Recomendaciones

• expected to last for more than a ~qear,a quarter had no qualifications, and a fifth (22 per cent) had had basic skills’problems since the age of 16.

U

> Four fifths of respondents h~d at least one of four known markers of • disadvantage (living in social reined accommodation, no qualifications, suffering

from a health problem or disability expected to last for more than a year, no job prior to their unemployment s~ell) Forty per cent suffered from multiple

I

disadvantage.

1

> Over two thirds of respondents had experienced problems finding or keeping a

.

job in the past year The most~frequently mentioned problems were ‘no jobs nearby’ (29 per cent) and lack ofipersonal transport (25 per cent)

U

U

This chapter describes the charactenstics of the sample of entrants to New Deal_{between September and November~1998 The sample is representative of entrants to} the programme six to nine months after its extension to young people throughout England, Scotland and Wales. Information on participants’ charactenstics was

I

collected at the first survey interview which took place, on average, six months after they had entered the programme

.

Knowledge of participants’ charactkistics isimportantin understanding NDYP— who

it isfor, and the profile of particip~ntsit seeks to help These data have three uses in • the assessment of NDYP’ s impact I~nlabour market outcomes at the second wave of

thestudy.

U

(I) They will be used to estimate the likelihood of survey non-response that can help

U

account for possible biases an impact estimates where non-response is correlated with outcomes of interest.1

(2) They will be used to estimat~the likelihood of entry to different parts of the • programme.

(3) Finally, they will be used as control variables in multivariate models seeking to

I

isolate NDYP effects from oth~rinfluences on labour market outcomes.

• The charactenstics covered below~are selected either because they are of

particular

• policy interest, or because earlierliresearch indicates that they affect young people’s job prospects. Not all of these characteristics will prove to have a

significant

impact • on job outcomes for NDYP pa?iclpants. and other factors may also affect job

‘The charactensucsofrespondentsandnbn-respondencs are compared in the technical report (BMRB Intei-national, 2000) using data from the Employment Service’s NDYF Database

I

U

Chapter One

prospects. Some of these, such as longer-term work history variables, are being collected at wave two, while others will be derived from administrative data sources.

1 1 Gender

The labour market preferences and experiences of men and women are different in

U

many respects. Determinants of their job prospects often differ (White et a!., 1997).

Bntain is unusual in Europe in that the majonty

of

the unemployed is men. NDYP

U

participants are no different. Seventy-one per cent of respondents were men.

1.2 Age

Even within a narrow age group such as NDYP participants, age may influence job

U

prospects. As well as indicating the maximum time they have had to get jobs or

spend unemployed since leaving school, age may be associated with diffenng labour market prospects for groups entenng the labour market at different points in time. Respondents had a mean age of 21 at the time of their survey interview (Table 1.1). Forty-three per cent were under 21 years old.

Table I I Gender.byage Men Women AU

I

18 3 4 3 19 20 26 22 20 18 19 18 21 15 14 15 22 13 11 12

5

23 12 11 12 24 12 10 12 II 25 7 5 7 26 * o Over26 * 0 Age unknown * 0 Weighted base 4281 1729 6010 Un~ç~ghtedbase 4253 1757 6010

Base all respondents

a

1 3 Ethnic origin

U

Life chances and labour market experiences are strongly associated with ethnic origin

I

(Jones, 1993; Modood ez aL, 1997). However, because non-white minorities

constitute a relatively small proportion of the unemployed, surveys of the unemployed

are rarely large enough to conduct analyses by ethnic origin. The NDYP is large

5

enough to conduct some analyses by ethnic origin, although sample sizes do prohibit

analyses of small sub-~groups Seventeen per cent of the sample was from ethnic

I

minorities, including 5 per cent who identified themselves as Pakistani and 3 per cent

who said they were Black Caribbean. Women were more likely to be of non-white ethnicorigin than men (Table 1.2) were.

U

S

U

I

1 Chapter One

U

Table1 2: Gender, by ethnic ongrn

5

Men Women All

% 1%

1

White 85 78 183 Black-Caribbean 3 3 3

U

Black— African 2 2 I 2 Black—Other 1 1 1 • Indian 2 3 2 Pakisiani

:

• Bangladeshi 1 2 1 Chinese * * * • Other 2 2 2 Noanswcr * * * Weighted base 4281 1729 6010 Unweighted bose 4253 1757 6010 —

Base all respondents

I

1 4 Health

U

Poor health adversely affects employment (Lakey, Mukherjee and White, 1998). • One-fifth (19 per cent) of responden~said they had a health problem or disabiiity that • they expected to last for more thana~year.A third of these respondents (6 per cent of all respondents) said the health problem limited the kind or amount of paid work they • could do. Twenty-nine percent des~nbedtheir health as ‘excellent’, 33 per cent said

it was ‘very good’, and 24 per cent’described it as ‘good’. Ten per cent described their health as ‘fair’, and 4 per cent skid itwas ‘poor’

1

1 5 Housing

5

The sort of housing people live in, and their housing tenure, are often good indicators • of individuals’ material well-being ~.ndtheir social class, both of which affect their

employmeri prospects.

Table 1 3. Type of accorninodauon

U

Weightedfrequency Unweighredfreq~ncy

Pnvaie residence 5868 5880

• Hotelibed and breakfast 21 18

Hostel or institution 55 57

• Nofixedabode 43 34

Living rough 1 2

U

Other 21 19

• Total 6010 6010

Base all respondents

U

Ninety-eight per cent of respondeins were living in private residence. Table 1.3 presents the weighted and unweigt~tedfrequencies for those in a private residence,

I

I

I

Chapter One

hostels, and hotel and bed and breakfast accommodation. Thirty-four people

I

interviewed were of no fixed abode and two were sleeping rough~

Table 1 4 Housing tenure

Owned outright 11 Being bought on a mortgage or bankloan 20 Rented from council, New Town or housing association 48

Rented pnvatcly 14

Rent free/squatting I

Other 2

Notliving in private residence 2

U

Don’tknow 2

Weighted base 60i0

UnwelglLred base 6010

5

Base all respondents

a

Almost half (48 per cent) the sample were living in social rented accommodation, a

known marker of social disadvantage (Marsh, 1994)

(Table 1.4). A third (31

per cent)

U

were living in owner-occupied accommodation, and one in seven were living in

pnvate rented accommodation.

I

There is a strong association between the housing costs the unemployed face and the

wages they seek (Dawes, 1993) This, in turn, may affect their job chances.

I

Reflecting the age of the sample, almost half (48 per cent) the respondents to the

survey were living in accommodation wherethe mortgage or rent was paid by parents or other relatives (Table 1 5) In 28 per cent of cases, the respondent was either solely orjointly responsible for paying the mortgage or rent. In another 2 per cent of cases,

the partner was meeting the accommodation costs In 15 per cent of cases, there were

U

no housing costs to payS in the majority of these cases the home was owned outright

Table 1 5 Responsibility for housing costs

Respondern 19

U

Respondent with others 9

Partner 2

U

Parents or other relatives 48

Others 6

5

Don’t know *

I

No mortgage/rent to be paid 15

Not living in private residence 2

5

Weighted base ~10

Unweighied base 60)0

Base all respondents

U

_____________

I

~According to the address file provided by the Employment Service for sampling, there were 20 people recorded as being of no fixed abode

I

I

U

I

I Chapter One

U

1.6 Partners I

One In seven (14 per cent) respon~ientswere living with a partner at the time of the survey interview In these instances, decisions about work are often taken jointly,

partly because what one partner ~ioescan affect the benefit receipt of the couple

U

(Millar, 1994).

1

Table [6 Partners’ econonijc status at th~timeofthe survey interview, by gender of the respondent

I

Respondent~na!e Res~~ntfemale Altwithpartners

U

Full-time job 10 40 17

U

Part-timeSelf-employedjob 5* 55 51

— Govtprogramme * I I

• FTed/irarning 3 3 3

Uncmp,ciairrung 13 33 18

U

Unemp, not claiming 5 8 6

L.ong-term sick 3 1 2

I

Familyresponsibility 58 2 44 Other 2 2 2

U

Werg!ued base 632 I 209 841

U

Unwezghredbase 617 1 194 811

U

Base respondentshyingwithpartners

A quarter (23 per cent) of partners wereemployed or self-employed at the time of

U

interview, but the percentage was~uch lowerwhere the respondent was male (Table

U

_{although this}1.6). Forty-four per cent of_{was rarely so}partr~6rs_arnbngwere taking_{the partners}on_{of women participating in the}the responsibility of the home,

15 programme.

U

Forty-one per cent of couples included a person earning. In 14 percent of couples,

— both were earning; in 17 per cent, ~6nlythe respondent was earning,and in 10 per cent — of cases, only the partner was eari~ing.Twenty-six per cent of respondents who were • not living with a partner at the tim& of interview were in paid

work.

• 1 7 Children

• It is well known that young wom~n’sfamily formation and employment patterns are

U

causally linked1 but this is also true for young men who make up the majority of NDYP participants. Mamage re~1ucesyoung men’s probability of unemployment,

U

even if they married in their teens. However, young men with larger families have

higher unemployment probabiliue~than childless men (Payne, 1989) ~

U

I

— Ten per cent of NDYP responde~itshad children, with four per cent having two or

— more.

U

II

U

~Interestingly, men who go on to have 1~.rgerfamilies are more likely to be unemployed than childless men even before thefirstchild is born, suggesting that the causal mechanism is not nsing benefit

U

entitlements

S

U

Chapter One

In Britain, lone parents are known to

have

particularly low employment chances (Bryson, Ford and White, 1997). Two per cent ofrespondents were single parents.

1.8 Benefit receipt

U

Table 1 7 Benefit receipt

U

Allrespondents Respondentsand partners

I

Jobseeker’s Allowance 56 52

Housing Benefit 21 61

CouncilTaxrebate 14 48

Income Support 7 17 Sickness/disabilitybenefits 4 7 Child Benefit 4 54 Family Credit 2 17

U

Otherbenefits 3 6 None 30 14 Weightedbase 6010 841 Unwe~g~redbase 6010 811 -

Base. all respondents. Note respondents could give multiple answers to this question so percentages add to more than 100

Of

course, when they became eligible for New Deal, all respondents were in receipt of

the Jobseeker’s Allowance. Six months later, although the majority still claimed

5

Jobseeker’s Allowance, 44 percent had already ceased to claim it. However, 70 per

cent of respondents were in receipt of some form of state benefit (Table 1.7). Few (4

U

per cent) had transferred to a sickness or disability-related benefit. A fifth (21 per

cent) were in receipt of Housing Benefit Benefit receipt among couples (the benefit —

unit) was higher. with 86 per cent in receipt of state benefits. Most (61 per cent) were receiving Housing Benefit and roughly half received Child Benefit, Jobseeker’s

Allowance or Council Tax Rebate. Family Credit played a significant role in

U

supplementing wages for couples.

1.9 Educational achievement

Together with labour market experience and social skills (discussed later), education and qualifications form part of what economists term individuals’ ‘human capital’

Human capital is the value or worth an individual has as a potential employee

U

Employers look for markers of this worth in people’s qualifications and experience

Simply by virtue of their recent unemployment, entrants to New Deal are

U

disadvantaged relative to many in the labour market However, their education,

qualifications and labour market experience mean they have different sorts of human

capita] to offer employers

U

Forty-one per cent of respondents had left full-time education by the time they were

U

16 years old, with a further 38 per cent leaving before they reached 19 years old

(Table 1.8). However, one-fifth (19 per cent) continued their education after the age

ofl8

U

I

U

I

U

U

Chapter One

• Table 1 8 Age left full-time education

U

__________ Lcssthanl5 4

U

15 6 16 31 • 17 23 18 15

U

19 9 20 5

I

2lorolder 6 Don’t know or missing 2

Weightedbase 6010

U

Unweighted base 6010

Base allrespondents

1.10 Literacy and nurneracy

U

Literacy and numeracy problems ~dverse]y affect job prospects directly by limiting

U

the paid work an individual can ~io, and indirectly by making it more difficult to

U

obtain qualifications Twenty-t’w~per cent of respondents had had basic skills problems since the age of 16, either with problems reading or writing English, or problems with numbers or simple arithmetic Tenper centhad problems with reading or writing English.4per cent had l~adproblems with numbers, and a further 8 percent

U

had had problems with both Englis1h and numbers

U

1.11 Qualifications I

U

At the time of the survey intervie~i,24 per cent of respondents had no qualifications • at all (Table 1 9) Fifty seven per~centhad qualifications to NVQ Levels 1 or 2, and 19 per cent had qualifications above NVQ Level 2 Two-thirds (67 per cent) had

U

academic qualifications and nearly~ahalf (46 per cent) had vocational qualifications.

• Table 1 9 Educational qualifications

U

Vocational !Academ:c All

%

—

No qualifications 54 33 24 — NVQ1or2 30 62 57 — NVQ3 8 1 8 NVQ4or5 3 2 4

U

Other 5 2 7 Data missing 1 * * Weighted base 6010 6010 6010

U

Unweighied base 6010 i6010 6010

Base all respondents

New Deal Options’ participants ar able to work cowards a qualification, usually up to NVQ Level 2, and sometimes to NVQ Level 3 As Chapter Two shows, many had

U

begun Options by the time of tl~esurvey interview, but few could have acquired qualifications as a result ofOpti~iparticipation because they had not been on them

U

for very long

U

U

U

Chapter One

1.12 Labourmarke: background

U

The survey contains a substantial amount of information on participants’ labour

U

market history before their entry to New Deal. Here the focus is on three measures

charactensing those histories the length of the unemployment spell qualifying them for New Deal; the activity they were in before becoming unemployed; and whether they had ever had ajob before entenng the programme

U

Table 110 Length of qualifying spellofunemployment

Under4 months 16 —

4 monthsbut less than6 months 17 6 months but less than 12 32 12 months but less than 18 13 18 months but less than 2 years 7 2 yearsbut less than3 years 7 More than 3 years 8

Mean numberofweeks 58

Median number of weeks 32

Modal number ofweeks 24

Weighted base 4742

Unweighted base 4~8I

Base the 79 per cent of cases withreliableand precise date information Note The 21 per cent

without accurate data included 15 per cent with an imprecise start date earlierthanthe beginning of August 1998, 2 per cent with a start date beginning after I~August 1998, and 4 per cern where we only knew the year in which the eventbegan

Table 110 shows the time respondents had been unemployedin the spell before their

participation in New Deal. This is termed their qualifying spell of unemployment

U

sinceit made them eligible for New Deal ~ Otherprogramme evaluation studies have

shown that the chances of leaving unemployment for a job fall with the duration of

U

the qualifying spell, other things being equal (White, Lissenburgh and Bryson, 1997).

Today’s entrants to New Deal are taken from those flowing into six months’ unemployment, plus early entrants to the programme who are ‘fast-tracked’ because

they have particular disadvantages and could benefit by early programme entry

U

Thus, qualifying spells of unemployment will rarely stretch beyond 6-7 months

However, the survey includes the flow, plus many taken from the stock of the unemployed that had been unemployed for longer than six months. The duration of qualifying unemployment spells presented in Table 110 reflects this. One-third (34

per cent) of respondents had entered the programme before reaching six months’ unemployment However, 10 per cent had entered between weeks 22 and 25 of their

unemployment they are likely to be part of the usual six-month in-take Therefore,it

U

is likely that around a quarter of the sample were truly early entrants to the programme Another third (32 per cent) entered the programme six to twelve months after the start of their unemployment. Among the third entenng after 12 months or more were S per cent with at least three years’ unemployment.

______

U

~In 7 per cent of cases, this spell was not a period of unemployment In half thesecases,itwas a spell

of full-time education or training

U

U

U

U

Chapter One

U

U

Research has established that what people were doing before becoming unemployedis an important determinant of whe~ethey go on leaving programmes (Walker et a!.,

U

1999). Forty-three per cent of respondents (48 per cent of those for whom information is available) were in paid work before they entered their unemployment

U

period

that qualified them far New~Deal(Table 111). A further fifth (22 per cent) were in full-time education or training.

U

Table 1 11-Activity before qualifying spellofunemployment

I. -~___

Full-time job (30+ hours per week) 36

U

Part-time job(under30 hours per week) 6

Self-employed

U

Ongovernment/TECI’LECprogramme 5

Full-timeeducation and training 22

U

Unemployed claiming benefits 7

Unemployed, not claiming benefits 5

U

Long-term sick, injured ordisabled 1

Lookingafterfamily 1

U

Other 4

Not available 11

I.

Weighted base 6010

U

linweighied ba5e oWO

Base all respondents Note those unemployed and claiming benefits prior to the qualifying spell of

U

unemployment were those whose qualifying spell was notanunemployment spell~

• Workexperience prior to New Dea’ may well count in participants’ favour on leaving

the programme, althoughthis will depend, inpart, on the relevance of the experience • acquired to the jobs sought However, one-third (31 per cent) of respondents had

never had a job since leaving schooi.

U

113 Bamers to working I

U

Some of the factors mentioned a~iove have an important bearing on individuals’ employment prospects. Respond~ntswere also asked a direct question about any

U

problems they had had finding or keeping a job in the last year.5

I

Over two-thirds (69 per cent) said tiiey had had problems and a third (36 per cent) had • faced multiple problems (Table 112). The biggest single problem respondents said they faced was a lack of jobs n~’arby A close second was the lack of personal

U

transport, which had affected 25 p& cent of respondents. In fact, three-quarters (75 per cent) had no driving licence, ¶~per cent had a licence but no vehicle access, so

U

only 16 per cent had a licence and access to a vehicle Illness or disability had affected one-sixth (17 per cent). A lack of employer references, the lack of public transport. and debt and money problems were also viewed as barriers to getting and

U

holding jobs by a significant propo~nonof respondents

U

____

U

s_problemsToidentify problems respondents may have had with working, they were askcd ‘Have any of the_{listed onthiscard madeitdtffic~dtfor youto find orkeepa job in the past yea?”}

U

Respondents were asked to point to the ni~mberrelating toeachproblem item

U

U

Chapter One

Table I i2 Difficultiesin finding or keepinga job in thepastyear

U

____________

U

Types ofproblem

Noproblems 31

1

No jobs nearby 29

Lackofpersonaltransport 25

U

Own ill health or disability 17

Lack of references frompreviousemployer 15 Debt ormoneyproblems 12 Lack of public transport 12

Problems with the law or previous record 8

Nopermanentplace to live 5

1

illness of another member of the family 5

Problems with drugs or alcohol 3

Any other problems 3

Lack of childcare or affordable childcare 2

Number ofproblems o 3! I 33 2 19 3orinore 17 Wetghsed base 6010 Unweighied base 6010

U

Base allrespondents

Eight per cent cited problems with the law or a criminal record as a barner to

U

working6, and 3 per cent problems with drugs or alcohol

U

1 14 Multiple disadvantage

There is increasing awareness that some of the unemployed face multiple disadvantages in entering and holding Onto jobs Some have gone further and argued

that these disadvantages can result in deprivation and social exclusion There is

•

evidence that multiple disadvantage reduces subsequent employment chances

(Bryson, Ford and White, 1997)

Table 1.1.3 indicates the incidence of multiple disadvantage among respondents,using

U

four known markers of disadvantage: • Living in social rented accommodation, • Having no qualifications;

• Suffering from a health problem or disability expected to last for more than a year;

I

• Having no job pnor to the qualifying spell of unemployment.

Four-fifths (79 per cent) of respondents had at least one of these markers of disadvantage. Four in ten (38 per cent) had a srngle marker, while another four in ten

(40percent) suffered from multiple disadvantage

U

6In subsequent chapters analyses include identification of ex-offenders The variable isbased on this

jobsearch barrier question, plusrespondentsidentifying time in pnson or on remand as their main activityat somepointintheir woik history. This group is referred to as ‘ex-offenders’ althoughit

In document PROPUESTA DE UN PLAN PARA LA GESTIÓN DE IMPACTOS AMBIENTALES EN UNA EMPRESA DE RUBRO ÓPTICO (página 63-71)