The problem of expanding the age range for NEETs from 16-18 to 16-25 is that the wider age grouping also includes graduates. In principle, I have nothing wrong with this widening of the age grouping for NEETs, but it might create some interesting issues for the government.
Take teaching: If an unemployed graduate who has trained to be a teacher is to be offered a job, will it be in the same area as their teaching course, regardless of whether it was an undergraduate degree or a postgraduate training course?
The Prime Minister has also talked about the importance of place, so will any job be where a graduate is currently living, often the location of their university or where they grew up?
Suppose there are teaching posts available elsewhere in the country to where the graduate either is currently living or grew up, will graduates be required to move to the job or be allowed to stay put and reject the teaching post?
With training provision patchy in certain parts of England, offering a job to an unemployed newly qualified teacher, even if it requires them to relocate, seems like a sensible move.
Even more interesting is whether the job is in this country. My previous post on this blog highlighted the large number of vacancies for teachers of music across some other parts of the world. If any vacancy is being offered by a school that is part of a UK group, regardless of where the school the teacher would be employed is located, would such a vacancy qualify for the government scheme? An interesting question.
What of teaching jobs abroad offered through recruitment agencies, will the government disqualify such vacancies?
Sometime ago, (actually in 2020), I wrote a blog post suggesting that every newly qualified teacher without a teaching job, and still looking for one by the end of August, be offered a term as a supernumerary teacher in a local school Supernumerary teachers? | John Howson
On the wider front, the government will have to consider, not only for teaching, but for other vocational degrees and even ‘T’ levels and other vocational courses between 16 and 18, whether the Milburn Scheme will ignore the qualifications acquired, and just require a NEET to take a job regardless of what the job was?
Substituting the cost of mentoring with a reduction in the the Employers National Insurance or some other similar cashback for an employer taking on a trained graduate that is a NEET, and making use of their learning, would seem like a sensible approach, and more cost effective than making these graduate endure hours of coaching while their current skills are ignored.
Will unemployed NEETs also be offered the chance to become an entrepreneur, or is the government’s view that a ‘job’ means working for someone else? Lots of questions, and it will be interesting to read those parts of the final report not announced in advance, and how far the thinking around how the schemes will actually work?
