Rachel Reeves annuncia la garanzia dei giovani per combattere la disoccupazione a lungo termine
Rachel Reeves announces youth guarantee to combat long-term unemployment
di pppppppppppppppppd
Rachel Reeves annuncia la garanzia dei giovani per combattere la disoccupazione a lungo termine
Rachel Reeves announces youth guarantee to combat long-term unemployment
di pppppppppppppppppd
12 commenti
“Under plans to be announced on Monday, every young person who has received universal credit (UC) benefits for 18 months without “earning or learning” will be guaranteed an offer of paid work.
Claimants will face sanctions such as losing their benefits if they refuse to take up jobs under the scheme without a reasonable excuse, the PA news agency understands.”
What happens when the kids get their doctor to sign them off with anticipated work related stress and anxiety – back at square one?
If they are capable of work, the best thing to do would be to increase employability options for them from the moment they claim universal credit – not delay, so they are not closed off from the world.
I also can’t see how they can ‘guarantee’ work unless the DWP are going to employ them directly.
This is going to give some fit 18 year olds who haven’t worked for a year and a half an interesting insight into the type of work immigrants do.
How are they going to be ‘guaranteed work’? Public sector where their inability to work will be tolerated or government-funded jobs in the private sector would appear to be options, for few rational organisations would hire them, especially if workers rights are increased.
Why can’t there be some system where you have to do x hours of community service to get the full UC benefits if you’re physically able?
Things like street/park cleaning, volunteering at elderly homes, etc.
Maybe I’m not thinking it through properly and there is a good reason for it to not be a thing?
Should just do a proper job guarantee for anyone of any age as suggested by Professir Bill Mitchell.
16 hours a week for anyone that wants it with the local council or a nominated charity. Give the council or charity the UC money.
Would be roughly the same cost as UC plus housing of circa £750 a month.
At least we’d get some work out of it.
Maybe this is good. But I have a lot of questions about practical implementation that I hope Labour’s policy researchers have robust answers for. And although we have to start somewhere, 18 months is a long time to be out of work. I can see a lot of people looking for work for a year, failing, going back into study for a master’s and then the clock is reset again
I think it not a bad idea but when I left uni I know how disheartening it can be to want that dream job.
Business should work with government to help train people’s skills.
Someone leaving uni with a degree in English as example will probably not jump at the chance at an Apprenticeship in hairdressing. The forcing people aspect of this could further demoralise youth unemployment.
Need to let them know that for most you need to start entry level / work a job similar to where you want to be career wise.
I’m 27 now, and I was promised all kinds of miracles for the past 17 years. Where’s my future guarantee? There’s an entire generation of people my age who suffered since 2008, had to carve out a troubled teenhood and adult life for ourselves, while being promised the world and delivered on nothing.
Too many questions. I wish they were less vague when they made these announcements.
How will they deal with those who have hidden health issues and/or caring responsibilities? What is the projected cost of guaranteeing jobs to every eligible young person? how they will fund it without cutting other services? how will they prevent employers from hiring subsidised workers over others and the reduced opportunities that could result in? Will the jobs being given provide meaningful work with tracks for progression or are they just temporary roles that folk will cycle through without any real prospects?
Will they also be addressing structural issues that hold young folk back like lack of apprenticeships, regional inequality, housing instability, education gaps etc etc? This new scheme doesn’t really address those root causes and I don’t see why anything would change significantly if all that other shit remains in the same sorry state.
I believe the last time we did this it was called WorkFare, wasn’t it? The criticism raised was that by having the state effectively pay people’s wages through the benefits system, workplaces were incentivised to stop hiring regular employees and take up free workers on benefits instead. I wonder what the proposed solution to that is this time?
It’s not a bad idea but the main thing is how is it done? In theory practice and theory are the same, in practice it’s not.
It’s so funny, the government has made hiring young people too expensive, with costs for entry level compounding at 4%+ over the last 20 years, way above the GDP growth rate or inflation . So rather than fix that they are coming up with even more pointless schemes. Terrific!