1. Punishing Jobseekers?
UK Jobseekers’ lived experiences of support and sanctions
Work, employment and Society, University of Leeds, 8th September 2016
Professor Del Roy Fletcher, Sheffield Hallam University
Dr Alasdair B R Stewart, University of Glasgow
Dr Sharon Wright, University of Glasgow

2. Actually Existing Neoliberalism: Punishing the Poor
Punishing Jobseekers? UK Jobseekers’ lived experiences of support and sanctions
Actually Existing Neoliberalism: Punishing the Poor
Neoliberal state-crafting - emphasises active role of state in ‘restructuring’ / ‘rolling-out’ new forms of welfare.
Centaur state – liberalising at top of class hierarchy and punitive at the bottom.
“harnesses the [state] to impose the stamp of the [market] onto that [of citizenship]” (Wacquant 2012: 71).
‘Double regulation’ of the poor through workfare and prisonfare.

3. Theoretical – polemical, all-encompassing.
Punishing Jobseekers? UK Jobseekers’ lived experiences of support and sanctions
Criticism of Wacquant
Theoretical – polemical, all-encompassing.
Empirical – limited original research, focusing strongly on case in United States, greater attention given to prisonfare side of equation.
Variations on the idea that Wacquant is ‘not Bourdieu’.
However
‘America as model’ within international policy.
Underlying subtlety in development of Bourdieu’s ‘thinking tools’.
Ability to translate main arguments into questions for theoretical-empirical research.

4. Punishing Jobseekers? UK Jobseekers’ lived experiences of support and sanctions
Welfare conditionality: sanctions, support and behaviour change ( )
Funded by ESRC grant ES/K002163​/2
Twin aims
To consider the ethics and efficacy of welfare conditionality
Fieldwork with three sets of respondents
Semi-structured interviews with 40 policymakers
24 focus groups with frontline welfare practitioners who implement policy and work with welfare service users
Three rounds of repeat qualitative longitudinal interviews with a diverse sample of 480 welfare recipients who are subject to conditionality i.e interviews in total.
Exploring welfare conditionality across a range of policy domains and groups
Recipients of social security benefits (unemployed people, lone parents, disabled people, Universal Credit), homeless people, social tenants, individuals/families subject to antisocial behaviour orders/family intervention projects, offenders and migrants
Locations across England and Scotland
Bath, Bristol, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Inverness, London, Manchester, Peterborough, Salford, Sheffield , Warrington

5. 65 directly sampled as a jobseeker (jobseekers main sample).
Punishing Jobseekers? UK Jobseekers’ lived experiences of support and sanctions
Jobseekers Sample
65 directly sampled as a jobseeker (jobseekers main sample).
156 from the WSU sample in total had experience receiving Jobseekers Allowance at Wave A (jobseekers total sample).
54% of main sample and 51% of total sample had experienced one or more sanctions.
74% of main sample and 76% of total sample had felt at risk of being sanctioned.
Times Sanctioned
Never
Once
2-5 times
5+ times
Don’t know
Jobseekers - main
46.15%
32.31%
20.00%
1.54%
0.00%
Jobseekers - total
48.08%
28.21%
20.51%
2.56%
0.64%

6. Identity distribution and stigma
Punishing Jobseekers? UK Jobseekers’ lived experiences of support and sanctions
Identity distribution and stigma
Benefit claimants as ‘deviants’. Poverty porn, mirroring the ‘law and order pornography’ of prisonfare. Many playing on ideas of ‘deserving’ vs ‘undeserving’ also seen in interviews.
Moral behaviourism - Jobseekers Allowance and Claimant Commitment.
“I think it would be quite depressing if you were living on the money that you do get from the Jobcentre for like - like forever. Basically you'll get people that are all right with that, they can't be bothered to work and stuff like that, but I'm just not one like that.” WSU-ED-BW-016
“Basically, it was like you're being told what to do. Why? Because it's like the way they think of it, long-term unemployed can't think for themselves. That's why they're unemployed; they're useless”. WSU-SH-EB-016

7. Surveillance of job seeking activity
Punishing Jobseekers? UK Jobseekers’ lived experiences of support and sanctions
Surveillance of job seeking activity
Constant and intense surveillance of job seeking. Increasing regularity of sign-on times after set periods, such as the end of a Work Programme placement.
Universal Jobmatch - Panoptic in terms of extending and intensifying the level of surveillance possible.
However, variation in delivery remains through continuing importance of job coaches interpretations of job logs, deciding when to sanction, etc.
There's this bit of suspicion that people are not looking for a job. So to me it's - it's just like - it's humiliating. I'm failing of a better way, maybe, I'd say it's humiliating, they're trying to humiliate me. You doubt that I'm looking, you think I'm not honest, I'm not honestly looking for a job. But I always look for a job, yes. Because I want to work. Yes. WSU-LO-LS-001
“It's for them to spy on you […] It's for them to look in and see you're going in there and seeing how many jobs you're applying for.” WSU-GL-AS-021

8. Punishing Jobseekers? UK Jobseekers’ lived experiences of support and sanctions
Lack of Support
Participants noticed scaling back of Jobcentre in recent years. Feeling that advisors are there to enforce conditionality, and little else.
Common to report lack of support from advisors at Jobcentre Plus. While some had computers, little or no staff to help people use them. ‘Support’ came in form of being referred to courses or the Work Programme.
“They were more helpful [five years ago]. They’d look on the computer and help you, but now they just like stand back and they’re looking for faults in you, if they don’t think you’ve done enough and it’s so easy to sanction people for ridiculous reasons. ” WSU-SH-JM-015
“You don't get that [sort of help] with the benefit agency, the Jobcentre Plus or whatever, they don't give you that. They just send you out to other organisations and they done away with [you…] and all this stuff now as well, it's all going to be done through universal job search. What about people who are computer illiterate? Lots of people cannot do it.” WSU-GL-AS-016

9. Work Programme & Mandatory Courses
Punishing Jobseekers? UK Jobseekers’ lived experiences of support and sanctions
Work Programme & Mandatory Courses
Some courses were viewed positively – though strongly tied to whether participants felt there was any benefit to them from it. Placements involving sitting at computers to apply for work, and little else, were viewed most negatively.
Similarly, work placements mostly seen as waste of time since little or no skills training, working for benefits, and no guarantee of work at the end.
“If there were benefits in place that were going to benefit you, rather than being just, 'Here's a computer and a room, go and find a job', then it's not going to benefit me, it's just the same as any other course I've been on, but if they're going to say, 'We've got funding we can put you through a forklift, scissor lift licence, we're going to encourage you […] and get you into a job', then, yes, I'd definitely be interested in doing it.” WSU-GL-AS-012
“I don't get anything out of it anyway; it just gives you something to do but it's just a waste of time because there's no job at the end of it anyway. I think doing things like that is just doing people out of jobs anyway, isn't it? It's cheaper to get somebody like me in - offer them a placement - than flipping take somebody on.” WSU-SH-JM-014

10. Punishing Jobseekers? UK Jobseekers’ lived experiences of support and sanctions
Reports that staff were quick to resort to, or threaten the use of, sanctions and sanctions used for minor transgressions.
Most common reasons for being sanctioned included failing to meet jobsearch requirements, being late, and missing appointments.
Most felt that their sanction had been applied unfairly – and sanctions were overly severe punishment for what people had done.
[The job coaches could be more considerate by…] talking to you properly. Not treating you like a piece of trash and not threatening […] 'Oh, you've missed out a day there on your job diary', […] 'Oh, you could get sanctioned for that you know'. 'Oh, what, you're sanctioning me?', 'No, but I could'. WSU-GL-AS-016
“But it is shocking for reasons like my brother's had like being attacked outside the job centre and getting sanctioned, being five minutes late at a job centre and being sanctioned […] This is basically to try and boot as many people off as possible so more people will think it's a pain to go in every week, more people will stop going on jobseekers.” WSU-ED-BW-022

11. Punishing Jobseekers? UK Jobseekers’ lived experiences of support and sanctions
Impact of Sanctions
Financial impact of sanctions led many into debt, putting potential strain on relationships with friends & family. Feeling like life has been ‘put on hold’. Further, emotional impact in terms of anxiety at how they would survive and it seen as degrading having to ask for help.
Fear of sanctions – at times seen as something that was hard to avoid happening.
It’s hindering in everything, you know, in my daily life, to feed myself, and to pay my fuel, gas, and electric bills [...] I’m frightened to even have a bath [...] I’ve got no money for food; I’ve got nothing. WSU-BR-AS-014
[E]very week, I go in to sign on and I don't know, it's just it's at the back of my mind and I say to myself, 'What if I get sanctioned? What am I going to do for money, this, that and the other?' WSU-ED-BW-026

12. ‘Deterrence’, ‘disentitlement’, and ‘pushing’ claimants
Punishing Jobseekers? UK Jobseekers’ lived experiences of support and sanctions
‘Deterrence’, ‘disentitlement’, and ‘pushing’ claimants
Common to speak about ‘hating’ being on Jobseekers. Blanket nature of conditionality made participants feel there was little flexibility and no recognition given of their efforts.
Participants felt ‘pushed’. Pushed into applying for hard to achieve number of jobs per fortnight and pushed into applying for jobs they did not want.
“I worked for three years straight. I did my bit and everything [...] It’s not fair for me to be going to the Jobcentre every time and feeling embarrassed and going in and just feeling horrible, because you do because it’s a horrible place. So it’s not fair because I’ve worked do you know what I mean?” WSU-ED-BW-022
“I do understand that we should be applying for as many jobs as we can,
but giving us a direct number that we have to hit, that doesn’t really feel like
they’re trying to help us, it feels like they’re pushing us [...] That doesn’t feel
like a guideline, it feels like that’s a number I have to go to or I’m going to get sanctioned.” WSU-LO-BW-015

13. Limits to State-Crafting: Effectiveness & unintended outcomes
Punishing Jobseekers? UK Jobseekers’ lived experiences of support and sanctions
Limits to State-Crafting: Effectiveness & unintended outcomes
Ineffective / lack of support can result in demoralisation and feeling ‘stuck’ rather than pushing people into employment or ending their claim.
Sense of not enough jobs. Applying for the same jobs fortnightly or applying for jobs claimants have little chance of getting – such as jobs requiring driver’s licence when the claimant does not have one.
“You're not getting the support and help you need to get any work. You feel as if you're just going in a circle, wasting your time doing job searches, especially when you're unemployed two, going on three years, it's harder.” WSU-GL-AS-012
“I'll be honest with you right I was applying for jobs that I was never ever going to get because you had to apply for jobs.” WSU-BR-AS-011

14. Punishing Jobseekers? UK Jobseekers’ lived experiences of support and sanctions
Concluding points
Wacquant useful if paying attentions to the subtleties in his argument – yet, not complete and requires ‘fleshing out’.
Shift from left hand to right – increasingly paternalistic and punitive approach to welfare within UK. This shift though is uneven (both nationally and internationally) and includes discontinuities as well as continuities.
‘Effectiveness’ of policy changes significant question along the importance of unintended consequences – particularly, in recognising power struggle between policy makers and executants and between job coaches / service providers and claimants.
Devolution – a potential fracturing in the UK field of power and bureaucratic field?

15. Alasdair B R Stewart alasdair.stewart@glasgow.ac.uk
constellations.scot
@_AbeStewart
Follow us @WelCond