A Different Question From Business Attraction
Much of the public conversation about economic revitalization focuses on bringing employers to a place: offices, factories, stores and developments. That is one half of the picture. The other half is whether the people who already live in the city can get the jobs that result. These are separate questions. A city can add employers without residents’ employment rising much, and a city can improve residents’ employment through training and hiring even with few new employers.
This article concentrates on the second question, the link among employers, training and residents’ access to local jobs. The tools used to draw employers are covered in the article on attracting businesses, and the broader goals and open questions appear in the article on how the city is working to revitalize its economy. This article does not give job counts or resident hiring percentages, since such numbers should come from official sources.
Why Local Jobs Do Not Automatically Go to Residents
Several factors stand between a job opening and a resident who wants it.
- Skills and credentials. Many newer jobs, especially in health care, offices and technical fields, require a degree, a certificate or specific experience. If residents have not had access to that preparation, they may not qualify.
- Information and networks. Jobs are often filled through referrals, online applications and regional recruiting. People outside those networks may not hear about openings.
- Hiring practices. Screening tools, background checks, experience requirements and application processes can unintentionally screen out capable candidates.
- Transportation and schedules. Early or late shifts, or workplaces far from transit, make some jobs hard to reach. The role of public transportation is significant.
- Child care and other obligations. Work hours that do not fit with child or family care can rule out otherwise suitable jobs.
- Competition from the wider region. Camden is part of a large labor market, and employers draw applicants from across it. This is explained in the overview of the metropolitan area.
None of these says anything about residents’ ability or character. They describe gaps in preparation, information and access that policy can address.
Approaches Often Used to Connect Residents With Jobs
Training aligned with employers. Colleges, workforce boards and nonprofits design programs around the skills local employers say they need. The types of programs are summarized in the article on job training. This works best when employers are involved from the start and commit to interviewing graduates.
Local hiring commitments. Some agreements, public projects or community benefit arrangements include goals or requirements to hire local residents, or to use local contractors. Whether goals are binding, how they are measured, and who enforces them vary a great deal. Critics of weak commitments argue that nonbinding goals can be hard to verify.
First-source or referral systems. Employers agree to look at referrals from local workforce programs before or alongside other candidates.
Apprenticeships and pre-apprenticeship programs. These prepare people for building trades and other fields and can lead to well-paid work, especially connected to construction and infrastructure projects.
Support services. Help with transportation, child care and work clothing, as well as coaching after the person is hired, can influence whether someone stays in a job.
Anchor institution strategies. Hospitals and universities can set hiring and purchasing goals for local residents and businesses. The impact depends on how serious the commitment is and on the range of jobs offered, from entry-level to professional.
Supporting resident-owned businesses. Another path is to encourage entrepreneurship so residents create jobs themselves, as described in the article on small business opportunities.
How to Tell Whether It Is Working
Because announcements are easier than outcomes, it helps to look for measures that show whether residents are actually benefiting.
- The share of employees at new or expanded employers who live in the city, and whether they hold entry-level jobs only or also higher-paying positions.
- Wages and benefits of the jobs, not just their number.
- Retention: do people stay in jobs after six months or a year?
- Completion and placement rates for training programs, reported honestly and defined clearly.
- Whether residents’ employment and income change over several years.
The guide to evaluating city comebacks discusses these kinds of questions, and the revitalization impact material addresses the difficulty of attributing changes to a given policy.
Competing Views
People hold different views on what is most important. Some emphasize that any growth in jobs and investment is a precondition for improvement and that requirements on employers may discourage them. Others emphasize that growth without clear local benefit risks leaving residents behind, and that hiring and training commitments should be firm. Many community organizations argue for both: new employers and structured pathways for residents. The evidence from different cities is mixed, and outcomes depend on design and follow-through.
What Residents Can Do
Residents seeking work can contact career centers, community colleges and community organizations for information on openings and training. Those interested in the policy side can attend public meetings where development agreements are discussed, read the terms of agreements, and ask how local hiring will be measured and reported. The article on investing in the future lists records that can be used to follow public spending.