Author: Shuo Fei
Exploration of officials’ perspectives towards Universal credit’s influences on their clients’ employment-related behaviours in Sutton and Croydon
This paper explores perspectives of officials in Local Authorities, Jobcentre Plus, Citizen Advice Bureau of Sutton and Croydon on: local labour market trends; their clients’ needs; barriers prevent and bridges enable their clients to move towards employment; and changes (comparing pre- and post- Universal Credit) of official approaches to help their clients to ‘modify’ employment-related behaviours, shaped by British politics over the last 5/6 years, say, austerity and benefit cuts.
To tackle poverty, worklessness and welfare dependency, the UK coalition government of 2010-2015 introduces Universal Credit, which is being gradually rolled out nationally that aims to provide financial supports for people who are out of work; make work pay as people move into and progress in work; and move people out of poverty. This approach combines ‘help’ with ‘hassle’: in addition to financial incentive, such as the single taper rate of about sixty five percent, Universal Credit introduces a tougher sanction regime to boost recipients’ working incentives. Moreover, this ‘work first’ approach aims to place recipients in jobs as soon as possible and rests on the assumption that most recipients are capable of finding work, and that advancement and higher wages will come from the experience of working rather than from building skills through education or training.
Existing study on ‘work first’ approach, such as Lawrence Mead’s theoretical framework of paternalism, discusses supervisory approach’s effectiveness to reduce welfare dependency and alleviate income poverty. Mead’s supervisory approach is relatively consistent with coalition government policy agenda of Universal Credit, which combine ‘help’ with ‘hassle’. Lawrence Mead believes social programs, such as Job Opportunities and Basic Skills Program in Wisconsin, which include strict mandates and penalties, may produce more positive outcomes. However, the ‘work first’ approach may be not sufficient to help all citizens who have left welfare to remain employed in the long term. This paper presents empirical evidence against Mead’s theory and findings. In addition to individual conduct’s modification, future policy agenda in the UK may consider securing enough available jobs in local labour market, and investing to develop benefit recipients’ employability skills to match the employment opportunities currently available.