Unemployment Rises

This could go one of two ways; I could go on about all those poor teachers who are losing their jobs through no fault of their own (in many cases)  due to cuts in funding for education, or the thousands of PE and History teachers (as well as other subjects that are over-subscribed) who can't get jobs because there are simply too many of them about and not enough jobs. I am however, on the day when A Level results are published in England (regardless of the EdExcel computer blip last week), going to comment on the increase to 2.49 million unemployed in Britain, and the steep rise in youth unemployment.

What with the riots I'm getting slightly sick of seeing self-righteous politicians pontificating on my television about stuff they appear to know little about. Not only education, which is going to see reform in the way children are punished for breaking the rules, not before time I hasten to add, but policies are being drawn up to tell the police how to do their job too amongst various other new policies that make the politicians feel important about their role in society.

If only politicians would bother to talk to people who deal with those to whom the policies directly refer, namely teachers, youth workers and police. Has anyone in "power" bothered to actually listen to those who deal with young people day in, day out? I seriously doubt it, as they might hear things that they don't want to, or a brilliant idea that involves the government finding some cash.

There was footage of Prince Charles and Camilla touring parts of London affected by the rioting on the news. Now I have no real opinion of the Royal Family other than it generates millions of tourist pounds each year, which must be a good thing in a faltering economic climate. At least Charles speaks his mind and says what he thinks. Whether you agree with it or not is irrelevant, but the point is that politicians could take a leaf out of his book and give proper opinions based upon proper knowledge rather than toeing the party line, saying things they believe they want the public to hear and slating the opposition.

Anyway, I digress. If you'd have asked a teacher from a state secondary school or college whether it was a surprise that unemployment amongst then young would rise,  I would put my last shirt on the answer being "yes" in almost every case. Why? I will, in my opinion, say why:

Reason 1 - Courses taken and "Qualifications" Gained
It is not possible to fail in the current educational climate. If you are not the most academic at school you will usually be sent to college to do a practical subject for a day or two per week. Now this is a good idea, but there is a stigma attached to it, one that is embellished by schools. Generally naughty kids get sent to college purely to get them out of the school's hair for a bit. This isn't always the case, and the teachers of the classes those naughty kids are usually in are very grateful, but it is a shame that others miss out. Not everyone can be academically minded, but this could give all children a chance to succeed at something in education. Funding is low though, so places are limited, which inevitably means that some who could benefit, miss out; usually the nice, quiet ones who would benefit the most.

English and Maths GCSE grades should continue to be compulsory, but even if you aren't up to G grade standard, you can take what is called "Entry Level Certificate". Bear in mind that a typical G grade maths question would be "Write the number three thousand and twenty eight in figures", you might get an idea of what is involved in the ELC - the irony of this acronym is not lost on me! If they are not up to basic maths and English, are these children really meaningfully employable? They will need to read instructions at some point, surely when diluting detergent or something, within the home at least. They must have a certificate though, essentially one advertising the fact they they can't perform the most basic calculations.

Fortunately the majority still manage to sit their GCSE exams, but anything below a C grade is regarded as a fail in many sections of the job world, however fresh faced youths will claim until they are blue in the face that their F grade is actually a pass in interview. I know someone who won't look at any grade for maths or English below a B; her logic being that the A* is the old A grade, therefore meaning that the current C grade is equivalent to the old D grade - a government minister may argue that she's wrong, particularly if his/her upcoming promotion depend upon improving exam results, but few others will argue. I remember her telling me about a conversation that she had with a young girl who had applied to be a secretary, and it went something like this:

Employer: Your application says that you passed 8 GCSEs.
Interviewee: Yes, that's right.
Employer: But the only one you achieved higher than D grade was Art, so you actually only passed one.
Interviewee: No, I passed 8, look - D in maths, E in English...
Employer: I suggest you change you CV to reflect the fact that you only passed one GCSE in Art, and perhaps think about retaking your English and maths exams. Thank you for your application, but we won't be requiring your services.

The interviewee was upset, but had schools been allowed to fail her in the first place, perhaps she would have gone that extra mile to get a C grade in maths and English instead of convincing her that anything other than U, N or X was a pass. Part of the problem being that colleges will take kids with these grades because more students means more money. You can understand then that there seems little incentive to do well at school in some people's eyes.

Reason 2 - I'm don't need this to do what I want to do
I don't know about you, but I didn't know what I wanted to do at the age of 15. The number of children who announce at the age of 14/15 that they are going to be lawyers, plumbers, carpenters etc is astounding. What do they need maths and English for? Actually, more than you think sunshine, but there's no convincing them. If in doubt they will announce that they are going to work for a family member. An interesting statistic that I often quote is that 60% of school leavers who go to work in the family firm are sacked within 6 months and 80% with a year, presumably due to the misguided belief that they are unsackable by a family member. Some are even more deluded, and I'll never forget a conversation I had with a former pupil that went along the following lines:

Student: I'm going to be an air stewardess when I leave school.
Me: You do realise that you get tested in maths and English as well as other general knowledge, and in some companies, every year or so, don't you?
Student: You're lying, a second language is a bonus but not a requirement.
Me: I'll just do a quick internet search and.....there you go - numeracy and literacy tests.
Student: Ok, forget that then. I'm going to be a midwife.
Me: That involves lots of qualifications.
Student: What does a midwife do?
Me: Delivers babies mainly.
Student: That's disgusting, I'm not doing that. I'll be a farmer then.
Me: They have to deliver baby animals.
Student: A model then.

At this point  I had to bite my tongue before saying something along the lines of "there's a limited market for balaclava models".

This was a real conversation, and not an uncommon one. And they wonder why no-one will employ them with their "pick a job title out of the air" mentality.

3. The World Owes Me A Job
This has been said a few times in the past few weeks on the news channels, but it is a genuine problem. Just because children make it to the end of school with some reasonable qualifications they believe that that entitles them to a job. It doesn't unfortunately - you still have to compete for the job, no matter what your qualifications are. Another conversation I had with a seemingly intelligent pupil went something along these lines:

Student: Within 5 years I'll be earning more than you as a solicitor.
Me: Are you not bothering to qualify then?
Student: You do a sh*t job with sh*t wages so even as I'm training I'll earn more than you.
Me: With an attitude like that you may struggle to get a placement.
Student: How much do you want to bet?
Me: Apparently I can't afford it.

Again, a real conversation with a "well-to-do" child, but not an uncommon attitude.

So is it any real surprise that youth unemployment has risen recently? Of course it's not. Had anyone of the policy makers bothered to ask the people on the front line their opinion, they'd have known this 10 years ago and may have been able to do something about it. As is usually the case, those who actually know aren't asked and things come to a head in a disastrous way. These attitudes were partly the cause of the recent riots and the lack of aptitude for work costs the country millions in job seekers allowance payments.

You live and learn I suppose, unless you are in government.