TOTAL SUBCAPÍTULO 1.13 PROTECCION CONTRA - CAPÍTULO 01 PABELLON TIPO B SUBCAPÍTULO 1.01 MOVIMIE

and lowest among those in social rented accommodation, squats and other rent free

U

accommodation, and those living in Institutions and other non-private residences (Table 6.35) The differences are large- employment rates among those in social rented

accommodation were two-thirds those of respondents living in owner-occupied

accommodation (30 percent compared with49 per cent). This housing tenure effect may

be an indication of the degree to which young people from more socially disadvantaged

I

backgrounds lose out to the more advantaged in competition for jobs. The numbers in

rent freeaccommodation and non-private residences are small, making interpretation of

I

the results hazardous. However, it is possible that their high unemployment rates on

leaving the programme may be explained in part by the difficulties of getting and holding onto ajob when one’s housing situation is unsettled or difficult.

I

I.~1

I

Chapter Six

I

Respondents with sole responsibility for their housing costs had relatively low employment rates on leaving New Deal, but they were not much lower than employment

• rates among those whose housing costs were met by parents or other relatives (34 per cent against 38 per cent) Employment rates were highest where leavers were sharing • housing costs with people other than relatives or partners 47 per cent of respondents in

I

this situation_{housing costs are reduced through sharing the burden. On the other hand, young people}were working. It is possible that working becomes more feasible when • may only move away from home to live with others once they have ajob to go to.

Table 6 35 Housing tenure, by leaver destinations

5

Not in Owned Mortgage Social Private Rent free. Oilier Don’t

priv res ourright , loan rented rented squatting know

I

Paid 25 (23) 47 (36) 50(38) 30 (20) 42(26) 32(21) 42 30(17)

U

work (32) Unemplo 60 37 39 49 41 62 53 65

U

_Other ₁₅ ₁₇ _II ₂₁ ₁₇ ₆ ₅ ₄

U

leaver

I

Weighted 55 259 561 1138 372 19 42 20 base — Unweighi 46 264 470 1150 342 18 35 28 — edbase

Base all leavers Note figuresinparentheses arefull-timeemployment rates

• Employment rates were particularly low (26 per cent) where housing costs were being met by a partner. Respondents in this situation were much more likely than in other cases

‘5

to be unemployed and claiming benefits, or looking after the children

I

6.4 13 Multiple disadvantage

I. Recent debates about social exclusion have brought into focus once again the problems

I

associated with multiple disadvantage, first discussed in the 1960s and 1970s when Peter Townsend devised the concept of multiple deprivation (Townsend, 1979: Townsend,

I

1987) There hasbeen concernthatthosefacingmultiple socialdisadvantages may suffer more than others in the labour market Table 6.36 seems to support this contention by

I

presenting leaver destinations for respondents with different degrees of multiple social

U

disadvantages. The table indicates that employment rates fell and unemployment rates_{rose with the number of social disadvantages leavers faced}

U

Table 6.36 Multiplesocial disadvantage,by leaver destinations

I

________________

None One Two Three Four

•

Paid work 56(43) 41(28) 31(22) 18 (12) 9(6)

I

Unemployed 35 45 48 55 58 Other 9 14 21 28 32

U

I

165

U

-U

.

I

Chapter Six

U

________________________________

U

Weighted base 544 892 661 286 39

I

Unweighted base 456 855 653 290 48

Base all leaverswith non-missing data onfour data items in theindex Note figuresinparentheses are full-

U

tune employmentrates

Before reading too much into this table, the reader should bear in mind that this indicator is not exhaustive and has not been ngorously validated (see footnote 4). Respondents score a point for each of the following four known markers of disadvantage

• Living in social rented accommodation,

U

• Having no qualifications,

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

U

• Having no job before the qualifying spell of unemployment

Thepercentage in the £Other~category alsorose with the degree of social disadvantage.

This was due to the increasing incidence of long-term sickness, injury and disability

among the most socially disadvantaged. Among those with a score of zero on the social

U

disadvantage index, the rate of long-term sickness was 3 per cent. This rose to 19 per cent among those with a score of 3, and 23 per cent among those with a score of 4.

U

6.4 14’Job search problems

I

The employmentrate at the time of the survey interview was 31 per cent among leavers

reporting one or more job search difficulties over the previous year, compared to 54 per

I

cent reporting no such difficulties. The full-time employment rate for those with

problems was half that of those with no problems (21 per cent against 40 per cent). Those reporting problems were more likely to say they were unemployed and claiming

benefits (33 per cent against 24 per cent) and long-term sick (12 per cent against I per

cent).

I

64.15’Regwn

I

There were notable differences in labour market destinations for leavers in different

regions of Bntazn However, it is not possible to say whether the observed differences are true regional effects without controlling for other factors which vary with region, such as the composition of the unemployed, labour market conditions, and so on The region with the lowest employment and full-time employment rates was the South West.

London and the South East had the second lowest full-time employment rate

Table 6.37 region, by leaverdestinations

U

Scotland NE NW Yorks/Hu Wales W Muir E SW Lon arid

mber MidilEA SE

I

% % % % % Paid work 35 (27) 40 38 39 (28) 35 (28) 43(30) 41(31) 31 36(24)

1

(29) (28) (20) Unempio 46 41 43 42 54 43 41 50 49

U

I

•

U

Chapter Six

I

Other 20 19 19 19 ii 14 18 19 14 Weighted 335 197 324 390 103 17] 285 35 627

U

base Unweighi 281 181 355 343 119 180 241 47 606

I

Base all leavers Note based onunit of delivery regions Figures in parenthesesarefull-time employment

U

rates

U

6.4 16 Units ofdelivery

Table 6 38 Unitsofdelivery, by leaverdestinations

I

ESindividualcontract ESjoin~pannership Con.sortium Pnvate sector led

•

Paid work 38 (28) 40(24) 40 (28) 38 (27) • Unemployed 44 44 47 49 Other 18 [7 13 13

a

Weightedbase 1726 425 122 194

U

Unweighted base 1629 383 -~ 109 232

Base all leavcrs Note figuresin parentheses are full-time employment rates

Leaver unemployment rates were higher in private-sector and consortium-led units of

I

delivery than they were in other delivery areas, though the differences were not great (Table 6 38). Leavers in private sector areas were most likely to say that they were • unemployed and claiming benefits (37 per cent said so, compared to 30 per cent in consortium and ES individual contract areas, and 27 per cent in ES joint partnership

• areas) However, employment rates were roughly similar across the four delivery types The dLfference in unemployment rates is explained instead by the percentages in the ~Other’ category this was larger in delivery areas where the ES operated alone or in a • Jointpartnership Here long-term sickness rates were a little higher (10 per cent in ES led areas, 7 per cent in ES Joint partnership areas, and 4 per cent in both consortium and

1

pnvace sector-ted areas).

I

6 5 Experiences ofNew Deal and subsequent labourmarket outcomes for leavers

1

This section analyses associations between respondents’ experiences on New Deal and • their subsequent labour market destinations. It is worth stressing that perceptions of New Deal may be influenced by subsequent labour market experiences, rather than the other

I

way round, so that what respondents say about their New Deal expenences may say more

about their satisfaction with their current circumstances than it does about New Deal

I

Furthermore, as stated earlier, the survey came early on in respondents’ New Deal

• participation, so associations identified heremay not hold with data collected once miDst of the respondents have completed their programme participation

U

65.1. Point at which leftNewDeal

U

I. At the time of the survey interview, Options leavers had lower employment rates than

1

167

U

I

U

Chapter Six

I

U

Gateway leavers and those recalling little or nothing of New Deal (the figures are 31, 41 and 37 per cent respectively; Table 6.39) Over half of Option leaverswere unemployed, compared to four-in-ten Gateway leavers

These findings are not surprising since those leaving Options in the six months after

programme entry aremostly Option non-compteters leaving through dissatisfaction with

New Deal, or because of difficulties in maintaining their participation. By wave two of

U

the survey, Option completers will be counted among Option leavers, and it may be that

their post-programme destinations will be different.

I

In document CAPÍTULO 01 PABELLON TIPO B SUBCAPÍTULO 1.01 MOVIMIENTO DE TIERRAS (página 22-25)