The U.S. has the worst school-to-work transition system in the industrialized world. It would be more accurate, in fact, to say that we have no system at all. For high school students planning to go to college, we have an elaborate system of supports. Guidance counselors advise them on what courses they need and how to prepare for SAT or ACT examinations. When the time comes to apply, these kids get advice on how to ask for references and fill out college applications and forms for grants and loans. In other words, we put a big investment into getting these youngsters ready for college.
But for kids who are going to work instead of college--that's approximately half of our high school graduates--we offer very little. Schools know what courses kids need to get into college, but they have no idea what courses will help students get ready for jobs. And work-bound students are given no advice about where to find jobs or how to go about applying for them. This lack of help may be no hardship for youngsters whose parents are well-connected and can help them get jobs, but it is very tough for kids who don't have that kind of help.
Other industrialized nations do a much better job of connecting youngsters with the world of work. In Germany, where there is a long tradition of youth apprenticeship, the system serves 60 percent of students between the ages of 16 and 18. All employers make a certain number of work placements available for young people who are still in school, and the kids combine on-the-job learning with school work. This youth apprenticeship system has a number of benefits in addition to the job experience students get. What students learn in school becomes more meaningful to them as they see how reading or math or science is used on the job. And because it is very hard to get decent employment unless they have graduated from the apprenticeship program, students are motivated to stay in school.
President Clinton recognizes the terrible price we pay for our lack of a school-to-work transition system and wants to do something about it. And because the German youth apprenticeship system is such a success, lots of people are urging its adoption. However, to make the system work here as well as it does in Germany and elsewhere, we will have to do a number of things differently. A major reason youth apprenticeship works in Germany is because it is not voluntary; it is a pay or play system. Employers who do not participate in training youth apprentices have to pay a tax that supports government-sponsored training programs.
A pay or play system would meet with lots of opposition from American business, but a voluntary system is not likely to work at all. Companies are unlikely to institute apprenticeship programs if they are voluntary. Such programs cost money, and companies that invest money are likely to lose it as their trained apprentices are hired away by nonparticipating companies. In a voluntary system, companies that participate subsidize training for companies that choose not to--a powerful disincentive against participation. If we are serious about the German model, we will have to adopt something like the German pay or play system so costs and benefits are shared equally by all.
Another crucial difference between the U.S. and nations that have youth apprenticeships is that these other countries have a social contract among government, business and labor. Instead of the American system of labor-relations warfare, there exists a system of cooperation and codetermination. Unions actually plan and union workers manage the apprenticeship program. Employers rarely dismiss workers or close plants because they face heavy financial sanctions if they do so. The right of the union to exist and represent workers is unquestioned. So unions and their workers don't have to worry, as they do here, that youth apprentices will be used to undercut the wages of adult workers or displace them altogether. This social contract is what makes the youth apprenticeship system possible. It does not exist in the U.S.
Youth apprenticeship is worth developing, but we have to overcome these barriers before we can be confident that it can serve as the American-style school-to-work transition system. While we are working to develop this new system, we should expand and improve the school-to-work programs we already have. And we should work to establish employment offices in every high school to perform for youngsters who are going right to work the kind of function that college counselors perform for college-bound kids.
The difference between the services we provide these two groups of kids is an outrage, and we should support President Clinton in his commitment to end it.