Getting paid for the olympics

[indyld]

Granted it may be morally wrong for whatever reasons.....but having that sort of experience on my CV would be invaluable, as would the contacts I would go out of my way to make whilst carrying out the job.

 

Okay, I may think it is taking advantage and shouldn't be happening; but it is. There is nothing I can do to change that, so I may as well make the best of an imperfect situation and get some experience out of it.

 

I don't think it's morally wrong or that this kind of volunteering takes gigs away from the professionals. After all, if you can get volunteers to do the job you need, then why not? I don't question that it would be "an experience" but I would question if it counts any more as "experience" and something any better for the CV than, say, volunteering for lantern maintenance at the local theatre during the summer. And the kind of contacts you make on those shows are other hopefuls and freelancers that have little interest in getting you work, sorry to say.

 

So, in this instance, even the work experience argument isn't terribly attractive to young people that stop to think about it. It's a fallacy to think that being able to put "Olympic volunteer" on the CV is any more impressive than any other volunteer experience, especially as the duties are probably pretty varied and of mixed quality from a learning and skills point of view.

 

I think that we are talking about two different "markets". In one, it's an opportunity to get involved as a volunteer and be a pair of hands on a large scale event, similar to what happened with the Commonwealth Games. People did it, and I'm sure had a whale of a time and good on them.

 

In the other market, we are talking about the suggestion that professionals of a variety of disciplines might find it attractive to do the Games for free. I was paid for the Commonwealth Games, as were the hundreds of other professional techs, presumably because our skills levels and experience were not something you could find in volunteers - if you could, they'd want paying too!!! That's a market. :** laughs out loud **:

 

I don't think CharlieH is wrong to suggest that volunteering is attractive to him, but I also don't buy the wafer thin argument that somehow slapping the five rings of corruption, sorry, the olympiad, somehow makes a gig worth doing more any other - and especially not for free. I have form on this, I'm afraid. I deliberately had the night off on 31st Dec 1999, despite the silly money that was supposed to be changing hands for crew (forget the fact that a lot of it wasn't actually paid in the end and a number of "production companies" went bust after that gig etc). Was I going to do that "special" event for free? I didn't even do it for money!!!

 

I also will not be joining my learned colleagues in Stratford this year, paid or otherwise, despite no shortage of offers. I may be enjoying proceedings from the comfort of my sofa this time, or might forget to watch it all together and do the garden. It's all good.

[andy_s]

In the old days, the competitors didn't get paid. Now they do*. And so should anyone else providing professional services.

 

*yes, I realise this is a bit of an oversimple version of the amateur / professional question...

[Jivemaster]

Well if the accountancy is to Dome standards some who are on paid contracts will not get the money so why not expect to not get paid! People/firms went bust over the Dome, why should the olympics be different?

[nothingatall666]

I have an interview tomorrow for a (unpaid) internship at the ceremonies company.. I think there are/have been a few of these opportunities.

I wouldn't have gone for a general volunteering job because as people have said, there will be so many there that the experience might be 'I stood holding the backup mic for a few days'.

However I see an internship as a more worthwhile experience as there will be a significant amount of work and responsibility which will look good on a CV, also these are the opportunities which you will be directly in contact with the more senior production staff, possibly leading to some great future contacts..

 

- that is how I feel about all this unpaid talk.

[kerry davies]

Latest news from the Clusterf**k is that G4S are busily trying to "arrest" people on the highway and take the cameras from journalists outside the park.

Nice pic of security man removing his SIA badge to obscure his identity. Here!

[themadhippy]

G4S

Are yes the new privatised police force of the uk

http://www.opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/clare-sambrook/corporate-power-stamps-its-brand-on-british-policing

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lincolnshire-17772674?fwcc=1&fwcl=1&fwl

[charl.ie]

Latest news from the Clusterf**k is that G4S are busily trying to "arrest" people on the highway and take the cameras from journalists outside the park.

Nice pic of security man removing his SIA badge to obscure his identity. Here!

To their credit, the woman in the video was polite, and explained that she was just asking if they wouldn't mind not filming their security screening area - not an unreasonable request. On the other hand, the people filming were rude, jumped to conclusions and generally hard to work with. Even though they can legitimately film, all they needed to say was "We understand you'd rather we didn't film, and we respect you're just trying to do your job but we have a legal right to film and we are going to exercise that right", rather than aggressively proclaiming "you have no right to stop us"

[rossmck]

Latest news from the Clusterf**k is that G4S are busily trying to "arrest" people on the highway and take the cameras from journalists outside the park.

Nice pic of security man removing his SIA badge to obscure his identity. Here!

To their credit, the woman in the video was polite, and explained that she was just asking if they wouldn't mind not filming their security screening area - not an unreasonable request. On the other hand, the people filming were rude, jumped to conclusions and generally hard to work with. Even though they can legitimately film, all they needed to say was "We understand you'd rather we didn't film, and we respect you're just trying to do your job but we have a legal right to film and we are going to exercise that right", rather than aggressively proclaiming "you have no right to stop us"

 

The woman in the video was - the first two men were not.

 

 

The one that thought he could remove his SIA identification should have his SIA license revoked.

 

G4S (and many private security companies) all too often seem to think they can act like the police. It's bad enough the POLICE consider themselves to be above the law at times ( the previous issues with them harassing people photographing them or buildings(!) in London and more recently north of the border where strathclyde police were told they acted unlawfully and then publicly supported the officers actions - http://www.bbc.co.uk...w-west-17770342 ) without private companies starting to think this as well.

[paulears]

What it does do is show the shortcoming in the selection and training. The lady had clearly been told what to do and was simply assuming her employers had given her accurate information. The snag was she'd been told to carry out her duties on public not private land - so clearly outside of any legal standing. Not really much use asking the public not to take pictures - because people hate being told what to do by anyone. The Police have a tough time, but somebody taken on for the olympics clearly has no real status, and it's unsurprising people object to being 'controlled' in this way.

 

The first two people were just either thick or very poorly briefed. The lady did attempt to be civil - but the over bolshy response from the togs didn't really help. I've actually found my BECTU press card pretty useful for this kind of thing. It sort of diffuses the issue a bit, I think.