Mutual Learning Programme

Mutual Learning Programme DG Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion Peer Country Comments Paper - Finland How to provide good spaces for empowerment and work experience for young people? Peer Review on 'The Guarantee for Youth' (a particular measure within the broader context of the Youth Guarantee) Paris (France), 7-8 April 2016 Written by Robert Arnkil, Arnkil Dialogues March 2016

EUROPEAN COMMISSION Directorate-General for Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion Unit A1 Contact: Emilio Castrillejo E-mail: EMPL-A1-UNIT@ec.europa.eu Web site: http://ec.europa.eu/social/mlp European Commission B-1049 Brussels

EUROPEAN COMMISSION Mutual Learning Programme DG Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion Directorate-General for Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion Peer Review on 'The Guarantee for Youth' (a particular measure within the broader context of the Youth Guarantee) March, 2016 Paris (France), 7-8 April 2016

Europe Direct is a service to help you find answers to your questions about the European Union. Freephone number (*): 00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11 (*) The information given is free, as are most calls (though some operators, phone boxes or hotels may charge you). LEGAL NOTICE The information contained in this publication does not necessarily reflect the official position of the European Commission This document has received financial support from the European Union Programme for Employment and Social Innovation "EaSI" (2014-2020). For further information please consult: http://ec.europa.eu/social/easi European Union, 2016 Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged.

Table of Contents 1 National approach to integration of NEETs and implementation of the Youth Guarantee... 1 2 Assessment of the policy measure... 2 3 Assessment of the success factors and transferability... 5 4 Questions... 7 Annex 1: Example of relevant practice... 8 Annex 2: Summary table...10

1 National approach to integration of NEETs and implementation of the Youth Guarantee This paper has been prepared for a Peer Review within the framework of the Mutual Learning Programme. It provides information on Finland s comments on the policy example of the Host Country for the Peer Review. For information on the policy example, please refer to the Host Country Discussion Paper. After initially surviving the 2008 Global Financial crisis rather well, Finland, because of high dependence on global exports, is now experiencing major problems in the economy and employment, and rising national debt. Unemployment rate is 9,3 per cent (January 2016), and rising in all age groups, worst among the aged (55+). Youth unemployment is 22 per cent and NEET 12,9 per cent. So the present situation of Finland is close to an EU average, but worse than in the other Nordic countries, which are our most important comparison point. In terms employment there are problems in all key phases of a lifelong career. With the slump in the economy, young people are experiencing problems in the transition from education to employment, in all education groups, but worst with the lowest educated. In the middle of careers, long-term unemployment is rising, especially among lower education groups, but also among the highly trained, and the situation is deteriorating worst among the most aged jobseekers. As Finland has one of the most aged demographics in the world, the biggest problem in the labour market for Finland is to deal with ageing, and the fact that the labour force is contracting. Therefore concern about the young generations, and mobilising the labour force efficiently has been high on the political agenda for a long time. The main measure to deal with the youth employment and NEET challenges has been the Youth Guarantee, a spearhead project of the former National Government (which took office in June 2011). Finland has, in fact, been one of the forerunners and initiators of the Youth Guarantee 1 concept in Europe. The Finnish YG has been a subject of an EU Peer review in 2014. 2 In implementing the YG, local government (municipalities), which are strong actors with a broad remit, and their partners and networks are in a key position in YG delivery and addressing the NEET challenge. PES, which is a state function is also a key partner in this, and the Ministry of the Economy and Employment was the overseer of the YG on a national level, in collaboration with other Ministries. 1 See MLP Database: http://ec.europa.eu/social/pdfservlet?mode=mlppractice&practiceid=23 2 http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?langid=en&catid=1070&newsid=2068&furthernews=yes March, 2016 1

2 Assessment of the policy measure The French Garantie Jeune (GJ) (which is a pilot in the framework of the overall Garantie Jeunesse) has many similarities to the Finnish efforts to help young people in the first phases of their career, and also highlights some interesting challenges concerning services for young people. The most important aspect of the Finnish YG, and in dealing with youth employment and career related issues in general, is promoting local, cross-sector cooperation and using multi-actor, individualised interventions. The French GJ emphasis on local delivery (Mission locales), individualised multi-professional service and cross sector partnerships is similar to what Finland also wants to emphasise. Local government is a very strong and autonomous actor in Finland, with broad responsibilities (from basic education to college level, basic health, social and youth work, etc.), every measure or new initiative dealing with young people, always has to be embedded and assimilated by the local government and their networks and partnerships. This local network, led by the local authority, collaborates with PES, which is a state function. Overall, the challenge is always to mainstream pilots and projects into this local (and regional) regular network and this is not always successful. As local-regional governance and service structures are presently under major renewal, reaching coordination and resilience in YG-delivery is under pressure. The use of group guidance (peer groups) in combination with individual service, as in the GJ, has been used in Finland, and is considered to be a good way to get more efficiency in service, and in any age groups in fact. Perhaps the most successful single method used in Finland and proven in many evaluations - in activating especially vulnerable young people and NEETs is what is called Etsivä Nuorisotyö, which can be translated as Seek and Find Youth Work, an outreach measure, where special youth workers (often outsourced from NGOs by municipalities) seek and find and activate young people, who have dropped out of education, or have been lost in transition from education to work. This is really a hands-on intervention, where the workers go wherever necessary to find the young people, establish a good contact, and then help them with the next steps. The emphasis of the GJ on work first, with the philosophy of providing (vulnerable) young people with a rich and real local work experience, and thus motivate them, and help them to get local contacts, makes sense from a Finnish perspective, too. The Finnish approach is not so much work first (especially for the most vulnerable), however, but rather, after making an individual assessment and action plan, to tailor a pathway, which seems most appropriate in the particular situation. It can mean building up everyday skills and rehabilitative measures, and intermediary labour market placements (like workshops), or enter educational measures, before real working life practice. So in general terms this is still quite a linear approach, and one criticism has been that it too often falls short of providing real working life contacts to the open market. The most recent measure, as a part of the Youth Guarantee in Finland, is building multiactor, and multi-professional One-Stop Career Guidance Centres, started 2015, called Ohjaamo (literally cock-pit of an aeroplane, or bridge of a ship) 3. The One-Stop shop aims a providing career advice, on a voluntary basis, contacts and support for anybody under 30. Therefore it is not offering services only for the most vulnerable, but for everybody, also in order to avoid a reputation of being a space for losers. Ohjaamo is still in its launching phase, and the concept is being developed. In terms of providing financial support, the young people can enter into different activation measures on the lower level of unemployment benefits, and if they enter work 3 The One Stop Shop Career Guidance Centre (Ohjaamo) is more closely described in the relevant practice at the end of this paper March, 2016 2

practice, there is a small recap, all in all about to 700 /month. Also a special measure, Sanssi ( chance ), a wage subsidy voucher is used in order to ease the employment situation of young unemployed VET or higher education graduates (aged 18 30 years) 4. The overall governance of the YG rested in the former government term with the Ministry of the Economy and Employment (MEE) (in collaboration with the Ministry of Education and Culture (MEC) and Ministry of Social Affairs and Health in particular), and the actual service delivery would be through local government-led collaborative networks, so in terms of governance this would have a resemblance to the French GJ governance and delivery. A new National Government took office in May 2015 in Finland, however, it shifted the responsibility from MEE (employment) to MEC (education). It has also considerably cut the resources available for the YG, as part of the new governments austerity programme, so the investment to the YG is presently not nearly as strong as it used to be. This has been a matter of political debate in Finland. Table: Brief overall assessment of the French policy measure Questions Has your country implemented similar measures to that of the host country and to what extent has this been successful? How are services/structures organised to support NEET at the local level? How can work placements and other measures best be combined to achieve positive outcomes for young people? How is experience gained in this way best validated to improve employability? Is there a combination of individual and collective support and if so how can these two approaches best be combined to achieve positive outcomes? Does the Peer country have experience of counsellors working in pairs and what are the advantages and disadvantages of such approaches? What training is offered and required for counsellors working with NEET groups? Answers Yes local emphasis, multi-professional, multi actor, peer groups in combo with individual but not as strong work-first and not so strongly focussed on the most vulnerable. Most successful has been the youth outreach measure Etsivä nuorisotyö ( Seek and find youth work ) Local government led local partnerships (education career guidance, youth work, NGOs) in collaboration with PES, in the framework of the Youth Guarantee Individualised and consistent, continued support across the key transitions offered by the same person (and/or team), helping workplaces to provide the work experience, close cooperation with the workplaces Yes, career guidance groups, in combination with individual service and workshops are used. Yes, working in pairs is used, as seen fit, like employment officers working in pairs with social workers, combining skills and knowledge Counsellors used to be traditionally psychologists specialised in career counselling, working in PES, but today counselling is provided by a wider spectrum of professions. 4 The Sanssi voucher is more closely described in the relevant practice at the end of this paper March, 2016 3

A case in point are youth workers in the Seek and find outreach measure, which calls for both experience and personal suitability for intensive individual work. Basic training is usually offered in Universities of Applied Sciences (social work/youth work) but experience from the field is needed, i.e. on-the job learning (i.e. in projects) What successful approaches exist to working with local employers, encouraging them to offer work placements and employment opportunities? Should specially trained counsellors work with employers or is it better for counsellors for young people to work with both target groups (employers and young people)? As an example, the Sanssi-card wage subsidy measure has been used successfully (see relevant practice at the end of this paper) The challenge is to flexibly connect knowledge from both sides, but this can be done in many ways. In any case movement between both worlds is probably advisable Is financial support given to young people how is this structured and what is its added value? Financial support is given as unemployment benefits (lower level), vouchers and apprenticeships March, 2016 4

3 Assessment of the success factors and transferability The main points of the French measure localised, multi-actor, multi-professional, tailored service, with low workload and using a mix of personal and peer group methods all make sense also in the Finnish context. Finland does not have as much a work first and vulnerable group focus as the French measure, but the ideas and points taken up in the French measure are relevant for Finland, too. It needs to be mentioned, however, that entrepreneurship and start-up training has also been successfully used in the YG. The paper supplied to us by DGEFP 5 in preparation for the PR identifies several important questions, where a shift from traditional linear intermediation practices in helping young people to access work need to be reinvented. These points are highly relevant also for the Finnish context (see table below). Table: Reinventing the pathways to work Problems and challenges of traditional pathways Traditional linear models tend to break down and get stuck in between and never reach real work opportunities Traditional point-to-point matching of skills to jobs does not work Traditional face-to-face counselling is not enough The target groups (young people) are left in a passive, recipient role, and their potential is not used enough Employers, especially SMEs don t have enough time and skills to engage in the processes Partnerships and coordination on localregional levels tends to be too weak and lacks resilience Remedies and reinventions Providing real work experience upstream and along the way, using a more iterative and non-linear model Provide a learning space, opportunities to enrich work experience and contacts and to prove yourself in action Use also peer learning in counselling and action outside counselling Enhance soft and enterprising skills and capacity and initiative Develop and co-create employerabilities, especially with SMEs Invest in resources, resilience and professionalism of coordination and brokers In terms of important success factors in these types of measures, the French pilot has already identified many success factors: local, tailored network delivery etc. and also that the counsellors should have limited workloads, to allow for a more individualised and tailored way of working with vulnerable groups. Many Finnish reforms have faced problems, when pilots or new services have had adequate resources, and a reasonable workload at the beginning, after a couple of years, the workload has been increased. As a result the reform was suffocated and the counsellors burned out. This danger in intensive case-work with challenging target groups is real, and should be taken 5 General Delegation for employment and vocational training (department of Ministry of Work, Employment, Vocational training and social dialogue) in France March, 2016 5

seriously. Support for counsellors, in various forms, like peer learning, special workshops and training, and possibilities for recuperation (breaks) should be provided. Contacts with workplaces, and providing those workplaces (especially SMEs) with help in recruitment and arranging work experiences/work practices is an important success factor. Experience points to the fact, that employers often value this process-support more than wage subsidies. Transferability is always a tricky issue, when the structures, powers and responsibilities between countries differ, in this case especially concerning local actors. A key channel of delivery in the French case were the Mission locales and their partners/network. It seems from the initial assessments of the pilot, that re-gearing the Mission locales was somewhat a challenge at the beginning, and that building partnerships has been, and remains, a challenge. All this sounds very familiar also in the Finnish context. So resilience in partnership building and coordination are called for. The Finnish experience in YG tells that success needs good operation and mutual connection on all key levels: vision and cross-ministerial cooperation at the national, macro-level, good coordination at the regional-local level, and an intensive, tailored approach at the customer (micro) level. March, 2016 6

4 Questions How can it be secured, that the best practices and social capital developed in Garantie Jeunes, of the Mission locales, and their networks, will be mainstreamed to normal structures and practices, as (also in Finnish experience), the mainstream tends to remain in status quo while the pilot is running, and it is difficult to sell the practice after the pilot has ended? How do you intend to keep the best newly recruited Garantie Jeunes counsellors available after the pilot or will they disappear? How do you secure that the counsellors keep having a reasonable workload, and don t burn out? How do you intend to secure further development of coordination on the local and regional levels? How do you intend to secure national level commitment to both Garantie Jeunes, and Garantie Jeunesse? March, 2016 7

Annex 1: Example of relevant practice Name of practice 1: Ohjaamo 6 (One-stop-shop for career guidance). There are presently 35 One-stop-shop Ohjaamo career guidance centres in Finland, mainly in bigger cities. Year of implementation: Started in 2015, ongoing Coordinating authority: Ministry of Employment and the Economy (contact person Mr. Ari-Pekka Leminen, ari-pekka.leminen@tem.fi) Objectives: Ohjaamo is a part of the Youth Guarantee of Finland. The aim is to provide low threshold one-stop-shop service for young people below the age of 30, to provide information, advice, guidance and support across a range of sectors from the basic services of various administrative branches and across a broad network of collaborators. It is funded mainly through ESF 2014 2020 with additional national funding. Main activities: The modus operandi of Ohjaamo is to provide young people a voluntary space to sort and enrich their career and employment situation, which they can also do without involving the referring organisation. The Centre will give special support to young people going through transitions in their career, and will also encourage them to remain in education and work. The shop provides personal advice and guidance, support in life management, career planning, social skills and capacity building as well as education and employment support. Being a One-stopshop does not necessarily imply that participating organisations are always literally in the same physical space. It can also mean that several organisations act under a common trademark and exist as a network; or a digital platform. However, all onestop-shops aim to offer coordinated and holistic service to jobseekers with different entry points and a low threshold. Jobseekers immediately get a multi-professional service, either face-to-face or virtually, or in combination. Ohjaamo is supported by a special coordination project, Kohtaamo 7, which provides support for developing the Ohjaamo-concept, implementation, developing the digital platform and internet-based guidance (as a supplement to face-to-face services), the services offered, and evaluating the results. The provision of youth guidance and advice over the internet service is still in its very first stages. Results so far: As this practice has only just been launched, no evaluation has been published yet (but has been commissioned and done via the Kohtaamoproject). Name of practice 2: Sanssi-Card (wage subsidy voucher) 8 Year of implementation: 2018 - ongoing Coordinating authority: Ministry of Employment and the Economy, local PES offices (called TE-offices in Finland) Objectives: Sanssi ( chance ), a wage subsidy voucher is used as an incentive for employers to hire young people, and to ease the employment situation of young unemployed VET or higher education graduates (aged 18 30 years). Main activities: A Sanssi card entitled holders to the following benefits: 6 The Finnish word Ohjaamo means cockpit as in an airplane, or bridge in a ship 7 http://blogit.jamk.fi/opinovikanava/2014/12/18/nuoriso-ohjauksen-valokiilaan-kohtaamohanke-kayntiin/ (in Finnish) 8 http://www.teservices.fi/te/en/employers/find_an_employee/support_recruitment/recruiting_sa nssi_card/index.html March, 2016 8

The card holder will be paid the salary stated in the collective sector agreement; An employer may receive a pay subsidy for 30, 40 or 50 % of payroll costs depending on the duration of the previous unemployment. For instance, an employer hiring a young person who has been unemployed for less than a year, may receive a subsidy covering 30 % of the payroll costs for that person for a period not exceeding 10 months. If the young person has been unemployed for a longer period, the subsidy may be more extensive and paid for a longer period; This pay subsidy is available for employment relationships that are valid until further notice or for a fixed term, and for part-time and full-time work; In the case of training contracts (e.g. apprenticeships), subsidies can be granted for the entire duration of training. With a Sanssi card, a young person could seek employment with a company, an NGO, a municipality or a household. Every card was valid for three months at a time. The Sanssi card scheme was introduced in May 2010 and by January 2011, 18 500 young people had received a Sanssi card. Results so far: Sanssi-card was well received both by employers and young people March, 2016 9

Annex 2: Summary table Labour market situation in the Peer Country Unemployment, youth unemployment and NEET are about EU 27 average at the moment, but deteriorating Finland has a very skewed age structure big aged cohorts leaving the work force, and young cohorts only half the size of these, and very low immigration and foreign population (despite the ongoing refugee upsurge) So efficient mobilisation of the entire workforce, in all age groups, is relevant for Finland Assessment of the policy measure The main points of the French measure localised, multi-actor, multiprofessional, tailored service, with low workload and using a mix of personal and peer group methods all make sense also in the Finnish context Finland does not have as much a work first and vulnerable group focus as the French measure, but building good spaces of experience and connection to work to enhance the pathway to employment is relevant for Finland Assessment of success factors and transferability The French pilot has already identified many success factors: local, tailored network delivery etc. and also that the counsellors should not have too hard a workload, lest compromise the individualised, tailored way of working with vulnerable groups In addition, the contacts with workplaces, and providing them (especially SMEs) with help in recruitment and arranging the work experiences is an important success factor Overall, the philosophy and delivery mechanism of the French initiative serves to reassert, mutatis mutandis, many ideas and practices relevant for Finland, and challenges Finland to develop learning and contact spaces to work, and take a careful look at the most vulnerable groups, and to provide real work experiences. Questions How can it be secured, that the best practices and social capital developed in Garantie Jeunes, of the Mission locales, and their networks, will be mainstreamed to normal structures and practices, as (also in Finnish experience), the mainstream tends to remain in status quo while the pilot is running, and it is difficult to sell the practice after the pilot has ended? How do you intend to keep the best newly recruited Garantie Jeunes counsellors available after the pilot or will they disappear? How do you secure that the counsellors keep having a reasonable workload, and don t burn out? How do you intend to secure further development of coordination on the local and regional levels? How do you intend to secure national level commitment to both Garantie Jeunes, and Garantie Jeunesse? March, 2016 10