Eduardo Porter of the New York Times analyzed the findings of a new study that assesses the efficacy of a job training program. The program, called WorkAdvance, differs from previous programs in that it offers “demand-driven skills training and a focus on jobs that have career pathways.” As Porter explained, this meant that the “nonprofits that took part in the experiment had to link up with employers in their areas to figure out what kind of skills were in demand and might open the door to a career path of rising wages.”
Long story short: it worked. Trainees who went through the program earned an average of almost $2,000 per year more than those in a control group. Among participants who had been out of a job for a long time, they earned over $2,300 per year more than the control group. The gains were largest among those trained in the information technology field. Porter noted that other studies showed that job training programs that employed similar approaches achieved similar results.
The cost for the program ran about $6,000 per worker. In addition to what it does for the participants, the benefits are even greater when one considers the savings the government accrues from not having to spend other kinds of money on them. Porter noted that one-third of those who participated in WorkAdvance were on food stamps, and many of them wouldn’t need that supplement any longer if their income improved. A quarter of participants had a criminal record. Having a higher income makes a person less likely to end up in prison, and can help reduce recidivism. Porter noted that the government spends $31,000 per year, on average, to incarcerate someone, and of course there are broader societal benefits to keeping people from committing crimes.
So, how much does the U.S. government spend on worker training programs? Three-hundredths of one percent of our GDP. By that measure, Germany spends seven times what we do. France? Twelve times. Denmark bests us by a factor of, wait for it, 18. This is crazy given that well-designed training programs largely pay for themselves just in terms of what government spends overall, not to mention the benefits to the trainees who get better jobs at higher pay. Why don’t we spend more? Well, I’ll leave that one to Mr. Porter:
“Americans’ main problem may not be that there are no solutions for the workers’ plight. It is just easier, not to say more politically rewarding, to scream at the Mexicans and the Chinese.”
In case you’re wondering, he’s talking about Donald Trump.
Ian Reifowitz is the author of Obama’s America: A Transformative Vision of Our National Identity (Potomac Books).