58.8% of graduates are in non-graduate roles. So now what?

Last month brought with it the rather depressing news that 58.8% of graduates are in roles that did not traditionally, or previously, require a candidate who was educated to degree level. We're talking bar work, waitressing, sales assistant jobs. You get the idea.

It seems that now, a degree is becoming, or has become, a pre-requisite for entering the work force, in any industry. Of course, traditional careers such as medicine, finance and journalism still require entry-level candidates with degrees, but the news that over half of the graduate work force are in jobs that have never previously asked for degrees from their prospective employee's, represents a rather dismal outlook for this year's haul of graduates, and beyond.

To me, the problem seems obvious. We are sending, or rather the government are sending, thousands upon thousands of students to university, allowing them to gather mass amounts of debt, all with the promise of the career they desire and the notion that, if you go to uni, you'll get it.

But the sheer surplus of students and graduates who cling to that dream is the issue at hand. More people than ever are heading off to university, and the problem is is that there simply aren't enough jobs being created in order to provide for the number of graduates universities are producing. We're being sold the 'work hard at uni for the dream career' transaction, but not the reality of the situation once we're no longer students, but alumni.

What can be done is obviously a matter of huge contention. It's easy to surmise that the creation of more jobs roles, particularly in competitive industries, is the solution. But that simply isn't feasible in a lot of fields. Next option. Less students heading off to uni? But with the growing number of basic jobs requesting graduates to fill their roles. it isn't realistic to try and discourage people from university.

It really is the definition of a catch-22 situation. Too many talented and hard-working graduates, to the limited number of desirable, and attainable jobs in popular careers and industries.

While I don't think I'm in a position to propose a viable solution to the problem, I do think that jobs roles that don't necessarily, and did not traditionally, require a degree and the skillset that comes with that, should not specify graduates on their job postings. But then, where would graduates attempting to gain their dream careers be, if those jobs too were closed off for them?

Apprenticeships now seem to be gaining in popularity, with their promise of a real, paying job at the end of years of supported study. As an alternative to the uncertain and unclear future of a graduate, it's easier to see why these schemes are appealing to so many now.

So perhaps the solution is for non-graduate roles to stay that way, and for less people to go to uni? It would be a sad situation if people were discouraged from university, which, outside of all the controversy of career prospects surrounding it, is an undeniably amazing and valuable experience in and of itself.

Whatever the solution, it seems clear that graduates must be more hard-working and entreprenurial than ever, in order to secure anything like their dream job, in the murky waters of today's job market.

SHARE:

0 comments

Why MTV's new show infuriated me regarding youth unemployment

Okay, so this is definitely going to be a rant-type post, but if you can't write these sorts of things on your own blog, where can you?
So feel free to read on if you dare!

---------------------------------

MTV's new 8pm weekly show began three weeks ago Tuesday, and poses the young people on it the ultimatum; get a job or get out. The young people on the show are told by their parents that they must get their act together and start contributing to the family home/income, or be sent packing.

The episode introduced Robyn, a 21 year old girl living with her parents and generally being pretty lazy. 

Viewers were told that she had had, and lost, thirty jobs in just the past TWO years. 30. In two years. That's a lot. 

So far, so acceptable. It seemed a pretty solid premise for an MTV show.

However, this is where it got annoying. And plain old unrealistic. 

Robyn had, in recent years, discovered she was pretty enthusiastic about all things beauty and make-up. So logically, the show sent her to a top hair and beauty salon in London. This is fair enough. MTV is a big channel with a big budget and presumably, pretty huge public sway, allowing Robyn to get in at this salon.

However. What infuriated me was what followed. Robyn was given, okay, some quite menial tasks to complete first, such as wiping down the shelves, organising a window display, and handing out flyers. But general work experience 101 has taught anyone aspiring for a career in a difficult industry, that you happily accept any task, acknowledging it as a necessary learning curve and a chance to really show what you can do, and how hard-working you are. But not Robyn. Robyn merrily moaned and swore her way through the entire thing, and to be honest, performed pretty poorly. Getting tired of handing out flyers, she threw away 1000 of them after handing out only 6 to the general public, effectively destroying company property. She openly criticised the salon boss when he asked her to change the window display, showing a lack of willing to accept criticism to improve her skills for the better.

And this is what frustrated me.

If this were any ordinary employer, after such a poor show and clear lack of professionalism shown over two days, you'd be out. But not Robyn. She was invited back, and after one, one successful day, given a full time job at the salon.

I get it. It's a TV show. I fully understand that the aim of the show was probably to show the inspirational and perhaps even aspirational story of a lazy, unmotivated twenty-something learn from her mistakes, grow, and become a person that her parents were proud of. I get what they were trying to show, and I understand that it was more than a bit set up for the show itself.

But I cannot describe how frustrating this depiction feels, as a 21 year old graduate trying to establish herself in her chosen career. The notion that you can rock up at a highly prestigious company, no matter what sector you're in, and perform abysmally, yet still get a job after one less-than-abysmal day, is kind of offensive. I know tons of people who work insanely hard, and still haven't been offered a full-time, paid opportunity. And I accept that. I accept that this is the nature of the times we are living in, and the nature of the economy as a whole. It's tough now. But we've always been told, that if you work hard, are polite, helpful and enthusiastic, you will eventually make it to where you want to be. And this is why 'Fired by Mum and Dad' was so frustrating. Robyn was shown to put in minimal effort, display a less-than-professional attitude, work one solid, good day, and be given a job that I'm sure many would give their left arm for. I think that this portrayal of such a process is damaging, especially to young people who have perhaps not entered the work force yet and think this is how it works, and it's as easy as just showing up. However, it's also damaging in the way that it dismisses, and undermines the hard work being done by young people the country over. Damaging in the way that it exacerbates the notion that becoming famous, or getting yourself on any random TV show is the way to be successful. And I think that hard-working, motivated young people deserve a little bit more credit than that.

At the end of the day, it is a TV show, and it is always going to be slightly unrealistic, in the way it's been edited, the fact that the scenario has been set up for the purpose of a show, and that the people on it have been specifically chosen for the show. But it would be great if they really tried to show the realistic path young people go through towards unemployment, instead of making a show that somewhat misrepresents that. 

SHARE:

0 comments