The Dominant Paradigm
In most countries and at most levels of educational governance, the dominant justification for public investment in education is economic: education produces human capital, human capital drives productivity, and productivity drives prosperity. From this line of reasoning, the conclusion is drawn that the primary purpose of government-funded education ought to be to equip individuals with the ranges of knowing and certifications that labour markets demand. The question "What should schools teach?" is answered, in the first instance, by asking "What do employers need?"
This paradigm has deep roots — in the human capital theory of Becker and Schultz, in the policy frameworks of international organisations like the OECD and World Bank, and in the intuitions of policymakers who must justify public expenditure in terms of measurable economic returns. The argument has merit: there is substantial evidence that education contributes to individual economic mobility and national economic development. The paradox is that education for employment, too often, is preparation for obsolete, non-existent jobs because of technological innovations.
Technological Unemployment
Technological unemployment is an inescapable feature of modern societies. Technological innovations eliminate existing jobs and create new ones. Blacksmiths, farriers and wainwrights have all but vanished; they were replaced with workers in foundries, rolling mills, tire factories and car assembly plants. A large proportion of those plant, mill, assembly and factory workers has since been replaced by robots controlled by computer programmes.
There is the persistent and stubborn hope that the ratio of obsolete jobs to new jobs remains one to one, but this hope has not been realized by developments in OECD countries in the first quarter of the 21st century. From 2001 to 2021, the unemployment rate for all OECD countries stayed within the range of 5.6% to 8.3%, with the 2021 rate at 6.8%; of the unemployed, about one-third (33%) are long-term unemployed (those unemployed for at least 12 months).
The unemployed and the underemployed comprise labor that is surplus to requirements. Surplus labor is caused by downturns in business (a decrease in demand for goods and services), by the adoption of business models which intentionally use underemployment, and by the replacement of human labor with automated systems and computer-controlled machinery in the production and distribution of goods and services.
Employment of surplus labor cannot be achieved by education. Surplus labor becomes employed through the creation of additional jobs — either by (1) new investment to expand current business, (2) the creation of new enterprises, or (3) the restructuring of the labor market (reducing the work hours per day performed by an individual and employing additional individuals, or retiring the employed at an earlier age, or starting employment at a later age). Surplus labor is not a problem that education can solve. Occupational (vocational, technical and professional) education, so favored and supported by successive governments, can help develop the ranges of knowing currently in demand in an economic system, but education cannot create new jobs, nor can it restructure working conditions such that there are increases, decreases or redistributions of the number of employees required by an economic system.
Challenges and Solutions for Surplus Labor
Where labor supply exceeds labor demand, there is nothing inherently wrong with unemployment. It is only a problem if three conditions accompany it (and they usually do): (1) no income, or below-liveable income, for the unemployed and the underemployed; (2) the insistence by governments and their supporters that the unemployed have an obligation to work and should continuously seek employment (even when there is no work available); and (3) the view that the unemployed are out of work not because they are surplus to labor requirements, but because they are lazy — and are therefore deserving of their poverty.
Below Liveable Income
No income, or below-liveable income, for the unemployed and underemployed is not an educational problem. Resolution of the problem requires political and economic action, not occupational education programs. The problem can be resolved through the establishment of consumer democracy — a system of distributive justice in which there is provision of a liveable income that assures access to the necessities of modern life: decent housing, pure water, an adequate diet, suitable clothing, sufficient power, appropriate medical and dental care, efficient means of communication, reliable and convenient transport, sound schooling, readily accessible information that is accurate and truthful, and good-quality recreation and entertainment.
Insistence on Employment
The insistence by governments and their supporters that the unemployed have an obligation to seek jobs continuously, in an economic system that does not have enough jobs to go around, is again not an educational problem. It can be resolved by acknowledging that there is surplus labor and that it is inherently unfair to maintain the obligation of everyone to work without maintaining, with equal diligence, the right of everyone to work and the provision of a job for everyone. If governments insist that 100 per cent employment is imperative, then employment opportunities must be restructured so that they are evenly and equally divided: everyone works, but everyone works fewer hours per week, fewer weeks per month, fewer months per year, or fewer years in a lifetime. And because everyone then works fewer hours, wages must be increased to assure that everyone earns a liveable income. This rearrangement of the structure of work, together with the adjustment of wages, assures distributive justice (a liveable income for all) and productive justice (each of us bearing a fair share of the labor burden).
The Unfairness in Regarding the Unemployed as Lazy
The third challenge — the view that the unemployed are unemployed because of their laziness and are therefore deserving of their poverty — is resolvable through education. Through education, we can develop an understanding of how economic systems function, how demand for labor supply fluctuates, and how unemployment arises not from individual idleness, lack of ambition or moral inadequacy, but from surplus labor. Through education, we can also consider what constitutes a worthwhile life — one not predicated on wage for labor, fee for service or product for payment, but rather on how well we treat and develop ourselves as mindful human beings, and how well we treat other members of our society as fellow human beings deserving of dignity, respect and self-determination.