One of the issues that I think creates real difficulty is that those agencies that are funded by government CAN NOT COMPETE WITH or INTERFERE WITH the private sector. I think your dating analogy will be very useful as we move forward in the conversation. While partnership is vital and important; it is not as much of a life and death matter. A person can survive (perhaps not as happily) without a partner. Having a means of getting food, shelter and some other necessities is a totally different matter. By necessities, I’m not referring to a Park Avenue penthouse or $20/pound coffee.
Many training programs IMPLY that taking their training or enrolling in their program will lead to employment. These programs have become very crafty about how the present themselves because they know that people will often not get jobs as a result of the training and they don’t want to be “on-the-hook.” They do however advertise “lifetime placement assistance” whatever that means.
Problem: Too much emphasis is placed on the idea that the client is totally responsible for finding work.
Manifestation of Problem - The emphasis is subtle but to me obvious.
1. There are limited resources for ACTUAL PLACEMENT of people into jobs that pay a wage or salary that is sufficient to meet their basic expenses
2. A quick look at the schedule of events/programs will show a lot of training and workshops that could prepare someone to be able to find work.
This is an interesting problem, and I'm glad you posted it. But I'm not sure what you mean when you say these entities place "too much emphasis on the idea the the client is totally responsible for finding work." How does this emphasis manifest? Is it an idea they simply express a lot, or are there ways in which it is expressed in their policies?