The Hourglass and the Escalator …

Labour market change and mobility

a research report by Paul Sissons published by The Work Foundation July 2011

Executive summary (headline items only for space considerations)

The past decade has been a period of considerable change in the labour market, in particular in the latter years when the economy has experienced recession and emerging recovery. Over the longer-term, as the economy has been increasingly based on knowledge rather than routine production, new jobs have been created in large numbers in high-skill, high-wage professional and managerial occupations. Yet the last decade has also seen growth in lower wage service occupations, combined with a reduction in middle-wage occupations, leading to concerns of employment polarisation. In short, there appears to be a gradual hollowing-out of the labour 

The process of labour market change and polarisation has tended to be experienced differently by men and women.

However, changes in the labour market have not resulted in the sharp increases in wage inequality which were seen in the 1980s and 1990s.

The recent recession was not the white-collar recession that many commentators were predicting.

The least skilled have suffered in the recession as people with more skills ‘bump-down’ in the labour market.

One of the potentially damaging aspects of growing polarisation in the labour market is that it may create additional barriers to earnings mobility.

In order to support in-work progression for low earners, policy-makers should:

• Identify ways to improve and upgrade service sector employment.
• Work with employers, sector skills councils and training providers to develop career ladders.
• Ensure good quality careers advice is available. 
• Promote lifelong learning. 

Recent changes in the labour market have also created some specific policy needs going forward:

• Facilitate the sector swap.
• Re-skill and re-train. 

Hazel’s comment:
I’m getting tired, very tired, of reading research reports which say “more and better careers advice” and “lifelong learning is key to economic development”.
Yes, of course, careers advice is key, yes we must have more opportunities for people to learn outside of the formal education system.
My frustration is that I’ve been reading these reports, or similar research findings, for nearly thirty years.
Back then people such as Linda Butler and John Allred were saying it. Why, if these areas of development are so important are we still asking for better guidance, more lifelong learning?

---