Bill Overview
Title: American Workforce Act
Description: This bill establishes the American workforce program to provide subsidies to employers who enter contracts to provide on-the-job training to individuals with a high school diploma (or equivalent). The total subsidy per contract may not exceed $9,000.
Sponsors: Sen. Cotton, Tom [R-AR]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals with a high school diploma or equivalent seeking training opportunities
Estimated Size: 100000000
- The bill targets individuals with a high school diploma or an equivalent. This encompasses a large portion of the global population, especially in developed countries.
- Assuming that the global literate adult population forms a considerable size and approximately a significant proportion holds at least a high school diploma, it is likely that at least hundreds of millions globally could be potential beneficiaries, though not all would be involved in the program.
- The potential impact is limited to regions or countries that could implement or be influenced by similar labor policies.
Reasoning
- The policy targets individuals with only a high school diploma, offering a practical path to skills development for those who may not pursue or complete four-year college degrees.
- Individuals who are unemployed, underemployed, or seeking to enhance their job skills are likely to benefit.
- Employers may also see this as an opportunity to fill skill gaps in their workforce, though they must weigh the subsidy against the cost of training.
- Not all eligible individuals will choose or be able to participate due to various barriers such as location, lack of awareness, or competing responsibilities.
- Given the budget, the policy can impact between 50,000 and 500,000 people per year (assuming the subsidy is fully utilized for each individual).
- The policy's impact is more pronounced in areas with higher rates of unemployment and fewer opportunities for postsecondary education.
- It is important to consider demographics like age group, family responsibilities, and willingness to participate.
- By incorporating diverse perspectives, we can simulate a more realistic range of outcomes: from highly positive for those who are trained and secure better jobs, to negligible for those not participating.
Simulated Interviews
Retail Worker (Ohio)
Age: 22 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I am excited about the possibility of getting better training through my job.
- This could help me move up from just a retail position.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
Office Administrator (California)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 18/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I am established in my role, but additional skills can only help.
- It might be a good opportunity for younger colleagues.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 3 |
Unemployed (Texas)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I am really hoping this will open doors for me to find work.
- It's tough balancing responsibilities, but training can make a difference.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 3 |
Construction Worker (New York)
Age: 33 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- On-the-job training should help me expand my skills, maybe even move into management.
- This seems like a good initiative.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Factory Worker (Illinois)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 20/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm not really expecting much change for me, but younger workers could benefit.
- Training is always valuable, but time is limited for me.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 2 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 2 |
Fast Food Worker (Florida)
Age: 19 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This could be a way for me to get into healthcare without going to college.
- Training could make it easier to switch fields.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 3 |
Small Business Owner (Michigan)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Getting a subsidy to train employees would be very beneficial.
- Cost is always a limitation for hiring new staff.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 3 |
Barista (Nevada)
Age: 24 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 3
Duration of Impact: 6.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I need skills that pay more than minimum wage.
- This might be a step towards a better job.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 2 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 2 |
Retired (New Jersey)
Age: 60 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Interesting initiative but not something that directly impacts me.
- Retirement plans and fixed income more pertinent concerns.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Customer Service Representative (Washington)
Age: 28 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- If the company participates, it could boost my chances for advancement.
- I hope this actually gets implemented.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $450000000 (Low: $300000000, High: $700000000)
Year 2: $450000000 (Low: $300000000, High: $700000000)
Year 3: $450000000 (Low: $300000000, High: $700000000)
Year 5: $450000000 (Low: $300000000, High: $700000000)
Year 10: $450000000 (Low: $300000000, High: $700000000)
Year 100: $450000000 (Low: $300000000, High: $700000000)
Key Considerations
- The uptake rate of the subsidy by employers is crucial in determining the actual cost.
- Administrative efficiency is necessary to ensure proper management and distribution of funds.
- Unexpected economic factors, like a recession, could influence both costs and effectiveness.