Abstract

This paper presents the findings of a survey undertaken in selected countries in the Sub Saharan Africa and Middle East and North Africa regions (SSA and MENA) aimed at reviewing the status of employment service provision, challenges and opportunities for their development to buttress governments’ efforts to tackle employment challenges, particularly for the youth. Given the enormous employment challenges in these regions relating to the quality (SSA) and quantity (MENA) of employment, particularly for vulnerable groups, the study confirms the potential role employment services can play in the region, including improving the quality of employment in the formal economy as well as promoting the formalization of the informal jobs and enterprises.

While public employment services are at different levels in different countries, they share the weakness in capacity. In order to address these challenges, governments need to invest in resourcing the PES and setting up a clear and conducive legal and policy framework. The institutional framework for PES seem to play a critical role – PES organized as executive agencies tended to be stronger, more effective and efficient than those that were part of the Ministries of Labour with some exceptions. The paper recommends that PES adopt digital technology in service delivery with a balanced offer of physical services to ensure inclusion, explore the use of partnerships with other public organizations, private employment agencies and third sector service providers, and focus on employer services where labour demand is low while adopting a more realistic phased approach to service development. The study was undertaken as part of the ILO cooperation with YouMatch – global initiative on innovative employment services for youth, implemented by the German Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) gmbH on behalf of the Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ).

Executive Summary

This paper discusses the status of public employment services in SSA and MENA regions based on a survey administered in 18 countries covering PES and non-PES providers of employment services supported by an extensive literature review.1 The delivery context these organizations operate in can be characterized by a number of common factors. In all countries, Labour Market Information (LMI) is limited, contributing to a lack of transparency concerning demand and supply. Labour market function in all countries could be said to be inefficient, with high levels of irregular and informal employment. High levels of persistent unemployment, poor working conditions, limited/noncompliance with health and safety regulations, limited/absent employment protection, and low paid work involving long hours, large populations of NEET2 youth are common features. There is a very high dependency on informal recruitment networks that can enhance discrimination in hiring practices.

The PES operated in two groups of institutional settings. Public agencies or bodies legally established and responsible to a parent Ministry (usually employment/labour ministries) described as “Agency PES”, and PES which are “line departments” of the responsible Ministry but with no independent agency status, described as “Ministry PES”. One PES has a hybrid structure with youth services delivered by a legally separate agency, and other PES operations delivered by the Employment Ministry.

Some of the non-PES organizations described in this report provide certain PES services under partnership arrangements including commercial contracts with Ministries, both as complementary and competing actors.

The Agency PES tended to describe a more focused remit on delivery of services to jobseeker and employer customers. They generally had PES- specific performance delivery objectives and targets, and, in most cases, some input into staff recruitment policy and job design. These organizations generally produced specific plans describing their management approach to delivering their mandate and priorities, these documents provided the framework for their service models. PES which are a constituent part of parent Ministries, in most cases, lacked their own coherent elaborated strategies and plans. They did not have separate operational objectives from their overseeing Ministries and had a low priority compared to other areas of employment policy administration reflected in very limited resources. Namibia provided an exception to this trend where legislation has formalized the PES mandate with its remit highlighted in the National Employment Policy, and a dedicated department within the Labour Ministry both reflecting and promoting the political priority afforded to PES.

All PES described (at least in theory) a core service, this included job search support and delivery of at least some form of Active Labour Market Programs (ALMPs), typically guidance. A number reported delivering careers advice, though clear evidence of careers, as opposed to general job search counselling was less prevalent and “classic” careers counselling was only described in a couple of countries. Only one PES, Zambia, was not currently handling any vacancies registered by employers, however, this was due to extreme capacity constraints rather than a policy decision not to offer what is accepted as a core PES activity. All respondents reported disaggregation of targets from central to local management/delivery tiers, though in most cases of Ministry PES (Namibia being an exception) the performance objectives quoted were Ministry level national employment policy objectives and not PES operational targets. Agency PES, however, all reported specific PES service delivery objectives.

All respondents reported at least some contact with employers, though the extent of this varied. Agency PES, with one exception, Benin, reported dedicated Employer Support Units in their organizations. Benin, the Agency PES not operating this model, explained that this was due to a preference to integrate employer engagement with jobseeker services, which was viewed as more productive; this was not an indication or reflection of diminished priority. In contrast, Ministry PES tended to have less developed employer engagement operations, and only one reported a “PES” specific Employer Engagement Strategy. This is reflected in the level of services offered to employers, with the Agency PES generally offering intermediation services beyond vacancy handling and referring clients. This involved more comprehensive support including arranging/delivering specific employability/skills training, support with recruitment exercises and internships, etc.

Though, most PES reported some client group differentiation of services, including describing profiling and segmentation, this was in most cases fairly residual in practice, involving some categorization and information gathering to assist in referring clients to particular programs, with little evidence of discrete client group specific service lines. However, in a couple of cases, PES are employing more sophisticated techniques to identify and analyze client characteristics to support more systemized integration approaches.

Ministry PES have very little scope to feed into resource planning decisions, and even less to influence these. Agency PES structures, however, tend to provide models and systems with the potential to enable the allocation of budgets to better reflect operational considerations and requirements. However, the de facto impact of these arrangements tends to be limited by the relative status and political influence of PES, even if legally independent compared to central Government Ministries. Cameroon PES, a single example mostly funded by a levy on employers, displays more significant evidence of genuine control over its funding.

Partnership working, under both informal/formal arrangements, service level agreements, and some commercial contracts, is an important feature of delivery of employment services in all countries participating in the study. PES is involved in “hand-offs” to specialized service providers for certain client groups (e.g. youth, disabled people) and in some cases cooperate with Private Employment Agencies and Temporary Work Agencies (PrEAs/TWAs). The extent of cooperation and collaboration varies. In some cases non-PES actors provide services either parallel to or duplicating PES or, in other instances, support in the absence of any PES provision. As such, the extent of service coordination varies considerably. A number of PES are responsible for PrES regulation, though there is no information available as to the outcomes from these relationships. The returns from non-PES organizations involved in the study reflect various approaches to cooperation with PES and illustrate a variety of differently constituted bodies. These form part of the overall employment support system in countries where no PES could be described as delivering a comprehensive service.

Staffing levels and the extent of IT support reflect a significant variation in service provision between PES. A number of promising developments are covered in the main body of this report, with clear examples offering scope for greater sharing of knowledge and expertise between countries and organizations. Notwithstanding this, the PES participating reported a number of fundamental challenges. Chief amongst these are a lower priority given their services compared to other areas of public policy, limited resources, insufficient vacancies to offer clients, staff retention, a need for more strategic coordination, and the logistics of delivering services to dispersed rural populations. All of these issues need to be considered in the context of how labour markets operate in countries with high levels of informal employment.

Introduction

Public employment services in SSA and MENA region are still in their nascent stages, exhibiting wide variability across countries, yet sharing some common characteristics. As part of ILO efforts to support member states capacities to design and implement comprehensive employment policy frameworks to promote quality and quantity of employment, the study examines the role of public employment services in the implementation of employment policies as well as in influencing their design. It does so by analyzing the policy and legal frameworks, their institutional and organizational set up and how these affect service provision, delivery as well as their effectiveness.

Providing good practices and new developments in employment services in the Sub Saharan Africa and the Middle East and North Africa Regions, this working paper is a product of the collaboration between the ILO and YouMatch GIZ project.

The information is derived from a survey (see Annex 5) sent to 15 Public Employment Services (PES) and 8 Non-PES Organizations that deliver part of employment services. The completed questionnaire is the primary source of data. This has been supplemented by other sources from the available literature.

It is important to note that the data was gathered from analysis of the aforementioned self-completed returns from Youmatch project participants. Though the questionnaire consisted of a set of standard questions, some respondents provided very useful extra information, others provided material returned under different subject headings from the questions requesting specific information. The extent of questionnaire completion and level of detail in responses also varied considerably. Notwithstanding efforts to avoid ambiguity, there were also some variations in the way respondents interpreted certain questions. Caveats have been applied in the paper to clarify responses to questions, which remain open to different interpretations. These primarily relate to definitions of functions e.g. vocational training for which there is no single standard definition. The development of more standardized descriptions can assist in future study and support the use of typologies to support comparative analysis. In this regard, some of the queries remaining at the time of publication, and a number of the specific more detailed responses have provided subjects for possible further study.

Many of the organizations that contributed to the study have very limited resources and sparse capacity. In most countries participating, delivery of PES services is an internal function of a Government Ministry. In some of these cases, there is very little organizational capacity, and a limited and sometimes only a most residual delivery infrastructure. In some of these examples, there may be no clear definition and internal organizational boundary between units delivering what might be described as a discrete PES operation and other Ministry functions. Where specific services have been reported as being delivered by the Ministry as distinct from (internal) “PES Units”, this has been recorded. However, the overall descriptions of delivery functions should therefore be understood in the context of employment services provided by the state authorities irrespective of internal bureaucratic structures.

Background – The role of Employment Services in Emerging Countries

Employment services are an essential component of efficient labour markets with a number of functions including matching jobseekers to job opportunities.

The OECD (OECD, 1997) identifies three core functions of Employment Services: payment of benefits, job intermediation and referral to ALMPs. The ILO has had a mandate to work on employment issues from its inception. This has been reaffirmed with the Global Employment Agenda (2003), the Declaration on Social Justice and Fair Globalization (2008) and the Global Jobs Pact (2009). The ILO also notes in Conventions 88 and 181 the crucial role of PES in providing a mechanism for the collection of Labour Market Information (LMI). The ILO Convention on Employment 1919 (No.2) both acknowledged the role of and promoted the establishment of national Employment Services.3 The role of PES was fully articulated internationally with the adoption of Employment Service Convention 1948 (No.88). Frey and MacNaughton (2016) noted the key role of the ILO Decent Work Agenda adopted in 1999 as a soft law instrument proposing to focus ILO policies around four strategic objectives or pillars: (a) rights at work, (b) fostering employment, (c) social protection, and (d) social dialogue.

Historically, PES operated as state monopolies, normally organized through Ministries of Labour. However, there has been a gradual recognition of the role of PrES through conventions 34 and 96. An especially significant call occurred following the Private Employment Agencies Convention in 1997 (ILO Convention No. 181) and the accompanying Recommendation (No. 188). These recognized potential benefits including cooperation between PES and PrEAs. PrEAs can complement PES with alternative options for job matching and provision of employment focused training to meet employer requirements. Thuy et al. (2001) noted the increasing growth of PrEAs with deregulation following the Convention, which essentially formerly recognized an existing trend.

Employment Services have two key sets of customers, employers and jobseekers, and most are steered by advisory bodies emphasizing social dialogue principles involving dialogue between government, employers and workers.

In advanced countries, job intermediation increasingly involves a combination of public and private services, delivered through a blend of online, self-service, and traditional face-to-face channels. Struyven (2014) has noted a trend of institutional splits between government commissioning bodies and service providers, which could be either public or private organizations. This reflects New Public Management theory with supplier/customer divisions and delivery mechanisms reaching beyond what were previously internal government functions (see Hood, 1991; Walch, 1995; Clark and Newman, 1997).

The context for the operation of employment services is very different in developing countries to that of those operating in advanced economies. The increasing transparency on both the demand and supply sides of the labour market, driven by technological change, noted by Leroy and Struyven (2014), is less established in most developing countries. Mazza (2017) attributed this lack of transparency to poorly functioning markets with employers rarely advertising vacancies and poor-quality information, combined with inefficient, slow and frequently unfair hiring practices. She described nepotism (and sometimes politicized hiring) amongst elites and educated people without influence waiting for what can be poor-quality public-sector jobs. However, public sector employment can also be a better option than private sector jobs in many cases. Ineffective matching also acts as a drag on productivity with very slow transitions. These can prevent companies recruiting personnel with the required skills and competencies that will enable them to capitalise on growth opportunities.

People using a mix of formal and informal networks to find or change jobs is an accepted, and generally acknowledged as a positive feature of labour markets in developed countries. In developing countries, informal job search networks predominate and in many countries, data is very limited if not non-existent. Diego F. Angel-Urdinola (2010) in an ILO survey of recruitment in MENA countries found “Friends” to be the overwhelming response to questions about how people found a job.

A crucial problem of a reliance on informal networks is the danger that they will serve to reinforce and even institutionalize existing disadvantage. Research of recruitment in Venezuela by Marquez and Ruiz-Tagle (2004) found workers in the informal sector more likely to use informal job seeking networks and having a greater propensity to be locked into low-paid informal precarious work. Garcia and Nicodermo (2013), in a study of Colombia, identified negative geographical dimensions to a dependence on informal employment networks with people in poorer neighbourhoods locked into a cycle of poor-quality jobs. Contreras et al. (2007), studying employment patterns amongst indigenous people in Bolivia, found especially serious gender imbalance issues from informal job search networks. Women with greater domestic responsibilities experienced great difficulties gaining any exposure to the type of formal recruitment networks which might provide them access to more secure salaried employment.

Many African PES have experienced significant reductions in resources since the advent of Structural Adjustment Programs in the 1980s. In a 1998 ILO Report, Schultz and Klemmer described a “vicious circle” with PES services to be in perpetual low capacity, ineffectiveness and poor reputation with jobseekers and employers. PES, which were a constituent part of Ministries rather than a separate legal entities, struggled to secure resources often being treated as a low priority. This has resulted in gaps in provision and many countries only able to deliver residual or marginal PES services. The African Development Fund observed notable challenges for jobseekers in developing countries. They particularly stressed persistent high levels of unemployment, poor working conditions, wage gaps and discrimination. Consequently, finding employment did not guarantee decent living conditions in low income countries. Five primary employment challenges were identified in developing countries: increasing decent employment, improving youth employment, achieving gender equality in the workplace, responding to the environmental crisis, and ending child labour.

The difficulties arising from poor working conditions are recognized in the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals through UN SDG 8, prioritizing decent work for everyone. This promotes sustained inclusion and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work for all, with objectives to advance opportunities for women and men to obtain decent and productive work in conditions of freedom, equity, security, and human dignity. An ILO Study (2018) recorded two billion people, 61per cent of the employed population, as working in the informal economy. Informal work is usually, but not systematically, characterized by a lack of employment protection, a deficiency of social protection, long working hours, non-compliance with safety standards and low wages. Developing countries, where the vast majority of employment is informal, are faced with a dual challenge of improving conditions in the informal sector whilst seeking to introduce social protection mechanisms to enforce labour regulations.

A 2019 ILO study records that over 20 per cent of young people (under the age of 25) are unemployed and not receiving training or education, and 145 million young workers live in poverty. The scarring effects of long-term unemployment, especially youth unemployment, necessitate governments adopting youth unemployment as a public policy priority. The UN Global Initiative on Decent Jobs for Youth recognizes this by calling for cooperation between public and private actors, the promotion of partnerships, and especially information exchange to facilitate effective labour market interventions.

World Economic Forum research in 2018 identified a 32 per cent global average pay gap between men and women. A World Bank study (2012) reported a 26 per cent gap between male (77.7 per cent) and female (51.8 per cent) participation.

The Survey Questionnaire

The questionnaire included questions on the following organizational themes:

• Organizational Models

• Services to Clients

• Financial Resources

• Human Resources

• Client Specific Services

• Labour Market Information (LMI)

The role of non – PES Organizations

Responses from non-PES organizations provided insights into their important role in developing countries’ employment systems. These bodies are sometimes complementary to state provision, but frequently offer services which would not exist without their involvement. Organizations providing such services include NGOs, Training Bodies, PrEAs and TWAs.

The organizations responding to the survey provide new service capability and some local connections and knowledge where PES presence is very limited or non-existent. In some cases, they deliver flexibility, which is not possible through direct state provision, examples of particular use of results-based delivery and some competition to PES increase choices for jobseekers. Some non-PES providers have partnership arrangements with PES and de facto form part of the PES delivery system.

The Egypt National Employment Pact (NEP) was initiated in 2011 by the Egyptian German Business Community in collaboration with the German-Arab Chamber of Industry and Commerce. It is supported by the German Development Corporation on behalf of the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development. In 2014, the NEP became an official project for training and education as an Egyptian NGO focusing on youth and technical education and training.

Through its Employment Centre, the NEP facilitates job matching for jobseekers aged 18 to 35, especially those who do not have degrees or formal technical training. The objective is to bring together jobseekers and private sector employees to enhance mutual understanding, trust and reliability, and ultimately help to fill vacant blue-collar positions in the private sector and income opportunities for youth. Most NEP staff have been certified as Employment Officers by the German Chamber of Commerce in Frankfurt/Oder. National Employment Pact sponsorship enables the Employment Centre services to be provided free to the community.

The NEP, as an NGO, reports to the Ministry of Social Solidarity, which monitors its activities though there is not yet any wider and more formalized cooperation with the Government which does not provide any funding. However, as part of its role in capacity building in employment promotion service institutions, NEP has also provided training for Government employees.

In 2018, a new company affiliated to the NEP was founded. The Network for Employment Protection. This is a social enterprise which offers support for institutions interested in establishing or improving placement services for blue collar employees. It uses enabling tools e.g. standard operating procedures, tailor made software and databases, capacity building training and quality assurance to transfer operational expertise to selected partner institutions.

In addition to organizing jobs fairs and employment days, NEP applies a bespoke methodology to deliver its core business of matching and placement services. This model involves skills identification, referral to training as needed, personal case management and referral to vacancies, including follow- up to establish if a job placement has been sustainable. The organization is designed with two functional arms, one reaching out to jobseekers and one to employers.

Services are promoted through outreach campaigns to attract jobseekers and a “job scout” approach to attract companies with vacancies, matching the skills and competencies of jobseekers registered with the organization.

Jobberman is a PrEAs operating through Nigeria’s largest online recruitment platform which currently has 2.5 million active jobseekers. Joberman also liaises with Government under contracts to promote specific recruitment projects, particularly, youth and civil service recruitment initiatives. The organization additionally provides direct services for companies, including recruitment programs, which can include employability training for potential employees and training for existing staff, and human resources development. The recruitment platform operates under various brands across a number of other African countries, notably Kenya.

As a revenue-driven organization, Jobberman is structured around four core service functions: Sales, Recruitment Solutions for specific companies, Youth Engagement and Learning (primarily in partnership with Government) and Human Resource Solutions (consultancy for private companies to improve their recruitment and development activities).

The Mauritanian Chamber of Commerce, Industry and Agriculture (CCIAM) was established in 1958 and, under a law passed in 2000, was endowed as a professional public institution with legal status and financial autonomy to represent the economic interests of commercial, industrial, agricultural, fisheries and service companies.

The organization is intended to be the interface between the public and private sectors providing an effective tool for economic and social development services. CCIAM provides companies with economic commercial and legal information (including on recruitment issues and training programs). Funded by state grants, CCIAM organizes training to meet the needs of companies and is responsible for the collection and dissemination of economic information. It also manages economic mapping as part of its remit to make the country more attractive to foreign investors, promote partnership between Mauritanian and foreign companies and guide investors in Mauritania.

A key objective is to ensure that employment training meets the skills needs of businesses in Mauritania. Surveys are often conducted to identify the needs of companies. Using this information, training programs are developed with companies and vocational training centres. Young people leaving vocational training centres are placed on internships in companies and assessed. A profile of young people is produced and used to facilitate their integration with companies.

AWIB is an Ethiopian civil society organization, an NGO which combines education and private placement agency functions. It operates through both universities and PrES with a mandate to facilitate employment opportunities and assist job matching for women through providing training designed to enhance graduate employability. The organization is funded from a variety of sources including government, contributions from corporations, donations and fees from companies recruiting staff. Programs to enhance employability include workshops, mentoring and networking opportunities. Current performance targets are for 80% of participants to be employed within one year of graduation, and 50% of all clients to be placed.

Al-Balqa University (BAU), a public educational institution in Jordan, focusses on teaching and learning for employability. Its primary goal is improving employability by working in partnership with employers to reduce labour market mismatches. BAU specializes in applied technical and vocational education and training (TVET) to achieve its mission to contribute to sustainable development and a knowledge-based economy. BAU’s aim is to meet the needs of local and regional labour markets and to reduce unemployment.

The University identifies market needs through surveys undertaken in partnership with private sector partners. Based upon the results, technical education curricula are developed to support training in operational, specialized and practical skills. The University promotes partnerships with the private sector through their inclusion in designing curricula and directly training students. The University hopes to develop an advanced model for career paths which will enable students with academic backgrounds to move to vocational paths at any level of study where skills demands and labour market needs have been identified. BAU has championed proposals submitted to Government for the restructuring of tertiary education in Jordan to introduce recognized examples of international best practice in technical education such as the German model.

World Entrepreneurs is an NGO which has been established in Togo since 2011. Since 2018, it has organized a program to support entrepreneurship and professional integration for young people and women. Its objective is to enable clients to access sustainable employment or create a sustainable business through offers of guidance, training and individual support services. The target group for the program is low-skilled and unskilled people, especially in deprived urban areas. It particularly prioritizes projects with an impact on social inclusion and the environment.

The primary aim of the Program is to contribute to economic development through the creation and development of small (micro) businesses and to enable deprived citizens to access sustainable employment through skills training and other longer-term support required to foster integration.

A key component of this activity is a Program Agreement with the Government which authorizes the organization’s activities if they align with Government strategic directions. A fundamental requirement is therefore to operate in synergy with the state employment support agencies PES. Services are provided in parallel with those directly provided by the Government but funded through private donors. Clients are guided towards specific programs following initial listening sessions to identify their needs. Referrals can be made to either World Entrepreneurs own services or other agencies if deemed more beneficial. In addition to guidance and training, World Entrepreneurs is able to link clients to job opportunities in companies with which they have developed relationships.

LINK is a private recruitment and training firm in Guinea which targets jobseekers and businesses. It has contracts with the Guinean PES to provide training for jobseekers which is mostly provided from a national centre in the capital. However, subject to demand, services can be established in other cities to meet specific needs and demands. Currently, 70% of clients are referred from the PES under a contract following initial screening with the Government Agency. They are then interviewed by LINK staff to obtain their perspectives and motivations, and finally profiled before being referred to a specific program. 20% of clients refer themselves, and 20% are already in employment and are referred to training programs by businesses. Programs are evaluated using clients' outcomes and attendance rates at courses as key metrics

The Senegal National Confederation of Employers (CNES) combines more than 85% of companies including SMEs with 90% of Training Institutes and includes representatives of Trades Unions. CNES is a key interlocutor between the state, social partners and technical and financial partners on issues affecting the private sector.

Funded from contributions from its members and through levies on employer contributions of 3% of payroll, the organization pilots a partnership for the governance of vocational training to foster employment. The aim is a better workforce training and the optimal use of human resources.

Conclusion

The organizations responding to the survey aspire to deliver a broadly similar and common core of PES services. Ability to deliver a service commensurate with these aspirations or even to meet obligations as laid down in national laws and employment policy statements varied considerably. This appears to be a consequence of levels of resource and the political context within which the organizations operate, specifically the degree of priority afforded to PES.

Some micro analysis indicates that employment officers, especially in PES under the direct supervision of Ministries, are often required to combine their core role with other administrative functions, such as labour inspection and industrial relations. In theory, synergies could be exploited from such arrangements to produce some added value, or to at least avoid further reducing an already overstretched service. However, in practice, staff can simply be diverted from PES activities to what are deemed higher priority functions. Most PES included in this study lack resources for more than the most basic functionalization, so even if local front-line staff are not deployed on non-PES activities, they have to spend most, if not all of their time on jobseeker registration. This inevitably precludes the proactive employer engagement activity, which might enable PES to display to governments what could be achieved if they could secure more resources. This contributes to many PES remaining seriously under-resourced, lacking both staff and equipment.

Although the GDP levels of the majority of participating countries were broadly similar, there were no particular links between GDP and the range of PES services reported. There is evidence that PES established as independent legal entities (generally in Francophone countries) separate from Ministries tend to have more focused strategies. Their dedicated remit to deliver PES services and structured stakeholder input, including from social partners, through tripartite governance systems, may allow for an enhanced priority and facilitate management reforms. Agency PES tended to report more operationally-focused performance metrics and closer links with employers than PES which are constituent entities within labour and employment Ministries. More research is necessary to establish the extent to which organizational typologies drive delivery models before any robust conclusions can be drawn as to the desirability of certain structures. Evidence from this study suggests that certain management systems and governance structures may be preferable as vehicles for service improvement and capability building.

Notwithstanding the cause and effect of the Ministry/PES relationship on organizational features, Agency PES reported more control over some aspects of their operations than the Ministry PES. All reported at least some influence on staff recruitment policies, and all had Governance structures which through tripartite Labour Councils, provide at least the possibility for stakeholders to influence operational policy decisions. They offer a permanent platform enabling discussion and consideration of PES issues. The absence of such fora may be a contributory factor to the more limited service levels described in the majority of the Ministry PES.

Some Agency PES reported a degree of transparency in decisions on resource distribution with attempts to identify and quantify the relationship between resource levels and services delivered. In some cases, the generally greater level of transparency was reflected in bespoke PES planning documents. In contrast, specific references to Ministry PES were noticeably absent from all of the National Employment Policies reviewed with the notable exception of Namibia.

As further evidence of the above point, some Agency PES were able to describe at least some elements of PES specific organizational policy and strategy as discrete from Employment and Labour Ministries. This is reflected in more developed and integrated performance measures, which at least to an extent seek to report on PES activities and can, in some cases, start to offer a proxy for considering the added value PES make to labour market operations. In contrast, the Ministry PES in most cases had no operational delivery targets and reported their objectives as the socio-economic policies and aspirations of Employment and Labour Ministries or the wider government. In this regard, there is significant evidence of the viscous circle described by Schultz and Klemmer (see section 3) where PES with a low priority within ministries have no opportunity to develop performance measures which can assess their value and contribution, leaving them with no evidential basis upon which to improve services. There is also a risk that they can be subject to random reductions in resources, with an absence of longer-term planning and even where resource is allocated for PES services, this can be redeployed on an ad-hoc basis to serve other functions.

Based upon study of the questionnaire returns, PES established as separate legal entities from Ministries appear to operate more autonomously. They are more able to exert influence upon features such as job roles/design, organizational delivery models and target setting/performance management. The Agency PES generally described Social Partner input, which can provide a platform for stakeholder perceptions and needs to be fed into PES service planning, potentially enabling more client- focused services.

A need for more client group specificity was generally acknowledged, however, insufficient resource is a particular barrier to enable investing in this.

The limited extent to which PES have exploited potential synergies and realized potential benefits from partnerships is reflected in summaries of services offered. Only four PES reported providing advice on entrepreneurship. This reflects findings from a World Bank study (Urdinola, Kuddo and Semlali, 2013) that though entrepreneurship programs are routinely offered in MENA countries, they are rarely delivered by PES. This study also reported the lack of evaluation, especially concerning the cost-effectiveness of programs confirmed by PES in this research. All PES recognized the importance of employer engagement, with varying degrees of resource dedicated to this. There tended to be a high proportion of backroom administrative, as opposed to front room client facing delivery staff; however, more detailed and granular study of internal PES operations and job design and designations would be needed to confirm the size of management/administrative overheads for comparison between organizations. The need for more client group specific services is generally acknowledged though resource constraints inevitably limited the ability to deliver more segmented and bespoke services.

Most PES are seeking to exploit the benefits of IT especially for improved service, capacity development and outreach. However, as for client and other services, the level of available resource is a key determinant of how far services and processes can be automated.

The contribution of non-PES organizations, including NGOs, PrEAs and TWAs forms an important component of employment service delivery. There is scope for greater coordination of these services with PES, together with a more joined- up approach to the delivery of PES and other related skills and training support provided by other government agencies and NGOs.

Front line officers tend to be especially under resourced which necessarily restricts their capacity to provide services and compromises the ability of the PES to deliver common policies across countries. A standard basic service model could be described; this could then be adapted and supplemented in the context of different socio-economic situations and levels of resourcing.

The possibility of building upon this learning to inform further reform is summarized in the next section, the Recommendations section.

Recommendations

Governments need to identify the optimum balance between local flexibility and improved outcomes (vertical governance), and integrated work between PES and other (especially) local stakeholders (horizontal governance).

The extent of PES autonomy will be determined by a range of factors. These can be external, political, socio-economic, institutional and due to policy priorities. However, some flexibility is possible in performance management, the management of networks to deliver local programs, outsourcing, eligibility criteria for ALMPs, the allocation of budgets and policy design.

Key actions are: building capacity for local actors to influence programs, balancing flexibility with equity and efficiency, setting minimum standards for the type and quality of services, building accountability systems compatible with goals, and producing good data and information to assist local stakeholders to better understand the local context.

Digitalization offers a unique opportunity for SSA and MENA countries to expand service provision and delivery and improve outreach to remote areas and disadvantaged groups in the labour market. Nevertheless, as well as online offerings, an expansion of PES services with a core of walk-in offices will attract employers and jobseekers. Face-to-face meetings can assist in changing hiring and placement practices. Employers may need help to explain what they want or to place vacancies, jobseekers may need help with job search and information on training not available on platforms. Many of the key target clients PES will want and need to attract will not be able to access digital channels, though for others, digital contact if available is already their default choice option.

A well-functioning PES is needed to assist labour market development. Employers are the first customers to engage in this regard. Training offers linked to employers can generate work opportunities. Online is an important element but not the only necessary channel for service delivery, good use should be made of all existing systems and infrastructure. Partnership working is crucial so that PES can make the best contribution possible to an overall ecosystem with a range of actors delivering employment services. Meeting both employer and jobseeker needs is necessary for PES to contribute to a better functioning labour market and enhance social inclusion.

However, PES in SSA and MENA countries are operating at different levels, and all face difficulties in how to make the best use of their resources. An “Employment Information Centre” model for African PES suggested by Schulz and Klemmer could still provide a useful blueprint as a core service for all SSA and MENA PES, especially if adapted to take advantage of the development of digital communications over the last decade.

The returns from the study participants confirmed previous research including a 2015 study of African PES by the Inter-American Development Bank. This concluded that PES working alone in Africa were particularly limited. Limited coverage was combined with insufficient financing to deliver services in rural areas or have enough local offices. The PES lacked key mechanisms to serve clients and had limited capacity, especially to respond to the needs of the most vulnerable. Given that public expenditure in SSA and MENA countries will inevitably be constrained, enhanced state provision could be introduced as part of a wider enhancement of the PES “ecosystem” involving strategic partnerships between PES, other government agencies, PrEAs and NGOs. This would require PES offices to initially concentrate on their information provision (with signposting as appropriate to other service providers) and registration function (with registration being placed online where possible). Improved advice, counselling and information services could be developed incrementally and provide useful support for jobseekers promoting employment and training opportunities. If PES were able to showcase what could be achieved in terms of provision of an effective information service, employers and other stakeholders could be encouraged to make use of these improved facilities and so create a “critical mass” which would provide the foundation for development of and investment in more comprehensive PES services.

A model to develop PES capacity from a very limited or even residual starting point could therefore have three stages:

• Auditing the labour market, employer base, local skills and provision of existing employment and training support in pilot locations;

• Identifying sufficient potential employment opportunities in pilot locations to attract job centre customers and work with selected employers hiring needs;

• Establish a basic core service for registration and collection of LMI.

Mazza (2017) develops this approach suggesting three models for PES development in developing economies depending on the nature of local employment markets and potential for growth.

Where the informal sector is substantial and potential for overall formal employment growth in the short to medium term is low, but there is a private sector employment base, she advocates a sectoral approach. Noting that if such labour markets sectors tend to be regionally concentrated, and with growth dependent on Foreign Direct Investment, Mazza proposes a work first/skills development strategy. This would involve alignment of PES registration services with employment/sector focused training provision. The model could provide the prototype of a subsequent generic PES, or remain as a sector specific service with potential to consider private sector delivery options. The Jamaican PES has grown its PES since 2014 focusing initially on tourism, with a subsequent development to incorporate agriculture.

Where labour markets are characterized by supply side deficits, particularly a lack of suitable jobseeker skills, the initial approach would involve more broadly based employer engagement to gather vacancies. Targeted support for vulnerable groups with particular labour market barriers, such as women and young people, could be linked with closer links to VET provision to improve supply of skills. In (typically rural) areas where there is very limited private sector activity and formal employment, and little current potential for growth, informal and self-employment tend to predominate. The added value of a nascent PES in this model would again be sectoral but possibly be delivered by PrEAs, with a focus on encouragement to assist development of micro- businesses where appropriate.

Notwithstanding the problems they encounter, both SSA and MENA PES participating in this study and others continue to provide good examples of well-designed successfully implemented reforms. Whilst this study indicates that PES with Agency status have been, in most cases, able to provide stronger PES delivery systems than those under direct Ministry supervision, there are also examples of progress in centrally-governed PES. The Mauritius PES operates as a central department of the Ministry of Labour, providing well-functioning employment services covering most core PES functions: matching, LMI, counselling and guidance and the administration of labour market programmes, whilst also providing a well-functioning online jobs portal.

The Ministry of Labour in Ghana undertook a “Comprehensive Needs Assessment” in 2016 selecting a number of Public Employment Centres (PECs) as pilot offices for a study. PECs are established with three key functions: assisting jobseekers and companies in job matching and placement, ensuring compliance with labour regulations and ILO Conventions and providing LMI for the Ministry Employment Information Branch.

A subsequent study, conducted in 2018, identified limited capacity and infrastructure with activity concentrated on the labour inspectorate activities to the exclusion of job matching and gathering LMI. However, this research also suggested that a local office network was essential to facilitate improved capture of LMI (noted as a vital prerequisite for the improved operation of labour market policy) and facilitate ALMPs. This justification for the continued existence of PECs was cited as providing a policy justification and business case for investment in staff training, improved infrastructure and more adequate resource.

Recommendations from this research offer a blueprint which illustrates the potential to build on existing infrastructure, exploit synergies and utilize these as a vehicle to display the potential added value from PES. As in many other SSA and MENA countries, improved counselling and guidance for school leavers and graduates has been identified as a key labour market requirement in Ghana. It was therefore recommended that the mandate of an existing network of Youth Employment Agencies (YEAs) be reviewed with an agenda to ensure a greater labour market orientation. The proposal was to establish PECs in all YEA Districts so that these entities could operate in parallel and complement each other to exploit potential synergies, with PECs delivering YEA functions where YEA’s had no local presence.

Licensing fees for PrES and registration fees for TVET agencies were identified as potential sources of added financial support to supplement government funds necessary to invest in this service enhancement.

Schulz and Klemmer identified a number of preconditions for such a development- political will being a primary requirement. This depends upon an acceptance that better resourced PES could make a difference to labour market operation and inclusion. A more adequate funding stream could then be negotiated. Schulz and Klemmer described the options for generating this revenue as being financed from taxation, insurance payments or a levy on employers. From this study, the Cameroon employer levy to fund PES seems to potentially offer a more stable financial base for service provision and planning than alternatives, and merits further investigation. In most cases, SSA and MENA countries do not have insurance systems which could support this model, and ring-fencing taxes through hypothecation is very difficult in practice given inevitably competing demands on revenue, especially during periods of economic downturn and retrenchment. Irrespective of the revenue source identified, a degree of stability in resourcing is a fundamental enabler for the improvement of PES capacity. Enhanced PES services would have a chance to introduce a much-needed rise in their profiles both within ministries and externally, thereby attracting wider and increased support and sponsorship, including from social partners.

The South Africa PES organization, Employment Service South Africa (ESSA), was established in 2007 to be delivered through 125 local Labour Centres of the Department of Labour (DoL). These centres had historically offered three core services: labour relations advice/consultation and inspections, administration of unemployment benefits and services for work seekers and employers (Arende, Chabane and Paterson 2015). The introduction of the ESSA system was a response to persistent and chronically high levels of unemployment resulting in a concentration on the administration of unemployment benefit to the exclusion of other functions. ESSA was therefore a recognition that there was a need to improve the performance of the market in matching jobseekers with vacancies (Hornsby, 2013). ESSA has also successfully introduced an online jobs portal.

Recognition in South Africa of the specific role of PES in section 5 of the 2014 Employment Services Act presents a further development and example of legislative action to promote delivery of employment services as a specific policy priority. This law requires the DoL to provide a number of services free of charge and to ensure that these are open and accessible:

• Registering jobseekers

• Registering job opportunities from employers

• Matching jobseekers to job opportunities

• Facilitating the placement of jobseekers into opportunities

• Advising workers on access to social security benefits

• Providing career counselling and life skills advice and assessment

• Regulating Private Employment Agencies

• Making recommendations to the Home Affairs Department before work visas are issued

Situational Analysis of unemployed people in South Africa, prior to the passage of the law (Govender 2015), identified particular barriers preventing labour market integration. Most significant were: a lack of skills that promote employability, a lack of work experience, a lack of mobility and resources to look for a job and unemployed people who have not finished secondary education and lacking relevant experience being in great need of assistance to access available opportunities. In seeking to address labour market disadvantage whilst also providing a structure to deal with issues arising from an earlier 2002 Immigration Act, the PES was given a legal mandate to address a number of key priorities, especially issues faced by young people and discouraged jobseekers:

• Promote employment

• Improve access to the labour market for jobseekers

• Provide opportunities for new entrants to the labour market to gain work experience

• Improve the employment prospects of jobseekers, especially the more vulnerable

• Improve the employment and re-employment prospects of employees facing retrenchments

• Facilitate access to education and training for jobseekers, especially vulnerable jobseekers

• Promote employment growth and workplace productivity, and

• Facilitate the employment of foreign nationals in the South African economy, where their contribution is needed in a manner that does not displace local skills

The PES network of local Labour Centres, established with an extensive geographical spread and operated through visiting points (customer service centres), offer both an employment and careers advice service for citizens. They promote employment policy objectives raising awareness of incentives e.g. tax and wage subsidies, internships, public/community work schemes. The Centres encourage jobseeker registration and employers to place vacancies. They focus on developing strong community partnerships and provide the link between citizens and training, skills development and work-based learning opportunities.

To protect vulnerable jobseekers, further functions also include monitoring applications for visas to migrant workers and registering PrES. Whilst most services are now available online, the Government has acknowledged the importance of maintaining a “drop in” delivery model to avoid anyone being denied access. ESSA, particularly, the online platform, has a very important role in generating labour market information.

Whilst a survey of employers using ESSA services (Arende, Chabane and Paterson 2015) reported 75% as content with PES sourced employees, only 50% posted some of their invariably intermediate and especially low-skilled vacancies with the PES. These decisions reflected assumptions about the skills level of jobseekers registered with PES. This finding was confirmed by Labour Centre managers who referred to a preponderance of low-skilled jobseekers in their system. Asked which improvements would make them more likely to use PES services, employers cited: greater staff capacity and understanding of employer needs, follow up of placements and care for newly recruited employees. This emphasizes that a focus on improving the employer offering can be a crucial first step in breaking a cycle of employers not placing vacancies due to a lack of skilled jobseekers who in turn will not use the PES because of a lack of suitable vacancies.

In contrast to positive changes in PES South Africa following ministerial reorganization (as referred to in this study), Uganda has had several unsuccessful attempts to strengthen its PES. Evidence suggests that the complex system of devolved responsibility, with local employment centres being overseen by municipal authorities, themselves not responsible to the Labour Ministry (which has policy but not operational responsibility for the PES), has significantly compromised reform efforts. Tanzania and Kenya have both reorganized ministerial structures in an attempt to improve the capability of their PES, which were constituent parts of parent Ministries. Kenya established the National Employment Agency (NEA) in 2016 as an executive agency under the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection while Tanzania’s Employment Service Agency (TaESA) is a trust under the Ministry responsible for Labour. The objective is to devolve sufficient levels of responsibility to provide a service more focused on local labour market needs to complement the introduction of national online job portals.

Evidence from South Africa and Namibia suggests that where the role of PES has been recognized in legislation, it is possible to enhance the profile and secure investment in improving services. This reflects the fact that, ultimately, political priority rather than institutional setting can be a key determinant of PES capacity. Similarly, Mauritius has established an influential discrete PES unit within the Labour Ministry which has maintained central governance but ensured that PES is afforded a high priority within the employment policy administration. Conversely, countries with fractured delivery, with employment centres operated by local administrations with no Ministry of Labour input, and where PES has a low priority within Ministry policy development, continue to struggle to establish effective services. It may be beneficial for all countries in this position to follow the lead of some now considering reform of internal Ministry structures. Where possible, legislation to confirm the PES mandate and reflect this in National Employment Plans could also provide a positive catalyst for change.

A French Development Agency report on the Informal Economy (2019) noted that although the informal sector is characterized by worker vulnerability, it nevertheless makes very significant contributions to the GDP of developing countries. Often part of a wider mostly formalized supply chain, it may not always be unorganized.

Whilst it remains very difficult to quantify the informal economy, informal should not automatically or necessarily be associated with shadow, hidden or illegal markets. Some informal employment is a consequence of particular work practices which fall within legislative loopholes or administrative complexities. Whilst it is a priority to tackle the exploitation of poor informal workers, especially those having limited education, there are also affluent informal workers performing technology assisted functions. Whereas research demonstrates that formalising employment leads to greater output and wages, policy tools to tackle informality need to be developed carefully with input from workers and employers. The objective of ultimately formalising the economy and labour market therefore presents a complex range of issues for policy makers and especial challenges for PES. Reform in this area will necessarily form part of a broader consideration of rights, social protection and decent work measures. Policy proposals will need to be considered in the context of local, including environmental, factors and, crucially, to focus on the needs and position of those currently engaged in informal work, including many who move between formal and informal employment. As the informal sector continues to grow, PES will need to adapt services accordingly, assisting with the formalization of the enterprises and jobs.

In addition to the challenges SSA and MENA PES face from the informal economy, a lack of resources and weak institutional capacity, the PES must address issues related to the ‘future of work’. The wider socio-economic consequences for the future of work in the context of the 4th Industrial Revolution present both challenges and opportunities for PES across the world. Technological change and the rise of the platform and the “gig” economy are changing the nature of the labour market and the relationship between employers and employees. Automation is both replacing existing occupations and creating new ones with the growth of Transitional Labour Markets. These changes are having significant impacts upon the way public services, including from PES, are provided for clients. PES will have an increasing role as career managers, supporting clients through more frequent labour market transitions during working lives.

A feature of the technology driven changes, both within PES and in the wider labour market, in recent years has been the growth of a wider ecosystem of employment services provided by a variety of factors including PES. There would appear to be scope for PES to seek to supplement capacity through exploring opportunities for greater cooperation with PrES and TWAs to realise the potential for mutual benefits as articulated in ILO Conventions 181 and 188. Where countries are able to develop Strategic Cooperation Frameworks with private actors it may be possible to bridge gaps in service provision whilst preventing the development of exploitative relationships in the absence of effective and proportionate regulation. There are now many examples of positive public-private cooperation in the delivery of PES services which can provide the basis of further investigation. Seychelles provides a very rare global example, and unique in SSA, of all services being outsourced to private providers including ALMPs. Though this overall model may be a function of country-specific factors some further study of aspects of this outsourced public service delivery in practice could provide useful learning material to explore the possible role private actors can play in closer working relationships with PES.

Africa is experiencing a great increase in its labour force with a rapidly growing, young, population. Whist non-government agencies are playing an increasingly significant role, PES need to be key actors in mediating labour market adaptations for citizens, especially the young, women, and other disadvantaged groups. They can provide an enhanced role in supporting the currently weak regulatory, legal, and enforcement frameworks necessary to protect jobseekers and workers from exploitation. In this regard there may be scope for PES to exploit synergies with other employment policy functions, e.g. labour inspectorate, youth employment services, PrEAs/TWA regulation, and establish mutually beneficial partnerships with non-governmental, including private agencies, in order to develop more cohesive and effective services for citizens.

A model for a core delivery structure could be designed, reflecting on the findings from the survey and other references from the literature. It could be evaluated through piloting, which would include trialing key performance indicators, service quality standards, transparency through regular service reviews/audits and benchmarking. The overall objective to strike an optimum balance between meeting local needs and supporting delivery of national employment policies will require resolution. Mazza (2017) has described this as a frequent bureaucratic struggle between standardizing processes and office organization at the national level and greater flexibility to meet the needs of jobseekers and employers at the local level. However, she cites examples of PES in developing countries which have resolved this issue evolving over time, including Tunisia which has developed an assortment of different centres orientated to the needs of specific sectors. Benin, included in this study, is also presented as an example of a PES which has combined high levels of local management flexibility with a necessary degree of central control of policies and programs.

Suggestions for further research

The survey has identified a number of potential case studies which would merit further in-depth study (see Annex 4). It is notable that these are mostly from PES with Agency status. More detailed research could contextualize these practices and possibly establish whether, and in what conditions, they might be transferable. These examples cover key elements of PES strategy, particularly: resource allocation, communicating with clients, customer contact/channel strategies, engagement with employers, and collecting and using LMI.

A further study could also include more intensive research to verify and clarify the nature of service delivery on the ground. Having established a common evaluation framework it could inform a benchmarking exercise which might produce a platform for some ongoing and periodic review. If possible, this should include a spread of countries with different levels of capability, legal mandate, and resource. This could allow progress to be monitored and provide transparency about transfers of expertise between countries.

The examples from NGOs have provided further interesting context, and a review of these can assist in considering an essential basic question, what is/should be the role of PES in developing economies? The NGOs are examples from the mosaic and range of parallel and sometimes disparate organizations providing employment services in all countries involved in the survey. Though PES having a contributing, but far from central, role as labour market actors is by no means unique to developing countries, the wider socio-economic context within which these institutions operate raises fundamental questions about their role and how this can be developed. PES capacity can possibly be enhanced with their developing as one of a group of complimentary actors in a wider delivery ecosystem. Gathering information on PES services in developing countries through issuing self- completion questionnaires can have intrinsic methodological difficulties. Surveys need to include questions which are specifically generic to enable some comparative analysis, without being so broad as to prevent meaningful distinctions being drawn between different countries. This is a particular issue for surveys reporting on countries with fairly significant differences in capacity and capability.

Further to this, the basic question of how one should define a PES does not necessarily have a simple clear answer in countries where there is no discrete PES organization with independent legal status or established delivery unit within Employment/Labour Ministries. Therefore, apparent ambiguity in the role described for some PES may be due to a lack of clear definition of roles and responsibilities within a country’s employment policy administration as well as, or rather than, due to logistical problems in gathering data.

Consideration of how best to interpret information gathered as part of this exercise suggests potential directions that further work might take to build upon information collected so far.

The information gathered from returns from NGO’s delivering employment support describes a number of organizations providing a range of services. Whilst the disparate nature of these inputs limits the scope to draw any general conclusions, the material provided supports the characterization of Employment Services in SSA and MENA countries as being delivered through an ecosystem. This comprises a number of Agencies, Public, Private, and NGOs.

The extent of the informal economy, absence of any state welfare system and, even in the most well established PES, very limited resources, places obvious limits on how traditional PES models can and perhaps should be applied as operational templates for the future development of SSA and MENA PES. In this regard, some more in-depth studies can provide data with granular information on, the characteristics of registered clients, the nature of employers who work with PES, and how mapping services might identify synergies with other actors. These should include both public and private organizations, including providers of Labour Inspection and Youth Employment services. This can illustrate how links between PES and other actors might be further developed to enhance overall delivery of labour market policies through enhanced partnership delivery models.

Annex

Annex 1. Participating Organizations

Annex 2. Key Themes from responses to Questionnaire

Annex 3. Institutional Setting of PES

Annex 4. Suggested Case Studies for further investigation

Annex 5 - Questionnaire

Part A. For completion by PES

If organization is not a PES, please answer questions at Part B.

Section One – Organizational Model

1. Autonomy and Decentralisation

• • What is the legal framework for the operation of the PES?

  • Judicial autonomy

  • When was the PES established?

Is your PES?

• • • An internal department within a Government Ministry (i.e. Labour Ministry)?

    • An Executive Agency under the direct control of a Government Ministry?

    • An autonomous public body?

    • Has the legal/institutional setting of the PES changed in the past, if so, what were the changes, and when did these happen?

      Note: Executive Agencies carry out policies defined by the Government; autonomous public bodies can propose policies within guidelines set by Government.

  • Decentralisation and local decision making

2. Management structures

• • Role of social partners

    • Do social partners have a supervisory role in your PES? - If so which partners, e.g. Employers Organisations, Trades Unions?

    • What role partners play in decision making? E.g. each partner having equal share. - Do partners have a role in the design, monitoring, and evaluation of labour market programmes?

  • Office structure – what is the number of

    • Regional offices?

    • District offices

    • Local offices

  • What administrative criteria are used to determine locations of regional district and local offices e.g.: Political Boundaries of regions/municipalities, population, labour market factors, other?

3. Resource Allocation

• • What decision-making autonomy do National, Regional, District, Local tiers have for the following?

    • Financial / Budget Management – which aspects

    • Staffing levels

    • Other issues?

  • How are staffing levels at national (central), regional, district and local offices decided?

4. Personnel management

What management tier is responsible for:

• • Recruitment

  • Job Design

5. Policy and strategy

• • What are your countries national economic and employment policy objectives?

  • How does the PES support these?

  • Is the emphasis of employment policy delivery on:

    • Active or Passive Labour Market Policies?

    • Universal provision or targeting?

    • A Work First or Human Capital Development approach?

6. Performance Accountability

• • What is your PES primary goals and objectives?

  • At what level (National/Regional/Local) are performance targets set?

  • What level are national targets disaggregated to?

    • Regional

    • District

    • Local

    • Team

    • Individual Staff member

  • Performance measures

    • How is performance supervised and evaluated? Is the impact of the PES measured, if so how?

    • What is the monitoring authority for PES performance : Ministry of Labour, PES, other (please specify?)

    • What performance measurement system is used in the PES?

    • How are the levels of performance indicators decided?

    • What is the relationship between national performance indicators, and indicators at region, district, local tiers?

    • What are the key performance indicators?

    • How is customer and employee satisfaction measured? What are the recent performance trends?

    • What criteria are used to compare the performance of offices, taking into account different levels of staff resource and varying local labour market situations?

    • Are PES services, including ALMPs, objectively evaluated, if so how, and which services have been found to be most effective?

    • Provide a summary of PES performance (number of people accessing specific PES services, share of labour market served by PES, client satisfaction rates, specific challenges?)

7. Communications

• • Does the PES have a communication strategy?

How are

• • • Internal communications handled in the PES?

    • External communications handled in the PES?

  • What are the main challenges associated with your PES Organisational Model?

Section Two – Services to clients

1. Which of the following services does your PES provide for job seeking clients? Briefly describe these.

• • Providing labour market Information/advice and guidance (counselling, orientation, referral to training/active labour market programmes, job search assistance, placement/intermediation)

  • Individual support (skills assessment, profiling, individual action plans)

  • Group activities

    • Information seminars

    • Job Fairs

    • Job Clubs

    • Others?

  • Specialised support (e.g. Career Guidance for young/older -over 50 years jobseekers- counselling/vocational orientation)

  • Multi – channelling provision of services

  • Teams or advisors for special target groups (the Long Term Unemployed), the disabled, ex-prisoners, substance abusers, ethnic minorities, low skilled or unskilled jobseekers)

  • Case management, intensive support for jobseekers facing multiple issues/barriers

  • In-house training for jobseekers

  • Have there been major changes in service provision during the last twenty years, if so, what were these, and why were they introduced?

  • Is there an operational manual describing processes and procedures?

  • Is job matching IT based or manual?

  • Are ISCO and ISIC codes used for classifying jobseekers?

2. Services for employers

• • Does your PES have an Employer Engagement Strategy? If so, are contacts with Employers organised by

    • Sector

    • Size of organisation

    • Number of vacancies provided for PES

    • Type of support required (i.e. support for staff in firms in pre-redundancy situation)

    • Need to train/retrain employees and/or employees willing to participate in ALMPs

    • Location

    • Other methods

  • What share of national vacancies are placed with the PES?

  • Are employers legally required to place vacancies with the PES?

  • For each of the last five years how many vacancies were advertised, mediated and filled?

3. Does the PES have dedicated staff/units dealing with employers, if so, how are these organised?

4. Which services does the PES provide for employers?

• • • Information, advice, guidance for recruitment (vacancy registration, vacancy and CV databases, preselection services etc)

    • Legal and financial counselling (information and guidance on access to subsidies, advice on contracts etc).

    • Support for human resources development or other (training for new/employees, placement information, subsidies for hiring persons belonging to vulnerable groups etc)

    • Other services

    • What is the profile of employers who work, place vacancies with the PES?

    • How are employers interviewed i.e. at PES offices, employers’ premises, by telephone, other methods? Is there an appointments system?

    • Are ISCO and ISIC codes used for classifying employers?

5. Priority Groups/Goals

Does your organisation provide specific support for priority groups, if so, can you specify?

• • • Younger/Older people

    • Women

    • Disabled people

    • Long-term unemployed

    • Migrants refugees

    • Other groups

6. Programmes

• • Is your organisation responsible for delivery of :

    • Active Labour Market Programmes

    • Careers Advice

    • Vocational Training Programmes

    • Unemployment Benefits

    • Social Assistance/Welfare Benefit Payments

    • Other functions

  • Are these delivered

    • In-house?

    • By other organisations: public bodies /private bodies /NGOs?

  • What type of programmes does your PES provide?

    • Employment incentives for employers (e.g. subsidies)

    • Supported employment and rehabilitation

    • Direct job creation/public works

    • Start-up incentives/entrepreneurship

    • Workplace learning, work experience, traineeships

  • What is the legal framework for the operation of Private Employment Services (PrES) and Temporary Work Agencies (TWAs).

7. If your PES has dedicated measures for specific target groups, how many measures are provided for each group?

• • • Young/Older people

    • Women

    • Long term unemployed

    • Disabled people

    • Migrants and refugees

    • Other groups?

8. Customer service arrangements

• • Describe the customer journey (process/procedure) from registration to final placement. Have there been recent changes, if so why?

  • Is Profiling of jobseekers done? If so, what methods are used?

  • Are all services delivered through the PES or are other (public/private/NGO) organisations involved, if so how? Describe how the PES collaborates with other providers to deliver services?

  • If the PES delivers services with other delivery partners, describe the main reason for this?

  • Does the PES use different customer contact channels, i.e. face to face, telephone, email, SMS, social media, internet etc? For which groups and to provide which services are different channels used? What is the reason for the PES channel strategy? How effective would you describe this approach, and what is the basis of your assessment?

  • What were the total number of jobseekers registered with the PES, and proportion (%) of registered young, older (50 years plus), disabled, me/women, migrants/refuges, as of 30/9/2019, and for the previous 5 years?

9. Use of Information Technology

• • Has the PES introduced digital technology into design and delivery of services? What major changes have been introduced following this?

  • Does the PES operate an electronic system for exchanging/advertising/managing vacancies? Is this linked to other public/private job boards/ vacancy exchange systems? If so, how does this work?

  • Does the PES have access to a labour market information system to support service delivery, if so, is this integrated into other PES systems, what services does this system provide?

  • Did the introduction and adoption of ICT change the PES delivery model?

  • Does the PES use the same systems as other related agencies? If not, does the PES share data with other agencies? If so, specify which ones?

  • Who is responsible for the construction and maintenance of the PES IT system/s, what were the development costs and annual running costs?

10. Partnerships

Does your PES have partnerships with other organisations – if so, specify which?

• • Regional and local governments

  • Training Institutions

  • Non-profit service providers

  • For profit service providers

  • Trades Unions

  • Education and Training Institutions?

  • Private Recruitment agencies

  • Temporary Work Agencies

  • Large employers and employers’ organisations

  • Private providers of skills training

  • Other National Governments

  • Others

11. Service Agreements

How are your partnerships with other service providers managed?

• • Service level agreements

  • Commercial contracts

  • Operation of voucher schemes

  • Outcome contracts

  • Service fee contacts

  • Others?

12. Regulation and cooperation with private and non-profit service providers

• • Is the PES responsible for the regulation of PrES (as described by the ILO Private Employment Agencies Convention 1997 (No 181)? If so, how is this done, what is the legal framework? If not, which body is responsible for this function and how do they coordinate it with the PES ?

  • Does PES cooperate with PrES and non-profit service providers? If so how?

  • Which services are delivered through PrES and other providers, e.g. Temporary Work Agencies (TWAs)?

  • Are these services outsourced or jointly delivered?

  • Does the PES prescribe and specify outcomes and how they should be achieved, or is a “black box” approach used?

  • Have services delivered through other service providers been evaluated?

  • How many PrES and (TWAs) operate in the country?

Section Three - Financial Resources

• • What is the source of your PES funding, e.g. central government budgets/public funding, social security/insurance contributions, PES own revenues (please explain), other sources of finance (please describe)? Are different sources of funding used to finance specific types of labour market polices, if so please explain?

  • How are PES funding levels decided, what is the basis for allocating specific levels of funding?

  • What is your current 2019-2020 overall PES budget (excluding unemployment payments), and what was your expenditure for the previous five years, i.e. since 2014-2015?

  • What proportion of your current PES budget is spent on Operational Costs (with further breakdown if available), Active Labour Market Programmes (ALMPs), and Passive policies? What was your expenditure on these for the previous five years, i.e. since 2014-2015?

  • What is the current expenditure on different types/categories of ALMPs and what was spent on these for each of the previous five years?

  • What proportion of your current PES budget is spent on staff salaries? And what was your expenditure on staffing for the previous five years, i.e. since 2014-2015?

  • What decides the budget allocated at national, regional, district and local levels?

  • What factors have driven changes in funding and expenditure during the last five years?

Section Four - Human Resources

• • What is the total number of staff (full time equivalents) currently employed in your PES, What was the number of staff for the previous five years, i.e. since 2014-2015?

  • What proportion of staff are on permanent and temporary contracts?

  • What proportion (%) of PES staff work at the national (central) office, regional, district, local, tiers?

  • What share of staff (%) work in direct contact with clients?

  • What proportion (%) of staff work solely with young people, older people, disabled people, Long Term Unemployed, employers?

  • How many employment counsellors are there in the PES?

  • What is the average caseload for front line staff /counsellors?

  • What ICT tools are available to assist front line staff/counsellors managing their caseloads?

  • What training/development is provided for staff?

  • How are PES staff selected?

  • Through national public employee recruitment schemes

  • PES competency-based selection process

  • Other methods please describe

  • Does the PES operate promotion systems, incentive schemes for staff? If so, describe these.

  • What are the educational/competency requirements for staff recruitment to the PES?

Section Five - Client Service Groups

If your PES provides specific services for certain groups of clients?

• • How many staff are employed/dedicated to working with each group?

    • Age, young/older jobseekers

    • Long term unemployed

    • Disabled people

    • Relations with employers

    • People receiving unemployment benefits

    • Other groups?

Section Six - Labour Market Information

• • Is there a labour force survey (LFS) in the country?

    • Are the results and basic labour market indicators (such as employment by sector and occupation, unemployment rate, labour force participation) available to PES staff and customers?

    • Is there a vacancy survey which asks businesses about their vacancies (quality and quantity) or survey on vacancies and labour turnover i.e. hires, exists, layoffs etc?

    • Are there other surveys which can help determine labour market trends?

    • Do employers ask PES for labour market information, if so, what type of questions?

    • Are there any regularly updated, administrative data sets available to PES staff concerning:

      • Number of students per educational level and orientation of the course/degree (vocational or regular education)

      • Number of beneficiaries of public employment programmes or public training programmes or entrepreneurship programmes supporting unemployed or other jobseekers

      • Number of foreign work permits issued each year and for which occupations

      • Beneficiaries of social protection

Part B for completion by non-PES organisations

Section One - Description of organisation

1. Institutional Setting

• • Please describe your organisation, see categories below, and briefly explain its overall remit and objectives?

    • An NGO

    • A training organisation

    • A Private Recruitment Agency (PrES)

    • A Temporary Work Agency (TWA)

    • Other body

  • What is your organisations relationship with the national government?

2. Funding

• • How is your organisation funded to deliver services for the Government?

  • What is the nature of the relationship with Government e.g. Contract, Service Level Agreement, other?

  • Which services are delivered?

  • Which organisation is the primary client e.g. Labour Ministry?

  • What are the targets and performance expectations?

  • What is the annual budget for delivering employment services?

  • How long is the current contract?

3. Staffing

How many staff are employed delivering employment programmes?

4. Services

• • How many outlets are services delivered from?

  • How many clients were served in each of the past five years?

  • What proportion of clients receive the main services provided?

  • How does the organisation classify clients?

  • What proportion of clients are in each group?

  • How are clients referred/selected for specific programmes?

Annex 6 – Management structure by country and PES governance model

Annex 7 – Personnel Management by country and PES governance model

Annex 8 – Existing of a communication strategy by country and PES governance model

Annex 9 – Goals and objectives setting by country and PES governance model

Annex 10 – Group activities and Services offer to Jobseekers by country and PES governance model

Annex 11 – Priority groups targeted by country and PES governance model

Annex 12 – Services offer to employers by country and PES governance model

Annex 13 – Programmes repartition by country and PES governance model

Annex 14 – Customer service arrangements by country and PES governance model

Annex 15 – Use of IT by country and PES governance model

Annex 16 – Partnerships with other organizations by country and PES governance model

Annex 17 – Regulation and cooperation with private and non-profit service providers

Annex 18 – Staff/Client Ratio

Annex 19 – Use of Labour Market Information (LMI)

Annex 20 – GDP per capita by country

Annex 21 – Unemployment rate by country

Annex 22 – Labour Force

Annex 23 – Labour Force Participation

Annex 24 – Staff Client Ratio

References

OECD. 1997. Enhancing the Efficiency of Active Labour Market Policies; a Streamlined Public Employment Service, (OECD, Paris).

Thuy P., Hanson E. and Price D. 2001. The Employment Service in a changing Labour Market, (ILO, Geneva).

Walch K. 1995. Public Services and Market Mechanisms. Competition, Contracting, and the New Public Management, Palgrave Macmillan, (Basingstoke).

Hood C.C. 1991. A Public Management for all seasons? Public Administration, Vol. 69, No. 4, pp.3-19.

Clark J. and Newman J. 1997. The Managerial State. Sage Publications, (London).

Leroy F., Struyven L. 2014. Building Bridges, Shaping the Future of Public Employment Services towards 2020. Die Keure, (Belgium).

Mazza J. 2017. Labour Intermediation Services in Developing Economies: Adapting Employment Services for a Global Age. John Hopkins University. Palgrave Macmillan, (Washington D.C).

Angel-Urdinola D. et al. 2010. Public Employment Agencies in the Middle East and North African Region. World Bank, (Washington, D.C).

Marquez, G. and Ruis-Tagle, C. 2004. Search Methods and Outcomes in Developing Countries. IDB Working Paper No. 430.

Frey Dianne, F. and MacNaughton, G. 2016. A Human Rights Lesson, Full Employment and Decent Work in the 2030 Sustainable Development AGENDA. Journal of Workplace Rights, April-June 2016, pp. 1-13.

International Labour Organisation (ILO). 1999. Decent Work Report of the Director General ILO Conference 87th session, Geneva, Switzerland. Available: https://www.ilo.org/public/english/standards/relm/ilc/ilc87/rep-i.htm (13 Nov. 2020).

Garcia, A. and Nicodemo, C. 2013. Job Search, Wage Inequality and Neighborhood Channels in Developing Countries: The Colombian Case. IZA Discussion Paper No. 7336, (IZA, Bonn).

Mwasikakata, M. and Martins, P. 2017. Assessment of Public Employment Services in Namibia, Working Paper, (ILO, Geneva).

Contreras, D. et al. 2007. The Role of Social Networks in Employment Outcomes of Bolivian Women, Working Document Series, No. 251 July. (Chile University, Chile).

ILO. 2018. Women and men in the informal economy: A statistical picture, Third edition, (Geneva).

ILO. 2019. World Employment and Social Outlook, (Geneva).

World Economic Forum. 2018. Global Gender Gap Report, (Geneva).

World Bank. 2012. Gender Equality and Development, World Development Report. (Washington D.C)

OECD, IDB, WAPES. 2015. The World of Public Employment Services: Challenges, capacity and outlook for public employment services in the new world of work. OECD Publication, (Paris).

Diego, F. Angel – Urdinola, Kuddo A. and Semlali, A. 2013. Building Effective Employment Programmes for Unemployed Youth in the Middle East and North Africa. World Bank, (Washington D.C).

European Union. 2018. Report on Field Mission for seven selected Public Employment Centres in Ghana – EU GESP Programme. Available : https://www.aets-consultants.com/projects/health-and-safety/mid-term-evaluation-of-the-ghana-employment-and-social-protection-programmes-gesp (13 Nov. 2020).

Schulz, G. and Klemmer, B. 1998. Public Employment Services in English Speaking Africa: Proposals for Re-Organization. (ILO, Geneva).

Arends, F., Chabane, S. and Paterson, A. 2015. Investigating Employer Interaction with the Employment Services of South Africa, Labour Market intelligence Partnership Report, (Pretoria).

Hornsby, S. 2013. Online step-by-step guide for employers and work seekers, Employment Services of South Africa (ESSA) – Public Employment Services, Department of Labour. Available: www.careerhelp.org.za (13 Nov. 2020).

Govender, S. 2015. Presentation to Department of Labour Conference, 11 November 2015. Employment Services of South Africa (ESSA), (Pretoria).