Page 1 of 6

Posted: Wed Oct 07, 2015 6:09 pm
by exoticpete
Hi all, is it just me but is it getting more difficult to get reliable young guys who want to learn the trade (landscaping) they all want to do the bare minimum and be paid top dollar my answer to that is generally jog on ..! If we are not careful once we all hang up our boots there will be nobody left in the trade cheers peter

Posted: Wed Oct 07, 2015 7:02 pm
by rxbren
Same here tried a couple of lads one who "wants to learn" doesn't pay attention to anything, takes too long to do anything, if he finishes what you ask he will literally just stand there instead of thinking what else can be done or ask. The absolute worst thing is the constant need to babysit him even simple tasks like cutting an edging slab or hauncing you have to stop to either do the cut for them or redo the hauncing. To top it off as he gets paid daily he thinks all jobs are day work so has no interest in doing things quickly regardless of being told all the work is price work- even to the point of me saying to him if I had the job down for x days and we finished a day or two early I'd pay him more for the job
The other lad is alittle better but still slow and its the same again with just do one thing and stand around.
Some days you wonder is it worth having someone with you

Posted: Wed Oct 07, 2015 7:39 pm
by lutonlagerlout
and that is why I told the CITB "no thanks"
the way it was in '84 when I left school a trade was worth having
now all we get are the ones too ill disciplined to have worked at school, or just not clued up enough.
I was always taught "keep busy,grab a broom,look busy ,walk fast,listen,learn"
I remember my first job, John Kent the foreman sent me up the shop every day for the daily mirror and a hamlet cigar

at the time it cost 27p but every day for 3 months he gave me 25p!
when I mentioned this he insisted I was making a fortune out of the shop run
now that is character building :;):
LLL

Posted: Wed Oct 07, 2015 8:07 pm
by exoticpete
Classic story Luton, sites back then were the crack not the prison camps they seem to be these days (not that i work on them now) I know exactly what you mine rxben I do really wonder if its worth all the effort, as you said you usually end up doing it yourself anyway.

Posted: Wed Oct 07, 2015 8:11 pm
by lutonlagerlout
they were a craic because every day everyone went to the cafe for a fry up and every day we went to the pub at lunchtime
cohesion and laughs
mind you we had to work 7.30-5.30
imagine telling that to a 16 year old now,you would be hung out to dry for child abuse :)
LLL

Posted: Wed Oct 07, 2015 9:51 pm
by sy76uk
Sorry lads but I must be really lucky. I have 2 lads working for me and they can't do enough for me.
One is 17 and the other 21.
They are both well mannered, do as they are told, use there initiative and are eager to learn.
One is also very intelligent having good gcse ' s and is on year 2 doing brick laying at collage.
I told them straight from day one that if they want to work for me that they have to do the graft and I don't have to lift a finger because I'm the gaffer and I'm paying the wages. Not that that happens but it could be that way if I wanted it to be.

Don't get me wrong, I agree that times have changed. Labourers were treated differently 20-30 years ago I've seen lads nailed to fences or tied to scaffolding or even pushed off of roofs so I don't think it's such a bad that times have changed.
There are still good lads out there willing to learn and work hard. You'll find them if you look.

Posted: Wed Oct 07, 2015 10:00 pm
by Pablo
In my experience, I have huge problems getting good workers regardless of their age. Good wages, bonuses, perks and conditions make no difference with regards to their performance so I have to lower my expectations of quantity when I'm in that situation. Saying that, I have a lad who has worked for me every summer for a few years now. He phoned me looking for a job when he was 16 and is one of the keenest, sharpest and brightest fellas ever to work for me. I'd love to get him full time, he'd easily handle a squad on his own but unfortunately he's destined for bigger and better things once his degree is finished. In general the 2 types I steer clear of now are students and ex soldiers (even though I'm one myself). Students generally only have half a chance of getting their feet in the right boot every morning and ex services tend to be lazy and moany with a stinking attitude. I had a medical student start part time with me last year, asked him to paint a new fence we had just built. He stuck the brush and his hand (up to the wrist!!!) i the pot and tore away. This guy is gonna be a doctor ffs and he didn't even last until tea break.
Quality of labour is the one thing stopping me from expanding my business again, I'm happy to train someone but I can't find enough folk worth training.

Posted: Wed Oct 07, 2015 11:53 pm
by lutonlagerlout
I'd say you are lucky sy
the blokes I have with me full time I have because they are well mannered and polite round people's houses
not the best brickie and labourer in the world
but can adapt to domestic sites
sy the problem long term is the good ones want to do their own thing or the grass is that little bit greener the other side
bonus is better than pay rise, as a bonus is just that *bonus*
pay rise is forgotten 2 weeks later
my labourer was moaning the other day that he would like the living wage
I asked him did he want a £5 an hour pay cut (down to the living wage)
that soon finished that conversation
:)
LLL

Posted: Thu Oct 08, 2015 7:27 am
by Forestboy1978
Interesting thread. Only useful person I've had working for me was older than me. He was a bit weak but made up for it with intelligence and good attitude.

I'm not too concerned about taking on youngsters. I would rather pay more and take on someone reliable. I appreciate that that might not work either but..

Posted: Thu Oct 08, 2015 5:53 pm
by dig dug dan
I am still trying to avoid taking anyone on. Last labourer I had had an ulcer on his leg, one wack from a branch it would have been game over. I would have ended up responsible.
so many people I know take on youngsters, train them, give them all the gear, certificates etc, then they leave and start up on their own!!
I may have to conceede soon and take on someone, just ordered another crusher for the fleet! Its hard juggling those, landscaping and home life as it is!!

Posted: Thu Oct 08, 2015 6:57 pm
by lemoncurd1702
lutonlagerlout wrote:my labourer was moaning the other day that he would like the living wage
I asked him did he want a £5 an hour pay cut (down to the living wage)
that soon finished that conversation
:)
LLL
£5 an hour pay cut, bloody hell most around my way would be content with £5/hour take home!

Posted: Thu Oct 08, 2015 7:04 pm
by lutonlagerlout
you need to move 150 miles east mate
but then the average house rent is 2k a month
LLL

Posted: Thu Oct 08, 2015 7:11 pm
by digerjones
dig dug dan wrote:I am still trying to avoid taking anyone on. Last labourer I had had an ulcer on his leg, one wack from a branch it would have been game over. I would have ended up responsible.
so many people I know take on youngsters, train them, give them all the gear, certificates etc, then they leave and start up on their own!!
I may have to conceede soon and take on someone, just ordered another crusher for the fleet! Its hard juggling those, landscaping and home life as it is!!
I've had the odd bloke, brickie, labourers etc. It's more miver than its worth. Financially how much better off are after all the stress and running round.

Posted: Thu Oct 08, 2015 7:39 pm
by Forestboy1978
Was desperate today cos i've had a few days off. Took my mate to work with me. 10am this morning was throwing his guts up lol. Fair play to him though, carried on after. Wasn't entirely useless. Got the back broken on the job thanks to him grabbing shit for me basically and some digging.

Posted: Thu Oct 08, 2015 9:52 pm
by lemoncurd1702
£550 for a 3 bed semi in a reasonable area here.

Forest,
It's good to have mates like that. Even if Supportive not productive, worth a Mint.