Copy article

Chancellor to ‘guarantee’ job or training place to young NEETs - does policy go far enough?

ended 01. October 2025

Rachel Reeves has committed to abolishing youth unemployment by “guaranteeing” a job or training place for 18 to 21-year-olds on long-term benefits.

The chancellor unveiled at the Labour Party conference yesterday a “youth guarantee” to combat rising numbers of young people not in education, employment or training (NEET).

She said the government is committed to “nothing less than the abolition of long-term youth unemployment”. 

Young people who have been claiming benefits for more than 18 months will lose their benefits if they refuse a work or training place.

  • Does this scheme go far enough?
  • What else do you think of the scheme?
  • What does Reeves need to do to abolish youth unemployment?

5 responses from the Newspage community

Copy all

Copy

Editor
Stephen Perkins
Managing Director at Yellow Brick Mortgages
The key thing missing from this plan is what incentives are going to be offered to companies to offer such employment opportunities. As unless cheaper or incentivised most firms will continue to offer the reducing number of roles to experienced individuals.
Copy

Premium
Debbie Porter
Managing Director at Destination Digital Marketing
Raising minimum wage for this cohort, along with a rise in National Insurance contributions is what has created this mess. With huge hikes in minimum wage it is now just too risky to take on an inexperienced young person. So the missing piece of this jigsaw puzzle is in looking at incentivising the employment of youngsters with the companies being asked to take them on.
Copy

Colin Crooks MBE HonDsc
CEO at Intentionality
Reeves' youth guarantee ignores those who need it most
The Chancellor's promise to tackle youth unemployment is welcome, but cutting it off at 21 is a critical mistake. The vast majority of the 987,000 young people not in work or learning are over 21—yet they're excluded. These are precisely the people hit hardest by the pandemic, entering the job market during chaos with no experience and growing CV gaps. If we're serious about abolishing youth unemployment, extend support to 25.
The 18-month wait is too long. By the time help arrives, the harm is done. Work skills fade, confidence collapses, and young people stop believing they can work. We need action within 6 months, whilst they still have some drive.
The scheme also needs the right employers. Most companies aren't setup to support people with challenges. The government must work with social enterprises and specialist youth providers who know how to help this group. Without that focus, the guarantee will fail those who need it most
Copy

Jill Poet
CEO at Organisation for Responsible Businesses
Whilst the commitment to abolish youth unemployment is to be welcomed, the cut-off age and the quality of training schemes are both of concern.

However, the biggest issue here is when the scheme kicks in. After 18 months of receiving benefits, the psychological impacts and anti-social behaviours associated with unemployment invariably become entrenched. The sooner solutions are in place, the more effective they are likely to be in getting young people into employment or appropriate retraining schemes.

Action to address the issues action should implemented no later than the 6-months unemployment stage.
Copy

Colette Mason
AI Ethics Consultant at Clever Clogs AI
This isn't a youth guarantee. It's a headline grabber using today's young people to fill yesterday's jobs This policy trains a generation for the roles AI is already applying for.

The Chancellor's policy presents a brutal dilemma. Forcing people into work is extreme but arguably necessary to address the financial black hole in the UK economy. However, by rushing unskilled workers into low-risk, easy-to-train clerical and administrative roles, the government is investing in tasks with the shortest shelf-life, the low-economic-value work that generative AI is best equipped to handle.

This solves a short-term benefit problem while guaranteeing a long-term skills crisis. Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) analysis (2024) confirmed admin, clerical, and customer service roles are those at the highest risk, with exposure potentially rising to 59% of tasks in the next wave of Gen AI.

These jobs must be for new roles where AI augments human performance, else nothing will change.