I did a couple of BBC interviews today (6:30 pm News and the Seven) about the latest Scottish Government data on young people Not in Education, Employment, or Training (NEET). I explained our research on this issue and related workplace health issues in Scotland. Tackling this issue is crucial for both young people and the economy, as we are far behind other countries.
Comparisons between Scotland and the UK are challenging because the Scottish Government focuses only on 16-19-year-olds, whereas the UK uses a wider measure up to 24-year-olds. The wider age range matters because the younger range will always have a higher participation rate. While we don’t have strong data on 16-24-year-olds in Scotland, the numbers are unlikely to differ significantly. Scotland has some measures that are better than the UK approach, such as higher apprenticeship take-up and the useful ‘No one left behind’ scheme; the UK approach, including Work Well and other measures, has significantly reduced NEET rates. From a record 16% when the interim Milburn review was published, down to 13% in the latest UK figures. The more limited Scottish figures today also show a small fall. This shows that active measures work, but we need to do much more to bring the numbers closer to European best practice.
No single reason explains such high NEET levels. Health is an issue, with 70% not in work for health reasons, and 30% of those have been prescribed anti-anxiety drugs. As the Reid Foundation report on workplace health notes, part of the problem is low workplace health engagement in the UK. The recent Mayfield Review is unlikely to help much, given its focus on already failing private-sector workplace health.
Education also matters because we have a poor transition for children with special needs into secondary schools, weak vocational elements in schools, and cuts to college budgets. While apprenticeships are higher, many of these are poor quality. That ties into work, where AI appears to be affecting some entry-level jobs, although it remains to be seen whether this will continue, based on past technology impacts.
What isn’t an impact is higher-level National Insurance or the increase in the Minimum Wage for younger workers. Both came after this issue, and NI isn’t even paid for many young workers. Benefits are not the issue many claim either. Social Security payments are low in the UK, and four out of ten NEETs don’t even claim it. Overall, claimant rates are stable. As is often the case, the problem is much greater in low-income areas, where 22% of young people fall into the NEET category compared with 9% in more affluent areas.
I argued that we should look at European examples, particularly the Netherlands. Their NEET rate is almost one-third of ours. They have a much higher vocational element in schools, with 70% taking part compared to 22% in the UK, and more students stay in education, twice the UK level. Their benefits system focuses on bringing young people into work, including health rehabilitation. They also devolve powers down to councils to address this. Their councils (342 of them) are much more local than our centralised structure. They create incentives (£3,000) to support employment, rather than slash wages, as some UK employers want to do. The focus is on the personal and the local. They also spend nearly five times as much as we do on employment support.
So, what should we do?
We need to put much more focus on health rehabilitation for young people. That includes more work with employers with abysmal health records and supporting young people with health issues to get into work. The benefits system is being better focused to help workers get into employment. In schools, we need a much larger vocational element to bridge the gap between education and work, as well as fair funding for colleges. Finally, we need to look at how employment support is delivered. This ties in with the discussion around local government and health reform. These services need to be delivered in real communities, not by the abstract councils we have now.
Better health support, more focus on vocational education, improved workplace health and services delivered to young people that are local and personal to them.
