IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsoctx/v12y2022i2p38-d761862.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Integrating Young People into the Workforce: England’s Twenty-First Century Solutions

Author

Listed:
  • Ken Roberts

    (Department of Sociology, University of Liverpool, Liverpool L69 7ZA, UK)

Abstract

This paper uses the transition regime concept in a case study of how the regime in England has been reconstructed since the 1980s. It explains how the former transition regime evolved gradually up to the 1970s. Thereafter the regime proved unable to cope with an acceleration of de-industrialisation and the government’s switch to neo-liberal social and economic policies. These changes destroyed many working-class routes into employment. The resultant push onto academic routes, which had the attraction of continuing to lead to jobs, meant that the enlarged numbers exiting the routes could no longer rely on employment that offered secure middle-class futures. The paper explains how the next 30 years became a period of radical regime reconstruction. Government education, training and welfare policies and changes in the economy and occupational structure, were the context in which schools, colleges and higher education institutions, employers and other training providers, together with young people, ‘negotiated’ new routes from points to entry to exits into different classes of employment. At the beginning of the 2020s, the reconstructed regime was delivering the fastest education-to-work transitions in Europe, with lower than average rates of youth unemployment and NEET. Then came the challenges of COVID-19, lockdowns and Brexit.

Suggested Citation

  • Ken Roberts, 2022. "Integrating Young People into the Workforce: England’s Twenty-First Century Solutions," Societies, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-15, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsoctx:v:12:y:2022:i:2:p:38-:d:761862
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4698/12/2/38/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4698/12/2/38/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Schoon, Ingrid & Lyons-Amos, Mark, 2016. "Diverse pathways in becoming an adult: The role of structure, agency and context," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 46, pages 11-20.
    2. Maarten Goos & Alan Manning, 2007. "Lousy and Lovely Jobs: The Rising Polarization of Work in Britain," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 89(1), pages 118-133, February.
    3. Geoff Payne, 1987. "Mobility and Social Class," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Employment and Opportunity, chapter 8, pages 189-192, Palgrave Macmillan.
    4. Holford, Angus J., 2017. "Access to and Returns from Unpaid Graduate Internships," IZA Discussion Papers 10845, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Judith Jacovkis & Alejandro Montes & Xavier Rambla, 2022. "When Arriving Is Not Enough—Constraints in Access to Education and Employment Opportunities for Migrant Youth," Societies, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-15, June.
    2. Siyka Kovacheva & Xavier Rambla, 2023. "The Dual Nature of Opportunity Structures Amid the Global Pandemic," Societies, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-9, January.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Matthias Haslberger, 2021. "Routine-Biased Technological Change Does Not Always Lead to Polarisation: Evidence from 10 OECD Countries, 1995-2013," LIS Working papers 814, LIS Cross-National Data Center in Luxembourg.
    2. Baird, Matthew D. & Engberg, John & Gutierrez, Italo A., 2022. "RCT evidence on differential impact of US job training programmes by pre-training employment status," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    3. Loebbing, Jonas, 2018. "An Elementary Theory of Endogenous Technical Change and Wage Inequality," VfS Annual Conference 2018 (Freiburg, Breisgau): Digital Economy 181603, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    4. Keller, Wolfgang & Utar, Hale, 2023. "International trade and job polarization: Evidence at the worker level," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    5. Rabensteiner, Thomas & Guschanski, Alexander, 2022. "Autonomy and wage divergence: evidence from European survey data," Greenwich Papers in Political Economy 37925, University of Greenwich, Greenwich Political Economy Research Centre.
    6. Iftekhairul Islam & Fahad Shaon, 2020. "If the Prospect of Some Occupations Are Stagnating With Technological Advancement? A Task Attribute Approach to Detect Employment Vulnerability," Papers 2001.02783, arXiv.org.
    7. Bhorat, Haroon & Goga, Sumayya & Stanwix, Benjamin, 2014. "Skills-biased labour demand and the pursuit of inclusive growth in South Africa," WIDER Working Paper Series 130, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    8. Franzini, Maurizio & Raitano, Michele, 2019. "Earnings inequality and workers’ skills in Italy," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 215-224.
    9. David Hémous & Morten Olsen, 2022. "The Rise of the Machines: Automation, Horizontal Innovation, and Income Inequality," American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 14(1), pages 179-223, January.
    10. Battisti, Michele & Gatto, Massimo Del & Parmeter, Christopher F., 2022. "Skill-biased technical change and labor market inefficiency," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    11. Nathalie Greenan & Ekaterina Kalugina & Emmanuelle Walkowiak, 2014. "Has the quality of working life improved in the EU-15 between 1995 and 2005?," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 23(2), pages 399-428.
    12. Holmes, Craig & Mayhew, Ken, 2015. "Have UK Earnings Distributions Polarised?," INET Oxford Working Papers 2015-02, Institute for New Economic Thinking at the Oxford Martin School, University of Oxford.
    13. Carlos Medina & Christian Posso, 2010. "Technical Change and Polarization of the Labor Market: Evidence for Brazil, Colombia and Mexico," Borradores de Economia 614, Banco de la Republica de Colombia.
    14. Leone Leonida & Marianna Marra & Sergio Scicchitano & Antonio Giangreco & Marco Biagetti, 2020. "Estimating the Wage Premium to Supervision for Middle Managers in Different Contexts: Evidence from Germany and the UK," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 34(6), pages 1004-1026, December.
    15. Tschopp, Jeanne, 2015. "The Wage Response to Shocks: The Role of Inter-Occupational Labour Adjustment," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 28-37.
    16. Guido Matias Cortes & Giovanni Gallipoli, 2018. "The Costs of Occupational Mobility: An Aggregate Analysis," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 16(2), pages 275-315.
    17. Dennis J. Snower & Alessio J. G. Brown & Christian Merkl, 2009. "Globalization and the Welfare State: A Review of Hans-Werner Sinn's Can Germany Be Saved?," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(1), pages 136-158, March.
    18. Ronald Bachmann & Peggy Bechara & Sandra Schaffner, 2016. "Wage Inequality and Wage Mobility in Europe," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 62(1), pages 181-197, March.
    19. James Spletzer & Elizabeth Weber Handwerker, 2015. "The Role of Establishments and the Concentration of Occupations in Wage Inequality," Working Papers id:7427, eSocialSciences.
    20. Daniele Angelini, 2023. "Aging Population and Technology Adoption," Working Paper Series of the Department of Economics, University of Konstanz 2023-01, Department of Economics, University of Konstanz.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsoctx:v:12:y:2022:i:2:p:38-:d:761862. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.