Unemployment - Coursework Example

? UNEMPLOYMENT The difference in ILO Count Measure and Claimant Count Measure concerning the number of unemployed persons can be explained by the fact that in Claimant count system; the measure uses administrative registers of the total number of persons claiming benefits (or rather jobseeker’s allowance) (Turner 2012) and (Dustmann, Glitz & Vogel 2006). On the other hand, the ILO measure calculates the total number of persons who are jobless bur keenly seeking employment. Claimant Count depends on records that may be incorrect and altered as well (Turner 2012). This can be explained by the datum that sometimes policies, which govern the benefit entitlements, can be altered or erroneous (Dustmann, Glitz & Vogel 2006). This denotes that comparisons may end up misleading and giving inaccurate count, as well as a count that does not mirror the actual count (Office for National Statistics 2013) and (Dustmann, Glitz & Vogel 2006). This misrepresentation of data could be the reason why the Claimant count emerged with a 1 million count of unemployed persons less than what the ILO Count got (Turner 2012) and (Dustmann, Glitz & Vogel 2006). The reason why the ILO Count was more than that of the Claimant count is because the ILO count measure takes into account all persons with no jobs unlike the Claimant count measure, which does not take into account persons who are unqualified for benefits (Turner 2012), (Department for Children, Schools and Families 2008) and (Dustmann, Glitz & Vogel 2006). In other words, the Claimant Count measure does not include in their measures persons who have a significant other being paid beyond the benefits level for the family, students employed for part-time jobs, persons under the age of eighteen and reluctant to go in for a youth-training centre as well as persons who have departed their profession voluntarily (Office for National Statistics 2013) and (Dustmann, Glitz & Vogel 2006). The ILO count measure obtains the real actual count of unemployed persons because it collects the actual facts of unemployed persons (Dustmann, Glitz & Vogel 2006). It gives the actual number of all unemployed persons who wish to get jobs but are not qualified for benefits unlike the Claimant count measure (Turner 2012) and (Office for National Statistics 2013). Additionally, ILO count measure collects data that is current unlike Claimant count measure that depends on administrative records that may be out of date, incorrect and misrepresented (Office for National Statistics 2013) and (Dustmann, Glitz & Vogel 2006) as well as (Department for Children, Schools and Families 2008). However, the ILO count may not be able to cover all the necessary facts in its surveys during data collection because people may not provide accurate facts. For the two measures, namely; ILO count measure and Claimant count measure, ILO count measure is likely to be inaccurate because it relies on people to answer queries accurately and truthfully, which may not be the case (Turner 2012) and (Dustmann, Glitz & Vogel 2006). People do not always tell the truth especially when it comes to personal information such as their employment status (Turner 2012) and (Department for Children, Schools and Families 2008). Likewise, the Claimant count measure is likely to be inaccurate as well because it depends on administrative records to calculate its count for unemployed persons (Turner 2012) and (Office for National Statistics 2013). The reason why this may result in inaccurate number of unemployed persons is because most of these administrative records could be misrepresented, incorrect, falsified or altered over time, thereby giving inaccurate information at the of the day (Office for National Statistics 2013) and (Dustmann, Glitz & Vogel 2006). The fact that there are numerous vacancies, yet the rate of unemployment is still high in UK, can be explored with respect to available human skills, lack of knowhow, lack of fresh recruits to replace the retired ones as well as the forcing of young persons by their parents to study courses that do not interest them. In looking into available human skills, most countries lack the needed skills to get some jobs done. For instance, in Italy, the fashion industry is on the verge of extinction simply because the human skills required choosing hides, cutting and preparing them, and assembling and stitching the parts, which make-up bags are unavailable. Most skilled workers had to learn from an early age, something that does not happen nowadays (Office for National Statistics 2013). The lack of know-how is also a problem since, for instance, in the fashion industry; much experience is needed to produce the best products, which is lacking as well. The lack of fresh talents to replace the retiring workers has also been a problem in UK. For instance, the Italian fashion industry lacks young talents that will replace the retiring workers. This might be one of the major causes for the extinction of the Italian fashion industry. This lack of young talents is contributed by the fact most young persons are studying courses that they have no interest in. Once they finish these courses they end up working in the fields that they never trained for, or worse end up jobless (Jackman 1998). This in return continues to increase the rate of unemployment, whilst at the same time creating vacancies. The disregard for manual work is the overall major cause for unemployment. Parents tend to have their kids get engaged in the careers within professions as well as public sector. Additionally, the education systems are poor in affording good preparation for working-life (Office for National Statistics 2013). To solve some of the above problems, a number of policies can be employed that can act as interventions. This includes information provision and advice giving to persons via employment exchanges, government training projects as well as different kinds of public-employment. The information provision as well as advice to the unemployed persons can be very effective in imparting the appropriate knowledge to people (Jackman 1998). For instance, parents need to know that asking their children to study for the courses that they feel are suitable to their children, may set their children out for failure. People need to be equipped with the appropriate information concerning career choice; appropriate skills for various jobs as well as how to create jobs for themselves rather than depending on employers to offer jobs, that is; how to be entrepreneurs. The government training schemes can be appropriate in imparting appropriate knowledge as well as hands on training. One major cause of unemployment is the lack of manual skills or low skills. Governmental training schemes can be instrumental in bridging the gap between the skilled and the unskilled or new unskilled recruits and the retiring skilled workers. The government training schemes will be in a good position to impart the right skills as necessitated by the labour market (Jackman 1998). Training schemes can be very efficacious in solving the problem of lack of know-how in different fields. The schemes can be used more efficiently to offer the appropriate preparation for working life than the educational systems, which provide knowledge without much practical skills. This can be very beneficial to many young people who have knowledge of things but do not know how to apply it (Office for National Statistics 2013) and (Department for Children, Schools and Families 2008). All the above strategies are the major weapon that governments can utilize to reduce the overall unemployment. These strategies touch on the root or cause of unemployment and try to solve from its basis (Department for Children, Schools and Families 2008). For instance, appropriate information provision and advice that is constructive as well as can be put into practice, is a good method of solving unemployment. People want information that will be able to get them out of their current status of unemployment into a long term solution (Jackman 1998). For instance, affording people with information on how to be entrepreneurs or the providing them with skills that are needed in the available jobs provides people with permanent solutions to their problems. Unlike such policies as wage setting, unemployment benefits, benefit transfer, job guarantee and workfare policies that do not necessarily provide permanent unemployment solutions. For example, in looking at the benefit transfer policy,which permits unemployed persons to handover their unemployment-benefit to a potential employer so that the unemployment benefit in essence compensates for employment instead of unemployment, the benefit was only directed to persons who had been unemployed for 2 years. This denotes that only a few persons are affected by the policy (Jackman 1998). The job guarantee policy places a responsibility upon the employment providers to seek and provide to each individual whose period of redundancy surpasses a specific duration of time. The efficaciousness of this system in locating unemployed persons is expected to be immense (Anderson &Ruhs 2008). The disadvantage of the job guarantee system is that it is a demanding governmental task that requires considerable funds to permit the employment service to fund job providers as well as generate public sector jobs (Office for National Statistics 2013). Additionally, the hard-core unemployed persons may just remain jobless as well as continue to pick benefits. The advantage of the job guarantee system is that the persons who have had difficulty in locating jobs will most probably fill up the available vacancies (Jackman 1998). The workfare system places a responsibility upon the employment service to afford every jobless person with anemploymentwith the compulsion the jobless person accepts the work presented (Jackman 1998). Repudiation will normally result to forfeiture of benefits. The workfare system gets rid of the prospect for funded inactivity as well as may likely eliminate from the unemployment count persons not available for employment (since they already hold an undeclared work) as well as persons with the chance of finding steady jobs (Office for National Statistics 2013). Much of the unemployment reductions may be attributed to policies that seek to improve the labour markets performance through restricting trade unions’ power as well as reducing subsidies to the jobless (Anderson & Ruhs 2008). However, these strategies are likely to increase disparity. Therefore, the major challenge, which governments face, is that of constructing policies around principles, which can succeed in more reduction of unemployment while not adding to inequity. The conservative government’s policies in form of information provision and advice giving can be very instrumental in increasing the efficaciousness of job seeking or afford incentives for vigorous job searching (Jackman 1998). References Anderson, B. & Ruhs, M. 2008 ‘A need for migrant labour? The Micro-Level Determinants of Staff Shortages and Implications for a Skills Based Immigration Policy’, A report prepared for the Migration Advisory Committee. Department for Children, Schools and Families. 2008 Building Brighter Futures: Next Steps forthe Children’s Workforce. London, Department for Children, Schools and Families Dustmann, C., Glitz, A. & Vogel, T. 2006 Employment, Wage Structure and theEconomic Cycle: Differences betweenImmigrants and Natives in Germany andthe UK. CReAM Discussion Paper 09/06 Florence. 2013 Dropped stitches: A lack of skilled workers could kill one of Italy’s manufacturing successes, The Economist, June 22nd 2013. Jackman, R. 1998 Unemployment and Labour Market Policy, Economic Review, February 1998. Office for National Statistics. 2013 Labour Market Statistics, Statistical Bulletin, June 2013. Turner, P. 2012 Explaining Unemployment, Interpreting Economic Data, November 2012. Read More