Context
Economy and Employment
Employment will benefit the local economy of Williams Lake; by reducing crime, reducing family monetary strain, adding money into the economy, improving the livelihood of youth and their families and future. “For the first time in our history, older Canadians are saying that their children will not enjoy the same standard of living as they did at the same age” (Greenparty).
As youth enter the job market, especially in rural communities such as Williams Lake, they are often faced with the burden of being unable to find a job, regardless of the skill level necessary for the job. When people are faced with the inability to acquire jobs to sustain themselves, those individuals occasionally indulge in illegal activities in order to acquire profits to support themselves (CBC). In fact a study found that a 1% decrease in employment can cause a 1-5% increase in crimes such as robbery and burglary (Raphael). BBC had conducted a survey and found that boredom and a lack of activities, or work led to higher crime rates for youth. In fact 70% of kids interviewed in the study, said they had at some point been involved with petty crime due to boredom (BBC). Thus a lack of job opportunities in Williams Lake can certainly increase the crime rates. Which can put a strain on the economy as Police have to attend to the crime which comes out of tax dollars. Also, if there are property crimes committed (such as graffiti, or other vandalism) then individuals and store/property owners have to spend their own money in order to clean it up.
Another economic strain that unemployed youth have is on their families. The longer youth are at home, and living with their families while not having a job, or some source of income, the longer the family unit must support that child with shelter and nourishment(Green party). This in turn leads to many families having a lack of disposable income. It also leads to parents being unable to save nearly as much money for their retirement fund, which eventually does have its toll on an economy and government agencies (or the extended family) as they have to take care of the elderly whom have a less then desirable retirement fund (Liberal).
By giving youth job opportunities now, you are both improving their livelihoods and their families, and the local economy.
“Being unemployed at a young age can have a long-lasting impact on an individual’s career prospects… A period of unemployment at the time of entry into the labour market is associated with persistently lower wages… This ‘wage scarring’ will strip the equivalent of $12.4 billion dollars from future earnings for Canadians unable to find work during the recession…” (CBC)
This is due to the inability to acquire skills at a young or even close to a young age (CBC). In fact, right now unemployment among youth in Canada is so high (ages 15-24 face a 16.4% and 20.9% unemployment rate—the highest percentage out of any other age group (PPF of Canada)) that many Canadian youth have given up trying to find work all together (Liberal). Some youth, in the same mindset have decided to drop out of high school due to the unlikelihood of finding work after school, or have dropped out of college because of the low prospects of finding sufficient enough work to pay their college tuition bills (PPF of Canada). Thus, due to a lack of employment opportunities you also have, in a sense a localized lack of educated youth, further perpetuating the issue of unemployed young people.
Although there are many issues with unemployed youth, the Canadian government is addressing the problem and investing millions of dollars in projects that address the problem such as the “Youth Employment Strategy” (Government of Canada).
“Creating youth employment and economic opportunities for Canadian businesses and communities are key priorities for the Government of Canada. By investing in strategic initiatives that support small business development and growth, such as these youth internships, we are helping to create jobs for young Canadians, while strengthening the economic outlook for our communities.” (Babcock)
However these youth opportunities for internships and local employments cannot happen if people (especially youth) cannot make it to their jobs, or potential jobs. That is why our group wants to help create a shuttle system that can help them get there.
Barriers to Employment
In British Columbia, there is a widening gap between youth and adult unemployment, heightened by the notion that youth of certain marginalized populations face additional employment barriers. Aboriginal youth, especially those living in rural B.C. communities, are particularly susceptible to employment barriers, and this manifests both in socioeconomic ways, as well as health ways, where youth face anxiety over the availability of jobs (BC Centre for Employment Excellence, 4).
In researching access to employment by youth in rural B.C. communities, the most commonly cited barrier to employment was transportation related, with 45% of participants citing this as a concern. When breaking this down further, studies show that 68% of participants with “behavioural conditions” saw transportation as an employment barrier, compared to 43% of participants who experienced “no behavioural conditions” (16).
While transportation barriers are linked to other barriers such as socioeconomic and educational attainment rates, transportation ultimately was a significant topic for discussion in research focus groups. Research found that transportation-based employment barriers primarily surround two elements: first, the inaccessibility and/or inadequacy of existing transit networks, and second, the requirement by some employers for employees to have their own vehicles or drivers license. This was especially relevant to youth living in communities where construction or landscaping industries were major employers (16). Economic factors also played a role, where some youth noted that they were unable to pay for transit fare, and ran risks of receiving fines which could jeopardize future employment opportunities.
Moreover, 40% of youth reported a lack of “skills/education” as a barrier to education (16). While much of this is rooted in not having the technical or educational skills required by many employers (such as a GED or technical skills such as FoodSafe), other reasons are more complex and again related to transportation barriers. One youth noted that while they had a technical skill, wherein they could drive a forklift, they still needed a drivers license in order to attain a job. Others said that even when they had the skills or technical capacity to fill a role, their lack of experience – which is fundamentally impacted by transportation barriers – prevents them from being hired over others (17).
While accessing employment is therefore largely impacted by transportation and skills, in maintaing employment, youth cited motivational issues, unreliable work schedules, poor working conditions, low wages, hostile work environments, harassment and safety as primary challenges. Various social issues in communities create additional challenges, especially for youth-in-care, who often face a lack of structure and stability in their living situations (38). When employment is maintained however, this is often because they see themselves as having worked hard (80%) and maintained strong relationships with co-workers (69%).
Despite such challenges however, youth remain optimistic about their employment prospects, and are eager to work and stay within their communities (42). If focusing solely on challenges in transportation, various programming currently exists to address this. The “BladeRunners” program, is notable, as it aims to increase the accessibility of public transportation through providing youth with bus tickets, gas cards and sometimes rides. Some youth were supported in pursuing their learners license through the program, which was desirable when public or shared transportation was not available .
Youth Migration/Retention
Many rural communities face the problem of youth migration, which in turn, suggests the need for youth retention strategies in rural communities. In many studies, rural youth are defined as being aged 15 to 29 and live in communities with a population of less than 10,000 people (R.A. Malatest & Associates Ltd, 2002). Birgit Jentsch points out that “young people have been identified as being amongst the most disadvantaged and restricted by rural living” (2006). According to A Rural Youth Discussion Paper, “the research suggests that there is a definite need for a rural youth strategy, as labour market data indicated that rural youth have been migrating in relatively large numbers to urban centers” (R.A. Malatest & Associates Ltd, 2002). There are different reasons as to why youth are migrating from the rural communities in which they grew up, the effects it is having on the communities, as well as suggested strategies for youth retention.
Reasons for youth migrating from their rural communities include lack of employment, education and social opportunities compared to those available in urban centers and larger cities (Theodori and Theodori, 2014). Many youth intend to leave their rural communities after graduating high school because there are very limited opportunities and options available for those with higher education and occupational aspirations. Transportation is also a problem that is cited as a cause for youth missing certain opportunities (for example, employment) in rural areas (Jentsch, 2006). As Jentsch points out, “rural employers tend to be widely scattered, a lack of public and private transport could be a serious problem in finding work” (2006).
Young people tend to be the largest group of out-migrants from rural communities and the consequences of youth migration from rural to urban centers have great effects on their rural communities (Jentsch, 2006). As Theodori and Theodori reiterate, “the effect of these decisions on rural communities is also tremendous, as the out-migration of youth may result in negative outcomes for their home communities due to the loss of potential workforce, community leaders, volunteers, and parents of future generations” (2014). This creates challenges for the sustainability of rural communities, especially in communities with declining populations, when economic and community development becomes more difficult (Jentsch, 2006).
Some youth return to their hometowns, but rural communities experience lower rates of return migration than urban centers do (R.A. Malatest & Associates Ltd, 2002). One study suggested that many youth would return if there were suitable employment opportunities available for them (R.A. Malatest & Associates Ltd, 2002).
One proposal to enhance young people’s opportunities in the research studied, is subsidies for transport or to improve public transportation systems in rural areas (Jentsch, 2006). According to Theodori and Theodori, the youth in rural communities are strongly influenced by their teachers, their schools and communities, and are encouraged to get youth more involved and engaged in community activities in order to sway young people to stay or return to their hometowns (2014).
Added Barriers: Indigenous Youth and Youth with Disabilities
Aboriginal youth and young people with disabilities are seen to face added barriers to employment (McCreary Centre Society, 2014). Some of the reasons for this trend include discrimination by employers during the job application process and discrimination at the workplace based on disability and ethnicity, as well as lack of access to job postings and difficulty going to the place of work due to transit issues and high cost of transportation (McCreary Centre Society, 2014).
Indigenous youth face barriers to employment that result from generations of systematic oppression. There is a long history of exploitation that underlies the current rates of poverty among Aboriginal people (Centre for Social Justice). Many people find themselves trapped in a cycle of poverty, poor health, low education and family violence which continue to reinforce each other. This, combined with systematic disadvantages and discrimination create numerous barriers to successful employment(Centre for Social Justice). Young Aboriginal people in Northern Canada are more likely to be unemployed than other Canadians (Abel & Delic, 2014). In 2006, for example, the unemployment rate for all Aboriginal youth in Canada was 22%, compared to a national average for youth of 13% while in 2009, the employment rate for Aboriginal youth was 45.1%, while for non Aboriginal youth it was 55.6%.12.
These rates can be attributed to a number of reasons, some of which include lower education attainment for Aboriginal youth, early parenting, and unwillingness to relocate (Abel & Delic, 2014). While the “Aboriginal Youth Employment in Northern Canada” report is focused on Northern communities, certain aspects are applicable in the context of a British Columbia rural community. Youth in Northern rural areas suffer from remoteness that includes their physical distance from areas of work and isolation due to inadequate transportation infrastructure, which is very much the case in the areas surrounding Williams Lake. Tension arises between the youth’s desire to stay within the community they are tied to, and the pull to move away to find better employment opportunities (CMEC, 2012). Lacking work opportunities in small communities and reserves not only causes unemployment but also lowers the wage for working youth due to high labour supply (CMEC, 2012).
“Aboriginal Youth Employment in Northern Canada”
http://carleton.ca/3ci/wp-content/uploads/Aboriginal-Youth-Employment-Report-March-20-2014.pdf
“Literature Review on Factors Affecting the Transition of Aboriginal Youth from School to Work”
http://www.cmec.ca/Publications/Lists/Publications/Attachments/298/Literature-Review-on-Factors_EN.pdf
“Overview: Struggling to Escape a Legacy of Oppression” by the Centre for Social Justice”
http://www.socialjustice.org/index.php?page=aboriginal-issues
Transit
According to the CTAA (Community Transportation Association of America), transportation is a huge concern as approximately 38% of rural residents live in areas with any public transit services. In addition, 1 in 4 of these individuals do not have an automobile. (Martin, 1999). Zheng also notes how the implementation of a public service would has several benefits, including lower ecological footprint and decreased chances of becoming obese. (2008).
The concept of public transit is different whether it is within a rural or urban context. Rural public transit is more of a “spectrum of possible services that have different funding and operating structures” as individuals within the community has different needs that cannot be met with the absence of a large, concentrated population. (Transport Canada, 2009)
Contrasting from public transportation, there is a variety of “social transportation”. These are mainly found in rural areas where the residents do not have access to conventional public transit. This system enables communities to support the different needs of groups such as seniors, persons with disabilities, schoolchildren etc. Although the combination of these social transportation systems may be coordinated in such a way that fulfills the objectives of a formal public transit service, it may be inefficient without the proper coordination. In addition, these programs may be vulnerable to financial stresses outside the control of the local government.
Benefits of a social transportation programs mentioned in Transport Canada’s report on improving travel options in small & rural communities include:
- Addresses key challenges of local community, mainly independent mobility to educational, employment, recreational and social opportunities
- Easy transportation for senior
- Alternatives for families with cars, and attracts young families into the community
- Allows employers to have better access to labour market by improving the mobility of potential employees
- Attraction of tourists
- Increase customers of local stores and services
Challenges of a social transportation program include:
- Difficult to implement in dispersed and low-density areas
- May be difficult to tolerate extreme climate conditions
- Funding challenges to initiate and sustain the program
- Diversity of needs among community members that must be tailored to requires more coordination and perhaps funding to meet all the needs
Carpooling is a specific form of social transportation. It is viewed as “an inexpensive way to reduce total energy consumption, air pollution, and traffic congestion levels” and “as an inexpensive way to reduce total energy consumption, air pollution, and traffic congestion levels” (Bell, 2006, p. 44). Carpooling program can be run by either for-profit or non-profit organizations. More common in high density areas, carpool systems are a relative new form of car ownership where people can jointly own a vehicle. Fuel, insurance and maintenance is often covered by the organization that coordinates the users. In addition, the coordinators are able to create a common schedule and destination which is needed for the effectiveness of the carpool system. Multiple positive externalities of a carpooling system include reducing costs for drivers reducing vehicle emissions, reduce tardiness and reduces general overall stress in longer commutes (Transport Canada, 2009).
The two examples below show the aspects of two existing social transportation programmes. The first is called “Haliburton Rideshare which was initiated in a rural setting. The programs supports youth to access employment, supports seniors to age in place, creates companionship on the drive, decrease the amount of vehicles on the road and helping those who do not have access to vehicles. The Rural Transportation Options of Environment Haliburton! also did research and decided to formalize ridesharing through a website. The website has safety and etiquette guidelines, can view postings format. The second social transport system that currently exists is the “Regional Rideshare in Rural Ontario. It lists participating organizations that people can register under those organizations, which provides a way for these individuals to be associated with certain group. By being within a system that is not with random individuals, it can help to build community (Martin, 1999). Having social transportation alternative available allows a community to bypass problems of a larger transportation system. It was noted that “the most difficult barrier to coordination is institutional…[as] there is a high resistance to change” (Martin, 1999).
Environmental Sustainability
Members of smaller communities are more aware of environmental issues such as the impact from climate change because they are more affected by it (Government of Canada, 2009, p. 4). There has been greater efforts to shift from automobiles to more sustainable modes of transportation, which can be “emblematic of a broader environmentalism that has the power to attract new residents” (Government of Canada, 2009, p. 4).
Various educational programs across Canada have been implemented to engage individuals in energy conservation and climate change objectives by using of fuel-efficient automobile methods. Community organizations and local government have assisted these individuals in accessing this information through local campaign regarding tools and resources being offered for sustainability programs (Government of Canada, 2009, p. 36). In addition, a reduction in the reliance on automobiles can be created by having both a more compact development and a well connected transportation method (Government of Canada, 2009, p. 9).
Bibliography (WW)s:
Babcock, Barclay. “Government of Canada Invests to Create Youth Employment and Support a Strong Economy for Sudbury and Surrounding Areas.” Government of Canada. Web. February 10th, 2016. March 8th, 2016.
Bell, T. “Analysis of a commuter carpooling survey.” Growth and change. Web. (2006) 9 (2).
BBC News. “Youths Bored in School Holidays.” BBC news. Web. July 11th, 2007. March 9th, 2016.
CBC News. “Youth Unemployment to Cost Canadian Economy 23 Billion.” CBC-Radio. Web. January 29th, 2013. March 09, 2016.
Government of Canada . “Improving travel options in small & rural communities.” Transport Canada. Web. (2009).
Government Of Canada. “Youth Employment Strategy.” Service Canada. Web. March 11th, 2014. March 8th, 2016.
GreenParty. “Sustainable Economy: Because Tomorrow is Serious Bussiness.” Green Party. Web. January,2015. March, 2016.
Jentsch, Birgit. “Youth Migration from Rural Areas: Moral Principles to Support Youth and Rural Communities in Policy Debates.” Sociologia Ruralis 46.3 (2006): 229-40. Web.
Liberal. “Opportunities for Young Canadians.” RealChange.Ca. Web. January, 2016. March, 2016
Ltd, R. A. Malatest &. Associates. Rural Youth Study, Phase II – Rural Youth Migration: Exploring the Reality Behind the Myths: A Rural Youth Discussion Paper. Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, 2002. Web. 16 Mar. 2016.Public Policy Forum of Canada. “ Employment Challenges for Youth in a Changing Economy.” Canada Public Policy Forum. Ottowa. Web. 2013. 2016.
Martin, K., Tull., T. “Integrating school bus and public transportation services in non-urban communities.” Transit Cooperative Research Program. Web. (1999).
Raphael, Steven, Winter-Ebmer, Rudolf. “Identifying the Effect of Unemployment on Crime.” The Journal of Law & Economics. Web: Vol. 44, No. 1.pp. 259-283. April 2001. March 2016.
Theodori, Ann E., and Gene L. Theodori. “Perceptions of Community and Place and the Migration Intentions of At-Risk Youth in Rural Areas.” The Journal of Rural Social Sciences 29.1 (2014): 103-21. Web.