September 01 ,2017 | by Anisa Choudhary

Number of workless households reaches record low, ONS figures show

_Content

The number of households with no workers has reached its lowest level, according to figures from The Office for National Statistics (ONS).

The latest Labour Force Survey figures show that 14.5 per cent of households in the UK had no workers in the three months from April to June 2017.

Inactive  

To gather the data, ONS looked at households with at least one person between the ages of 16 and 64, with older household members excluded from the research.

The term “workless” applies to those who are economically inactive, such as carers, students, retired people, and those ill or disabled. These are the main reasons for households being classed as completely workless rather than people simply being unemployed.

According to the figures, just 1.4 per cent of all households in the UK were classed as being completely workless as a result of all members not being in employment.

The number of households with no workers has now reached its lowest since 1996, when the proportion of workless households was 21 per cent.

The new figures also show the number of lone parents in employment has reached a record high, with 68 per cent in work.

Employment figures continue to remain at a record high, resulting in the proportion of households where all members are working increasing from 52 per cent to 58 per cent over the past 21 years.

Benefits

Commenting on the positive figures, the Work and Pensions Secretary, David Gauke, said: “What's particularly great news is that lone parents are more likely to be in work than ever before.

“With record levels of employment, more people across the country now have the ability to support themselves and their families.

“That means more children growing up with a working adult and more children who can see first-hand the benefits of being in employment''.

 

 

Share on Facebook Share on LinkedIn +1
There are no comments posted yet. Be the first one!
Please write your comment, minimum length 50 characters
Please insert your name
Please insert a correct email address
We couldn't process your comment, please try again later