Just IT recruitment

Oh man! Ad-blocking software has been detected! :'(

This website is run by the community, for the community... and it needs advertisements in order to keep running. Blocking our ads means your killing our stats!
Please disable your ad-block, or become a premium member to hide all advertisements and this notice.

Simon

Just looked at your FAQs link. First thing you see on the site - the first thing: "Get a guaranteed £16k - £25k job in IT"

I pretty much stopped reading there, as will anyone else who bothers to do their research. I think all you've done in resurrecting this topic is pushed it higher up the search rankings again - which, considering the nature of some of the previous posts on the topic, can't be particularly sensible on your part.

Still, never mind - I'm sure there's still a steady stream of suckers who don't do the due diligence and end up paying ridiculous sums of money for certifications that are worthless to them as entry-level techs. Hopefully that number will decrease every time you necropost on this thread though

 

Oh man! Ad-blocking software has been detected! :'(

This website is run by the community, for the community... and it needs advertisements in order to keep running. Blocking our ads means your killing our stats!
Please disable your ad-block, or become a premium member to hide all advertisements and this notice.

Whilst i think it's commendable you commenting on the topic and speaking about your company, which many won't, It's difficult to imagine that Just-IT isn't just another company taking all your pennies and throwing you into some long winded training scam.

Your figures mentioned of between £16 - £24k sound alot more feasible as an entry level role and compared to what other companies list on their website, is alot less - it's another situation that many of on here have come across way to often - myself included. When i was 17 i wasted £6k on a course which is very similar to this. I was young, naieve and thought that i could just break into IT within a matter of months, i had experience and basic technical knowledge, but they chucked me straight in at asp.net level programming C# code, and designing back office systems - i was useless, i had no knowledge of programming, and to learn that was a huge deal for me, long story cut short i dropped out, and i'm still battling for my money back these years on.

Yes, you may be a provider looking to help and backup your promises, but unfortunately it's the same old story over and over again, i don't know anyone who's gone on these courses and passed (Except for the intense 2 weeks course for people obtaining higher certs than the ones they currently have, but thats a whole new ball game anyway)

I don't think it's fair to "Guarantee" a job in IT either - no one can do that, and it unfortunately doesn't work like that.

People are now starting to realsie that self studying is a much more feasible, and cheaper way to study, and it works much better than paying over the odd's for courses like these - that's what i did after my fiasco back when i was 17, and it's paid off - i'm in a role now i could never of even thought of back when i started my "Training"

This forum is full of seasoned IT professionals, and the majority all self studied, i really wish training providers "Guaranteeing" jobs in IT would pack it in.

 

Well put - no one can guarantee a job in IT. If a company does this avoid them in my view.

We dont either - we offer a 'Money back job guarantee'. Its different. See http://www.justit.co.uk/it_training/jobguarantee for more information

The catch is that people have to pass the exams to get their money back. If people are worried that they are not going to get a job after the programme they should pay the lower fees which start from £1995 and pay the rest when they get a job. They can be protected because if they dont get an IT job they will not pay the fees.

There are also sponsorship places available on most courses and subject to interview people can do the course with no up front fees (apart from the exams) and pay the total fees when they get a job. Isn't this unusual in this market?

Since 2001 we have shown that we are different from other training companies. Speak to the candidates who have done our programme and you will get the full picture.

I hope that helps.

Simon

 

Semantics and Loopholes in my opinion. Sure you might not mean that you guarantee a job, but you are sure as hell banking on the fact thats how people will read it.

It's also not an "or your money back" scheme. It's a "Part of your money back each month until you get a job or we pay it all back".

Not to mention that your contract essentially nullifies the "guarantee" should the candidate take a lower paying role. Effectively this appears to be stating that if you agree to a role paying less than the 16K, then you are not entitled to the rebate.

Then there is the fact that you effectively nullify the guarantee should they have a criminal record, or a history of drug use.

Basically, it's smoke and mirrors. If you are so confident in your material, why dont you just let it stand on its own merit?

Edit: Oh, and you have a typo on your Job Guarantee page:

 

Missing 'h'?

 

nah, the "sat" seems like it should be "stay". Where is there a missing h?

 

Aww Fergal

 

ah. I get it now...

 

Is your place one of those that gives candidates exams before they can take the real exams and do those exams get harder and harder and therfore the candidates fail so you dont have to pay them back?

 

It’s a good question - I have heard of this being used by another company in the past. There are so many people with good questions about Just IT, maybe my FAQs on my web site should be even longer!

The answer to this question is that people can take the exams when they feel ready for them, but with the support of the trainers and the exam preps from people like Transcenders. We look for a certain type of candidate that can typically pass the A+1/2 and XP exams in 7-10 weeks before they go on to a 4-8 week work placement and then into their IT job. We look to cut down to as little time as possible the whole transition into the candidates IT career, as every month that the candidate is not working is effectively costing them £1500 of missed wages (assuming £18K starting salary which is typical in London).

With all this scepticism about what we do all I can keep on going on about is that if people don’t want to, or can’t afford to, pay for the training up front, then subject to interview they can go on the course without paying any training fees and then pay and affordable amount when they get a job.

I am sure people will look for the holes in this, but I can’t put in front of the jury at Certforums any stronger evidence of my desire to deliver a good service to people who suit our programme.

 

I don't know, you could provide the exact same course, without any of the guarantee pish, for a lower price (after all, you dont have to do any of the "extra" services). That might be fairly convincing evidence.

I think most people would rather just pay for the training they are getting, then move on afterwards. Dont confuse matters with any guarantee bull****, or "buy now pay later" pish, just give them the training.

If it truly is good quality, it will stand on its own merit

 

I agee with Fergal.

If the course and material is that good then you shouldn't have to tempt people with guarantees. It's places that gaurantee jobs and specific earnings that makes some of the members on here say it's BS because it usually is.

There has been so many TPs that do this and it's simply not true. I would suggest that if you wanted more business then you shouldn't gaurantee anything like that and simply base your company on excellent service you say it delivers.

 

big scammer, i hate you simon for taking my £3995

 

Okay guys, this is also the same point that I brought up with BM a long time ago. In the world of certification the braindump sellers are giving a money back 100% pass guarantee. this also then forces the suppliers with legitimate products to also give a the same guarantee. They don't like it or want to give it for the same reasons...

as GBL states. Of course companies should rise and fall on their quality and the ones that do produce good quality should succeed over those that don't produce good quality training, exam preps etc.


Just for the fact that Simon has hung around long enough to explain things (longer than any other TP and no legal threats either) and has even made some suggested changes to his business model suggests to me that he is one of the better TP's available and that he is trying to do the right thing. Of course, this will never satisfy everybody and no amount of changes will ever satisfy certain members of this forum.

There's an old adage floating around "Those who can, do, those that can't, teach". Well, here's the challenge, if you guys know how do do it better then why don't you do it yourself and set up a company that provides training. After all, there's a lot of people looking for quality training providers.

 

Well said Nugg

 

Have you taken Simon up on his offer of a phone call or popping in to see him?

If not, you can't just chuck abuse at him.

 

Not saying if Simon's company scammed you or not but you also need to either take responsibility for your choices or take legal action if you feel you have been ripped off. You can't accuse a company of scamming you if you failed to do your homework on what you were signing up to in the first place. I personally don't like training provider/recruitment company hybrid companies as the 2 should be kept separate so as to not take advantage of people. But that is just my personal view.

 

Despite what you might think, I am more than happy with using TP's. In fact, I am one of the more vocal supporters of using TP's in general on this forum.

It's not about what the market pushes, or about what he's trying - although the fact he is responding and actually considering the responses is nothing but a good thing.

What my point is about, though, is the fact that I am paying a premium (were I using his service) for a service I dont actually need or want. Sure, if he wants, he can offer the guarantee service, but I feel he should also offer the service just as pure training - for a lower cost. That way, if all I'm interested in is the training, I can take it, and he will stand purely on the quality of his training

Thats naive. Just because I have an understanding of how things should be. Doesn't mean I have the skills or inclination to do so myself. Dismissing our arguments with a "if you think you are so clever, by all means do it yourself" is childish. I am more than happy running my career in the path I so choose, and I will choose TP's based on exactly my opinions. Not going into a business I'm not interested doesnt invalidate my opinion.

I'm sure you, and many others, are full of opinions on how to run the country, or manage your favourite football team. Should the same adage apply to those times too?

I defend Simon's right to run his business however he see's fit (within the limits of the law). But that wont stop me proclaiming when it is unethical, or taking advantage. Besides, he specifically asked for opinions and comments, so he got them, for better or worse.

 

What Fergal said

But if I had the money I would like to teach people IT skills in my own company, obviousely though I still have a lot to learn before I could do anything like that anyway.