Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Petition: Petition to introduce national service for the Long-term youth unemployed Watch

Announcements
    • Political Ambassador
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Petition to introduce national service for the Long-term youth unemployed

    Petition to introduce national service for the Long-term youth unemployed

    This petition calls for the Government to introduce national service for the long term youth unemployed.

    The ONS stated that around 188,000 young people are and have been unemployed for at least 12 months, this petition calls for them to do national service for a period of 12 months. People between the ages of 18-25 and have been unemployed for at least 12 months constitute as Long term youth unemployed.

    National service will consist of 12 months service to the following:

    The Royal Air Force
    The Royal Navy
    The British Army
    The Royal Marines
    The NHS
    Civil Service
    And any other Government institution

    Should the young person choose to serve any one of the armed forces they will have a choice between working in a combat role or a non combat role. The service will depend on the young person's qualifications though if they are minimal services will include such things as portering for the NHS and administrative roles.

    The young people will be paid the minimum wage, and the budget for this will come out of the Department of work and pensions. It would cost around £3bn to implement, but the 12 months of work experience will help these young people to push on and get a higher paid job elsewhere or to carry on in their roles if they wish to and have been offered a full time permanent position.


    • TSR Support Team
    • Peer Support Volunteers
    • Clearing and Applications Advisor
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    I assume they would be exempt if they were in full time education?

    Otherwise, I'm not sure about this.
    • Political Ambassador
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Airmed)
    I assume they would be exempt if they were in full time education?

    Otherwise, I'm not sure about this.
    Of course
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Not too sure about this one.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Me and Rakas discussed this before, you can't just shove them into the health service or any government department, there should be schemes in place for the LTU, such as road building, continuous training in basic skills etc.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Airmed)
    I assume they would be exempt if they were in full time education?

    Otherwise, I'm not sure about this.
    They wouldn't be classified as unemployed, so of course they are exempt.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Political Ambassador
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by That Bearded Man)
    Me and Rakas discussed this before, you can't just shove them into the health service or any government department, there should be schemes in place for the LTU, such as road building, continuous training in basic skills etc.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Why not, having the LTU doing menial jobs means that doctors and nurses can focus on the higher priority things, there's no reason why service can't include things like road building. I noticed in the budget that workfare had been scrapped, I feel that this is a more preferable solution than shoving unemployed people into 40 hours a week of work for people who can afford to pay them a proper wage but would rather make them work for free.
    • Political Ambassador
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    They wouldn't be classified as unemployed, so of course they are exempt.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    You'd have thought it would be obvious.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    I'm not sure about including the NHS and civil service in there, but I can support this, it helps bolster our armed forces that the current TSR and, let's be frank, real governments are neglecting. It can help bolster our police forces and fire services too, and I imagine there are going to be smaller services that people forget about too that will not complain about the extra hands. Plus military discipline would do a hell of a lot of people some good.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Political Ambassador
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    I'm not sure about including the NHS and civil service in there, but I can support this, it helps bolster our armed forces that the current TSR and, let's be frank, real governments are neglecting. It can help bolster our police forces and fire services too, and I imagine there are going to be smaller services that people forget about too that will not complain about the extra hands. Plus military discipline would do a hell of a lot of people some good.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I included those things specifically for those who are qualified, there are plenty of degree educated young people who can't find a job, so something in the civil service with a bit more responsibility would be good for them.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    And where are you finding the billions it would cost to accommodate all those people? You're doubling the size of the armed forces and they have nowhere to put them. The armed forces barely have enough space to accommodate the people it already has, let alone 100,000 people who don't want to be there. Not to mention there are no resources to train anything like that volume of new starters.

    Further, while basic training might only take a couple of months, by the time you've added any form of trade training those people would have been there over a year. You'll get no productive service from any of them.

    You do know the armed forces don't just hand you a uniform and a rifle on day 1 and then leave you be, right?

    And how do you police the non-combat / combat choice? Those lines are a lot more vague than they ever used to be.

    I don't think you've even vaguely thought the practicalities of this through. It would never work.
    • TSR Support Team
    • Peer Support Volunteers
    • Clearing and Applications Advisor
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lime-man)
    You'd have thought it would be obvious.
    I was just clarifying, no need to be rude. Some countries ask for national service regardless of being a student, I've heard of that.

    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    They wouldn't be classified as unemployed, so of course they are exempt.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Thanks for answering. And welcome back.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lime-man)
    Why not, having the LTU doing menial jobs means that doctors and nurses can focus on the higher priority things, there's no reason why service can't include things like road building. I noticed in the budget that workfare had been scrapped, I feel that this is a more preferable solution than shoving unemployed people into 40 hours a week of work for people who can afford to pay them a proper wage but would rather make them work for free.
    Because the vacancies in the health service are in the skilled departments, they don't really have a shortage in say, porters. Thus you would need to train these people first. You'd probably also need some basic skills to ensure people are able to complete this training.

    Actually, one I think would be useful would be language training, although skilled, if we rolled out teaching other languages to this community it would improve their employability and means they could work in the community, more translators would be a good thing (think museums, tour guides, health services, sign posting)
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lime-man)
    Why not, having the LTU doing menial jobs means that doctors and nurses can focus on the higher priority things, there's no reason why service can't include things like road building. I noticed in the budget that workfare had been scrapped, I feel that this is a more preferable solution than shoving unemployed people into 40 hours a week of work for people who can afford to pay them a proper wage but would rather make them work for free.
    I'd rather not have youths who have been unemployed for 12+ months working in NHS administration - it's absolutely terrible as it is. We don't need more unenthusiastic admin staff to drive it to the ground

    But I agree with Civil service, Roadworks, not entirely comfortable with RAF etc.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lime-man)
    I included those things specifically for those who are qualified, there are plenty of degree educated young people who can't find a job, so something in the civil service with a bit more responsibility would be good for them.
    Fair point, didn't actually think about that. And I guess there are also a fair few basic and clerical jobs that don't really require any qualifications pretty much anywhere.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    In Singapore, whether you have a offer from Oxford or nothing at all, you serve a mandatory 2 year national service.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    The minimum wage? What absolute bs.

    They should be paid the proper wage just like anyone else doing them jobs would get.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    I would also add that I think it should be 2 years minimum before you're considered long-term unemployed.
    • Political Ambassador
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drewski)
    And where are you finding the billions it would cost to accommodate all those people? You're doubling the size of the armed forces and they have nowhere to put them. The armed forces barely have enough space to accommodate the people it already has, let alone 100,000 people who don't want to be there. Not to mention there are no resources to train anything like that volume of new starters.

    Further, while basic training might only take a couple of months, by the time you've added any form of trade training those people would have been there over a year. You'll get no productive service from any of them.

    You do know the armed forces don't just hand you a uniform and a rifle on day 1 and then leave you be, right?

    And how do you police the non-combat / combat choice? Those lines are a lot more vague than they ever used to be.

    I don't think you've even vaguely thought the practicalities of this through. It would never work.
    For a start, we'd save £15m from JSA, as well as plenty more from other benefits.

    Not all of them will be in the Armed forces, £3bn isn't a lot in the grand scheme of things, especially as it's an investment.

    Non-combat and combat are both completely different. Each role is either designated as combat or non-combat so there's nothing vague about it.

    So national service doesn't work? Would you care to explain all the other times where it has worked then? Or how about the workfare scheme which runs on the same principle?
    • Political Ambassador
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by That Bearded Man)
    Because the vacancies in the health service are in the skilled departments, they don't really have a shortage in say, porters. Thus you would need to train these people first. You'd probably also need some basic skills to ensure people are able to complete this training.

    Actually, one I think would be useful would be language training, although skilled, if we rolled out teaching other languages to this community it would improve their employability and means they could work in the community, more translators would be a good thing (think museums, tour guides, health services, sign posting)
    There are skilled people who are unemployed, I'd rather have the skilled LTU be put into something more productive than the unskilled LTU.

    The Department of CMS has the museums and whatnot so that's something that too can be included as it's a government department.

    (Original post by Another)
    I'd rather not have youths who have been unemployed for 12+ months working in NHS administration - it's absolutely terrible as it is. We don't need more unenthusiastic admin staff to drive it to the ground

    But I agree with Civil service, Roadworks, not entirely comfortable with RAF etc.
    Again, it's only if they're properly qualified to take on the roles, there will always be an element of choice but we're obviously not going to be sending in people with no exp or qualifications into brain surgery or aircraft maintenance.

    If someone has the qualifications though, I see no reason why the RAF can't train them to be pilots should all the requirements be there.

    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Fair point, didn't actually think about that. And I guess there are also a fair few basic and clerical jobs that don't really require any qualifications pretty much anywhere.
    Exactly, when people hear LTU they think of lazy people who can't be arsed or aren't qualified. In many cases the more qualified ones probably are holding out for something "better" so national service would probably change their mindset.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Should Spain allow Catalonia to declare independence?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.