In all the events and reports on worklessness that have come out over the last couple of weeks youth unemployment is always the central theme. But the evidence on youth unemployment is a bit like jelly – bright and brash on the surface, but 95 per cent water. You can’t use it to support anything. Only Polly Toynbee writing in the Guardian seems to have noticed that there was considerably more youth unemployment in the 80s than there is now.
Don’t get me wrong. I am not saying we should take all the public and private money that is spent on youth schemes away. The two groups that suffer the most when unemployment rises are the young trying to get a start on the employment ladder and older workers trying to stay on it – or get back on. Both groups require help – it’s not an either or thing.
The belief that all our problems will be solved if we throw everything into helping youth is irrational. It doesn’t even help youth long term. If older workers can’t get a job who will be paying to support them in their impoverished retirement? Today’s youth, one way or another.
In fact the interests of young and old are closer than you might think in other ways too. For example, schemes to help them often have the same flaws. So understanding what actually works when it comes to practically assisting one group can often lead to better initiatives to help the other.
Take the Future Jobs Fund. It is a Department for Work and Pensions initiative designed to create 170,000 additional jobs, mainly for 18-24 year olds who have been out of work for nearly a year. It does seem to be providing some new opportunities, particularly in work experience and training places. But it’s too early to say how many of real long-term jobs will remain when the money runs out in March 2011.
Here’s the problem. The Future Jobs Fund depends on there being employers ready to take government money to create sustainable jobs for youth. But will there be enough employers wanting to hire in the midst of a recession? Even with the incentive currently being offered of up to £6,500 for each unemployed young person taken on?
We really need to increase the number of expanding employers. One way to do that would be to put more effort into enterprise support for people creating new businesses. For example the over 50s – people who have seen recessions before. People with the experience, skills and knowledge to build businesses with a good survival rate, even in tough times.
So let’s put aside the false distinctions and the factional fighting. It’s often older people who can help younger people. And the other way round too.
Having said that, I’d not say no to a Future Enterprise Fund for the over 50s, should some wise government set one up. The point is the jobs the new enterprises create would help not just their older owners, but all of society.
If you like this site you may want to subscribe to the RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!
Possibly-related posts:
- Unemployment falls – but not for the over 50s The November employment figures, published by the Office for National Statistics today, show that unemployment is...
Print This Post



Follow us on Twitter