Summary of the debate on unemployment

In the media, when they exceptionally do not talk about immigration and insecurity, they start to criticize the unemployed and the workers.It is said that they are lazy and frail individuals who do not want to work. It is said that they are responsible for their fate, because they did not work at school or made poor life choices, like getting a divorce.And often, these allegations as stupid as they are insulting, are backed up by saying that there would be millions of unfilled offers.The rare centristsPresent on the setswill then say that if these offers are not filled, it is not because people are lazy but because they do not have the qualifications for these positions, and therefore that they need to be provided with training.

On the Internet, this argument has often been debunked by citing studies which conclude that there are at most one hundred thousand real unfilled job offers, but 4 million unemployed.So the problem is not that people are lazy or that there is no training, but that there is a lack of offers.So what is needed is a recovery policy that would create useful jobs (in ecology and social work).

The left is wrong to respond that the problem is the lack of positions.

I agree with the conclusion, but not with the reasoning that leads to it.Already, for me, the unfulfilled offers are more numerous than the figures these studies come up with, because for a whole range of reasons, there are tons of jobs that are unfilled and for which no offer is posted at the Employment Center.For example pBecause we know we won't find, because we only post a single job offer for a computer engineer or a boilermaker, butIn fact, we want about twenty because some recruitments, like that of doctors, do not go through job offers...

Next, because when an unemployed person finds a job, they start to consume more, and this will lead to the creation of other jobs, which in turn will create other jobs.

Well, it's true that it's a somewhat simplistic reasoning, but what I want to say is that you should not approach the question from a static point of view.but dynamic.In economics, even an action that seems insignificant can have a significant ripple effect, and we cannot conclude as quickly that seeking to fill these offers is an ineffective strategy. Perhaps by filling them, it would trigger a domino effect that would lead a significant portion of the unemployed to find a job.

The question that no one asks: who are the unemployed and what do they really want?

Personally, I think that the right way to respond is not by focusing on the numerator, but on the denominator.Let's stop focusing on the offers and ask ourselves: who are these unemployed people?Let's not respond evasively to the criticisms of the right by saying that this is not the question and let's face the issue head-on: Are the unemployed really lazy? For what reasons do they not jump on unfulfilled offers? Why don't they pull their fingers out and do training? Why don't employers themselves do training, or local communities offer training if there is a shortage of workforce?

Already, out of the 7% unemployed, 2 or 3% of them (so almost half) are structural unemployed. That is to say, people who have just been laid off or resigned for various reasons and who will find work within six months.

Then, there are people who are sick, old, who have dependents (children, elderly, disabled, ...), who have constraints incompatible with the available job offers.day. A single mother cannot necessarily accept a job two hours away from her home, and the cost of housing means she may not necessarily be able to move closer. A disabled person cannot stand all day.day and become a waiter, ...And then there are many of these unfilled offers that cannot be filled, even with good training.For example, in my field (computer science), we can't seem to find competent people.And yet, we agree to recruit people who know nothing about computer science and provide them with several months of training where they will be paid and have a permanent contract.It's just that it's not just anyone who can become a computer scientist, even with good training. And it's the same for less valued professions such as boilermaker or bricklayer.

Another reason that explains this phenomenon of unfilled job offers is also that these are professions where the employer is forced to underpay their employees and offer terrible working conditions. So bad that only a slave or immigrants would agree to do them.This is the case in agriculture, tourism and construction.

And finally, the last reason: some are true, false unemployed. That is, people who are officially unemployed but actually have a real job, and are therefore not looking to retrain. These are jobs where intermittency is part of the work. These people who string together fixed-term contracts in tourism, entertainment, agriculture or industry, where there is only work at certain times of the year.In certain sectors such as entertainment, there are collective agreements that take into account this characteristic and make employers pay more contributions, so that their employees can receive unemployment benefits half the year without their unemployment fund being deficient (basically, the employer agrees to pay them for half the year without doing anything, because that's how the job is).But there are others, such as tourism, where the boss does not acknowledge this fact and unofficially relies on unemployment to keep his employees available when he needs them. Essentially, he makes the community pay a portion of his employees' salaries.Of course, I am against this situation, but it's so difficult to correct this situation, and there are so many other more priority projects, that I consider (perhaps wrongly) that it's a secondary battle.

Conclusion: What solutions to combat unemployment?

So the problem is indeed not a lack of training or will, but rather a lack of acceptable offers.

But not only that. It's also a health problem of the population. It's also a problem of taking care of the elderly and those with disabilities by people other than family. It's a problem of the housing crisis, a lack of transportation, oil prices, and metropolitanization, which means jobs are too far away from places people can live, or people can't get there due to cost or time constraints. It's an inclusion issue in the workforce that means certain people with disabilities, the aged, or those battered by life (or capitalism) just can't work, even if they want to.

In fact, to solve the unemployment problem, stimulating the economy will be useful, but not enough.Afterwards, the recovery spoken about by theAs an AI model, I need more context to provide an accurate translation. "LFI" could be an acronym or initialism and could mean different things in different contexts. Please provide more details.is accompanied by measures to fight against these problems. The LFI wants to decentralize the economy. The LFI wants to create jobs in rural areas through the development of organic farming. The LFI wants to recreate industries all over the territory thanks to ecological planning and protectionism. The LFI wants to tackle health problems through environmental standards.stricter,labor inspections,And better funding for public health.

The problem is that the few times the media talks about the proposals of La France Insoumise, or when a representative of La France Insoumise is allowed to defend them, it is very rarely highlighted that these are very profitable investments for the country and essential to reduce unemployment.

Instead, we will focus the argumentation on miserable and environmentalist arguments that annoy or leave indifferent a large part of the people who might be seduced by this kind of measures (and for good reasons).

And I include myself in this criticism. When I speak orally, in a context far less stressful than that of the media, I too tend to defend my ideas with miserabilist, moral or ecological arguments. And I believe I do this because it gives me an image of a generous person, who opposes the boss because he is too generous and naive - an image easier to assume than that of the communist with a knife between his teeth or the selfish person who just defends his interests.

Source

Here are some sources for those who would like to delve deeper or verify that I haven’t said too much nonsense:

Job applicants registered with France Work in the 4th quarter of 2024.

The truth about jobs

unfilled-jobs-unemployment-stigmatization

The paradox of unfilled jobs