Beyond The Unemployment Rate - The Human Cost Of Economic Hardship In Boissiere No. 1, Maraval, Trinidad And Tobago

(MENAFN- Caribbean News Global) Dear Sir,

In Boissiere No. 1, Maraval, the struggle to make ends meet is not measured in percentages. It is seen in the mother who cannot afford all the groceries her family needs, the young person submitting job applications without receiving a response, and the parent wondering how the next household bill will be paid.

The struggle to get by in Boissiere No. 1, Maraval

For some, the problem is finding work. For others, it is earning too little or having no dependable income. Young people leaving school face another obstacle: employers want experience, but gaining it requires someone to give them a first opportunity.

These are the realities that should matter when Trinidad and Tobago debates unemployment, the rising cost of living and the government's promises of economic recovery.

Former prime minister Stuart Young has challenged the government's employment claims, describing them as“hogwash and lies” and alleging that more than 40,000 jobs have been lost under the United National Congress (UNC) administration. His allegation requires evidence. Nevertheless, the questions surrounding employment and the livelihoods of ordinary citizens deserve serious consideration, regardless of which side of the political divide raises them.

For residents of Boissiere No. 1, the real concern is whether they can find decent work, afford their groceries and bills, and provide their families with some financial security.

The young person waiting for a chance

Consider a young woman from Boissiere No. 1 who has completed secondary school and is eager to enter the workforce. She prepares her résumé, gathers her certificates and applies for vacancies. Yet the jobs she wants often require experience she has not had the opportunity to acquire. Some employers never respond, while other applications lead nowhere.

Meanwhile, her family still has bills to pay. She depends on relatives who may already be struggling with their own expenses. She wants to purchase her personal necessities without asking someone for money. She wants to contribute towards the groceries and ease her family's financial burden.

Instead, she remains at home, waiting for an opportunity that has not come.

Repeated rejection can erode a young person's confidence and make independence seem increasingly distant. Education and ambition should open doors, not leave young people wondering whether their efforts will lead anywhere.

A country that expects its next generation to build a better future must give them a fair chance to begin.

A father who cannot depend on tomorrow

Consider, too, a father who relies on small construction jobs, painting, repairs or other occasional work to support his household.

When work becomes available, he accepts it because his family needs the money. Some days, he earns enough to contribute towards groceries and bills. On others, he searches for work and returns home with little or nothing.

His responsibilities do not disappear when the jobs dry up. His children still need food, transportation and other essentials, and the bills continue to arrive. He may have to choose between paying a bill and keeping money for groceries. An unexpected expense can disrupt an already fragile budget. He wants to provide for his family, but willingness to work does not guarantee a dependable income. He cannot confidently plan for the following week because he does not know whether another job will come.

His circumstances expose an important weakness in employment discussions that focus only on whether someone is working. A person earning money occasionally may be classified as employed while still struggling to afford basic necessities.

For a household living close to its financial limits, even a few days without earnings can have consequences that last much longer.

When the grocery money falls short

For another household, the struggle begins before the shopping even starts.

A mother calculates how much money she has and what the family needs. She considers groceries, utility bills and transportation, trying to make the money last until the next income arrives.

At the supermarket, she compares prices and puts items back when the total exceeds what she can afford. Something intended for her children must wait. A cheaper alternative has to do.

There is little room for an unexpected school expense, a higher utility bill or a household repair. Any of these can upset an already strained budget. She does her best to keep the household going, perhaps shielding her children from the full extent of her worries. But the pressure remains.

This is what the cost-of-living debate looks like inside a household. It is not simply about rising prices; it is about deciding what the family can afford, what must be postponed and what has to be left behind.

These three stories are illustrative composites, not interviews with specific residents of Boissiere No. 1. They reflect circumstances people in the community and elsewhere may experience, without suggesting that every household faces the same difficulties. Their purpose is to bring the human consequences of economic insecurity into a discussion often dominated by statistics and political claims.

What the national figures tell us

Personal stories help explain economic hardship, but they cannot establish the scale of unemployment in a particular community. They must be considered alongside reliable national evidence.

According to the Central Statistical Office (CSO), the estimated number of employed people fell from 569,900 in the fourth quarter of 2025 to 564,000 in the first quarter of 2026. Over the same period, the unemployment rate rose from 4.3 percent to 5.4 percent, while the number of unemployed people actively seeking work increased from 21,300 to 27,100.

These are national estimates, not measurements of unemployment in Boissiere No. 1. Nor do they establish, by themselves, why employment changed. Seasonal patterns and other factors can affect quarterly comparisons, making longer-term trends important.

Nevertheless, the figures raise legitimate questions about the direction of the labour market and the opportunities available to people seeking work.

The unemployment rate cannot reveal the full financial circumstances of working people. It does not tell us whether wages cover household expenses, whether employment is dependable or whether a worker can manage an unexpected bill.

Someone may earn money this week without knowing whether work will be available next week. Another person may work full-time and still struggle with groceries, utilities and transportation.

Having a job and having financial security are not necessarily the same thing.

That distinction deserves greater attention in the national discussion. Economic performance should be assessed not only by how many people work, but also by whether employment provides a reasonable opportunity to support a household and improve one's circumstances.

Stuart Young's allegation must be examined

Young's criticism forms part of a wider political dispute over jobs associated with public employment programmes and contract positions.

His allegation that more than 40,000 workers have lost their jobs is serious. It should neither be accepted without evidence nor dismissed without examination.

The public deserves to know how the figure was calculated, which period it covers and which categories of workers are included. Does it refer to confirmed retrenchments, discontinued programme positions, changes in overall employment or a combination of these?

These distinctions matter. A decline in national employment is not necessarily the same as a verified count of workers who have been dismissed.

Still, the question behind Young's criticism deserves attention: what happens to workers whose jobs disappear, particularly those who relied on public employment programmes to support their families?

Losing even a modest but regular income can mean cutting back on groceries, falling behind on bills or struggling to meet children's needs. The consequences are personal, regardless of which political party is responsible for the decisions under debate.

The government must demonstrate the results of its employment policies. If it maintains that jobs are being created and opportunities expanded, the public should be able to examine the evidence.

The opposition, in turn, must substantiate its allegations and explain how its own proposals would address the problem.

Accountability should not depend on which side of the political divide is being questioned.

The budget must deliver for ordinary people

The employment debate must also be considered alongside the Government's budget commitments.

In its 2026 budget, presented in October 2025, the government announced a $475 million Employment Fund, to be used alongside $310 million in the Unemployment Fund to support job creation. Finance Minister Davendranath Tancoo subsequently said the Employment Fund would help finance a recruitment drive intended to create or fill 20,000 jobs.

Those commitments raise straightforward questions.

How many people have actually secured employment through these initiatives? How many positions are genuinely new, rather than existing vacancies being filled? What wages and working conditions are being offered? And how many people have obtained dependable jobs that allow them to support their families?

On October 12, 2026, the government presented its 2027 national budget under the theme A People Centred Approach: Investing in Communities, Transforming the Economy and Securing a Sustainable Future.

Its stated priorities include investment in people and productive sectors, economic diversification, and development in agriculture, manufacturing, tourism and technology.

These are important objectives. But announcements and targets are only the beginning. Their value must ultimately be judged by the opportunities they create and the difference they make to people's lives.

In Boissiere No. 1, progress could mean a young person securing an entry level position, a parent finding regular work or a household gaining enough stability to plan beyond the next few days.

The government should publish clear, regular information showing how employment funds are spent, how many positions have been filled, how many jobs are newly created and what support is available to displaced workers.

The opposition should also explain how its proposals would help unemployed young people, workers who have lost their jobs and households struggling to meet basic expenses.

Neither budget allocations nor political promises should be treated as achievements in themselves. The public deserves to know what has been delivered.

Boissiere No. 1 deserves a place in the national conversation

Economic performance is often discussed through national totals, percentages and investment announcements. These measures matter, but they cannot tell the whole story of how people are living.

Can a young person leave school and find a genuine opportunity to work? Can a parent obtain a dependable income? Can a family afford food and essential household expenses without constantly deciding what it must do without?

These questions matter in Boissiere No. 1, throughout Maraval and across Trinidad and Tobago.

The community should not be defined solely by hardship. Its residents have ambitions, abilities and responsibilities. Many want nothing more than an honest opportunity to earn a living and provide for their families.

The question is whether the opportunities available to them are sufficient to turn those ambitions into reality.

Addressing that concern requires more than expressions of sympathy. It calls for employment policies that deliver results, transparent public spending, accessible training, support for productive businesses and a serious effort to understand what households are experiencing.

It also requires reliable local information. National unemployment figures cannot tell us precisely how many residents of Boissiere No. 1 are unemployed, underemployed or struggling despite having work. Those circumstances must be investigated rather than assumed, so that community needs can be addressed using evidence.

Without that information, the experiences of ordinary people risk disappearing behind national averages and political arguments.

The real measure of progress

Trinidad and Tobago cannot afford to let the employment debate become another political contest in which accusations and promises take precedence over results.

Young's allegation of more than 40,000 job losses must be verified. The Government's employment commitments must be measured against the jobs actually delivered. Budget allocations must be assessed by their outcomes, including whether working families have a better chance of meeting their basic needs.

For the young woman waiting for her first opportunity, the father who cannot depend on next week's earnings and the mother trying to make the grocery money last, these are not abstract policy questions. They are everyday realities.

They want a fair chance to work, contribute to their households and look towards the future without constantly worrying about how they will manage.

Boissiere No. 1 deserves to be part of the national conversation, not merely as the setting for a political argument, but as a community whose residents should benefit from decisions made in their name.

The Government must demonstrate what its policies are achieving. The Opposition must support its claims with evidence and offer practical alternatives. The public must be able to judge both by their results.

Economic progress should mean more than a favourable percentage, an investment announcement or a promise of thousands of jobs. It should mean genuine opportunities to earn a living, greater security for working families and a future in which young people have reason to believe their efforts will be rewarded.

The real test of economic progress is not simply how many people are working. It is whether their work allows them to live with dignity.

Tony mark Ramjewan

Boisiere No. 1, Maraval, Port of Spain

Trinidad and Tobago

MENAFN22102026000232011072ID1111847546