Workfare how about some evidence?

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Workfare how about some evidence?

Post by Guest on Sun Mar 04, 2012 12:58 pm

Workfare has recently come under close scrutiny, and criticism aimed at some high-profile employers has culminated in a terse response from the Government.
Detractors condemn workfare as barely better than slave labour, while defenders claim it’s a valuable addition to other forms of help for unemployed people, but what does the evidence say about whether workfare leads to better outcomes and less poverty?
DWP commissioned a research review back in 2008 to look at the evidence from the USA, Canada and Australia on their workfare schemes. The conclusions are pretty stark:
“There is little evidence that workfare increases the likelihood of finding work. It can even reduce employment chances by limiting the time available for job search and by failing to provide the skills and experience valued by employers. Subsidised (‘transitional’) job schemes that pay a wage can be more effective in raising employment levels than ‘work for benefit’ programmes. Workfare is least effective in getting people into jobs in weak labour markets where unemployment is high.”
Paul Gregg examined the role of workfare when he was commissioned by the last UK Government to look at conditionality and the JSA regime. He concluded that policy makers should consider “…how to deliver work experience programmes, particularly for those further from the labour market. These need to build in help with job search and wider support rather than be delivered as a pure Workfare type scheme”.
Work placements coupled with the additional support and assistance required to help individuals move into mainstream employment would better tackle the barriers faced by the most disadvantaged individuals. This is supported by a JRF review by Dan Finn, who found that Dutch workfare, as part of a wider package of support, “cut costs and increased the number of social assistance claimants leaving benefits and entering employment.”
So, the evidence suggests that providing people with a full package of support and the right kind of work experience – ideally with additional pay and the hope of a job at the end of it – is crucial.
Workfare alone is not enough, and discussion so far has largely ignored the wider problem of the quality of jobs in the UK labour market. We know that low-paid, insecure work isn’t the solution. Getting on the ladder is vital but we need better and wider routes upwards.

Chris Goulden is Policy and Research Manager for the Joseph Rowntree Foundation

http://thisismytruth.org/economy-employment/workfare-how-about-some-evidence/

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Workfare how about some evidence?

Post by Guest on Sun Mar 04, 2012 1:21 pm

There are 67% employment here in Wales at least. Below the average nationally. That's 67% of the population paying taxes to pay for housing benefit, and other benefits that are now being cut.

There's no "group" that are supporting these cuts as far as I can see but reading all the politics page the govt. seem unfazed by these protests and are plowing on regardless.


Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Workfare how about some evidence?

Post by Guest on Sun Mar 04, 2012 1:29 pm


FOOD BANK IN EBBW VALE

An outbreak of unanimity has occurred amongst economic forecasters – and the outlook for Wales and the UK in 2012 is not good.
The Treasury’s summary of the many forecasts made by city and business strategists alike paints a bleak picture. Almost all forecasters are predicting that GDP will increase by less than 1% in 2012. Hardly surprisingly, forecasters are also downbeat about likely growth in employment – the median of forecasts is an increase of a mere 0.3% with some predicting that employment will decrease. Claimant unemployment is universally expected to rise – by around 1.6%. There is a similar consensus about inflation, with most predicting price rises of 4-5% and a contraction of real household disposable income of around 2%. For people on benefits, 2012 will be particularly tough as Housing Benefit for under-35 year olds and Income Support for lone parents are cut.
If Wales’s economy and labour market perform as forecast for the UK as a whole, total employment would increase by a mere 3,000 jobs whilst unemployment would increase by just over 1,000. But to expect Wales to follow the UK trend is optimistic, as numerous reports suggest that the Welsh economy and labour market is highly likely to perform below the UK average. Whether it’s companies’ hiring intentions or detailed sectoral forecasts, Wales generally limps along behind most other parts of the UK. So we could well see unemployment increase to nearly 80,000 over the next 12 months, with total employment decreasing by a few thousand – precisely what Oxford Economics forecasts.
With such a grim outlook for the economy, it is hardly surprising that the outlook for households is grim too. The IFS has predicted that households with children will be hard hit by a mixture of unemployment, constrained wages and benefit cuts, and rising prices – more than half a million children in the UK will fall into absolute poverty in the next three years and millions more will live in households where money is in very short supply. Other organisations are predicting rising homelessness, growing indebtedness and other types of severe stress.
Nor is there any solace beyond 2012. Whilst most forecasters see some modest improvement in the economy after 2013, for many this is the result of gazing into an optimistic crystal ball rather than serious analysis. And of course Wales is one of the parts of the UK least likely to benefit from this hoped-for growth.
Such a bleak outlook for 2012 brings twin challenges for government (of all forms), the private and third sectors alike. They are as follows. First, to do as much as possible to ameliorate the effects of the economic downturn by ensuring the most basic needs of the people of Wales are met, meaning that 2012 could well be the year of the homeless shelter, food banks, walk-in GP services and free school meals.
Second, to focus on the long-term transformation of Wales by stopping pretending that the Welsh government can affect the overall well-being of the economy – the eurozone crisis, global trends, or the value of the pound all have far more effect than anything that Mrs Hart might announce – and focusing on building economic resilience through decent infrastructure and excellent skills.
All economists acknowledge the importance of ’confidence’ in a nation’s economic prospects, whether it is for investors to invest or consumers to spend. People in Wales need ‘confidence’ that the Welsh Government is responding to the bleak prospects ahead too.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Workfare how about some evidence?

Post by Guest on Sun Mar 04, 2012 2:00 pm

you gotta post some links nems so i can see the source


Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Workfare how about some evidence?

Post by Guest on Sun Mar 04, 2012 2:30 pm

Seren wrote:you gotta post some links nems so i can see the source


Not a problem, the Joseph Rowntree Foundation I quoted
and the other is the Bevan Foundation.


http://thisismytruth.org/

http://www.jrf.org.uk/

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Workfare how about some evidence?

Post by Guest on Mon Mar 05, 2012 9:25 am

Even the founder of the welfare state supported workfare though the name wasn't in use then. Clearly you accept the status quo Nems many taxpayers do not. If we accept your arguments you are forcing taxpayers to pay for idelness anda life style better than their own.



Please feel free to offer a higher proportion of your salary to the govt to keep these people on the dole if you wish. However do not force me to pay. You are sanguine about this because you aren't a high rate taxpayer who picks up most of the tab. There is plenty evidence the won't work brigade has grown in number over the last decade. There is also plenty of evidence that those who earn lower salaries are better off not working if they have families. That in turn will drive up the levels of gard core won't work mentality.



The welfare state is so far away from its founding principles and you in essence are supporting workfree which we know is wrong and criticising workfare which for all its flaws is better than the alternative.



This is about democracy and the left have dictated the way for far too long. It is clear that the pendulum has swung and that people are sick of having their own lifestyle squeezed to keep those on wlefare in relative luxury.



Or to put it another way Nems. " I vote the other guy pays for it Mr Chairman".

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Workfare how about some evidence?

Post by Guest on Mon Mar 05, 2012 11:30 am

Drinky wrote:Even the founder of the welfare state supported workfare though the name wasn't in use then. Clearly you accept the status quo Nems many taxpayers do not. If we accept your arguments you are forcing taxpayers to pay for idelness anda life style better than their own.



Please feel free to offer a higher proportion of your salary to the govt to keep these people on the dole if you wish. However do not force me to pay. You are sanguine about this because you aren't a high rate taxpayer who picks up most of the tab. There is plenty evidence the won't work brigade has grown in number over the last decade. There is also plenty of evidence that those who earn lower salaries are better off not working if they have families. That in turn will drive up the levels of gard core won't work mentality.



The welfare state is so far away from its founding principles and you in essence are supporting workfree which we know is wrong and criticising workfare which for all its flaws is better than the alternative.



This is about democracy and the left have dictated the way for far too long. It is clear that the pendulum has swung and that people are sick of having their own lifestyle squeezed to keep those on wlefare in relative luxury.



Or to put it another way Nems. " I vote the other guy pays for it Mr Chairman".

Stop telling me what I think Drinky, its becoming tiresome.

We havent got the status quo now have we? Thats what Labour gave us, more and more benefit dependence. The Tories are bound and determined to end the dependency and cut the dole queues, conveniently forgetting when Thatcher cut the dole queues she just switched them all to DLA and kick started this way of thinking.
I am all in favour of giving people the dignity and hope that a decent job for a decent wage can bring, but as the country cannot provide these jobs I object to the demonising of the poor and sick.
People are not having their lifestyles squeezed because of fraudulent benefit claims or welfare dependency and anyone who swallows that drivel is a plank. People are having their lifestyles squeezed because massive bank bailouts, horrific foreign aid spending we cannot afford and because of the money pit that is the EU. Wholesale greed and waste are squeezing the public purse. People cannot afford food but make no mistake billions will be spent on the gladhanding around the Olympics.
The welfare state is way way from its founding principals and Beveridge must be spinning, but again I say stop taking the easy route of blaming the dependent and anyone who is still stupid enough to believe that living on benefit means a life of luxury wants to educate themselves.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Workfare how about some evidence?

Post by Guest on Mon Mar 05, 2012 4:56 pm

Nems we spend a fortune on benefits. 28% expenditure in fact. I agree with your point about the aid budget but it is Pennies in comparison. I dont think you are grasping the numbers involved. Labour grew the bill 25% in real terms thats billions more.

We stopped bailing out the banks two years ago how does that apply now?!!

The olympic expenditure is 98% done do you suggest we stop it nOw how dumb would that be.

At what point do you think we should address benefit dependency before or after we have gine bust. Please expkain to me also why you find moves to change the status quo fundamentally wrong. I am not telling you what you are saying I am feflecting back at you what you are saying.

If I am misunderstanding you it is because yiu are thinking one thing and writing another.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Workfare how about some evidence?

Post by Guest on Mon Mar 05, 2012 5:12 pm

Drinky wrote:Nems we spend a fortune on benefits. 28% expenditure in fact. I agree with your point about the aid budget but it is Pennies in comparison. I dont think you are grasping the numbers involved. Labour grew the bill 25% in real terms thats billions more.

We stopped bailing out the banks two years ago how does that apply now?!!

The olympic expenditure is 98% done do you suggest we stop it nOw how dumb would that be.

At what point do you think we should address benefit dependency before or after we have gine bust. Please expkain to me also why you find moves to change the status quo fundamentally wrong. I am not telling you what you are saying I am feflecting back at you what you are saying.

If I am misunderstanding you it is because yiu are thinking one thing and writing another.

I am not saying one thing and thinking another at all I am saying what I always said.
Benefit fraud costs less than tax evasion.
Obscene amounts of money are wasted in this country.
Don't blame the victims of benefit culture.
If the benefit bill is so high why are the coalition allowing unemployment to grow? Surely its better for people to be in work producing something and paying tax rather than claiming benefit and not paying tax?
I shall continue to moan about he bank bailout until every penny is paid back, that is money that could have been put to much better use.
The Olympics were always a nonsense and we should never have bid for them, we cant afford them and there are many bills to be paid over them yet.
Address benefit dependency Yes! but by making more and more unemployed I just dont get that?
There are more between 7 and20 people for each job in different areas of the country. Fill every vacancy then what do we do with all the other people?

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Workfare how about some evidence?

Post by Guest on Mon Mar 05, 2012 6:47 pm

Hello nems we cant afford the sizevof the public sector whether you like it ir not.

Benefit fraud is taking money of others thatbthey have paid in in good faith. Tax evasion isnt actually stealing of anyone though I stress I dont condone it.

Because labour ramped up spending dramatically and ramped up taxes to pay for a bloated public service avoidance has increased dramatically. Evasion isnt to my knowledge a growing problem benefit fraud is.

The govt isnt increasing unemployment the need to reduce the deficit is. The public sector is too lrge for the GDP of this country to support. Why cant you understand that simpke equation?

As to the olympics which you constantly whinge about the decision was taken by the last govt years ago. We are obliged to finish it or lose tremendous face as a nation. You may happily go back on a promise most people dont. It called integrity and standards. My word is my bond. Blame the last govt not this one fir finishing the job.

Besides having spent the money on infrastructure we willbegin to recoup it as the visitiors arrive. Your idea is frankly stupid spend the money ti date and then damage the return by not finishing the job. Im glad you arent in charge of the economy!

Finally the banks. The last govt spent billionspropping them up. I too want that money back. You however have a go at Hester the man charged with turning around Rbs every opportunity. You are full of contradiction s.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Workfare how about some evidence?

Post by Guest on Mon Mar 05, 2012 7:12 pm

Nems Again wrote:

I am not saying one thing and thinking another at all I am saying what I always said.
Benefit fraud costs less than tax evasion.
Obscene amounts of money are wasted in this country.
Don't blame the victims of benefit culture.
If the benefit bill is so high why are the coalition allowing unemployment to grow? Surely its better for people to be in work producing something and paying tax rather than claiming benefit and not paying tax?
I shall continue to moan about he bank bailout until every penny is paid back, that is money that could have been put to much better use.
The Olympics were always a nonsense and we should never have bid for them, we cant afford them and there are many bills to be paid over them yet.
Address benefit dependency Yes! but by making more and more unemployed I just dont get that?
There are more between 7 and20 people for each job in different areas of the country. Fill every vacancy then what do we do with all the other people?
When are you presenting yourself for PM? This is bloody common sense Twisted Evil

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Workfare how about some evidence?

Post by Guest on Mon Mar 05, 2012 7:14 pm

Thanks David x

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Workfare how about some evidence?

Post by Guest on Mon Mar 05, 2012 7:19 pm

Nems Again wrote:Thanks David x
Honestly we need people who deal with the NOW not the past Rolling Eyes Rolling Eyes

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Workfare how about some evidence?

Post by Guest on Mon Mar 05, 2012 7:24 pm

David1 wrote:
Honestly we need people who deal with the NOW not the past Rolling Eyes Rolling Eyes

I agree, time to start coming up with things that are going to work and stop trotting out the same
old same old

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Workfare how about some evidence?

Post by Guest on Tue Mar 06, 2012 7:11 am

Nems Again wrote:

I agree, time to start coming up with things that are going to work and stop trotting out the same
old same old
which us precisely what you do. We havent reformed the welfare state for decades. It is you who is arguing against it not me.

The cheek of you two patting each other on the back for reoeating the same old arguments against reform and deluding yourselves you are saying something new. You are priceless. The sovietss used to rewrite history when iT didnt match their message.

Even if we had the money it would be morally wrong to continue with this system. As we havent a point you lefties cant seem to grasp it is a fait accompli.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Workfare how about some evidence?

Post by Guest on Tue Mar 06, 2012 8:27 am

Drinky wrote: which us precisely what you do. We havent reformed the welfare state for decades. It is you who is arguing against it not me.

The cheek of you two patting each other on the back for reoeating the same old arguments against reform and deluding yourselves you are saying something new. You are priceless. The sovietss used to rewrite history when iT didnt match their message.

Even if we had the money it would be morally wrong to continue with this system. As we havent a point you lefties cant seem to grasp it is a fait accompli.

Im not arguing against reform Drinky I am arguing against the speed and ferocity of it and the fact that as usual is it punishing those who can least afford it.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Workfare how about some evidence?

Post by Guest on Tue Mar 06, 2012 5:59 pm

Nems Again wrote:

Im not arguing against reform Drinky I am arguing against the speed and ferocity of it and the fact that as usual is it punishing those who can least afford it.
Same with the reform of the Public Service: yes it needs reforming but not at this ferocious rate Evil or Very Mad

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum