Matching of jobs and applicants

PUNCHLINE

Ike Señeres

The Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) says that there are many jobs that are available in our country, but there are still many people who are jobless, because of the apparent mismatch between the skills of the applicants, and the skills required by the employers.

I look at this strictly as a supply and demand question, and in this regard I would say that if the demand for workers is equal to or greater than the supply of jobs, then there should be no unemployment at all, at least in theory.

On the other hand, I would say instead that the supply of workers is greater than the demand for these workers, and that is why the data shows that the rate of unemployment in our country is still very high.

To be honest on their part, I think that the DOLE should say instead that if only the mismatch could be addressed, then the rate of unemployment would go down, even if there would still be many people who would remain jobless.

If we are to believe the DOLE officials in what they are saying, it would be possible to have zero unemployment in this country, if and when those who are unemployed could be trained in such a way that their skills would perfectly match what the job market is looking for.

All told, I think that there is simply a big shortage of available jobs in this country, and that is why the rate of unemployment is very high. Proof of that is that many of our countrymen are going abroad to look for jobs, because they could not find jobs here.

At the risk of sounding redundant, I would say again that addressing the supposed mismatch would certainly lower the rate of unemployment at least partially, but in order to lower the total rate of unemployment to a more reasonable figure, the real solution is to create more jobs. At the risk of stating the obvious, I would say here that if only we could create more local jobs, then it would lower the total number of our countrymen who are going abroad to look for jobs.

Of course, creating more local jobs is easier said than done, but we have no choice but to do it. While achieving zero unemployment is very difficult on a national scale, it is definitely doable and attainable at the local level, within the local jurisdictions of the towns and cities.

Every town and city has its own Public Employment Service Office (PESO) that is tasked with the placement of local residents in jobs that would match their skills. In theory, each PESO could build a database of their local labor force, a registry that would tell them how many of these residents are employed and who are not, so that they would know the real rate of unemployment in their own localities.

Apparently, the DOLE created the legal fiction some years ago that those who are unemployed but are unwilling to work should not be counted as part of the labor force. That legal fiction would be valid if there is a database that is in place, and in the context of this discussion, I would say that that database should first be created at the local level.

Following the prevailing logic in database management, a central or national database could be created if data could be collected from below, and in this case, that would mean data coming from the local databases.

Logically, the database of the labor force should include not only those who are employed, but also those who are unemployed and underemployed. First things first however, the database managers should first define who should be categorized as unemployed on one hand, and who should be categorized as underemployed on the other hand.

It is obvious who the unemployed are, but it is unclear who the underemployed are. It seems that the prevailing logic is that those who are working less than eight hours a day are considered underemployed.

Strictly speaking however, the real underemployed workers are those who are working in jobs that are below their qualifications, even if they are actually working eight hours a day or more. As I see it, this is yet another problem of mismatch, simply put. I wonder if anyone in DOLE or in the local government units (LGUs) have recognized this type of mismatch.

It also appears that the neither the DOLE nor the LGUs have clearly defined the legal framework to identity and categorize those who are self-employed, because strictly speaking, this is also a form of employment.

The problem is, it seems that following the prevailing logic, anyone who is earning anything on his own from any means is considered as self-employed, and he or she is considered as employed, even if he or she is not earning enough, meaning to say that he or she is actually underemployed, so to speak.

I still have to figure out what to do, but I believe that I would be in a position to help any interested LGUs to build their own local labor force database, using their own PESO organization as the implementing unit. Offhand, I think that a mix of local area network (LAN), internet and mobile app solutions would work for this purpose. The internet solution could probably use social networking software that I am already offering for free, along with a mix of mobile apps that are also free.

For feedback, email iseneres@yahoo.com or text +639083159262