To think society would be better if you could join the workforce sooner

[Welllllll]

And the age of compulsory education was lowered I’m not sure exactly what age to but 18 seems quite and as a result it is then years longer before you can move out and gain independence that generations ago you gained much earlier high Aibu to think it would be better if it was more practical for people to be able to get a job and as a result move out/ become adults than what they already are with the system of for most young people adolescence seems to drag on into the early 20s due to the delay in leaving school/university and getting on the property ladder?

@XenoBitch

The national minimum wage for younger people is nowhere near enough to live on, let alone be able to save for property. The cost of living is not less just because you are younger.

exactly.

HOW would throwing people at work benefit society in any way?

We need more apprenticeship and a more varied choice of education. Not less education.

No, the solution is to have an education system that works for everyone. That means bringing in high quality vocational education so young people whose aptitudes are in the practical/skilled labour area can choose that path earlier, get trained up and then post 16 operate in the sort of mixed model that many European countries have. They could work 2 or 3 days a week, being paid the going rate for a new starter (so not the pathetic exploitative pittance that apprentices in the UK get) and spend the rest of the time in college, getting properly qualified in their trade.

But investing in a system like that costs money. I would not want to go back to a system where the school leaving age is 16. I used to work as an NVQ assessor and saw so many young people go into apprenticeships only to be tossed on the scrapheap by their employers at 18 so they could get a fresh and cheap 16yo.

I know 16 year olds with paid jobs, even in part of the country where the age of compulsory education was raised to 18 (this was not throughout the whole UK). I also know 16 year olds who do voluntary work regularly too.

It depends a bit on whether there are employers/settings who want to do that and deal with the extra paperwork, H&S, and such as a pp said.

We need broader education options and educational settings that are properly funded and resourced for those options.

I'd actually read something that was mostly the opposite - encouraging the idea of shifting society so part-time work was acceptable longer for better training, quality of life, and if it went to 30 or so for average start of families to ease childcare issues, then full-time work, then part-time work with lighter duties/retraining in later years. It was mostly a thought experiment on how to rework working life with a mind on various issues rather than an ideal/realistic thought, but I do think society would be better if education was more aimed at being part of the wider community and joining adult life than just getting into paid employment.

I started my first PT job at 16 when I was in higher education

I have older relatives who left school at 14, 15 into FT work

Why does it have to be one or the other ?

No age barrier to learning

No upper age barrier to working ( some industries excluded)

No. Quite frankly your post makes it clear that you could have benefitted from a little more education.

If you investigate worldwide education

The trend is to educate children for longer, especially females

It provides families with better opportunities

I think some children you just know are never going to be academic and allowing them to participate in an apprenticeship at say 14 would be beneficial to all. Obviously insurance etc would probably put a stop to it.
I'm using my own ds1 as an example even in primary school you could tell sitting and learning wasnt for him. Hes now at college doing a practical course and loves it, hes happier and less stressed now and I do believe it's down to not sitting and learning.

Christ, no.

There's so much more to life than work.

The whole point of getting children to stay on to 18 ,is to improve their future prospects.My DM and DF left school at 14 or 15! Straight into work! Poor old DM missed her School and friends .Most jobs today need a good skill set .unless you are happy for your children to be working in a Factory or shop . At 18 you are more prepared for life .

cupsofcoffee Agree 100 per cent!

I left school at 16. Got a job at 18 and bought my first home at 22. It really depends on the person doesn't it. I have children now and I would really like them.fo stay In education as long as possible! Unfortunately I'm not academic, more practical hence getting a job earlier on.

The whole point of getting children to stay on to 18 ,is to improve their future prospects

It truly wasn't, mainly about reducing unemployment stats

@DameAlyson

Would you hire a 16 year old (my son's friends are lovely, but I wouldn't want them to work for me!).

When did 16 year olds become unemployable? It's not so long ago that most people left school at 15-16, or even 14, and managed to hold down jobs.

And I think OP has a point - a young person who has been working and saving since 16 is by their mid 20s in a much better position than someone who only began to work full time at 21/22.

It's probably longer than you think and given the ridiculous growth in living costs and house prices vs wages in that period leaving school at 16 isn't going to pull in a wage to count against the current high costs. Learning trades is obviously a great option but that's still education. Maybe we do need more vocational education to kick in at 16 for people who see themselves going down that path.

Also a person working from 16 won't be saving much and whether they're in a better position by their mid-20's than a person who only started working at 21/22 is irrelevant as someone starting working at that age could be on a completely different career path.

I had a saturday job at 14 or 15 and was working full time at 16. Wasn't that long ago either. You don't have to do A Levels

You know it doesn't have to be one or the other? I've been working since I was fifteen, still did A levels, and a degree the traditional way (and subsequently a second degree, masters and professional qualifications while working full time, the latter with a young child)

No.

Minimum Retirement Age is now 67.. and rising.

That's a long time coming.

It's probably longer than you think

No, it isn't 'longer than I think'. The school leaving age was fifteen when I was at secondary school.

YANBU. There are plenty of teens who really don't want to carry on with academic learning and would be much less bored and happier learning a practical trade as part of an apprenticeship.

The option of three years sponsored learning that can be used for university at 18 or at any other point in life, would give much more flexibility.

@shinynewapple21

My DS did an Apprenticeship age 17. He had started doing A levels at 6th form college but felt it wasn't really for him, and wouldn't be going on to Uni.

I think it was one of the best things he's done, he gained in confidence so much, he seemed so much more adult than his friendship group who had continued at school / college. An apprenticeship also means that the YP will get a qualification at the end, as well as earning while they are doing it.

It will be interesting to see as they get older what the long term impact financially is on those who studied to degree, they ought to get a better job, but some don't, and they have all the student loan debt.

I am probably biased because of how well it worked for DS (who is now 20 and still working where he did his apprenticeship) but I do think that non-academic outcomes should be encouraged more at 16 as the path of A levels / uni isn't for everyone .

I agree my DS is a plumber, now in his early 30s he owns 2 plumbing businesses and employs 20 people, he is doing very well and I am very proud of him, in fact no-one in my family ever went to uni, including myself I left school at 15, I am now Operations Director for a global organisation

I left school at 15 in 1980. A week later I was working a 40 hour week for £26 a week. By 18 I had my own car and at 22 had a mortgage.
Not every 15/16 year old should be in higher education and most certainly not every 18 year old should be off to Uni (as seems the norm these days).

When did 16 year olds become unemployable?
When the government brought in a load of safeguarding rules that basically made everyone under 18 unemployable. It’s too much hassle to have anyone in that age group working for you. The other effect of increasing the school leaving age has been to decimate FE colleges which now have no students because so many just stay at school.

Would you hire a 16 year old (my son's friends are lovely, but I wouldn't want them to work for me!).

I left school three weeks after my 16th birthday and started full-time work, and the leaving age then was 15. It was pretty common to leave unless you were going to uni, which fewer did in those days.

You have to recognise the world of work has changed a lot, even since I left school in the 1990s. I agree this was a result of various policies brought in to reduce unemployment figures (and make it a lot harder to survive on benefits) but that just shows you how competitive the job market has become and the pandemic will only add to that. I think these days the importance of a paper qualification is so much higher in the practical jobs a non-academic child might choose. There are way less completely unskilled jobs, like factory work available and these tend to have low wages and little chance of progression. For something that could be considered a trade like plumbing or hairdressing you will be at such an advantage with some qualifications and some years of experience, so an apprenticeship or college course with work experience is nearly always needed to get into this sort of job. If I had a non academic 16 year old I would really push them to do either an apprenticeship or college course and live at home so they can save up for a deposit on a house or at least get some savings behind them.

Nobody is only capable of low skilled jobs. But leaving education at 16 would make it very difficult to get any other type of work.
Apprenticeships, trade qualifications count as education, it's not just A levels and degrees.

MILs generation went straight out to work, but she worked in factories on shit pay, in unhealthy conditions and her lack of education shows in her everyday life. Who wants that for their kids?