I propose that people who have been in institutions for a long time should be involved in training, work experience in companies and businesses. So that they become active in the workforce, do not lose their work habits, and are actively educated at the same time.
In a similar way as students are involved in education.
The compulsory traineeship in companies would last 9 weeks. Employer's cost € 100 per worker + mentoring.
Compulsory mentoring in the company and an individual programme drawn up jointly by the employer and the institute (the programme itself is quite simple, of course, as it has to leave some room for adaptation).
After the 9 weeks, if the employer hires the worker from this programme, he/she has a co-financed contribution for the next 9 months.
A worker who is registered with an employer can opt out of up to 5 such training sessions per year. Otherwise, inclusion is compulsory for unemployment benefits, etc. This, of course, gives the worker some chance of refusing work that is unsuitable for him or her. A range of possible on-the-job training should be prepared so that the unemployed can also apply themselves, i.e. they should go for the programmes they find interesting.
Cons: Yes, it is true that there may be some exploitation of employers' access to cheap labour. But there are a lot of advantages. People who are in the institution at the time cannot do illegal work, they are trained at the employer's expense and not the institution's, if they feel exploited they can refuse some training but not more than 5 a year, so they can be selective. In this way, of course, they can also be recruited for community service, cleaning, helping the elderly, etc. But if they work in the economy, they are adding value to the economy, which is definitely the way forward.
Employers can test the worker in this way and, if he is good, they can continue to employ him, which is certainly welcome.