Wednesday, 14 August 2013

OK then, maybe not.

Emailed in by BobE from The Guardian:

Under the £1bn Youth Contract, companies are paid £2,275 every time they take on a young unemployed person for at least six months. The scheme, championed by Nick Clegg, is meant to find jobs for 500,000 people between the ages of 16 and 24 over a period of three years...

Clearly, an unscrupulous employer is going to game the system by taking somebody on for six months, sacking him and then taking on somebody else for six months etc, so obviously, our omniscient overlords will have implemented some procedures to monitor recipients...

However, officials are not recording any data on whether these jobs are permanent, a freedom of information request by Labour has established.

In a review of the scheme, the government admitted there was "some evidence to suggest that wage incentives were not always being used as intended". It found that some companies were "letting employees go after six months in order to gain from new employees that attracted a new wage incentive payment".

9 comments:

Bob E said...

YC key facts

a) Of the £1 billion 'set aside' for the scheme £365 million of it was to fund 160,000 "wage incentives"

b) the DWP claimed that up to July 2013 5000 young persons had secured "jobs lasting longer than six months" thanks to the scheme

c) that works out at, currently, a cost of £72,800 per "sustainable employment"

Bayard said...

BE, do we know that the other 155,000 wage incentives resulted in jobs that only lasted 6 months, or is there still some of the £365M left waiting for employers to avail themselves of subsidised youth labour?

Bob E said...

Bayard - yup, you got me there, I have been very cavalier, indeed disingenuous in a DWP Stats way, in linking "total funding available" to "outcomes to date" and so the figure at c) is really just the present potential final cost of each "job lasting longer than six months". Apologies to all for being misleading ...

On an actual figures basis as the DWP claim 21,500 "YC take ups" in the first 14 months, resulting in 5,000 jobs lasting longer than 6 months, on the basis of "monies paid to employers to date" each "job lasting longer than 6 months" has cost a maximum mere £9,785.

Despite the subsidy on offer, a big chunk of which still remains, employers seem reluctant to take it up, maybe because under the Work Programme proper the WP providers currently have an seemingly endless supply of people who can be sent along to do "work experience" whilst the DWP continues to pay them their JSA; meaning minimal paperwork for the "employer" and no need to worry about having to pay out anything ...

Amfortas said...

The main beneficiary of this largesse is Therese Raine, the multi-millionairess wife of the PM of Australia (for the moment) Kevin Rudd. She owns the largest 'provider' of 'employment solutions' to the UK Gumnut.

Mark Wadsworth said...

Amf, nice one, Wiki entry here.

Amfortas said...

Note, ref Mrs Rudd. Common Ground is a subversive organisation tied to EU, UN and OWG aims, often referred to by JH at NO.

Gonski, the Igneus Chairman is also a 'player' in Oz politics having been chosen by Ju-Liar Gillard to screw vast amounts of taxpayers monies to go to the 'Education Revolution', a recommendation he made at Ju-Liar's behest. Gillard and Rudd have been playing knify-knify with Oz politics running up a $300 billion debt in just 6 years, with Therese and Gonski raking off millions for their 'charitable' causes.

Bayard said...

BE, given the info above, it seems likely that take-up of YC contracts has been low because you have to be one of the "favoured few", i.e. be an accredited employer, having either jumped through all sorts of hoops or having an ex-employee either of or in the DWP. Government cash isn't just for any Tom, Dick or Harry, you know.

James Higham said...

Clearly, an unscrupulous employer is going to game the system by taking somebody on for six months, sacking him and then taking on somebody else for six months

Already doing it.

Bob E said...

Bayard - the "favoured few" surely includes all the members of the following bodies who "signed up" to the YC before it was officially announced and duly got a mention in the "YC launched" Press Release in April 2012 ...

"Business organisations supporting the Youth Contract include the Confederation of British Industry, British Chambers of Commerce, Federation of Small Businesses, National Market Traders Federation, and the Chartered Institute for Personnel and Development"

and no less a personage than John Cridland, CBI Director-General, said in the self-same press release:

"The Youth Contract is a great way of encouraging more businesses to take on young unemployed people up and down the country.

Youth unemployment is a real concern, and by helping firms cover the costs of employing and training a young person, the Youth Contract should make an impact where it matters"

but as I posited earlier, I think that when it impacted on employers that they would still have to lay out minimum wage for 26 weeks in order to qualify for that "wage incentive payment" and then compared that to "an endless supply of young persons whom the government will be paying £71 or less a week to, and who I have to pay nothing" available via the Work Programme, well I guess the "freebie" option won out, and cue swift ending of "immense interest and support from business community for the Youth Contract"