미취업 여성청년층의 취업준비활동 효과와 취업지원방안

Effects of Employment Preparation Activities and Support Measures for Female College and University Graduates

1. 연구개요 가. 연구목적 청년층 취업난 심화에 따른 정부차원의 정책적 일환으로 다양한 취업지원 프로그램이 증가하고 있으나 청년실업문제는 여전히 풀기 어려운 과제로 남아있다. 이에 따라 본 연구는 정부의 다양한 취업지원 프로그램이 실제로 청년층에게 얼마나 체감되고 있으며, 취업준비활동이 실제 취업이행과 좋은 일자리로의 안착에 효과가 있는지를 분석하여, 향후 여성청년층을 위한 취업지원정책을 제시하는데 목적이 있다. 나. 연구내용 ◦ 여성청년층의 경제활동상태와 미취업자의 특성 분석 ◦ 대졸자 취업준비활동의 실태와 취약집단 분석 ◦ 취업준비활동의 일자리 안착효과 분석 ◦ 청년고용정책과 여성참여 현황 ◦ 미취업 여성청년층 취업지원정책 제안 다. 연구방법 ◦ 문헌분석 - 취업준비활동 참여실태와 취업준비활동이 취업에 미치는 영향에 관한 논문 및 정책자료수집 및 분석 ◦ 정책토론회 개최 - "대졸자 직업이동 경로조사(GOMS)" 자료를 분석한 1차 연구결과 및 청년고용정책 현황분석 자료를 토대로 정책토론회 개최 ◦ 자문회의 및 전문가 간담회 운영 - 연구내용과 방향, 연구방법, 정책현장에 대한 이해, 여성청년층 취업지원 정책개발 등을 위해 자문회의 및 전문가 간담회 총 5회 운영 ◦ 통계자료 분석 - 경제활동인구조사(2000-2012) - 경제활동인구조사 청년층부가조사(2012) - 지역고용실태조사(2012년 3분기) - 대졸자직업이동경로조사(2008GOMS1, 2008GOMS3, 2009GOMS1, 2010GOMS1) 2. 주요 연구 결과 가. 전체 분석결과 요약 ◦ 여성청년층은 대학에서 학업성취도가 남성보다 높고, 취업준비활동에도 남성보다 더 적극적으로 참여하고 있다. 대졸자들이 참여하는 취업준비활동(6가지 유형)은 취업, 정규직 취업, 좋은 일자리 취업에 전반적으로 긍정적 효과를 가지고 있으며, 특히 4년제 여자 대졸자에게 긍정적 효과가 더 크게 나타났다. 그럼에도 불구하고 여성 대졸자는 남성에 비해 취업기회가 적고, 정규직과 좋은 일자리 취업 기회의 성별 격차는 더욱 더 크다. ◦ 이러한 분석결과를 통해 다음과 같은 결론을 도출할 수 있다. 첫째, 취업기회 획득에서 발생하는 성별 격차는 여성청년층의 역량이나 노력 부족보다는 노동시장에서 눈에 보이지 않는 성차별 때문이다. 둘째, 여성인력의 저활용 문제는 30-40대의 경력단절여성만의 문제가 아니라 대학을 갓 졸업한 신규 대졸여성 집단에서도 나타나는 문제이며, 이는 국정과제인 고용률 70% 달성에 중요한 장애요인이다. 셋째, 취업준비활동이 특히 여성청년층에게서 더 효과적인 것으로 나타나, 청년고용정책이 취업기회의 성별 격차를 줄이는데 간접적으로 기여하고 있다고 볼 수 있으나, 그 격차는 아직도 상당하며 특히 정규직과 좋은 일자리일수록 격차가 더 크다.

This study proposes some employment support measures for female graduates of colleges and universities, drawn from the results of 1) analysis of the current state of youth unemployment and their potential as human capital, 2) analysis of female graduates' participation in employment preparation activities, 3) analysis of the effects of employment preparation activities on the opportunities for a regular and "good" job. In 2012, the number of unemployed young women reached 2,787,000. This study categorizes them into three groups: 1) job seekers (125,000), 2) job preparers who are not seeking a job at present time but preparing to enter the labor market (203,000); and 3) people who are neither a job seeker nor a job preparer (2,459,000). During the past decade, the number of young job preparers has increased, whereas that of job seekers has decreased. The former accounted for 70% of the latter in 2003, but the figure reached 150% in 2012. This result implies that youth employment policy needs to put more weight on young job preparers than ever before. Three points are summarized according to the analysis of the human capital characteristics of the two unemployed youth groups, which are job seekers and job preparers: 1) 65% of women are graduates of higher education, whereas 51% of men are those of secondary education; 2) among the college or university graduates, more than 50% of women have a diploma in human or social sciences, whereas 39% of man in technology; and 3) there is a large gap between the vocational expectation of unemployed youth and the real situation they face in regards to job status, industry and/or wage (or income). These results demonstrate that youth employment policies need to be specialized according to the needs of sub-groups of unemployed youth. Female graduates of colleges and universities turn out to participate into all six types of employment activities more actively than male graduates do. And graduates of university or of capital areas participate in employment preparation activities more than those of colleges or of non-capital areas. In this study, vulnerable groups of employment preparation activities are temporarily defined as those 1) who failed to have a regular job for the period of 18/24 months after the graduation of college or university, and 2) who had not participated into less than two types of employment preparation activities. According to this definition, 29.3% of graduates of colleges and universities fall into the vulnerable group of employment preparation activities. The female graduates have more important probability to fall into the vulnerable group than male graduates have. In 18/24 months after graduation, 81.5% of college and university graduates get a jab, but only 53.1% of them are hired for a regular position, and 11.1% for a "good job". In the case of university graduates, 82.3% get a job, but only 52.0% work in a regular position, and 19.8% for a "good" job. Women are given fewer opportunities than man are in getting a job, and much fewer in working in a regular position and "good job". When all graduates are split into four sub-groups (male college graduates, female college graduates, male university graduates, female university graduates), only three types of activities (vocational training experiences and acquisition of vocational qualifications during college or university education, success in open competition such as civil servants examinations) have a positive effect in getting a regular and "good job" for all sub-groups. The effect of other employment preparation activities varies across the sub-groups. For example, helpful career development programs and employment services have a positive effect for almost of graduates, except for female college graduates. From these results, this study proposes the following employment support measures for female graduates of colleges and universities: - To broaden the target group of youth employment poli