Denmark’s rate of employment is the highest in the EU with 75. 7% in 2004, it’s the highest compared to the UK aswell by 4. 1% and unemployment is 5. 4% in 2004 is one of the lowest in the EU, however UK’s rate is 4. 7% which is 0. 7% lower than Denmark.
We see that one of the reasons why Denmark has a higher rate of employment compared to UK is that its labour market is seen to be “characterised by high degrees of adaptability of workers through mechanisms and measures reviewed and reinforced on a continued basis through involvement of social partners”(4) this motto isn’t reflected in the figures for the New Deal programme though it is put in theory in the structural reforms of the programme, that is where UK is underperforming in the quality with which it integrates the programmes and puts into practise the ‘individually tailored to support one’s needs’ theme of it.
Denmark also focuses on investing in human capital looking ahead of how they could maintain fiscal sustainability better in the future they do focus on getting the unemployed back into work quickly which is why I believe it is the key challenge for UK but not yet comprehended fully anyway by the commissioner.
UK reform programme hasn’t at all mentioned the timescale of, in how long they will achieve is briefly outlined in New Deal programme but it isn’t implemented as you either see people leaving the programme for ‘other’ reasons other than ‘early employment’ and only some, very few attain employment but even that figure cannot fully speculate upon as figures aren’t fragmented into separate category for ’employment through completion of New Deal programme’ ‘early employment through other means or non’ , we don’t see number of people who had started New Deal programme for the second or third time.
Denmark’s national reform programme outlines a key driver to improving its labour market it looks at ‘overhauling employment policies’ whereas UK doesn’t really look at repairing so much but reforming or forming new initiatives which don’t really provide what’s required to achieve a competitive labour force though its exceeded the Lisbon targets 3 times in a row. Conclusion UK reform programme isn’t tackling the demographic challenges nor the long term unemployment alongside this it isn’t dealing with the number of adults with intermediate to low skills.
It doesn’t at all focus on what’s key here, the time in which an individual becomes equipped with the necessary skills and capability of being adaptable in the labour force to become employable. The New Deal is lacking thorough integration and full implementation to what it sets out to do in all areas of the UK in the Lisbon agenda. UK’s target of achieving 80% employment rate isn’t possible with the current level of productivity in the New Deal programme. Britain is lacking in the quality of training and skills programme to get people into the labour force.
New Deal needs to be transparent in its findings and with budget (quantity) there needs to be a reflection to a standard of quality compromising the i?? 3. 6 billion spent on New Deal. Denmark are organised and approaching their main challenges which is what UK needs to do to be organised in what it aims to achieve. There needs to be more concentration on training for the relevant skills for relevant sectors of employment according to Eurostat in 2003, they found ‘work-based training other than apprenticeships is relatively little used’ (5).
Bibliography 1. Source: Internet, Report on’ Evaluation of Targeted initiatives, published date, 3rd November 2006, reported for Employment and Learning. 2. Source: Internet, ‘Evaluation of Targeted Initiatives, published 3rdNovember 2006. 3. Source: same source as above. 4. Source: Lisbon Agenda document, EU Denmark Assessment. 5. Source: Internet, Eurostat document viewed titled, ‘Expenditure on training measures for the unemployed across the EU – Issue number 5/2006.