NO JOBS FOR COLLEGE GRADUATES: ONLY A MISMATCH PROBLEM?

NO JOBS FOR COLLEGE GRADUATES: ONLY A MISMATCH PROBLEM?

My former UP political science professor, Claire Carlos, always has interesting posts on Facebook, and I usually find myself nodding in agreement with her. Recently, however, she posted something that made me pause and think more deeply. She cited a recent CHED survey which revealed that out of 25,000 college graduates, only 3,000 landed jobs. She said that was a “crisis defined.” And I fully agree with her.

But what exactly is the crisis all about?

We hear so much about the supposed mismatch between the skills of college graduates and the needs of employers. Is that really the whole story? Is it simply a mismatch? Or is it something more?

A mismatch would imply that these graduates have skills, except that their skills are not what employers are looking for. If that’s the case, then we must ask: who or what failed them? Were they taught the wrong skills in school? Or did they fail to acquire the skills they were supposed to learn?

Is it the fault of the students for being poor learners? Or is it the fault of the teachers for being poor educators? Or is the real problem the curriculum itself—frozen in time, no longer in tune with the demands of today’s fast-changing marketplace?

CHED Chairperson Dr. Shirley Agrupis herself admits this is more than a hiring problem. She has called it a wake-up call for the entire education system. Her agency’s ACHIEVE Agenda (2025–2030) proposes mandatory on-the-job training (OJT), stronger collaboration with DepEd and TESDA, curriculum realignment with labor market needs, and even a renewed focus on character formation and soft skills. Noble initiatives, yes. But do they get to the root of the problem?

Some say the crisis begins much earlier—way back in basic education. If children leave grade school without strong reading, writing, and numeracy skills, how can they be expected to thrive in college? And if nutrition and poverty already handicap them at an early age, are we not simply setting them up for failure no matter how many diplomas we hand out?

And yet, even when jobs exist, graduates often cannot land them. Structural underemployment tells another story: young people forced into jobs that don’t require degrees at all—clerks, cashiers, seasonal workers—just to survive. In short, the system keeps churning out diploma holders, while the economy has no real capacity to absorb them.

Then there’s the problem of “credential inflation.” Employers now demand degrees for jobs that once required only vocational training, but the pay and career growth remain the same. Degrees are devalued, while the real need for skilled vocational workers—mechanics, welders, technicians, caregivers—remains unmet. Is this not another kind of mismatch, but one created by policy and social bias, rather than by the graduates themselves?

Add to that gender and role bias in the labor market. Some jobs—like ESL teaching or cashiering—are seen as more suited for women, leaving many male graduates like Cris Purgo (whose story was cited in reports) struggling to compete.

So yes, Professor Claire Carlos is right: this is a crisis defined. But if we reduce it to just a “skills mismatch,” we risk oversimplifying a multi-layered problem. The crisis is also about weak basic education, outdated curricula, structural underemployment, credential inflation, and even cultural attitudes toward labor.

What can be done? CHED’s reforms are a start, but perhaps we need more localized and modular solutions. Why not set up barangay-level micro-certification hubs for demand-driven skills? Why not promote apprenticeships tied to local industries and cooperatives? Why not establish circular design labs where young people can turn waste into products, learning entrepreneurship along the way?

In other words, why not break free from the one-size-fits-all degree pathway, and recognize that there are many ways to educate, certify, and empower young people? A degree should not be the only ticket to dignity and employment.

This crisis may indeed be defined, but it could also be redefined—as an opportunity to rethink what education means in the Philippines, and how communities themselves can take part in shaping labor ecosystems that work.

Because at the end of the day, the real mismatch might not just be between graduates and jobs. It might be between the dreams of our young people, and the reality of the system that has failed to prepare them for life.

Ramon Ike V. Seneres, www.facebook.com/ike.seneres
iseneres@yahoo.com, 09088877282, senseneres.blogspot.com

11-15-2025