What Happens When American Teenagers Can’t Find Work

Employment rates for teenagers are at the lowest levels since World War II. And that could hurt their longterm job prospects.

McDonald's employees wait to take orders during a one-day hiring event at a McDonald's restaurant on April 19, 2011 in San Francisco, California.
National Journal
Nancy Cook
Add to Briefcase
See more stories about...
Nancy Cook
April 9, 2014, 1 a.m.

This art­icle is part of a series for Next Eco­nomy on Amer­ic­an teen­agers and em­ploy­ment.

Most Amer­ic­ans love to re­min­isce about their first pay­ing job, wheth­er it was scoop­ing ice cream, babysit­ting, or work­ing be­hind a re­tail counter. It was rarely glam­or­ous, but earn­ing that first paycheck was a point of pride and marked a mile­stone in a teen­ager’s life.

By the time An­drew Sum entered his teen­age years, he’d already held a job de­liv­er­ing news­pa­pers. Now as an eco­nom­ist, one of his chief con­cerns is the state of the labor mar­ket for today’s teen­agers. The em­ploy­ment rates for teen­agers, ages 16 to 19, plummeted from 45 per­cent in 2000 to just 26 per­cent in 2011, ac­cord­ing to Sum’s re­cent re­search for the Brook­ings In­sti­tu­tion. That’s the low­est rate of teen em­ploy­ment in the post-World War II era.

The teens hard­est hit by the tough labor mar­ket also hap­pen to be the least for­tu­nate ones: those with less edu­ca­tion, from poorer house­holds, or from minor­ity back­grounds. Teens whose par­ents earned more than $40,000 a year boas­ted em­ploy­ment rates of 26 to 28 per­cent, while teens whose par­ents made less than that threshold, were em­ployed at rates of less than 20 per­cent.

These signs fore­shad­ow po­ten­tially an­oth­er sum­mer in which too many teen­agers are un­able to find work, years after the re­ces­sion of­fi­cially ended. “Kids are less likely to work now, and the range of in­dus­tries they work in is smal­ler—like re­tail, trade, or fast food. That massively re­duces the num­ber of kids on the payrolls,” says Sum, who also dir­ects the Cen­ter for Labor Mar­ket Stud­ies at North­east­ern Uni­versity in Bo­ston. It does not help that teen­agers now in­creas­ingly com­pete against adults for min­im­um-wage po­s­i­tions.

These data points about low teen em­ploy­ment spell ter­rible things for the long-term health of the Amer­ic­an eco­nomy. Study after study shows that early work ex­per­i­ence helps teens and young adults build con­fid­ence and pick up cru­cial soft skills, like how to ar­rive at work on-time and not ir­rit­ate one’s boss. Ideally, those are skills one wants to learn be­fore the mid-20s. “The res­ults are over­whelm­ing,” Sum says. “The more you work as a teen­ager, the more likely you are to work five years from now. That’s true at the state or na­tion­al level. When young people don’t get work ex­per­i­ence, it in­hib­its their wages.”

Or as Neil Sul­li­van, the ex­ec­ut­ive dir­ect­or of a Bo­ston work­force non-profit ar­gues, sound­ing an­oth­er alarm: “The con­sequences for Amer­ic­an com­pet­it­ive­ness are pro­found. You hear it an­ec­dot­ally from em­ploy­ers and from or­gan­iz­a­tions in Mas­sachu­setts. When we talk about youth de­vel­op­ment, part of that is to learn to speak ef­fect­ively to adults.”

As gloomy as Sum’s pa­per sounds, he does of­fer up page-after-page of policy ideas based on suc­cess­ful pro­grams at the state and city level. Among those pre­scrip­tions: In­cor­por­at­ing more ap­pren­tice­ships and in­tern­ships in­to edu­ca­tion­al set­tings; giv­ing teen­agers ac­cess to skills train­ing that a par­tic­u­lar re­gion will need in the fu­ture; and more ro­bust ca­reer coun­sel­ing to make teens think ahead. That sounds far more com­plic­ated than find­ing a job sli­cing ba­gels at a loc­al shop. But it may be what’s needed for teens to grow in­to adults who, by 2020, can get ahead.

What We're Following See More »
A CANDIDATE TO BE ‘PROUD’ OF
Chicago Tribune Endorses Gary Johnson
2 hours ago
THE LATEST

No matter that his recall of foreign leaders leaves something to be desired, Gary Johnson is the choice of the Chicago Tribune's editorial board. The editors argue that Donald Trump couldn't do the job of president, while hitting Hillary Clinton for "her intent to greatly increase federal spending and taxation, and serious questions about honesty and trust." Which leaves them with Johnson. "Every American who casts a vote for him is standing for principles," they write, "and can be proud of that vote. Yes, proud of a candidate in 2016."

FUNERAL FOR ISRAELI LEADER
Obama Compares Peres to ‘Giants of the 20th Century’
2 hours ago
THE DETAILS

Speaking at the funeral of former Israeli Prime Minister Shimon Peres, President Obama "compared Peres to 'other giants of the 20th century' such as Nelson Mandela and Queen Elizabeth who 'find no need to posture or traffic in what's popular in the moment.'" Among the 6,000 mourners at the service was Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas. Obama called Abbas's presence a sign of the "unfinished business of peace" in the region.

Source:
THE QUESTION
How Many New Voters Does the Clinton Campaign Aim to Register?
2 hours ago
THE ANSWER

Three million—a number that lays "bare the significant gap between Donald Trump’s bare-bones operation and the field program that Clinton and her hundreds of aides have been building for some 17 months."

Source:
“STANDING FOR PRINCIPLES”
Chicago Tribune Endorses Johnson
3 hours ago
THE LATEST

In a somewhat shocking move, the Chicago Tribune has endorsed Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson for president, saying a vote for him is one that voters "can be proud of." The editorial barely touches on Donald Trump, who the paper has time and again called "unfit to be president," before offering a variety of reasons for why it can't endorse Hillary Clinton. Johnson has been in the news this week for being unable to name a single world leader who he admires, after earlier this month being unable to identify "Aleppo," a major Syrian city in the middle of the country's ongoing war.

Source:
NEVER TRUMP
USA Today Weighs in on Presidential Race for First Time Ever
16 hours ago
THE DETAILS

"By all means vote, just not for Donald Trump." That's the message from USA Today editors, who are making the first recommendation on a presidential race in the paper's 34-year history. It's not exactly an endorsement; they make clear that the editorial board "does not have a consensus for a Clinton endorsement." But they state flatly that Donald Trump is, by "unanimous consensus of the editorial board, unfit for the presidency."

Source:
×