Really interesting report on NEETs. What do you think happens next?

[SomedayIllBeSaturdayNight]

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2026/may/23/uk-young-people-workplace-anxiety-alan-milburn

Such an interesting report by Alan Millburn in why the UK has so many young NEETs.

' “[Young people] are different, not worse, not lazier, not less intelligent. They have grown up in a digital world that has rewired how they communicate, form relationships and manage stress. They have fewer experiences of workplaces and they present with higher levels of anxiety and depression.”

Does this ring true to you? And what are the next few years going to look like?

I personally can't see any reason for the government not to ban social media for under 16s in this context.

Ok then , Italy has one of the highest rates of NEETs in Europe. So does Romania. Are those comparable?

Or does it only work if it directly supports your narrative? Any comments on the European , Western countries with the lowest levels? Are those comparable?

Romania is not at all comparable to the UK and you know it.

No-one is born with the ability to add up. It is taught by parents and schools. Similarly, other skills necessary to get on in the workplace can be learned. But we’re not talking here about children with severe disabilities who are non-verbal and in nappies at 8. I think everyone agrees they will need lifelong support. We’re discussing young people who have no disabilities or at least no disabilities that would stop them from learning to make eye contact, answer the phone and add up - but who turn up at work unable to do those things. Why is that?

Necessity.

We need a very painful adjustment period as the benefits are taken away and people acclimatise to their new normal, which is that to have money you have to earn it. I think there will be an initial uptick in crime and homelessness, but after 10 years or so the new generations will come through with a different mindset and work ethic. It’s not nice but it has to happen.

That’s because cutting benefits doesn’t help in any way. There are less jobs than unemployed people. Even if every single vacancy was covered tomorrow, you would still have a high number of people out of work.

What actually works (as proven by other countries) requires properly thought out , long term policies and investments , which means they will never happen.

What about Italy? Or Spain? What about the countries that do so much better?

So far, apparently no country is actually comparable to the UK because… reasons.

Of course it will help because we can’t afford it.

Where are the jobs coming from? People keep banging on about kids not being able to add, but adults don’t seem to be doing any better either. Though that would be subtraction, which indeed , is a bit trickier.

Farmers have not been able to fill jobs for a long time - dairyman for example, fish factories and slaughterhouses employ foreign workers
there are jobs,but low paid and people don’t want to do them . Does that mean the tax payer provides for those people to do nothing

AI says

Search Assist

Benefit payments in Romania are generally lower than those in the UK, reflecting differences in economic conditions and welfare systems. The UK provides a wider range of benefits and higher amounts, particularly in areas like unemployment and disability support.

We're not unique in our youth unemployment though.

We continue to have mass migration for every job under the sun as you'll see on this link.
Skilled Worker visa: temporary shortage list
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/skilled-worker-visa-temporary-shortage-list/skilled-worker-visa-temporary-shortage-list

This is the odd bit. Am I understanding it right?
Lower salaries for these people. Why would you actively recruit from this country if it costs you less to get migrants?

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/skilled-worker-visa-immigration-salary-list/skilled-worker-visa-immigration-salary-list
Check which jobs are on the immigration salary list in each area of the UK.
If your job is on the list, the minimum salary is 80% of the route’s usual minimum rate to qualify for a Skilled Worker or Health and Care Worker visa.
The annual salaries for these jobs are based on a 37.5-hour working week. They must be pro-rated for other working patterns, based on the weekly working hours stated by your employer.
If you do not know your code, you can search for your job in the CASCOT occupation coding tool.
If you qualify for the standard rate, because you got your first certificate of sponsorship after 4 April 2024, you should look at the “standard rate” column.
If you qualify for the lower rate, you should look at the “lower rate” column.
You qualify for the lower rate if either:

• you are applying for a Health and Care Worker Visa in certain occupations
• you got your certificate of sponsorship for your first Skilled Worker visa before 4 April 2024 and have continually held one or more Skilled Worker visas since then

most jobs seem to require maths and English. Unnecessarily imo.

We teach crap maths.
Not useful maths.

We should do functional maths as a requirement.

Functional skills is an offer but perhaps it could be offered year 10. Rather than a later addition.

@fairyring25 Even the schools not deemed super strict have a plethora of rules and focus seems to be on deference and passing exams rather than developing resilient young people ready for the world of work.
My son was no angel at school but there seemed to be a more balanced approach in the early 2000s. Had he been in our local school now he would never have made it out of isolation. There were plenty of opportunities for sports, music, drama and other extra curriculars and a decent lunch break for socialisng and he swears that it's the skills he gained through these that made him first a good employee and now a good employer and the GCSEs, A levels,degree and Masters (no relevance to his business) taught him very little.
School isn't preparing young people for work, sitting silently for long periods is unnatural, leading young people to believe that their whole future depends on passing GCSEs causing huge anxiety for many and writing others off before their life has even begun does nobody any favours.

I’m familiar , but the poster that started this particular conversation stated there’s a direct causation between lower benefits and higher employment (without actually doing even basic research of course). The examples of countries that are doing worse despite minimum benefits are not comparable apparently. The examples of countries that I gave that are doing a LOT better despite generally being strong on social policies were ignored.

That leaves the UK in a truly unique position I guess?

Relax the ultra strict uniform rules (eg. Rules on colour of boys socks that won’t even be seen, rules around when blazers have to be worn/haven’t to be worn/have to
be carried in a specific way - all things that I’ve seen children suspended for) - cost - £0

Allow sensory friendly uniform options without having to have an EHCP (eg polo shirts, softer trousers) - cost - £0

Reduce ridiculous amount of informative clutter on the walls (more in primary schools) - they are a sensory nightmare for SN pupils, and those who are not filter out the constant bombardment of info so removing it wouldn’t make a big difference. (To be clear I am an autistic adult and couldn’t cope in a 10 minute meeting in my son’s primary classroom).

Switch off smartboards when not being used. Zero cost, big difference to children who constantly hear the buzzing.

Drop the harmful fixation on attendance and the threats around it which has driven thousands of ND kids (diagnosed or otherwise) into EBSA and home education. Attendance should reflect the ability of an individual to attend. I know a family whose school sent automatic threatening letters and eventual threats of court/fine - their child was going through aggressive chemotherapy at age 13. Of course they weren’t fined and didn’t have to attend court, but the stress this added was immense and entirely unnecessary. For children with EBSA it is also unhelpful, does absolutely nothing to improve the situation. It’s a crappy system that has contributed to increased pressure on already stressed vulnerable kids.

Allow children to use the loo when they need to. We managed to do this 30+ years ago with few issues.

Stop treating children like untrustworthy thugs. I’ve seen this increase in the 20 years I’ve had children at school with the increase of non teaching SLT staff. Treat them like shitheads and they’ll eventually behave like that. Child rearing 101.

Low cost - change lights as soon as they flicker. DC’s old school had the same flickering lights for three years, I brought it up several times, it was never done. This adds to the overwhelming and stress of ND children.

Beyond that, SATS are a turning point for happiness - I remember seeing a graph showing a downward trend in child happiness coinciding with the beginning of SATS pressure in yr 5. Scrap them. There are other ways to judge a school without piling the pressure on young children. Secondary schools often do their own tests on intake to stream pupils.

The curriculum has become narrower and allows for less flexibility in teaching (the reason why many friends have left teaching as they feel they are doing more harm than good). This needs to change, but will cost money, but right now they’re throwing money after money making changes that will only make things worse. As for spending a reported £90m on the Gemma Collins campaign that is entirely missing the point of why so many are currently out of education - as SN parents have been trying unsuccessfully to point out for years. We are the elephant in the room, the ones whose input could actually make some positive impact, but nope, far easier to ignore us and firmly fix the blame on us 🙄

Children are not a homogeneous group, they are individuals with their own hopes and dreams. Planning a curriculum to bring everyone above target in different subjects, and impose rigid behaviour expectations upon them is not going to work, the same as trying to teach a goldfish how to climb a tree.

Schools used to have different approaches, some stricter, some more flexible. This has all but gone, pushing the most vulnerable to stress levels that children didn’t use to have.

Jesus, it’s like arguing with a toddler! Do you want some cutted up pear with that stance?

Thank you for that.
Some I completely agree with, some are already in place in some schools, some …. I’m not fully sure about.

If I may add, I hear you and I see you.

As the economy improves more jobs will open up, because there will be more money to spend and people willing to take bigger risks to open businesses. We have to get there first though and yes this will come at a price. But we can’t avoid it forever.

There are more where that came from!

Ultimately I strongly believe that the education system and further government-created societal pressures have pushed more and more children into having difficulties and requiring diagnoses in order to have their needs met.
In the not too distant past these children were easily catered for in mainstream schools. I’m not talking about severely disabled children here, I’m talking about those who, 30++ years ago may have skived off school regularly, dodged out of lessons they didn’t like, did no homework, all with few consequences. I know many of these people, mostly now adults who have never been out of work, they went to technical college, started apprenticeships. Contrast to today - the energy put into chasing up and punishing children who are unable to change (and didn’t need to years ago) just pushes them to more extreme behaviour, and with teachers now held responsible for children meeting unrealistic targets and being in school as close to 100% of the time as possible, it’s a disaster. Some schools are now up to 45% SN pupils. At what point do they stop and look at what’s going on? When are they going to admit that changes over the last decades have created a problem that needs to be fixed, instead of doubling down and blaming parents?

It’s ridiculous to expect an academic solution to a practical problem.
Schools can’t do everything and nor should they.
Children should be allowed to DO things. They should be allowed/ encouraged to do chores, babysit, cook meals, walk to school.
Children increasingly are stopped from doing anything which could build confidence and resilience.
Expecting schools to fix it is just washing your hands of a problem that is yours to fix

Our teens, at different local state secondary schools, come home with much conversation about “what happened in class today”

If you have a class that will engage it allows teachers to have a more engaging teaching style rather than having to get some students just to open a textbook.

Agree my autistic daughter had thrived in her very inclusive Primary school. She had SSEN before setting foot in any educational setting transferring to EHCP. She is academically very able with no behavioural challenges.
Transfer to secondary and it quickly went down the pan, she did part time timetable, missed days to recover from the previous one and eventually dropped out altogether. The ridiculous rules caused her anxiety to skyrocket, she carried multiple stationnery for fear of not having the exact item at any given time. 3 purple biros that were never used! Her friend put in isolation for having a sliver of colour seen above the heel of her shoe when teacher asked her to raise trouser leg for sock inspection made her spiral.
I fought first the LA for section 19 provision and then for placement in an out of County independent specialist school where there were few rules more mutually agreed code of conduct, no uniform, first names for all staff pretty much the antithesis of her previous school. LA paid the £75k pa fees plus transport costs.
She left with GCSEs but also a better understanding of herself and her needs. She now has EOTAS studying French, Textiles and Japanese by the time she has completed A levels it will have cost the LA about £500k to educate my academically able well behaved daughter largely because she couldn't cope with harsh attitudes and petty rules in mainstream secondary.