Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.

Tory 'Workfare' Proposals

by In Wales Tue Jan 8th, 2008 at 08:03:51 AM EST

A lazy Quote story based on a TUC press release.

Tory ‘Workfare’ proposals will not help people back into work

Responding to the Conservative Party’s welfare reform proposals announced today (Tuesday), TUC General Secretary Brendan Barber said:

“The Tories’ Workfare proposals manage to combine injustice, expense and inefficiency in a single package. Experiences of Workfare schemes around the world have shown that they fail to help people into work. In Australia, Workfare has left unemployed people less likely to get a job. In New York, existing workers have lost their jobs to Workfare temps.


“Employers aren’t impressed either – who will want to recruit someone who has been forced into their last job? The Tories will have to pay for the work people are forced to do, on top of support services like childcare. So there is no chance that the Tories will find the £3 billion savings they are looking for.

“Under the Tory proposals, people will not be paid the rate for the job they are doing and there will be guarantee of a job at the end. The only beneficiaries will be dodgy employers, who will exploit unpaid Workfare temps to the detriment of existing staff.”

A little extra info...

A study of Australia's workfare programme found “a large and significant adverse effect on the likelihood of exiting unemployment payments.” See “How Does ‘Work for the Dole’ Work?”, Jeff Borland and Yi-Ping Tseng, University of Melbourne, Melbourne Institute Working Paper 14/04, July 2004.

- Evidence from a study of Workfare in New York shows that workfare does not increase participants' chances of being in employment. The study also found that New York municipal workers lost their jobs when workfare was introduced and then, after months of unemployment, some found themselves doing their old jobs alongside former colleagues, but only being paid a fraction of the wage they used to receive. See “Unpaid Work Experience for Welfare Recipients: Findings and Lessons from MDRC Research”, Brock, Butler and Long, MDRC, 1993.

Although some may remember that fairly recently I quoted a press release on Labour making proposals based on 'workfare' in their own welfare reforms, especially around forcing disabled people and those on long term sick back to work, single parents also. Fortunately they took heed of the numerous warnings and took that bit out of the proposals.

That said, Peter Hain was recently quoted as saying that the Tories were copying polcies already announced by Labour around welfare reforms. He doesnt seem to be saying that today though.

BBC Online

The long term unemployed would be forced to work for their benefits under plans outlined by the Conservatives. People claiming Jobseekers' Allowance for more than two years would have to do 12 months community work.

Tory leader David Cameron said he wanted to help people get back into work and end the "something for nothing culture" of benefit "dependency".

But Work and Pensions Secretary Peter Hain said the scheme would be expensive and would not help people get jobs.


And the distinction between the two parties is??

Display:
Could someone explain the word "workfare"?

I want to force people on capital gains income to work. The lazy bunch, living off our work!

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Tue Jan 8th, 2008 at 08:32:10 AM EST
Workfare is the idea of making benefits conditional on people taking crap jobs, supposedly to help people become less dependent on benefits.

In the US it's called Welfare to Work. There is a critique of it in Bowling for Columbine.

We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Jan 8th, 2008 at 08:42:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Ah, so

Work + Welfare -> Workfare

<slaps forehead>

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Tue Jan 8th, 2008 at 08:46:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]
A better answer than mine.  I tried to find a useful link but didn't come across a good one.

Although wiki has a broader overview of welfare reform.

by In Wales (inwales aaat eurotrib.com) on Tue Jan 8th, 2008 at 08:48:20 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Workfare was the name of the scheme set up in the States under Clinton to get people off benefits and back to work.  

I'm sure Helen would point out that this is a wonderful example of the UK copying America's policies even where they have been proven to fail, instead of looking a little closer to home at more successful interventions elsewhere in Europe.

by In Wales (inwales aaat eurotrib.com) on Tue Jan 8th, 2008 at 08:45:39 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I'm sure Helen would point out that this is a wonderful example of the UK copying America's policies even where they have been proven to fail, instead of looking a little closer to home at more successful interventions elsewhere in Europe.

I would have, but you beat me to it. Still, I wish our political establishment would try to surprise me occasioanlly by not pulling something so obviously daft out of the hat. But, it's punitive, it's american, it's counter-productive and it's failed again and again. What's not to like ?

keep to the Fen Causeway

by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Tue Jan 8th, 2008 at 10:38:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Is it just that? Isn't it a lot to do with with the fact that the moral high ground the Tories take is that these people on the dole are scabbing off those of us who work and pay our taxes?

Isn't the moral route the one that makes these scroungers work for their pitiful benefits?  Like all the rest of us have to work to earn a living, why should they get to sit about enjoying a life of luxury and leisure at home?  

Screw the fact that the evidence shows no benefit, the point is that the scum of society is being put in their place and forced to work so the tories can strut about feeling pleased with themselves for turning around the rot that Noo Labour let set in.

The assumption is that these unemployed people have some weakness in character in that they allow themselves to be time and money wasters.  So make the bastards work for their pennies.  No Tory would ever be out of work, surely. They're much better than that.

by In Wales (inwales aaat eurotrib.com) on Tue Jan 8th, 2008 at 11:13:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]
But, it's punitive, it's american, it's counter-productive and it's failed again and again. What's not to like ?
Isn't it a lot to do with with the fact that the moral high ground the Tories take is that these people on the dole are scabbing off those of us who work and pay our taxes?

I think that's the same phenomenon expressed two different ways. However, you do introduce the idea that nobody has made the social case for taxes to pay for collective provision in an awful long time.

eg, it costs £8/day to send a child to school, but it costs £40/day to keep somebody in prison. so wouldn't it make sense to spend a lot more on educating children (and feeding those in low paid families with good food) properly, than in allowing the worst 10 or 20 % to drift into low grade crime and the penal retribution system for much of their life. I'm not saying that will cure all ills, but there are so many kids who can't even read at the age of 15 these days. I doubt many of them are intellectually incapable of reading, the system failed them. Never gave them a chance.

Taxes can be justified, the difficulty is finding a politician honest enough to do it fiercely enough.


keep to the Fen Causeway

by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Tue Jan 8th, 2008 at 11:40:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Yes, but if you did that you wouldn't get the warm glow of self-righteous satisfaction from knowing that there's someone behind bars who's a loser and you're better than they are.

Considering the huge amount of twisted happy these proposals will spread around the Tory faithful, they're a bit of a bargain in financial terms.

Sanity? In the UK? From the Tories? The party of perverts, prudes, pundits and the petulantly entitled?

It's like expecting Huckabee to start making sense.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Tue Jan 8th, 2008 at 12:07:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Helen:
I would have, but you beat me to it. Still, I wish our political establishment would try to surprise me occasioanlly by not pulling something so obviously daft out of the hat. But, it's punitive, it's american, it's counter-productive and it's failed again and again. What's not to like ?

Welcome to the last twenty five years of UK policy.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Tue Jan 8th, 2008 at 12:03:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I want to force people on capital gains income to work. The lazy bunch, living off our work!

And while we're at it, can the criticism of education as not being what companies require, from now on be limited to representatives of companies that actually pay the full amount of tax, and arent trying some tax avoidance methods.

Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.

by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Tue Jan 8th, 2008 at 08:52:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Same old, same old!

"Dieu se rit des hommes qui se plaignent des conséquences alors qu'ils en chérissent les causes" Jacques-Bénigne Bossuet
by Melanchthon on Tue Jan 8th, 2008 at 08:33:37 AM EST
< smiles sweetly>
by In Wales (inwales aaat eurotrib.com) on Tue Jan 8th, 2008 at 08:42:03 AM EST
I propose to heretoforth call the Tory policy proposal "Workfarce".

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Tue Jan 8th, 2008 at 01:05:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I will second your proposal.
by In Wales (inwales aaat eurotrib.com) on Tue Jan 8th, 2008 at 01:07:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]
The same is being set up in France under the acronym "RMA", close to the "RMI" of the dole. And it is based on the same principles ; and set up by a State Secretary who claims he is on the left.

Un roi sans divertissement est un homme plein de misères
by linca (antonin POINT lucas AROBASE gmail.com) on Tue Jan 8th, 2008 at 09:09:27 AM EST
This is exactly the opposite of what's needed, IMHO.

We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Jan 8th, 2008 at 09:18:11 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Could you please elaborate? What do you think should be done?

Earth provides enough to satisfy every man's need, but not every man's greed. Gandhi
by Cyrille (cyrillev domain yahoo.fr) on Tue Jan 8th, 2008 at 10:27:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Start with better education. Really throw resources at making sure that children are engaged rather than alienated by education.

But education isn't enough, because middle class jobs are being exported as much as skilled manual jobs. There has to be an evaluation of what work is for and a realistic assessment of how much it costs to send jobs overseas, or to simply run down an entire sector of the economy cos it's cheaper on a balance sheet to have things done in china.

There are so many things that  probably make sense on a micro-economic scale in the current accountancy paradigm, but which are obviously economically suicidal in a macro-economic sense. It is surely the role of government to reconcile these issues, unfortunately we have a government that is only concerned with facilitating the micro-economic view and then punishing the victims.

keep to the Fen Causeway

by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Tue Jan 8th, 2008 at 10:45:58 AM EST
[ Parent ]
A guaranteed living income funded by taxing wealth.

Every time I get a phone call from a telemarketer getting minimum wage for telling me that my number has been randomly selected to receive a brand new camera mobile phone, I cannot escape the conclusion that this person and I would both be better off if they were at home, on benefits.

There are so many people being paid crap to do unnecessary jobs that paying them crap to stay at home cannot possibly be worse. In fact, maybe they'll do something useful with their free time!

We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Jan 8th, 2008 at 10:48:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Gaaah no... Not even the crazies in the Greens want that anymore. Of course, different countries are, well, different, but even further reducing the incentives to work in this country would be disastrous. Tax money should be used for schools, hospitals, police, defence and paying interest on loans for infrastructure. Surpluses should be used for cutting income taxes, especially for those with low incomes. Not for giving people handouts.

Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.
by Starvid on Tue Jan 8th, 2008 at 11:13:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]
If corporate welfare is eliminated at the same time, you might have a point. But the concept seems to be - shall we say - somewhat assymetric.
by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Tue Jan 8th, 2008 at 12:10:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Corporate welfare is a somewhat problematic concept. Just like we shouldn't allow our fellow citizens to starve just because they have gotten into trouble, there are times when state intervention is warranted to save an industry from a temporary crisis.

This could take the shape of investments in infrastructure, emergency credit (in exchange for shares) or a straight private (or rather, public) equity buyout of an entire company, or even industry.

But sure, if we use the wording of Wikipedia, I agree fully with you.

Subsidies considered excessive, unwarranted, wasteful, unfair, inefficient, or bought by lobbying are often called corporate welfare.


Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.
by Starvid on Tue Jan 8th, 2008 at 12:24:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]
So, how do we prevent people from starving? By giving them unconditional handouts.

We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Jan 8th, 2008 at 12:57:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Yes, obviously. That is something the state should spend money on. It's called solidarity.

But I interpreted your comment on the lines of something of a "citizen wage", a steady tax-financed paycheck sent to everyone from the govt no matter what. That is something I believe would be horrid.

Use the money to cut taxes instead.

Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.

by Starvid on Tue Jan 8th, 2008 at 01:13:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I don't know what the difference is, in practice, between giving a check to those who don't have a job and giving a check to everyone.

We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Jan 8th, 2008 at 01:20:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Good evening, Sir. Do you have a mobile phone? The reason I ask is that your comment has been randomly selected to receive a brand new camera mobile phone.

We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Jan 8th, 2008 at 12:12:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]
No, I share Starvid's horror, there is a lot to be said for the simple discipline of work, however futile, over the indolence of unemployment.

However, there is a difference between badly paid, repetitive and miserable drone-work and that which has value and confers dignity. Unfortunately we have elimiated a lot of such jobs, but that doesn't mean we can't recreate them. There are environmental cleaning up jobs that need to be done. Currently it is politically difficult because people are employed to do these things (not well, but better than workfare) and would feel threatened. But it woulnd't take too much thought to aovid this.

Just a bit of fucking creativity....but we're talking about government so I guess I'm being delusional again.

keep to the Fen Causeway

by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Tue Jan 8th, 2008 at 11:32:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]
No, I share Starvid's horror, there is a lot to be said for the simple discipline of work, however futile, over the indolence of unemployment.

Protestants. <sigh>

by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Tue Jan 8th, 2008 at 11:42:15 AM EST
[ Parent ]
it's one of the few times I think that the Inquisition was right.

Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Tue Jan 8th, 2008 at 11:48:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Lol!

Even before you wrote that I was actually considering posting this link.

Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.

by Starvid on Tue Jan 8th, 2008 at 11:50:21 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Huh, easy to be smug. But I wasn't talking about the treadmill or other protestant ideas. There are numerous studies that suggest that joblessness itself can be bad for your self-esteem and can lead to depression and other mental illnesses.

Work allows you to focus outside yourself, especialy for those with little reason/incentive to leave the four walls of their residence.

However, the government has recently cut £100 million from the budget for continuing adult education, which blows a hole in their credibility for claiming to  help the jobless to find new useful work.

keep to the Fen Causeway

by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Tue Jan 8th, 2008 at 12:41:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]
The proposition that a job is what's needed to solve those problems is based on the assumption that you need a job to be entitled to self-esteem.

Lot's of other things can get you to focus outside of yourself. We only really value paid work under the current mind-set.

by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Tue Jan 8th, 2008 at 12:53:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Okay, so we'll give people handouts so they can go to school. Same difference. Mind you, if you force people into education you'll ruin the experience for those who want to do it voluntarily.

We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Jan 8th, 2008 at 12:55:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Please move discussion of my comment to the debate Socratic Economics VII: Guaranteed Living Income by Migeru on January 8th, 2008.

We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Jan 8th, 2008 at 01:42:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Linca, did you get my SMS last night?

Hey, Grandma Moses started late!
by LEP on Tue Jan 8th, 2008 at 09:29:48 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Yes, I was about to answer yes.

Un roi sans divertissement est un homme plein de misères
by linca (antonin POINT lucas AROBASE gmail.com) on Tue Jan 8th, 2008 at 10:04:10 AM EST
[ Parent ]
The RMA is not "workfare". It is not mandatory: REVENU MINIMUM D'ACTIVITE
Le Conseil Constitutionel l'a confirmé : les allocataires du RMI ont "la possibilité de s'opposer à l'inclusion du CI-RMA parmi les actions d'insertion qui leurs sont proposées" par le département dans le cadre de l'élaboration de leur contrat d'insertion

And the wage is at least the minimum wage: Le contrat insertion - revenu minimum d'activité

Le bénéficiaire du CI-RMA a un statut de salarié à part entière ; il est soumis aux mêmes règles légales et conventionnelles que les autres salariés de l'établissement qui l'emploie.
Sous réserve de clauses contractuelles ou conventionnelles plus favorables, il perçoit une rémunération égale au produit du SMIC par le nombre d'heures de travail effectuées.

I think you were referring to the "revenu de solidarité active", which is, as far as I know, not mandatory either.

"Dieu se rit des hommes qui se plaignent des conséquences alors qu'ils en chérissent les causes" Jacques-Bénigne Bossuet

by Melanchthon on Tue Jan 8th, 2008 at 10:45:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]


Display:
Go to: [ European Tribune Homepage : Top of page : Top of comments ]