Workforce development has become a cornerstone of social and economic policy across Canada. Governments, funders, and community organizations have invested heavily in programs to connect jobseekers with employers, reduce unemployment, and address skills shortages.
Done well, workforce development bridges education, training, and labour demand. It helps people build credentials, re-enter the workforce, and stabilize their lives. Communities continue to see these benefits.
At the same time, persistent gaps remain. Youth complete training but struggle to secure or sustain employment. Employers report shortages, while young people report instability. As one community partner put it, “The system works - but only up to a point.”
At the centre of this challenge is a familiar assumption: if individuals can be made “job ready,” the labour market will respond.
Feedback from Tamarack’s Pathways for Youth Employment (PYE) communities suggests that this assumption no longer holds on its own.
The “perfect employer” assumption
Much of workforce development treats the worker as the variable and the employer as the constant. Jobseekers are expected to adapt through skills training, attitude change, and resilience. Employers are positioned as neutral actors, simply waiting for the right candidate.
Across communities, this assumption breaks down.
In Sudbury, youth report being turned away for a “lack of experience,” while employers offer limited training or mentorship. Expectations are high from day one. Readiness is assumed rather than developed.
In Chatham-Kent, partners described employers holding tightly to older workplace norms. Youth are expected to accept low pay, limited flexibility, and minimal trust. Learning on the job is not built into the role.
In Grande Prairie, youth are expected to arrive with the same workplace fluency as older workers, even when they have not been exposed to office systems, digital tools, or informal workplace norms.
The pattern is consistent. Responsibility for readiness sits almost entirely with youth. Employer practices are rarely scrutinized.
The limits of “job readiness”
Workforce programs work hard to mitigate these realities. Transportation supports, work clothing, coaching, and wraparound services are common and essential.
But communities are clear about the limits.
In Yukon, motivated youth are screened out by long, formal application processes that assume prior experience. Rigid scheduling excludes those balancing school, caregiving, or seasonal work.
In Sudbury, affordability pressures and low wages leave youth with little margin for instability and at high risk for burnout. When youth cycle out of employment, it is often framed as a lack of commitment. But where hours for entry-level jobs change week to week, and shifts are cancelled with little notice, these jobs are fragile by design.
Workforce programs can support participation, but they cannot redesign work on their own.
When employers adapt
Communities, both within and outside of the PYE communities, are seeing examples of employers who meet jobseekers halfway, with promising results.
Some have simplified hiring processes, replacing long online applications with short interviews or paid trial shifts. This allows youth to demonstrate capability rather than credentials.
Others are redesigning entry-level roles to include structured onboarding, peer mentorship, and clear expectations for the first few months. Youth are not expected to be ready on day one; readiness is instead built into the job.
Flexible scheduling is another shift. In Yukon and Sudbury, employers offering predictable hours, advance scheduling, or part-time roles aligned with school calendars report stronger retention.
Several employers are also investing in micro-credentialing on the job. Youth gain specific, transferable skills that build confidence, even when roles are temporary.
These employers are not lowering standards, they are adjusting the job design.
The retention trap
Where advancement is unclear, disengagement follows.
Across communities, youth move through short-term or seasonal work with little progression. Employers assume youth will leave and avoid investing. Youth leave because there is nothing to grow into.
Some employers are breaking this cycle by mapping visible pathways. Entry-level roles are clearly connected to higher pay, new responsibilities, or supervisory positions. Even modest progression changes how youth relate to work.
From matching to designing
At its best, workforce development is not only about matching people to jobs. It is about shaping a labour market where jobs are viable.
Community experience points to a simple truth. A good match requires two forms of readiness. The worker must be supported to prepare. The job must be structured so people can sustain it. When only one side adapts, we prepare youth for work that cannot hold them.
Conclusion
Workforce development remains one of the most hopeful tools for inclusive economic participation. It brings employers, educators, and communities together around a shared purpose.
To fulfill that promise, we must move beyond the idea that employers are fixed and youth are deficient. Young people are navigating affordability pressures, bias, geography, and instability alongside the demands of work.
A fair system asks both sides to adapt. The worker must be ready for the job. The job must be ready for the worker. Only then does workforce development move from filling vacancies to building livelihoods.
Resources:
-
Read The NEET Generation and the Neural Economy of Disconnection by John Stapleton
-
View the Pathways for Youth Employment (PYE) Evaluation Framework
-
Learn more about the Communities Building Youth Futures network
-
Learn about Becoming a Tamarack Member
