Luxembourg’s neet rate rose from 5.7% of young people in 2007 to 6.3% in 2014
Not in employment, education or training--focus on Luxembourg's neets
The proportion of under 25s not in education, employment or training in Luxembourg (neets) has risen slightly in recent years, new data has revealed.
Luxembourg’s neet rate has risen from 5.7% of young people in 2007 to 6.3% in 2014.
Young people find themselves in this situation for a host of reasons, according to a survey and analysis by Luxembourg’s institute for economic research (Liser) for the national youth service (SNJ) and social security general inspectorate (IGSS), and published by Statec.
Among the multiple correlating factors explored in the survey, school dropouts showed an increased chance of becoming neets (37% compared to 11% of non-dropouts who were Neets). Other factors which showed a correlation included lack of cognitive faculties and incompatible competencies for employers’ needs despite qualifications obtained by the young people.
Who are neets in Luxembourg?
Among the neet group surveyed, 59% were male, one in ten had at least one child, and eight out of ten lived with one or both parents. Regarding family heritage, four out of ten were born in Luxembourg to parents born in Luxembourg, while a third were first generation. The survey showed an inverse correlation between level of education and neet recurrence.
It found that while almost two thirds of neets shook off this status within two years--half found work while 14% took up studies--a third remained in this situation beyond two years.
Report author Laetitia Hauret concluded that the situation was critical for the 40% of neets who were not in this status by choice and for whom this was not merely a transitionary stage.
She called for a action to help these young people “because the more time one spends as a neet, the more difficult it will be for them to find work. Furthermore, time spent as a neet creates a loss of human capital which makes reintegration to the labour market harder.”
Correction: An earlier version of this article incorrectly cited the report author as Statec. Liser authored the report, which was then published by Statec. This was updated on 15 June 2017.