This week, leader of the Scottish Conservatives Russell Findlay proposed lowering Scotland’s school leaver age from 16 to 14.
Findlay justified the proposal by highlighting the benefits of a “hybrid eduction”, where students can learn outside of a classroom in a way that may be better suited to them.
On paper, it may sound to some like a fair proposal. Not every pupil is academically inclined – many young teens would jump at the opportunity to leave school and get a bit of cash.
So, what is the problem with lowering the school leaver age to 14?
The answer starts and ends with the inevitable result of enforcing this policy: exploitative working conditions for children.
Findlay hopes the scheme will encourage more high school students to get apprenticeships. For the most part, apprenticeships last four years- sometimes less.
As it stands, the minimum wage for apprentices is significantly less than the National Living Wage – and it’s even lower if you’re an apprentice under 19.
If you are under 19, you can expect to be paid £6.40 an hour. If you get an apprenticeship at 16, you will receive this hourly rate for three years. Once you are 19, you will get boosted to £8.60 an hour.
If the school leavers’ age were to lower to 14, apprentices would potentially receive £6.40 for the entirety of their qualification.
For context, the over-21s minimum wage is currently £11.44.
Encouraging children to enter the workplace for a rate nearly half as less than an adult’s rate is deplorable. Apprenticeships are often physically gruelling, pushing stress and exertion on bodies. As with any job, they are mentally taxing, too.
Allowing 14-year-olds to leave school to enter apprenticeships is just another way of getting cheaper labour for a longer period of time, and takes little consideration of the children’s welfare.
On top of this, the rate 14-year-olds would receive for working is still higher than the Education Maintenance Allowance (EMA), which is currently £30 per week.
The EMA is a financial incentive for school-leaving aged children from low-income households to go to school.
With the earning possibilities from an apprenticeship being higher than EMA earnings, the likelihood of children not attending school will increase.
In turn, this will decrease the number of children on the poverty line pursuing education. Along the line, this will widen the wealth gap at universities and further deter poverty-line and working class students from going into higher education, as it becomes more culturally alienating.
The snowball effect of lowering the school leaving age to 14 is immeasurable. An avalanche of problems will plummet into the lives of the children most financially vulnerable in Scotland.
Scotland’s Education Secretary, Jenny Gilruth, branded the plans “Dickensian”, saying it singled out working class children.
That is nothing but the truth.
Whilst Findlay and the Scottish Conservatives are yet to confirm the details of the proposed policy, it is impossible to imagine any way they can avoid detriment to vulnerable Scottish youths.
Enticing children to leave education any earlier than 16 can only be seen as an attempt to widen the gap between pupils on either end of the financial and class spectrum. This policy is unlikely to impact middle and upper-class children who are more likely to be encouraged to pursue education and are less likely to be tempted by £6.40 an hour.
It is likely, however, to reduce the number of Scotland’s most disadvantaged children getting an eduction, degrees, and enjoying their childhoods outside the working world for as long as possible.
Editor-in-Chief.
Twitter/X and BlueSky: @AlexPaterson01
