Guild system

The concept of guilds allow a company, school, or other organization to train apprentices to novice, journeyman, and further ranks until reaching master.  This allows more experienced and knowledgeable members to instruct beginners who have the potential to succeed.  Why can't the guild system exist today?

Companies expect employees to come in at entry level (no experience), or with experience from other jobs or schooling.  In the case of entry level, the employee isn't expected to make the job into a trade or a career.  But the experienced employee is expected to already have experience that would count as a career.  Why not have an instructional environment that allows entry level to progress and learn the job rather than being subject to promotions which may or may not ever come?  Wouldn't companies have better employees if they trained and educated people from the ground up about their own job?  Instead, companies hire and fire, or layoff and then recuit.

With today's rapidly moving society, apprentices and higher ranks are sure to move on to other companies, or other career paths, but a company should welcome this just as well.  The employee is giving their time to the company, and the company benefits by their work.  But the company often becomes like a family to the employee, meaning they will be more reluctant to leave unless they hate everything about their job. 

gb/2 Lineage Wars
oh and...

2GET

The concept is not dead, at least not in Germany. There is a group of carpenters and handworkers called Zimmermänner or Zimmerer who, as teenagers, learn their trade, then travel the country or even the world for a year to practice their trade. Eventually, they are promoted to master carpenters and such.

They sure do dress, funny, though.
http://www.goest.de/bilder02/zimmerer.JPG

I know a German carpenter who was educated this way 40 years ago, before moving to another country (where I am).

He's the best carpenter in our city. Earns out the wazoo. So they must be doing something right.

because training costs money?

Because noone wants to deal with a pesky cunt who eventually becomes better than you.

i certaintly dont want to

Guilds require a society that values its people and are willing to invest in them. The current US-dominated, globalized capitalism sees people as commodities and would rather fire and hire cheaper than invest in people. >>5 says it short and sweet.

Why should a company's shareholders have to pay for someone's training? A person can leach off a company for education and leave at their own will, what is more economical is if they get a loan, get an education and pay off their fees, that way the only person who suffets is the person who deserves it. Do you want a totalitarianism or a free society?

On the other hand, training provides an incentive for an employee to stay. Nowadays they're always talking about "perks" and peripheral benefits. Well, this is one of them.

I know I'd rather have additional training as a perk, rather than yet another fucking water cooler or coffee machine. Guess where I never apply?

I think >>9 says it well. For a company, there is no incentive to train a person because he can use his skills in a rival company.

Guilds are different because they are not companies but a group of people with similar skills.

I guess you have to be your own boss to have an apperentice.

Maybe it would be a good idea to replace unions with guilds.

>>12
Or add guild functions to unions.

a set theory appears!