Is It Employers’ Duty to Employ Primarily British Workers to Combat Unemployment?

One million young people between the ages of 18 and 24 are currently unemployed or not in full-time education or training. It’s also been claimed by many, that British workers fail to work as hard as immigrants. So given Shadow Immigration Ministers Chris Bryant’s recently retracted keynote speech accusing both Tesco and Next of opting to not take on British people as employees, are British people opting to depend on benefits rather than take on low-paid jobs.

Shadow Immigration Minister Chris Bryant

Bryant’s Retraction

When he delivered the speech on 12^th August, Bryant’s comments were milder than expected. “Even good British companies are affected by the impact of low-skilled migrant workers.” he said. He went on to compliment Tesco on their training schemes and employment of young people and disabled people. Rather than appearing to attack immigrants and those who chiefly employ them, Bryant focused on “unscrupulous” employers who provide low wages, use agencies that don’t actively attempt to recruit in the UK. He also stated that many employers take on foreign workers for short periods of time and housing them in sub-standard accommodation.

Originally, Chris Bryant was expected to bluntly claim that Tesco undercut wages of British employees by recruiting from Eastern Europe, which the store denied. He also accused Next of primarily taking on Eastern European employees, particularly for their temporary summer positions. Next claimed this was because there is simply a lack of British people applying for their jobs, so foreign agency workers tend to be favoured. This is despite the fact that one in six children in the UK currently lives in poverty and in 2011-12, 2.3 million UK children (17%) lived in homes with substantially lower than average income. So what’s preventing people from applying for low-paid jobs?

The spirit of negotiation and collaboration is essential to a forward-moving society and exclusivity doesn’t foster a decent labour system. Yet given that the unemployment rate for 16-24 year olds has risen so sharply since 2008 when the recession began, according to the Poverty Site. They also stated that the unemployment rate for young people in 2010 was actually higher than its previous peak in 1993.

Benefits for the Basics

Morally, it’s vital to work rather than live on benefits as a good example to your children, young family members and others in society. However for some, benefits are simply the most economical option to sustain them and their family so logically, if someone can earn more through benefits than working, it’s likely they’ll take the straightforward option of getting the income they need without working. There are thousands of families in this country today who cannot afford to eat because disproportionate British wages fail to correspond to our rate of inflation and 22% of young Londoners are consequentially unemployed.

Current circumstances have gotten so severe that since 2010, food banks and soup kitchens have been introduced alongside local and nationwide charities, to help tackle poverty in Britain due to the recession and wage and benefit cuts.  In fact, a recent controversial scheme set up in Stoke-On-Trent has sparked debate, as it allowed Police to provide shoplifters with food vouchers for their local food bank. It was axed after Staffordshire Police confirmed seven vouchers had recently been given to “hard-pressed” thieves- those who couldn’t afford to eat. The force said that out of 5,833 dealt with since the scheme began in March, just seven received between one and seven vouchers.  

Fighting to Stay Alive

It’s safe to say if you steal a television, laptop or car, you are most likely aiming to flog it down the market. But if you’re stealing food, it may be the only way to feed yourself and/or your family. Yet it was argued by some that the scheme rewarded criminals for their unlawful actions. Councillor Janine Bridges said, “If somebody has committed a serious offence then I am absolutely in favour of proper punishment to fit the crime. But you have got to allow professionals to make these decisions and be empowered because they are the ones at the frontline dealing with the issues on a daily basis.” The scheme utilises sophisticated thinking and presents a fight against the harsh consequences of the recession.

The welfare state is a colossal and necessary part of modern British family life, with 20.3 million families receiving some kind of benefit (64% of families). For 9.6 million families, benefits make up more than half of their income, yet due to welfare cut backs the number of families receiving benefits will be between 1 and 2 million fewer in the next tax year because of changes to child tax credits, so some working families who previously got a small amount now receive nothing.

It’s no secret that the British economy is struggling, but surely keeping its citizens fed, watered and well…alive, should take precedence over, for instance David Cameron’s £77 million investment into promoting cycling in the UK and making it safer and more convenient. However innovative this may be, the overall welfare of Britons should be the primary agenda for our government as opposed to excess schemes such as this, no matter how much they endorse a healthy and active lifestyle.

Excessive: Cameron's new cycling scheme

Unemployment Breakdown

Some Britons are of the opinion that low wage jobs such as cleaning and customer service are unsuitable for them, which is astonishing given that the number of people out of work fell by 57,000 to 2.51 million in the three months to May according to the Office for National Statistics. The number of people in work is 29.71 million but it can be argued that if someone’s worked themselves into debt to gain a solid degree, qualification or training and is unable to get a job that utilises it, it may be difficult for them to accept low paid positions or menial labour. But surely if you have bills to pay and working is your only method of income, doing a job that you may consider academically ‘below’ you may be the best and only option.

To fight unemployment, the government has cut benefits which has backfired on many Britons, yet there are still countless companies who tend to favour immigrants for various reasons. But with unemployment figures rising continually and benefits increasingly being cut, it seems more economically sensible for British people to get their feet on the employment ladder rather than rely on the instability of the state.