[Translation : EPALE France]

Enabling and supporting the active participation of all young people

Article 1: Reconnecting with the so-called ‘invisible’ youth

As part of my activity as thematic coordinator for employment transitions, I offer a series of articles on the EPALE platform on the issue of mobilising groups in support systems designed to help them embark on a career path, whether education plays a part or not. This series is also intended as a modest contribution to the European priorities of the Erasmus programme, which states that “Europe must rely on the vision and active participation of all young people in order to build a better future that is greener, more inclusive, and digitalised”. With 2022 being the European Year of Youth, we will tackle these two themes (transitions and youth) from several angles, which will allow us to “draw inspiration from the actions, visions, and ideas of young people to further boost and strengthen the EU community project.” To that end, we will address an aspect of the issue of young adults aged 16-25 who are not in education, employment, or training (NEET). More specifically, we are interested in the so-called ‘invisible’ young people.

Particular circumstances

After more than two years of the pandemic, which has changed several individual and collective benchmarks, this international situation has amplified multiple concerns that affect us all. Unpredictability is at its peak, and seeking to integrate into employment at this particular time means rallying energy, optimism, and support. This concerns everyone, but, as is often the case, crises tend to be revealing of numerous inequalities, and can even magnify them. This tension can be seen in the mobilisation of actions aimed at supporting long-term jobseekers, but also in numerous initiatives throughout France addressing the issue of so-called ‘invisible’ young people. In this series of articles, we will seek to better document and illustrate this groundwork which is starting to bear fruit, and gives us valuable insights into the complexity of the factors at work, and the need to take the time to listen and avoid simply applying a predetermined scheme to groups whose situations rarely match our prototypes and procedures.

The so-called ‘invisible’ youth

Those who do not take advantage of their rights, who drop out of school, NEETs, and so-called ‘invisible’ groups; a myriad of terms for one central societal and democratic issue: to explain that a significant proportion of the population do not have access to rights that could improve their situation.

The facts speak for themselves and are long-standing, with young people at the forefront: “Young people aged 16-25 face an unemployment rate that is twice as high as the average (21.8% compared to 9% in the third quarter of 2020) and almost double in high-priority neighbourhoods. In its February 2020 study, DARES estimated that in 2018, 963,000 young people aged 16-25 were not in education, employment or training (NEET), representing 12.9% of young people in this age group.[1].” How can this situation be explained and what public action levers should be mobilised? There have been numerous initiatives over the years, including the specific measures launched throughout France as part of the Skills Investment Programme. However, this issue spans well beyond France and is of concern to the whole of Europe. It covers issues of inclusion that cannot be reduced to employment and training alone. It is the feeling of being able to act on one’s own future, as well as the future of a whole generation of European citizens, that is in question. The issue is not a new one, but one that is more important than ever for European democracies at a time when suspicion of institutions can increase the temptation, for many people, to disassociate themselves, to try to get by on their own, and to withdraw. Moreover, the substantial financial resources and creativity of professionals that have been deployed in dedicated programmes have not always reached their target audience. So, who are we talking about?

This term refers to people who are not only unemployed and untrained, but who also do not take advantage of the social and professional integration schemes available to them, either by choice or out of ignorance. In France, the new Youth Employment Contract, on which we have an upcoming blog article based on the initiatives proposed in several Missions Locales (Youth Employment Centres), also aims to encourage the mobilisation of this group.

Confusions to be avoided

However, experience has led us to a number of observations and remarks:

- Our propensity to classify these groups into categories (NEETs, dropouts, invisible youth, etc.) can give the illusion of a situation ‘prototype’ where a one-size-fits-all method can be applied - yet experience has shown us that there is a wide variety of situations, and above all that building a bond of trust requires attention to many factors that can rarely be reduced to tools or procedures.

- This classification also has the disadvantage of reductionism: the people concerned are sometimes reduced to the difficulties they face – and yet experience shows us the incredible wealth of resources that these people are able to mobilise. This implies shifting the focus from the characteristics of individuals to the context in which mobilisation can take place, allowing people to feel that they are in a position to act upon their own situation (and to not feel obliged to submit to the norm).

- The other risk is to reduce the influence of the element of identification or diagnosis. Most of these people have grown tired of the multiple diagnoses they have experienced. The objective is indeed to identify the so-called ‘invisibles’ and to re-establish contact, and above all to encourage their remobilisation, thus ensuring the transition to a stage adapted to the pathway currently being constructed – and it is indeed a question of co-construction, and not of prescription.

Moreover, the reflection on the so-called ‘invisible’ groups cannot be reduced to the construction of dedicated measures, however interesting and relevant they may be. More broadly, it raises the question of a support process that really takes into account the situation of people who have chosen (or have felt obliged) to break free from a system perceived as restrictive and overly demanding; a system that speaks of motivation, but in reality increases doubt and even mistrust.

What are the levers for action?

In this respect, focusing solely on identifying and diagnosing these groups risks making them feel that they are being hunted down, which is not conducive to their mobilisation. We should also question the virtues that are central to the new Youth Employment Contract as a pedagogical lever for engagement, even though ease of entry and non-conditionality appear to be enabling factors for ‘re-weaving’ a bond of trust.

Agnès Heidet, a consultant, has been working on these issues for several years, particularly by supporting a number of networks that assist these so-called ‘invisible’ people. She puts it this way:

“There are several dimensions to this distancing from systems and structures, including a feeling of relegation that does not encourage people to put themselves out there, a lack of belief in their ability to dictate their own future, the feeling sometimes of being reduced to the obstacles that they face, and often also the feeling of a discrepancy between the expectations of institutions (or of the labour market) and the often complex personal circumstances. These factors add up to produce a lack of trust that is difficult to shake. This withdrawal can be observed in many situations, not only amongst young people, and has been exacerbated by the pandemic.” 

Referring to a project on ‘invisible’ youth by the Normandy Missions Locales to which she contributed, Agnès Heidet stated that, “from the beginning, the question arose of possible levers for mobilisation. It was clear that we had to find a more rapid, intense, local, and less formal form of support. This is precisely what we did, with very interesting results, both for the target audience and the professionals involved”.

What she described to us is ultimately a reversed process in which the actions are not predetermined or organised in an applied manner (adhering to the programme), but rather are co-developed with the target audience, tested, modified, and even abandoned if necessary. By no longer employing a vertical engineering approach (determining what must be done beforehand) and facilitating - sometimes informal - opportunities for experience, trust is created, and thus the pleasure of participating and contributing ensues. If we stop to take stock after several months of work and collecting information, we can identify 4 pedagogical principles that are capable of initiating mobilising practices by taking into account, in particular, a change in function:

1 – The consideration of young people and how they are perceived: each person is considered capable and able to contribute to the work proposed. In this respect, diagnosis of constraints from an expert point of view only reinforces the person’s feeling of helplessness.

2 - Teaching methods: the introduction of a reversed system is in recognition of the need for momentum, experience, and cooperation. The target audience will come together that much more if the activity represents an opportunity to move beyond simple reflection or the transfer of information and techniques. CVs can be worked on in countless ways. In this regard, alternative pedagogical strategies are essential.

3 - The attitude of the coach: it is not a question of convincing, promoting, or playing the role of a benevolent social influencer, but rather of acting as a facilitator/mediator, which is essential for the appropriation of what is being built with young people over time.

4 - A conducive environment: external interventions, experience-based processes, construction of cooperative projects resulting in a collective body of work – essentially, it is a question of co-constructing nurturing learning environments that open up to new opportunities. In summary, we need to move away from an academic view of employability which always places the burden and responsibility on the person in difficulty. In this respect, the evolution of the labour market, by calling recruitment criteria into question, can encourage us to open up spaces for negotiation which can encourage any individual to believe that doors are open to them.

Perspectives

All of this forces us to ‘dis-align’; to move away from our own beliefs about others, in the words of the philosopher François Jullien, and thus to open up possibilities accessible to everyone, everywhere. But is this just a pipe dream? It’s up to us to come up with a supportive teaching approach that does not impose additional standards but which mobilises and activates the invisible resources of many people. More than a pedagogical issue, it is a question of fairness and democracy.

                                                                                                                      André Chauvet

[1] Call for projects/Identifying and mobilising ‘invisible’ groups, and first and foremost, the youngest among them / Skills Investment Programme (PIC)