I’m a 21-year-old grad, why does the government want me to go on the dole to get a job?
Oliver Dean was turned away from Job Centre because he wasn’t already on benefit. No wonder the welfare bill is ballooning
Andy Burnham’s answer to youth unemployment has arrived. It begins with 14-year-olds, and the new technical pathways reach classrooms in September 2028. There is a great deal to be said for it and, as much as I relish any opportunity to criticise our Andy, I find myself agreeing with much of what is suggested. But whilst it addresses those who are not yet in the job market, it fails to touch on the more than 1,000,000 young people who are considered not in employment, education or training (NEET).
So, to see how hard it is to get a job as a fresh graduate at the moment, I ventured off to my local job centre to see the situation first hand.
I walked through the front door and was met by two security guards. “Are you here for a general inquiry?” they asked me.
“No, I’m just a graduate looking for some work” I replied. They told me to take a seat, and that someone would be over to help in just a moment. Not thirty seconds later, I was approached by a man with a clipboard. The gatekeeper of employment, I thought to myself.
I began explaining my situation to him. I told him that I had recently graduated, and that I was looking for anything that would help me get by, no matter the pay. He stopped me mid-sentence and asked if I was claiming Universal Credit or Jobseeker’s Allowance.
When I told him no, and that I had quite literally left university just days ago so had no reason to apply for welfare support, he informed me that he couldn’t help me whatsoever. “Not even part-time work?” I asked.
“No,” he answered bluntly. He went on to say that applying for UC is easy, and that I need only go to the official government website to do so. When I pushed back against such an idea, arguing that I didn’t want to go onto benefits in order to receive employment support he said matter-of-factly that “that’s just how it is”.
And that was it. Not five minutes spent inside, and I had already been turned away, despite my pleas to take on even low-wage, part-time work.
A kick in the teeth
With such a system in place, is it any wonder that the NEETs crisis is so out of control? Research by the Centre for Social Justice has highlighted that the total cost to the taxpayer is a staggering £125bn per year. Coupled with the fact that those considered NEET has increased by more than 250,000 over the last five years, and the nation is left with a ballooning welfare bill that is becoming ever harder to rein in.
Youth unemployment stood at 16.4 per cent in figures released last week, a jump from 14.2 per cent the year before. The writing is on the wall. More young people than ever are desperate to find a job. Whether it be part-time work alongside their studies, or a summer job to make a bit of extra cash, many of them want to work but have been locked out of doing so.
And the final kick in the teeth is that if these young people venture down to their local job centre in search of a gig, they’ll be turned away unless they’re on benefits. That is no way to treat those who make up tomorrow’s work force.
Now, I recognise that there is an argument for rationing employment coaching and opportunities to those with the greatest barriers to employment and I must confess, it is not a foolish one. After all, we want to see those who need the most support receive it. But rationing by need and rationing by benefit status are two different things. At present, the government has chosen the latter whilst dressing it up as the first. It is yet another example of the circular logic and perverse incentives that are driving up the welfare.
The fix requires neither legislation, nor a spending review. Make employment support available on the basis of needing work, which is a fact about a person, rather than on the basis of drawing an income from the state, which is a fact about a payment. Instruct jobcentres to see anyone who walks in, not just those who are ensnared in the grip of the welfare state. A graduate who wants a fortnight of shifts and a route into something better is the cheapest case the system will ever handle, and at present he is the one case it refuses.
Burnham’s shtick is that he wants an education system with no dead ends. Such an ambition is rightly founded, and the eagerness to close the gap between hard hat and the graduation cap is very much welcome. But the dead end at the moment is not the 14-year-old who hasn’t yet sat his GCSEs, it is the front desk of a job centre, staffed by a man with a clipboard who has been instructed to turn away those who do not claim benefits.
Oliver Dean is the assistant editor of ConservativeHome