The UK's Youth Guarantee Plans — and What They Mean for Scotland

8th December 2025

In recent months, the UK Government has placed a major focus on tackling youth unemployment and expanding opportunities for young people who are out of work or education.

Central to this effort is a new "Youth Guarantee" — a proposal to ensure that young people, particularly those aged 18 to 21, can access employment, apprenticeships, training or meaningful work experience, rather than staying stuck on benefits. But because many aspects of employment and skills policy are devolved, the implications differ significantly in Scotland.

Scotland already operates its own Young Person's Guarantee, which has been running since 2020. This raises important questions about what is actually guaranteed, what is new, and how these systems compare.

What the UK Government Is Proposing (England-focused)

The UK Government’s Youth Guarantee is part of its wider “Get Britain Working” programme. The goal is simple in principle: give every young person a route into work, learning or training. But the structure is more complex.

A major £820 million package has been announced, targeting almost one million young people on Universal Credit. The Government plans to create around 350,000 workplace or training opportunities, especially in sectors like construction, health and social care, and hospitality. The idea is to help young people build experience quickly, and in some cases, the programmes include guaranteed job interviews after six weeks of training or placement.

A series of eight “trailblazer” pilot schemes are being rolled out in various mayoral areas — including London, West Midlands, East Midlands and Tees Valley — where different models of combined training, support and employer partnerships will be tested before a wider rollout. These are seen as prototypes to refine the national scheme.

Another headline reform is the shift to the Growth and Skills Levy, replacing the old Apprenticeship Levy. This promises more accessible apprenticeships, including shorter and more flexible options, with full funding for under-25s placed with small or medium-sized businesses.

The Government presents the overall offer as a commitment that every young person should be able to “earn or learn.” For those on Universal Credit, participation will not be optional: work coaches can refer them into training or work-preparation pathways, and failure to engage without a valid reason may result in benefit sanctions. This conditionality has attracted particular attention.

Criticisms and Concerns About the UK-Wide Guarantee

While many welcome the ambition, there are recurring concerns.

The CIPD has expressed support for the principle of a Youth Guarantee but argues that the plan still isn’t bold enough. They recommend considering an outright Apprenticeship Guarantee, noting that high numbers of young people remain NEET (not in education, employment or training) and need more substantial long-term support.

There is also the issue of health and disability. A rising number of NEET young people cite long-term sickness or mental-health barriers. Critics argue that a uniform “jobs and training” pathway will not meet these varied needs, and risks forcing some young people into unsuitable schemes.

Questions around job quality loom large. Sectors being targeted for placements — such as hospitality and social care — are often characterised by low pay, limited job security and high turnover. Commentators worry the guarantee could funnel young people into unstable work without offering real career progression.

Another frequent concern is coercion. Because sanctions are part of the package, some argue the guarantee is less a promise of opportunity and more a mandate to comply, regardless of the suitability or quality of the placement offered.

Meanwhile, there is doubt about whether enough real jobs exist to uphold a true “guarantee” at scale. A promise of opportunity only works if the labour market can actually absorb young workers at the rate policymakers envision.

Online discussions reflect this mixture of hope and scepticism. Some welcome the emphasis on doing something to prevent young people from stagnating on benefits. Others fear the scheme could repeat the weaknesses of past programmes — with temporary, low-quality placements unlikely to lead to sustainable employment.

Scotland - A Different System with Its Own Youth Guarantee

Because skills, education and training policy are devolved, the UK Government’s Youth Guarantee applies mainly to England. In Scotland, a separate and long-standing system already exists: the Young Person’s Guarantee (YPG), introduced by the Scottish Government in 2020.

The Scottish YPG makes a broad promise that every 16- to 24-year-old in Scotland will have the chance to access one of the following:

a job
an apprenticeship
further or higher education
a training programme
volunteering
support to start a business

The Scottish Government has invested significant funding in the scheme — around £70 million in its most recently referenced allocation — which includes:

£45 million for local employability partnerships

£13.5 million for colleges and universities to support industry-focused learning and graduate pathways

£10 million for additional support in schools

£1.5 million for third-sector and volunteering opportunities

Hundreds of employers have signed up to provide opportunities under the Scottish model. The YPG emphasises tailored support, especially for young people who experience barriers to work, including mental-health challenges and socio-economic disadvantage.

Scotland also continues to invest in its own apprenticeship system (Modern, Foundation and Graduate Apprenticeships) and works through Skills Development Scotland to deliver careers, training and employment support.

Interactions and Tensions Between UK-Level and Scottish Policies

Although the UK Government’s new levy reform and training schemes don’t directly apply in Scotland, the Scottish Government has stated it is monitoring them closely. Changes to the apprenticeship levy in England could indirectly affect Scottish employers or the overall funding environment, so alignment issues remain.

But beyond these technical overlaps, Scotland continues to run its own model, separate from the UK Guarantee, meaning young people north of the border will not automatically access the new England-focused programmes.

Criticisms and Limitations in Scotland

While Scotland’s Young Person’s Guarantee is well-established, it is not without challenges.

The commitment is to provide opportunities, not a guaranteed job for every young person. As in England, outcomes depend heavily on local employers, training capacity, and regional economic conditions. Critics note that demand for apprenticeships in Scotland often exceeds supply, leaving some qualified candidates unable to secure places, even in priority sectors.

There is also debate about whether funding levels are sufficient to meet the ambitions of the scheme, especially given long-term economic pressures and fluctuations in employer demand.

Two Guarantees, Different Contexts — and an Uncertain Future

The UK Government’s Youth Guarantee marks a significant shift in youth employability policy in England — with substantial investment, expectations of participation, and an emphasis on linking young people quickly to work or training. It is ambitious but faces major questions about job quality, capacity, and suitability, particularly for young people with health-related barriers.

Scotland, by contrast, has had its own guarantee system for several years. Its approach is broader, more flexible, and more explicitly aimed at personalisation, but it too depends on real opportunities being available, and it is not an absolute guarantee of jobs.

Both systems aim to address the same problem: a generation of young people at risk of long-term exclusion from work. Both come with genuine potential — and significant risks if implementation falls short.

The coming years will show whether these guarantees become meaningful pathways into sustainable employment, or whether they risk becoming new versions of old schemes that fail to deliver lasting change.