YET YOUTH JOBLESSNESS REMAINS ABOVE ONE IN FIVE – WHAT’S WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE?
The latest unemployment figures show that the number of over 65s in work has risen by 52,000 to reach 929,000, the highest number since records began in 1992. Yet in the same period, youth unemployment has fallen by just 10,000. (It is now 21.9%, meaning over 1 in 5 under 24s is jobless.) In response to the news, commentators have warned of “ageing workplaces” if the government fails to act on the growing inter-generational imbalance in the labour market.
The figures concern Graduate Fog because the numbers show that the young are continuing to be hit the hardest by the economic climate – and are struggling to find a place for themselves in the world of work. They are already in tens of thousands of pounds of debt after studying for a degree they were told would guarantee them a well-paid graduate job (but which probably hasn’t materialised). For many of today’s young people, the dream of owning their own home or having a family is distant, or even impossible.
Meanwhile, those of retirement age appear to be clinging to their place in the workforce – or re-entering it when they discover their pension is not sufficient to fund their twilight years. But if older workers refuse to retire, shouldn’t younger people be concerned that – directly or indirectly – there will be less work available for them?
Graduate Fog has written before about what appears to be a growing generational conflict in the fight for paid work – and some of our readers feel it is unfair. But something about all this feels very wrong to us. While the young struggle to find work paying more than the minimum wage, the old – sitting on much of the country’s wealth in homes they bought for pennies but are now worth hundreds of thousands (if not millions) – are still refusing to bow out of the job market and make do with what they’ve got.
And we are seeing further signs that the so called “inter-generational contract” – where each generation looks out for the one that follows – is breaking down. How many middle-aged managers are well aware that their interns are working for free – yet they do nothing about it? How many refuse to give their junior staff the miniscule pay rises they ask for, while they keep cashing their fat (and growing) pay cheques at the end of every month?
The subject is starting to be discussed openly – but it remains fairly taboo. Shiv Malik and Ed Howker’s book Jilted Generation: How Britain has Bankrupted its Youth – warning of these issues back in 2000 – was ahead of its time. Malik – also co-founder of the Intergenerational Foundation – told Graduate Fog today:
“Clearly in many ways when entry to the jobs market is restricted older people have a lot of advantages. Not just previous experience but many over-65s have lower housing costs and savings and state benefits to pull on including bus passes and pensions. On top of this over-65s don’t opay National Insurance meaning they are cheaper for employers too. The government has to step in at some point and correct this stituation especially as young people bring much needed vitality and skills to ageing workplaces.”
Other commentators are also picking up on this issue. Just last week, the Evening Standard’s brilliant Rosamund Urwin wrote a comment piece entitled Generation Jammy doesn’t need freebies. In it, highlighted the injustice of the fact that the baby boomers (of all social classes) still enjoy free travel in London, free TV licenses and winter fuel allowances despite the fact that many of them enjoy far more wealth than the younger generation will ever have. Yet challenging them makes you very unpopular:
“If you ever dare to brand the baby-boomers “Generation Jammy”, the letters and emails flood in. “We worked hard for our lot,” the pre-pensioners and pensioners proclaim, before accusing you of playing a game of ‘Bash Granny’.”
Graduate Fog has a good relationship with its parents (both of whom we are proud to say are suffering from baby boomer guilt). We also have huge respect for older citizens. Their wisdom and experience is a great asset to our society. We are also not asking for olds to live in poverty. Clearly the most vulnerable must be looked after. But many over 65s are not vulnerable – they are just looking out for themselves. And this is something we need to talk about. After all, if they continue to hog the goodies, what does that leave for their kids?
*SHOULD OLDER WORKERS MAKE WAY FOR YOUNGER ONES?
Do you worry that seniors are job-hogging? Do you see youth unemployment as part of a wider generational conflict – or is Graduate Fog just granny-bashing?
There’s no doubt that inter-generational fairness is a really important issue, and it would be good to see more debate on this.
However, I do find it frustrating that when Graduate Fog raises this, it tends to do so in terms of older people “clinging to their place in the workforce”. The truth is that the vast majority of those who work significantly past 65 – into their 70s and sometimes into their 80s – are doing so to make ends meet, not out of a desperate desire to keep working for working’s sake.
The factors that result in old people being compelled to work for longer than they would wish, and that see young people with limited opportunities as a result, are structural and complex. It will need solidarity between the generations to reach effective solutions. You rightly point out in the article that this inter-generational contract seems to be breaking down. I agree with many of the points you make about older managers denying younger workers appropriate terms & conditions.
But I don’t think framing the debate in a way that seems to criticise those who have no choice but to keep working when they would like to be putting their feet up helps to foster that solidarity either.
@ACareersAdviser
Point taken – I’m sure most of these over 65s would rather be putting their feet up! But I do take issue with this idea that they ‘need’ to keep working or they will be living in a cardboard box in a few years time. Many of them have been earning very decent salaries for many years, and have amassed great wealth through the rise in house prices (which again, our generation are paying for, while they benefit). I’m not an expert in this subject and you’re right that it’s complex. But from where I’m standing, it’s the baby-boomers’ children who are in real long-term trouble, not their parents… Should we be prioritising helping them get their lives started?
Help for the younger generations is definitely needed – as it stands their looking at having far less wealth throughout their working lives, and working into their 70s!
As for whether the old have enough wealth, well the answer is it depends. I’m thinking of the woman in her 80s who serves me in Tesco and the guy in his late 70s who helps me find what I need at B&Q. From chatting to them, I doubt their going back to big mansions at the end of every shift. No doubt you have different examples of people you’ve met in mind when you write on this topic.
Chances are we’re both drawing on anecdotal evidence when what we need is some proper data on the motivations of older workers. Anyone know of any good studies on this area?
I agree we probably need some better evidence! Shiv and Ed’s book Jilted Generation is absolute gold, if you haven’t already read it? And their conclusion (after lots of number crunching, not anecdotal evidence) comes through loud-and-clear that however cash-strapped the baby-boomers might claim to be, they are nowhere near as screwed as their children’s generation is. It’s basically the combination of housing, tuition fees and jobs (including wages, which somehow never seem to rise for the young) that has proved so corrosive for anybody under 30 today…
No doubt that collectively today’s under 30s have a far rougher deal than the baby boomers, or even the generation/s in between. I’ll look up that book for sure, sounds like a good read.
I sympathise with the somewhat naive and ill-informed belief that older workers may be “clinging to their place in the workforce for the reasons highlighted above.
I’ll third that. There is a complex dynamic at play here, many of those approaching retirement are seeing the value of their pensions and savings drop. Many of them are ‘making provision’ for going into a home in later years, they aren’t responsible for the fact that they are living longer.
However there is also a reluctance to acknowledge that it was those very generations that were in control/positions of power/government/management generating their personal wealth in the ’70’s/80’s and 90’s. The same luxury is not afforded the working (and non-working) generation of the naughties. It is also those generations that may have instilled the entitlement culture that we now hear frequently attached to other groupings.
My solution would be that we train and employ more youngsters in the care of the elderly. Thus forging intergeneration links and creating more jobs.
Focusing too much on generational conflict seems to me to ignore class as a factor here. There are older people who have to work because their pensions aren’t covering what they need, and their savings are not great. Just like there are young people who earn good salaries and are happy to employ interns for nothing.
I’m not sure about the relevance of the generational contract either. For people who can afford to fund their children through lengthy unpaid internships, offerring such work may be seen as a way to give back to the younger generation. The desire to help younger generations is always going to be made difficult if you don’t fully understand their needs.
Thanks for giving the information.i am also done my graduation in writing skill and now i am search a writing job can you give me some suggestion?