Unemployed or underemployed?

When yesterday’s unemployment figures were released I was overwhelmed with a feeling of disbelief similar to that I had experienced on May the 8^th. Although I respect the Electorate’s decision to vote in the minority for a conservative majority, I sat looking at the television thinking is this really what you want? I felt similarly this morning at my computer, looking over the Office for National Statistics website.

Unemployment is continuing to fall. The proportion of people in work is the highest it has ever been since comparable records began. Really? This just isn’t the vision of Britain I see at all and thankfully Mark Carney the governor of the Bank of England showed himself to offer a little perspective on the matter. Productivity, Carney said, has been “one of the great costs of the financial crisis,” adding also that, “the Bank of England had been disappointed with the productivity performance of the UK.” The UK’s productivity is on average 16% worse than it was prior to the 2008 crash, meaning that for every hour worked we produce 16% less collectively and I wonder if that plays into I wider narrative about the nature of work within our country.

Underemployment is the buzzword of our moment especially for all those beaten down Labour politicians that need a line to feed their eager recruits. ‘Our country is underemployed!’ Say it boys and girls, ‘it can replace zero hour contracts as our death march.’ And although it is a buzzword to be forgotten like, ‘hard-working families’ or ‘long term economic plan,’ underemployment does have a definite meaning, an important one. The Office for National Statistics and indeed other bodies, record the numbers of those that wish they were effectively more fulfilled in work and why and this tells us something about the nature of our economy not just how many jobs exist within it.

The ONS in 2014 recorded that approximately 1 in 10 of us were underemployed, that is 3 Million of us want to work more; about 11.3 hours more so say the ONS. According to the ONS 31.1 million Britains are in some form of employment today. As unscientific as it may be, I cannot help contrasting the number of those in supposed underemployment, a proportion of whom will subside on considerably less than the national average salary, and those in employment. I notice that although overall employment has risen by 5.5% on the previous quarter this government’s vision of success seems somewhat tainted by ‘underemployment’ and lowered productivity.

Such an affirmation of competence, as the government have touted these statistics to be, seems illusory when constituencies like Clacton show unemployment rates of 50%. When the government’s victory is taken from a more regional perspective a slightly different picture emerges. The benefit claimant figures of April 2013 were examined by the guardian on a constituency by constituency basis and, although things have clearly changed since then, the results are stark. Constituencies like Mid Derbyshire, Penwrith, York Central all showed a sharp fall in the number of claims, where more clearly depressed regions like Barnsley, Basildon, and Thurrock showed a distinct spike. An extrapolation in to the present from 2013 is again somewhat uncertain but so are to an extent the ONS’ own statistics, by a self-proclaimed margin of 3% actually. And the margin of error that pollsters were allowing for prior to May 7^th was unacceptably large also. Put simply, it ain’t all about the numbers is it? It has to be about the kind of economy we want to build as a country.  

GDP, which is supposedly a good economic indicator of a nation’s wealth, has been rising steadily since 2010. Unemployment is down the lowest since decent records began. Inflation is at zero. If all of this is true and it is by the way, surely most fair minded folk as ‘our Cleggy’ put it must be wondering, where is my slice?