Youth unemployment, which is pegged at 34 percent in The Bahamas, is especially a cause for concern if only because many of the young people have not yet had the opportunity to join the labor force... and as such, are being denied access to gainful employment... which is considered by many social scientists as the traditional route to the process of social integration

Youth unemployment

thenassauguardian editorial

The most recent Labour Force Survey, which was released by the Department of Statistics, contained some insightful but at the same time alarming information on the current state of unemployment in The Bahamas.


Apart from the distressingly high unemployment rate of nearly 16 percent overall and the continuing challenges to the Grand Bahamian economy, with an unemployment rate of 21.2 percent, the data on youth unemployment is perhaps the most disturbing.


Youth unemployment, which is pegged at 34 percent, is especially a cause for concern if only because many of the young people have not yet had the opportunity to join the labor force and as such, are being denied access to gainful employment which is considered by many social scientists as the traditional route to the process of social integration.


High youth unemployment is not peculiar to The Bahamas; indeed it is now recognized as a global phenomenon which is adversely impacting both developed and developing economies. Several studies on the subject have suggested that prolonged periods of unemployment among young people tend to lead to a reduction in self-esteem, diminished levels of well-being and a sense of isolation from peer groups.


Over time, youth unemployment could become problematic to the larger society since young people without the means to provide for their basic needs may not only engage in anti-social behavior, they may withdraw entirely from the labor force and by so doing, further reduce the future developmental potential of the economy.


The marginalization and social exclusion of the youth, according to some studies, are even more pronounced during a recession in that young workers are usually the first to be laid off or downsized when firms begin cost-cutting exercises. And those who remain in the labor force are disproportionately represented in the'informal'sector where they have no formal contract of employment, no guarantee of regular work and in some instances, little or no rights under labor laws. The more educated among the youth are often forced to'trade down'or accept employment far below their qualifications, and for the most part, that group is underemployed and often becomes resentful of the society or the environment in which they find themselves.


Many countries, both developing and developed have attempted to address the problem in a variety of ways including providing direct incentives to labor intensive sectors and/or establishing schemes to promote self-employment.


Both initiatives, although useful, are not the solution in isolation and ought to be part of a more comprehensive youth employment strategy which has at the centerpiece, sustained macro-economic growth for the entire economy.


To be sure, the self-employment initiative pre-supposes a widespread possession of the entrepreneurial spirit and acumen which clearly is not present in everyone, nor is it something that can be taught. It has to be recognized that the future growth and development of any society is dependent on the efficiency with which it employs its factors of production: land, capital, labor and entrepreneurial know-how. Of all the factors, it is labor that has to be continuously introduced, engaged, trained and developed at an early stage in order to be most productive.


In other words, we have to regard our youth as an asset that has to be fully integrated into the productive process and good public policy demands that young people be given priority. According to the United Nations, instead of seeing them as tomorrow's leaders, we ought to regard them as today's partners.

Feb 25, 2012

thenassauguardian editorial

Caribbean Blog International

Echoes of a General Strike

The Bahama Journal Editorial




For better or worse, there are lessons that always come with the struggle for power; whether this battle has to do with who gets to determine how money is spent in a household, in an organization anywhere civil society, in a firm or at the state level.

Even more simply, politics is about who gets what, when, where and how; in addition, it is also about the definition of that party or individual whose will must be obeyed.

In other words, then, as in our own fledgling democracy; the question today arises concerning whether the governing party should, would or could yield to demands currently being made by some of this nation’s union leadership.

Among the instruments they say they have is that one that allows them to withdraw their labor and that of their membership in the event that the governing party does not yield to their demands.

We seriously doubt that, they have this level of support.

In addition, the fact remains that, this is just not the way things are done in today’s Bahamas.

Indeed, while unions and their membership do have the right to protest any policy they see fit; and even though they do have the right to take the government to court, they do not have any real right to hold any government hostage.

And for sure, it is a fact that the governing party has a mandate to lead and that –as such – they are called upon to lead. They also have promises to be kept.

Clearly, then, no right-thinking government should ever put itself in a position where it must endlessly consult with everyone; or for that matter, anyone else other than those given a similar mandate by the people.

This comes as a direct result of the free vote and expression of the people in free and fair elections.

Thereafter, the government leads and its Loyal Opposition opposes; with one party having its sway and the other its say.

We dare say that, anything else is a clear invitation to both foolishness and anarchy.

While we do believe all of what we are saying; we hasten to add that, no government worth its salt would ever so paint itself into a corner by alienating the masses of people who identify themselves as workers.

But by the same token, union leadership must always be mindful that while they are called to lead, this call must always be tempered by what is in the very best interests of their followers.

What makes this situation so very important is the fact that workers are voters. This means that whenever they wish, they can bring a government to grief and despair. These workers who are also voters know as well as anyone else that the choices they make can determine whether one side wins or the other loses.

This means that when workers become restive enough, their approval of this or that politician matters greatly.

Compounding the matter in the Bahamian case is the fact that the Bahamian labor force is compact, well organized, knows and feels its power.

Politicians who wish to be re-elected cannot ignore these people and their demands.

No politician worth his salt would ever dare express contempt or disdain for those voters who are workers.

We make this obvious point as we try to make sense of what seems increased restiveness on the part of very many public sector workers.

On occasion, their main gripe seems to concern money. At other times, workers and their representatives seem to be preoccupied with matters germane to respect.

In addition, there are times like the ones in which we live where some union leaders seem to have reached that point where – like politicians in their guise as law-makers – they would pontificate on matters germane to policy.

Here they are embarked –as it were – on a journey without maps; and here we are reminded that, history does not repeat itself.

We make this point as we reflect on some of what is today being said about how today’s political climate is seemingly reminiscent of that era in the late 1950’s when there was both call and response to the idea of a General Strike.

That great call was made by Randol F. Fawkes, Clifford Darling and Lynden O. Pindling.

Out of this great struggle has come a modern Bahamas where the rights of workers are enshrined in the law.

This we do in free and fair elections.

All else is anathema.

In the final analysis, then, law-making and policy should be left where the Constitution places them – squarely and fully in the hands of this nation’s parliamentarians.

That is why we boast so much about the longevity of parliamentary democracy in the Bahamas.

January 06, 2011

The Bahama Journal Editorial

Bahamas Blog International