Worrying trend

Is it any worse than in the 1980s? We had 10% unemploment, 3 million out of work and the goverment ran a Youth Training Scheme. The scheme was far from perfect, but it gave 16- and 17-year-old school leavers work experience, vocational training, and a weekly allowance.

The employment situation was so dire in the 1980s that we had great difficulty persuading our 16 year old daughter to even sit her GCSEs. She couldn't see the point of all the hard work when she would never have a job.

Getting her to do A levels, was on a par with a major international level of negotiation, but we got her there in the end. The 1980s was far worse than now.

So much emphasis is placed on young people passing exams these days and many employers won’t look at a youngster if they don’t have GCSEs or A levels. In reality there are people who, while not being academic, would be hard working and competent given the chance. In my day the less academic could leave school at 15 or 16 and walk straight into a job. However, there are many reasons that employers can’t do that such as the rise in the minimum wage and high business rates. Perhaps less emphasis should be placed on exams and more on teaching practical skills at school and more help given to employers to take on less qualified and younger school leavers.

Why are you worried? Are the people you mention all under 25?

Are they working part time by choice??

If they are young people and it’s not their choice, that is slightly worrying, but if they’re in their thirties or above and this is their choice, then maybe it’s not a worry?

eazybee

I think it is good that a few people are not flogging themselves to death at work. Work/life balance is a good thing.

The people who are flogging themselves to death at work are those who have to carry the can for the part-time workers.

That’s actually nonsense.

Many people who a high earners now work four days a week. My step daughter does, my son is aiming for that. Both higher income earners.

One could argue teachers are part time! Though having a DD who teaches at Primary School the hours she works at Primary School more than make up for her long holidays.

Many people also now do compressed hours and shift work, which might give the impression that they have lots of days off, our DDiL is a chef, she often “only” works 4 days out of every 7, but her shifts are 12 hour shifts.

Why do you care??

Firstly, when on benefits now the amount of hours are utterly irrelevant, it’s all based on income, so plenty of people working full time claim a top up from Universal Credit.

Anyone else who is managing to work without claiming any government top ups, is perfectly at liberty to work 7 days or 1 day a week, for whatever reason they choose. It’s none of our business.

Yes, I agree - it seems ridiculous that business models don't have to include paying living wages, and even more so that the taxpayer has to step in to plug the gap.

I would also like to see a law saying that if hours are available, they should go to existing staff who want them, rather than allowing companies to have twice as many people on half time (or whatever), so they are kept below the NI threshold, as that impacts on their pensions and other entitlements.

^. But I can imagine the outcry if employers were legally obliged to pay a proper living wage. At the first mention of minimum wages (as opposed to living wages) being raised, or of increases in employers' NI there is uproar.

Maybe it's true that businesses couldn't function if they paid enough to their staff,^

Then they should go under. In my opinion.
Others always try to take their place.
I would like to see if they could do better.

It's a conundrum. I agree that it's wrong that taxpayers should fund employers who pay too little, and of course anyone working full time should have enough to live on and should earn more than those working part-time. But I can imagine the outcry if employers were legally obliged to pay a proper living wage. At the first mention of minimum wages (as opposed to living wages) being raised, or of increases in employers' NI there is uproar.

Maybe it's true that businesses couldn't function if they paid enough to their staff, but if that's the case, the country is in an impossible state. I've long felt that subsidies should be on a loan basis - maybe for the first five years of a start-up, with companies obliged to pay back at least a percentage when the time is up.

The cost of living, coupled with the cost of rent underlies so many of the problems we have across the UK. IMO the fact that workers see those who don't work bringing in more than they do is responsible for the swing to Reform and the like - it is a very dangerous state of affairs.

I think it is good that a few people are not flogging themselves to death at work. Work/life balance is a good thing.

The people who are flogging themselves to death at work are those who have to carry the can for the part-time workers.

Thanks. This is an excellent report. I hope it doesn’t get lost amongst other issues.

I would urge people to read Alan MIlburn’s Young people and work: interim report published 10 August 2026.

It is a long read but worth it to understand the complexity of the problem.

www.gov.uk/government/publications/young-people-and-work-interim-report/young-people-and-work-interim-report

These paragraphs struck me:

This is a whole system failure. And the price is paid by a generation of young people. Overwhelmingly they want to work. In a survey carried out for this review, 84% of NEET young people said they want to find a job, education or training. I do not accept the caricature of a generation that is not interested in employment. I do not accept that mental health is simply an excuse. Nor do I accept that the answer is to tell young people who are struggling simply to try harder. These are myths. Sometimes cruel ones. Young people are not to blame. Institutions that should have provided opportunities to them are the ones that have failed.

I heard young people describe applying for dozens, sometimes hundreds, of jobs and hearing nothing back. I heard about interviews followed by silence, automated rejections months later, and entry-level jobs that somehow required previous experience. What I heard, more often than not, was effort matched with frustration. Young people were trying. They were tired of being ignored, tired of being rejected, and tired of being judged by people who had not listened to them.

The thing that puts most people off claiming is that Job Centre + expects them to apply for a certain number of jobs EVERY day, it is just not possible unless you spend nearly 8 hours a day online looking for work. I expect the NEET age group are not too worried about NI contributions as they can't ever see themselves claiming a pension. Although we know it should contribute to things like Health care, Education , but when getting to see a GP or dentist is virtually impossible and they didn't have a good experience in school, they think why bother .

a. I was thinking about those recently.
I think there are many people like that.
And from what little I know, they then get entitled to a lot of other government benefits as well.
And some of the employers are household names, who get a lot of profit, but dont pay their workers enough to live on.
In my opinion.

b. of the opening post.
That can be sensible too??

Luckygirl3

I think it is good that a few people are not flogging themselves to death at work. Work/life balance is a good thing.

So do I.

fwiw, the two at least I know, are higher income bracket.

Greenfinch

My grandson is a NEET. He doesn’t feel justified in claiming benefits and although he has had a few interviews, because he is autistic, the prospect seems hopeless. There is no support. What is he supposed to do?

I dont know.

I imagined there were all sorts of resources and help available.

I am a bit surprised and shocked that there is not.

Not in Employment,Education or Training. It’s a very common abbreviation amongst those affected by it.

And what is NEET I just don’t do acronyms I think its a lazy way of talking or writing just like this stupid DD business ( not so much used on here now thankfully)
Say it for what it is please

I think it is good that a few people are not flogging themselves to death at work. Work/life balance is a good thing.

Some people have ‘portfolio’ careers, where they work fewer hours than FT in each but in total it comes to FT hours or more.

It’s worth NEET’s signing on just to get the ‘stamp’ for their pension records. I don’t know any details but I wonder if it’s possible to get your contributions paid but not actually claim money?

My grandson is a NEET. He doesn’t feel justified in claiming benefits and although he has had a few interviews, because he is autistic, the prospect seems hopeless. There is no support. What is he supposed to do?

I dont know about NEET.
But the rest of what you are saying, yes, I agree with you.

c. that is not a bad thing?
The people I personally know like that, are either making more money on the other days, or are using it as a better work life balance. Or both.

Which ages are you talking about?

I can't speak for all the reasons and scenarios for people working part time, but many employment sectors (retail/hospitality for example) don't want full-timers on their books.

They like people with small contracts (or even zero-hours contracts) so they can save money on insurance, and staff benefits such as holiday pay. Sometimes overtime is available to supplement a small contract but often not, because places run on fewer staff generally.

It isn't always choice to be part-time.