Q+A with Alan Milburn on his 'Young People and Work' report

[RhiannonEMumsnet]

Hi there,

As you may have seen in the news this morning, Alan Milburn has today published his Young People and Work interim report. He warns that Britain is “at risk of a lost generation” unless urgent action is taken to tackle the growing number of young people not in education, employment or training. The review looks at everything from the reduction in entry-level jobs and apprenticeships to barriers within welfare, education and mental health support — and argues that the current system is failing to help young people build stable adult lives.

We know this is a subject of huge concern to lots of Mumsnetters, and we’re pleased to announce that next week Alan will be sitting down with Justine to answer your questions.

If there’s something you’d like to ask him, then please do post it below. As ever, one question per user please, and keep it civil. We’ll be tight on time, so short, focused questions will help us get through as many as possible. And watch this space to hear the answers!

Thanks,
MNHQ

Thanks.

'while previous reviews have tended to see the NEET issue mainly through a supply-side lens, this chapter argues that the demand side now matters at least as much: how the labour market is structured, how employers recruit, and how easy or difficult it has become for young people to get a foothold. '

So let's look at the labour market they’re trying to enter.

Small/medium-sized businesses employ around 16.9 million people in the UK, about 60% of the private sector workforce. Small businesses alone account for around 13 million jobs. Tax, NI, and legal compliance are getting absurdly difficult and complex, as well as expensive. The UK is getting more litigous and ever based on rules and legalities.

Large corps absorb HR, legal and compliance costs far more easily than a café, shop, contractor or local firm with a handful of staff.

So, employers have to rely more on temporary contracts and agencies. They automate where they can and avoid taking chances on people who need training.

Business groups have already warned MPs that rising employment costs are making firms less willing to hire younger or less experienced workers. The Federation of Small Businesses say more than a quarter of firms have reduced staff numbers.

We can’t solve this just by blaming young people. If most jobs come from small businesses, and small businesses increasingly feel they cannot afford the risk of hiring, then more young people are inevitably going to end up shut out of work.

What concrete steps can you take to encourage and support SMEs? This requires large step measures. When will government listen to the FSB and small businesses?

The cost, stress, and complexity of compliance are absurd and have become increasingly difficult in the past few years. We need clear routes and structures specifically for small/micro businesses that consider how they are genuinely different from large corps and the public sector, and ensure the system serves them.

Please listen to, and consider, the SME sector!

I often see a pattern of young people starting benefits early and this having the effect of decreasing motivation, dismantling their routine of being up early in the morning, and frankly enabling addiction to alcohol and weed. After a few years of this they’re unemployable and often with MH issues. Is this pattern something you observed in your study and would removing benefits for the under 25s have a painful but necessary role in stopping this?

Too many of our children are leaving school without experience, direction, meaning or motivation.

What practical steps would you support for 16–19 year olds (and ideally starting before they get to this age) who are not suited to university or interested in traditional trades, particularly around creating a clear national pathway into work experience, internships and apprenticeships — including a single UCAS-style system for finding and applying for opportunities before young people become disconnected altogether?

What opportunities can you create for young people like my son (autism/ADD/learning disabled) who want to work but might only be capable of narrow tasks.

As an example he could push trolleys in a supermarket but I am told that supermarkets don’t want this, they want young people able to do ever. That was advice from a specialist employment advisor used to placing young adults like my son into jobs with support,

it’s so frustrating as he’s left to flounder. Education isn’t for him although we continue to try abd push this. At 23 it’s easy to see he’s being left behind and nobody cares.

I haven't read the full report but I've seen the coverage today and I think it's pretty terrifying - but good that this is being highlighted. But my question to Alan is do you think there is actually the political will to respond to this crisis? We know there's a problem, but what are the government going to do about it?

Many school leavers and graduates are finding that entry-level jobs are not there for them. There are also not enough apprenticeships to go round. Even those with medical degrees are finding it difficult to get training contracts in the UK.
How will you incentivise companies to take on young people with no experience?

Will young people with disabilities who are unable to work due to them (currently LCWRA group) have benefits removed if they are unable to do Youth Guarantee? Also what employers are going to want to employ young adults who cannot speak or write and can become unable to move at times needing hospitalisation? Its terrifying as a parent.

There was a higher rate of NEETS in my day in the 1990s than now and the answer to that was deemed the mass expansion of higher education funded heavily by the taxpayer. Is anything planned to reform this which has also led combined with the very high minimum wage to a loss of jobs for those without degrees?

I saw a Dutch politician talking about NEETS and she noted how much better they are handled in Holland.

One aspect of the Dutch system is that children can stay back a year if needed and move between different types of education (more/less academic) more easily. A family friend who lives there was able to become a dr despite childhood struggles with academic work caused by both ADHD and mental health. They were able to do that because they could take longer to complete secondary, going back a year and retaking it. it would be very difficult to do this in the UK.

It would be good in my view to see the UK making the curriculum less exclusionary, making it easier to repeat and retake. I would be very interested in your thoughts on this.

Another more personal comment if I may. I have a teen ds with ASD who is desperate to find a job as an adult and talks about that a lot but also requires a lot of support day to day in school just to stay in the classroom. When he can’t cope he melts down.

He is longing for a job when he finishes school and he will hopefully have qualifications as he is reasonably able. Based on employment figures for young people with ASD nationally which are pretty dire, I think it will be hard for him to secure employment and if he gets a job they will likely not pass his probation after he melts down.

It does worry me awfully, literally keeping me awake at night, that there would be no support into employment for him and no safety net of financial support for him if he can’t secure or retain a job.

What recommendations do you have for us as a family to help my ds secure work and avoid becoming a NEET? How can employers be incentivised to recruit and retain young people like my ds? Does making sure the SEND support is there in school for dc like my ds not play an important part in resolving the NEET issue, as surely it will reduce NEETS if we make sure young people make maximum progress at school not only academically but also with their mental wellbeing, independence and broader skills, which requires the right SEND support in place?

Considering the broken, reactionary mental services that children and young adults are left to battle, the dire transition between both, the lack of treatment for treatable conditions that are left to become serious conditions all of which won’t be helping NEET figures what do you think should happen as regards mental health services.

Many children in this category I would guess are autistic and get through primary school fine in caring community schools but then fall apart at secondary which are now run like businesses. EHCPs take far too long to get anything suitable with parents in our area needing to go to Tribunals so taking 2 years and the LA do not answer the phone or e-mails and by which time the child is in crisis. The system also massively favours those with funds to pay a lawyer or who are legally trained who get £70k placements per child sometimes for multiple children leaving no money for those who don't. By this time the child is in crisis but camhs don't help until after suicide attempts and often refuse totally if child is autistic. What is being done?

Why does he keep conflating pip with work? Pip is not an out of work benefit.

Is this really just cover for the govt getting the pip cuts they wanted last summer (4 point rule), manufacturing consent through the youth employment crisis?

Cos it sure looks like it to me.

I’m a huge fan of apprenticeships. But there simply aren’t enough to satisfy the need of the number of young people seeking a start to their career. And there needs to be a diversification of the sectors offering apprenticeships. Most seem to be practical careers, rather than academic (with the exception of accountancy or law).

why aren’t government and local government investing heavily in apprenticeships? Why aren’t more sectors getting onboard? Does there need to be more incentive for sectors to engage with apprenticeships? Particularly the degree level apprenticeships.

Half of NEETS aren’t on benefits, for those that need them, what do you expect them to live on? Fresh air? Not everybody has parents that can or will financially support them.

I read the report with interest. It seems to gloss over the different opportunities available to young people in different parts of the country - to quote the report -

“There are nearly 57,000 16–17-year-olds in England who are NEET. But the proportion who are either NEET or “not known” in England ranges from 1% in Barnet to 21.5% in Dudley. That variation is not explained by local labour market conditions alone and reflects differences in how young people are tracked and supported.”

Do you really believe that the difference in proportion of NEETs between London and (say) the North East is mainly because local authorities track young people more or less? It sounds more likely that young people in London have more opportunities to access education and work. I am surprised the report does not focus on the structural issues facing young people in the North vs the South, as well as rural areas. It seems obvious that there must be bigger challenges in some areas than others?

I'm really worried about the impact of social media on young people's wellbeing and mental health and I've heard you talk about how it's contributing to the employment crisis. Do you think we should ban it for u16s?

Your report warns that AI and automation are likely to put further pressure on the entry-level jobs that have traditionally given young people a start in employment. As someone who served under Tony Blair, do you agree with the very pro-AI approach set out in his recent essay, or do you think it risks prioritising the interests of big tech companies over young people? And what do you think about the current debate in the Labour Party generally? Is Blair's criticism right? Is it time for a new leader?

Do you think the government’s employment law changes have made employers a bit more wary of hiring young people? I’m not saying people shouldn’t have decent rights at work, obviously they should. But I do wonder if some firms are now thinking twice before taking a punt on someone young or inexperienced.
Say someone who needs a lot of training or hasn’t worked before.

I heard an interview with Gareth Southgate on the radio this morning where he was talking about young men in particular and the NEETS crisis and how we need to treat/teach boys and girls differently to get the best out of them. Is that borne out in what you've seen so far in your report?

Fewer young people would be NEET if LAs didn’t act unlawfully as often as they do around post 16 and especially post 18/19 provision via EHCPs. Do you think serious repercussions for LAs when they act unlawfully would go some way to curb unlawful LA behaviour around EHCPs, thus reducing the number of YP who are NEET?

Unlike the pp, I recognise the ‘sharp-elbowed’ parents ‘demanding’ ‘gold-plated’ is incorrect rhetoric aimed to divert attention and blame. Some DC not getting the support they need isn’t the fault of those children and parents who advocate for their DC and enforce the law. DC not getting the support they need isn’t because other CYP receive the SEP and placements they require. You can be successful without being a legal professional or paying for representation, too. Most don’t have that, yet the vast majority of appeals are still upheld.

They don’t have the money to fulfil their obligations which were originally designed for far far fewer children

And yet they have large sums of money to waste on defending indefensible cases they know they are going to lose against unrepresented parents.

Not meeting needs in the short term can increase costs longer term. It is shortsighted to only look at immediate costs.

The problems go well beyond issues with funding.

The money wasted and kicking the can down the road is sadly cheaper than actually enforcing the education immediately

It isn’t in the longer term.