Every year, Youth Day encourages South Africa to reflect on the courage of young people who challenged a system designed to limit their futures.
The youth of 1976 were not just opposing a language policy.
They were confronting an educational system that prepared black children for a life of limited opportunities.
Almost fifty years on, legislation has changed. The language has evolved.
Commitments have shifted. Yet, for many young South Africans, the outcome remains starkly similar: they are still educated into exclusion.
The problem extends beyond unemployment; it is the severing of the link between education and employment.
As per Stats SA’s latest Quarterly Labour Force Survey, the youth unemployment rate for those aged 15 to 34 is at 45.8%.
For individuals aged 15 to 24, the rate rises even further to 60.9%.
These statistics are often repeated, potentially contributing to the problem. They have become so familiar that they risk losing their initial shock value.
Behind these numbers are young people who have diligently followed the expected path.
They finished school. Many sought learnerships, short courses, diplomas, or degrees.
They sent out job applications. They polished their CVs.
They attended interviews. They waited.
Yet, far too frequently, they find themselves excluded from the job market.
In South Africa, increasing unemployment is eroding the ladder of opportunity.
Entry-level jobs are no longer solely for those entering the workforce for the first time.
They are now contested by graduates, displaced workers, experienced professionals, and other first-time job seekers, all competing for the same scarce openings.
When everyone feels forced to accept any available job, the job market gets distorted.
Young people miss their chance to start. Experienced workers face setbacks in their careers.
Employers establish increasingly high expectations for junior positions, causing the traditional path from education to initial employment and subsequent advancement to diminish.
We observe this in job postings that describe a role as “entry-level” yet still require two years of experience.
We see it when new graduates are offered unpaid internships that are financially unmanageable for them.
This is evident when employers claim they cannot find candidates who are “work-ready,” while young individuals assert they cannot achieve that readiness without their first opportunity.
This creates a stark contradiction at the core of youth unemployment: young people are told they lack experience, yet experience is treated as a reward rather than a necessary stepping stone.
Merely providing training will not solve the issue.
South Africa has made significant investments in skills development, and rightly so.
However, skills without access to employers can turn into yet another waiting room.
A certificate holds significance only if it helps a young person move closer to employment.
A programme is valuable only if it meets the economic demand.
A learnership is meaningful only if it offers more than a temporary engagement.
At ORT SA, we have seen how the outcomes can differ when training is seen as a bridge, rather than simply an event.
A notable instance is Sandile Mgobhozi, who completed ORT SA’s Big Data programme.
This programme was not just theory-based.
It was designed to equip young individuals with digital and analytical skills that employers truly seek.
Sandile has since secured a permanent position at Cape Union Mart.
His story is significant not for its uniqueness, but for demonstrating what should be standard practice.
When a young person receives relevant training, workplace exposure, mentorship, and a strong industry connection, employment becomes a possibility. Not guaranteed, but attainable.
That already surpasses what millions of young people are currently offered.
South Africa does not need another layer of well-intentioned initiatives that keep youth busy without facilitating real progress.
We need tangible pathways into actual work.
First, employers need to reconsider their approach to entry-level hiring. If a role is genuinely junior, it should not require prior experience.
Companies can assess attitude, learning capacity, communication skills, reliability, and problem-solving abilities without hindering young candidates’ prospects. Work-readiness is developed through experience, not anticipated ahead of time.
Secondly, training providers and NGOs should collaborate with employers from the outset to design programmes.
The question should not be, “What course can we offer?” but instead, “Where is the demand, what skills are necessary, and what support will help young people transition to work?”
Thirdly, small and medium enterprises must be part of the solution.
Larger corporations cannot accommodate all young job seekers.
SMEs often maintain closer connections to local communities and can provide significant first-job opportunities; however, they need support in hosting, mentoring, and retaining young talent.
This assistance could include wage subsidies, practical HR advice, and easier access to youth employment incentives.
Finally, the concept of progression needs to be reinstated.
A first job does not have to be perfect.
However, it should serve as a foundational step. It must offer young individuals a reference, a work schedule, a skill set, a network, and proof of their potential contribution.
The youth of 1976 resisted a system that sought to dictate their futures.
Today’s youth face a different system, yet many receive a similar message: there’s still no place for you.
In 1976, young individuals demanded the right to learn. By 2026, their children and grandchildren continue to struggle for the right to earn.
June 16 should not merely be a day of remembrance.
It must act as a measure of whether we are creating the systems that facilitate the transition from education to economic reality.
*The author of this article is Ariellah Rosenberg, the CEO of ORT SA. The views expressed by Ariellah Rosenberg do not necessarily reflect those of The Bulrushes
