of failure that the education system is not doing its job as well as it should. If people left school at 16 with acceptable levels of literacy and general knowledge in maths and other basic subjects there would be no need to consider extending the school leaving age.
This is one of those rare occasions where I entirely agree with you.
I think this is actually one of the biggest problems.
And for such people leaving school without qualifications and without acceptable basic skills I doubt raising the school age will help. It would be surely more effective to tackle these things earlier on; I'm no educational psychologist but I think the really crucial years must be from primary school until the early years of secondary school. And if there are problems with basic literacy and the like additional tailored help; small groups, etc is more effective than blanket increases in the school leaving age.
I think we should be allowed to leave school earlier if you/parents wish then have credits for the years we didn't go. When you are older and ready for the rest of your education, you can go back and choose which course you want.
I know I didn't give a fuck about my last 2 years and I didn't learn a thing. I regret that now.
The problem I personally think is that a lot of people seem to think they're above doing jobs such as cleaning (and then people come in from Poland to do them and then people whine about immigration). I mean personally I know a lot of people who refuse to work because a lot of jobs in my area involve packing boxes, stacking shelves, working behind a till.
I mean fair enough, get qualifications if they choose... But qualifications are not the be all and end all. A cleaner should be just as proud of their job as a rocket scientist because they are just as (if not more) needed.
Besides, people can go back to education if they want.
That's partly true but for some people on benefits they would, financially, not be much better off by taking a low paid job. (And for as long as there is an unlimited pool of cheap labour from Eastern Europe it won't change as wages won't increase). Immigrants from Eastern Europe are hardworking but they keep wages low.
Big business has been lobbying against proposed restrictions on immigrants from Bulgaria and Romania - evidently, it's because business knows Bulgarians and Romanians will be hardworking and work for low wages. (The unscrupulous meanwhile will exploit those with a patchy command of English who are ignorant of their rights).
You are partly right though, there is some snobbery and there are many people actually on benefits who are capable of working. What needs to change is that such people need an incentive to go out and work - that requires reform of welfare and an increase in pay for low paid jobs. The latter will only be done through an end to the distortion of market pay rates by unlimited cheap labour from Eastern Europe and through an increase in the minimum wage. Welfare in its present state keeps many people poor, it stifles incentive and makes many people who can provide for themselves dependent on the state. It needs reforming - but where to start..
Children should start primary school later - say age 6. There are no need for SATS in primary school, a little entry test for schools would be fine. Work the way through secondary school until they are in their 4th year still studying a full range of subjects. THEN it should be optional to specialise in a subject e.g engineering or childcare or such like or to stay on and do GCSE's/A Levels. There should be a choice in this. The idea behind it being everyone stays on to study but not everyone has to study the basic boring stuff some people are just not interested in. Also, EMA should be offered when they move on to do either vocational or academic study, the minimum of £10 a week to ALL students, with no more than say 4 absents a term to encourage attendance.
My opinion but I am in education still and believe what I say, this would work for 99% of people. The 1% of people are just tossers anyway!
They've enforced a similar rule to this at my school. 3 days a month off (or 4 with a doctors note, apparantely) then you miss EMA for the week.
At my old school however, the sixth form rules are that if you miss a lesson, you miss your EMA, no exceptions, illness or no illness. While this seems very strict (especially around now, when all the bugs are going around, and money is needed more than any time of year thanks to Xmas) it works. My mates barely miss anything unless its really life or death, whereas I know if I remember to ring in, I get away with it.
I do agree that EMA should be avalible to more students, if not all though. My boyfriend misses out on EMA due to his mum's earnings, but his course costs are ridiculously high - he spends at least £10-£20 on supplies each week, with no funding, whereas I recieve £10 a week with no regular costs for my course.
Also, if raising school leaving age is an initiative to stop young people leaving school and getting badly paid jobs then government should make the minimum wage the same whatever your age.
Also, while the minimum wage would be great for everyone should it go up. I disagree completely that it should be the same for all ages.
Generally in jobs, the longer you have been working somewhere, the more you get paid, how unfair would it be for the new young trainee starter to get paid the same wage as someone a few years older, and has been working a lot longer.
Plus if you raised the minimum wage to the same level for everyone, then those who are older, will not get the same wage increase, and that's hardly fair is it now!
i had been there 5 years (aged 21) when a 49 year old woman started, doesnt mean i should get more just because i`ve been there longer
But you probably have more experience - at least with that shop anyway, so you know how everything works and where everything is.
he is saying the older you are, the longer you have been there, the more money you should make....i`m saying that isnt always the case
Disregarding that though, if you raised all Minimum wages to £5.35/hr, then I'd be pissed of because I wouldn't get a wage increase, and you'd be discriminating against me because I was older, and since 1st october 2006, this is illegal. As for the current state of wage discrimination, I don't think the act is retrospective against a wage difference that was allready there before the act came into place.
why couldnt you get one?
As for talking about working longer, I didn't mean as a specific job, I meant generally as in someones working life.
And I'm talking about the minimum wage, ie: the national minimum wage as provided under statute law.
One thing people don't realise is that the minimum wage does increase pretty much every year, and that one thing the minimum wage guarantees by having different levels for different ages, is that those people who do get paid minimum wage, don't get paid the same rate for the rest of their lives.
What I think is needed is more apprenticeships for 16 year old school leavers, to fill the need for tradesmen.