doubts about internships and poststage.

[MassiVonWeizen]

Mine is an assessment of how things should be.

bhé you are insisting that the intern should not claim to be paid, I only point out that it does not need to demand anything as the pay is due to him a priori

I do not believe that the internship is a waste of time for the student because if he learns little in terms of teaching knowledge he has a way to learn how a working environment works not only with regard to his figure that is little involved, but observing the relationship of other people

It seems right to point out that the creator of the post, which as always happens is gone, never wrote to claim to be paid for the internship, but only to have a valid training, but that from how he describes it this training is not there. Let me forget that the more I read the post the more absurd things seem to me to increase (for example it is the only "designer" of a company, and before it arrived as they did?), in my opinion the training is given doing things inherent to the productive reality, therefore working, otherwise if you remain to do exercises and let them correct from the tutor so much it is worth staying at school; instead you have to receive productive tasks at your own reach or slightly higher than at the end of the day will be examined by those of duty (as you would with an apprentice or new hire) receiving input and dizziatony

 

[cacciatorino]

to me it seems absurd that one who is learning should not be paid, these situations are just those that block the social elevator: those who have their backs covered by their parents can invest a lot of time in their training, those who don't have it will go to make the waiter earn that little money he needs to pay the bills and stay there all his life. In my opinion the intern must also take a worthwhile figure, paid by the firm or the promoter agency (region, province, etc.).

 

[welcome to the machine]

in my post I highlighted the word "pretenda" not because I wanted to advance the hypothesis of not paying the boys in formation, that I have always paid even beyond that little that establishes the law, but only to mark an attitude, unfortunately widespread, for which many boys "pretende" to deserve a role and a pay for the only fact of studying and believing to know. this attitude already leads them from the beginning to "transverse" about the work and the role that work must have in the life of a person.

are not the companies responsible for the fact that "when you go shopping, you have to pay the cash," as someone said in a previous post, but it is the whole company that works like this and I don't see how else could work realistically. However, companies cannot (and I think they must not) deviate from exclusively meritocratic and selective criteria. Obviously this must be done in full mutual respect and fairness in relationships, even before the laws.

I am convinced that if this discussion happened face-to-face without the mediation and intervals of a chat, we would realize that we are all saying the same thing, except for a few points a little extreme but that still has to be interpreted and not forced.

I don't think that exxon thinks that boys need to work for free or that someone else here is thinking that forming graduates is an activity. directly directly production for companies. (what company can sell a boy's work in training? if you know of them phone calls to the finance guard or... on a blue phone)
training is an extremely expensive exercise, because for obvious reasons you cannot entrust, to someone you still do not know, nothing that can have negative impact on everyone's work, so you will have to form it on things that do not create value for the company and for others who work there.
then the company will have to be lucky if it succeeds to achieve positively the path of formation, where positively means that:
1) the boy learned really and in reasonable time
2) stays in the company for a period sufficient to "restitution" to the company a higher value (not equal: superior and even of much otherwise the accounts do not return) to what cost its formation.

the companies live only if they produce profit and do not have, except if we want to believe to some hypocrites and demagogic statements of some multinational, the mission to form professionalism if not for their own purposes. It is the collectivity that must be borne by supporting companies that want to grow their own organic. but all the support tools (a few) that exist today can be used in a distorted way by unfair companies because absolutely lacks any form of control on the real destination of the facilities. who comes to check that companies really use the benefits for real training routes?

It's a very long theme and I close it here not to go ot and especially not to bother you further.

 

[exxon]

@massivonweizenabout the op, it seems obvious to me that the thread has assumed its own life of which the first post is now only the starting point.

On the claim to be paid to learn, I repeat, I find it absurd in terms. This is quite different from asserting that the intern should not be paid. are two different things: if the intern brings advantage to the company, then the same has the obligation to pay it accordingly, but if the only one to earn it is him, he should be happy with what he receives "for free", not even demand money over the gift that is already made to him.

that a six-month internship can be useful, it can also be; that it is a real tool to introduce young people into the job market, not even in a dream. If the state establishes that the minimum duration of the apprenticeship for a graduate in jurisprudence before being able to give the exam to be able to exercise the profession of lawyer is two years, how do you think that for an engineer the path can be a few months? (and at that time, law graduates do not even receive a reimbursement of expenses. ..
If the companies had a similar instrument, we would see a new economic boom.

just to make an example: degree in mechanical engineering; salary at the beginning of the career (end of apprenticeship) 2 thousand euro/month; duration apprenticeship 24 months. the company begins the apprenticeship and salary of the apprentice that monthly will be 83 euros, 167 euros, 250 euros, and so on to end with 1,917 euros, 2,000 euros. in this period the company is raised by the social and additional charges.

at any time the apprenticeship can be concluded or with the recruitment, or with the unilateral interruption. If the apprentice is interrupted, the apprentice can continue with another employer by continuing from the conditions matured at the time of interruption. at the end of the apprenticeship, the minimum wage, the one to follow will be free bargaining between the parties. the company will have similar constraints, as a maximum number of monthly apprenticeships per year according to the number of apprentices hired/licenced.

a system that stands on these bases prevents both parties from exploiting the situation: the apprentice knows that he has only those 24 months and will try to spend them in a company that offers true training; the company knows that it can not exploit apprentices as low-cost labor, because if they leave the apprenticeship "they will burn" the chances for the company to take full advantage of this mechanism.

the salary that rises linearly is also ethically correct, because from the first day that the apprentice begins "to learn", will receive a compensation commensurate with the acquired skills, which are assumed entirely reached at the end of the apprenticeship, when the salary is established for the professionalism achieved.

try to look with an analytical eye the difference of setting a tool like the one described, compared to the alternation school-work, or to the passage of a "meteora-stagista" that as it arrives, so it goes, taking little and leaving even less...
@cacciatorinoclaiming that companies are paying for training is a concept that can find place in a closed socialist economy, but not in a global market such as that in which we are immersed. culture has a price (very high): costs first of all in terms of time spent learning, but also in money spent on the learning path. in the economically most developed countries (use, uk), universities cost enormously more than by us, and most students access it with mortgages or scholarships. because this universally recognized value should not only be given by a company to the intern, but also while paying it as a productive factor already inserted? It seems obvious to you, the opposite seems right to me.
@welcome to the machinequoto all 100%

 

[Alan91]

I beg that at my age 27 I don't have many arguments to cling to like you (which give me the impression that you are 40 years old or even ultra) but I still want to tell my experience about what I've been through. I want to premeter one thing: I am part of those guys who never wanted to do a dick until a certain age (in my case 20-21) when then I realized that life is a mighty chuck norris that does nothing but give you rotating kicks to repetition I had to change attitude. I found myself throwing myself into the world of work with the third media and nothing in my hand, as the work agency proposed me as an intern at 450 euros per month in a thermoplastic firm ensuring me a complete and secure training in the molding field. They told me that the internship would only be a pretext to see if I was going well to them and if they were going well to me, and that the end of the 6 months there would be a path of apprenticeship that would later insert me into that company. I must be honest: I was shocked at the idea. I didn't care for a dry fig if the first 6 months I earned a dick, they could also not pay me, but a promise of such a settlement as they gave me... well the devil was really tempting. so I accepted and started. here began the trick because after the first months I realized that nothing of what they told me corresponded to the truth and in the end all I did was stand in front of a press to press continuously a button, without learning anything...it is there that I felt denigrated, subpaid and also taken enough for the ass. expired the 6 months made me a normal contract of another 6 months with same job and same feeling of denigration that I was already trying from the first 6 months and the fact that I had gone to earn from 450 to 1200 per month had not changed a dick. I wasn't satisfied, I wasn't happy. After those other six months, they'll leave me at home and I started wondering how I could do to improve my life. after a few years that I have done other occasional jobs, all those without giving me adequate training, I have made a decision that I consider the best of my life: I have reinitiated to study. I have decided to undertake the superiors (serals) of mechatronic mechanics (which I am still doing) and give me first a school education that effective work. I must be honest: I feel satisfied, all I'm learning is satisfying me, all I've learned is satisfying me and it's repaying me, because thanks to what I'm doing, I managed to find a dt job in a company of no little account in my area. It is obvious that I do not consider myself a real dt, it is obvious that I still have a lot of road to do before I feel inserted to all effects in the world of mechatronic mechanics, but raga, I am satisfied. I have had the huge fortune that they immediately took me with normal contract, but I can assure you that if even they had taken me less (450 a month or what it is) I would have had the same satisfaction rate I have now, because now yes I feel motivated, now I am forming for my future. at the end of the fair the money always goes on second floor. What really matters is if the company in question is effectively forming for that you are doing. In this way one is motivated and the ears don't even think about it.

 

[exxon]

❏lan91 I got it!

 

[stevie]

but we say that (if I can express my personal opinion). .
on the "philosophical" concept of "being paid to learn" , I have a half-way view among those who say that an intern deserves to be paid and who claims that he does not deserve a se*a, indeed he should pay.
I think it would be right that at least one part of the pay would be covered by state agencies, since the tutor in an internship does the professor's veci (which is paid and even well if we look at the hours worked) and that in fact failed in the formation of the boy.
I say that a refund is there, but that ends there...
in the company I happened to children to whom I gave everything and then... or because they were not brought, or because as soon as they learn something they start to claim, or because or because... eventually they took other paths.
But the time lost by me and others is not paid by anyone.