Do employers have a role in developing young people?

The decision by Steve Ivell to fire 16-year-old Kimberley Swann over comments she posted on Facebook about finding her job “boring” is the latest in a long line of news stories that highlight the teething problems of two cultures, with completely different attitudes about the internet, trying to work together. It has many parallels with James Andrew’s infamous Twitter remark, except that he is a highly-paid executive and Kimberley is a bottom-rung admin assistant.

My initial reaction when I saw the story on the BBC was that Steve Ivell, despite being MD of a marketing company, hadn’t realised the negative impact the story would have on him and his business. As well as being one of the most read stories of the day, a quick Google search brings up countless blogs, forums, Facebook groups etc, all that seem to be highly critical of Mr Ivell. Anglers Net is one of the more polite discussions. As it’s a B2B company, it’s unlikely they are going to lose direct sales as a result, although Ivell Marketing has hardly demonstrated that they live the values of their Investors in People status.

But look at the comments posted on the Daily Mail‘s version of the story and they are weighted far more in favour of Mr Ivell, and critical of Facebook and Kimberley for biting the hand that feeds her.

Dealing first with the issue of posting messages on Facebook, and the dismissal; my personal view is that a straightforward sacking seems unnecessarily harsh in the circumstances. Whilst presumably still within a probation period and therefore not covered by a disciplinary procedure, it would be difficult to argue that three disparaging remarks about the nature of her role (not her employer, or her colleagues or customers) to a limited number of people could be classed as gross misconduct.

Kimberley was not being malicious when she posted. She most likely did find the work boring (we all recognise those entry-level/summer jobs that are utterly tedious). She was, like many people, using micro-blogging as an outlet for her frustration.

As well as not understanding way one culture uses the internet, there is a wider issue about taking on employees of that age and recognising that they are not the finished article.

The government’s advice on Employing 16-17 year olds states: “Consider their immaturity as well as their inexperience”, and although this relates to health and safety, it applies to the rest of their employment as well.

Schools don’t seem to have taken a strong-armed approach to young people posting negative thoughts about their education unless it is personal against a teacher or another student. Judging by the number of “school sucks”-type comments on the internet, the entire school population would probably need disciplining if they did.

If a young person has therefore understood that that is acceptable behaviour, and school is the only organisational environment that they have experienced, then they need to then learn that (in this company at least) those kinds of comments aren’t appropriate. And understand that colleagues are not the same as school peers.

So, doesn’t Ivell Marketing have at least some responsibility for Kimberley’s development from child to adult? If it wanted an employee who “totally got work” then why did they take on a 16-year-old?

That’s not to say Mr Ivell should have ignored the situation, but instead allowed Kimberley to review her actions, understand what impact they have and learn from the experience (ooh, spot Kolb!). Had Kimberley continued to post negative comments on her Facebook (or at least not simply removed her colleagues as friends and notched up her privacy settings) then Mr Ivell would have been perfectly within his rights to give her her marching-orders.

Employers should be allowed to take on 16-year-olds who want to work, but they can’t ignore their responsibilities regarding the young person’s development. All it really would have taken is Mr Ivell to have asked Kimberley, “so, how do we make your job less boring?”

Photo credit: Scott Beale / Laughing Squid. Used under licence.

Making leaders

Wednesday saw the official announcement of the new National Body of Youth Leadership. And I’m really rather excited about it.

For more years than I care to remember (from 1995), I’ve been involved in running, and then writing and developing, youth leadership courses through my volunteering with St John Ambulance. The Youth Hostel in Matlock became my second home for a while, the number of courses I was delivering there. The organisation’s Cadet Leader 2 course was the single reason that I didn’t leave St John when I was 17 and, as a trainer, has since provided some of my most memorable and enjoyable weekends.

I’ve been aware that similar organisations are doing equally as wonderful things, and when I came to help rewrite the Cadet Leader 1 course in 1997, I remember thinking there must be other excellent resources out there. This was in the very early days of the internet, and although the fabulous Scoutbase existed, it was run by a bunch of keen enthusiasts rather than as an official programme resource. And before the internet, it was decidedly more difficult to do casual research on what other people were up to.

The Duke of Edinburgh’s Award demonstrates the power of putting a universal name to what effectively could be fitted into every informal education / youth development programme going. The DofE not only helps employers and universities/colleges identify the commitment and development that a young person has been through, but also ensures that the young people see their effort for what it’s worth. It’s only as I moved from young person to youth worker that I recognised the enormous value of those random weekends I’d be sent off to go and learn about John Adair‘s model of leadership, or do blindfold exercises around a car-park.

What I really hope if that the NBYL becomes a centre of excellence, using the vast knowledge already in the sector to develop a way of making youth leadership training as recognisable as the DofE. That doesn’t mean having a single programme that all operators have to work to, but valuing particular elements of learning and from that being able to issue young people with a universal certificate that is recognised by employers, educators and peers alike.

Photo credit: Corypina. Used under licence.

Cohesion isn’t just the responsibility of the young

Ted Cantle, writing in the Guardian recently suggests that young people are the solution for creating community cohesion.

The executive chair of the Institute of Community Cohesion makes a valid, if somewhat obvious point, that young people’s enthusiasm for integration is thwarted by the prejudices of older people; and it’s only through nuture that humans develop their negativity towards other people.

But, we can’t simply rely on young people to go out and do this work on our behalf. It’s our responsibility to support them, to promote what they want to achieve and to act in a way that demonstrates tolerance is the best way forward.

Photo credit: drp. Used under licence.

Interview with the minister

This makes me happy in so many ways, and really proud of my involvement with Headliners*. A young person gets the opportunity to interview two senior government ministers.

And far, far more interesting and revealing than the rather vacuous Children Interview Celebrities feature that the Guardian published at the weekend.

* I worked at Headliners, as Head of Editorial, when the Yorkshire project was set up.