My first reaction reading this research from the DWP was a rather crude exclamation of ‘no sh*t Sherlock’! Reading it certainly didn’t surprise me and it chimes with what I have heard about the private/third sector ‘delivery’ of Pathways to Work.
Findings included the tension that existed between the aim to tailor support to client needs and the drive to meet job outcome targets. Provider staff felt that the focus on performance targets influenced their behaviour with clients, to the extent that they spent less time than required with people with multiple barriers to work (and perceived as harder to help). They also felt they needed to encourage job ready clients to take jobs that would enable a swift return to work, rather than take lengthier routes towards jobs that they wanted.
So much for tailored support.
Most providers who took part in the research perceived that clients were, on the whole, harder to help than they had anticipated and some staff expressed concerns that this had also lead to job outcome targets being prioritised ahead of clients’ wellbeing and ability to sustain employment.
In a nutshell it is all about targets and profits, the needs of the individual are not at the forefront neither is training good quality staff. What is the central tenet is incentivising staff to ‘cream’ off the profits from people that can be placed in work and ‘parking’ the ones who need further and more complex help. In the language of the market and the corporate sector, why spend time on these people when profits are to be made?
Also, I think (and this research backs that up) is the private/voluntary sector had a rude awakening regarding the delivery of welfare. They assumed that it would be essentially simple, but coupled with the economic meltdown where they bleated and whined for more funds from the government and the fact the whole welfare benefits system is massively complex and bureaucratic. Most providers who took part in the research perceived that clients were, on the whole, harder to help than they had anticipated and some staff expressed concerns that this had also lead to job outcome targets being prioritised ahead of clients’ wellbeing and ability to sustain employment.
Why didn’t NL invest the money in the public sector as opposed to wasting it on a bunch of bargin basement chancers? The other issue that hasn’t been mentioned in this research is once (and this has been exposed) staff are under pressure to meet their targets then fraud will emerge on a mass scale. Yet NL are still throwing good money after bad. You incentivise a system, based on greed as opposed to need then you will fundamentally change the ethos of that system. The public sector runs the benefits system on the needs of the individual not greed, dishonesty and exploitation.
The section on ‘sanctions’ is a grim and depressing read. People felt bullied and threatened and scared about losing their benefits. Yet where are the so-called customer care procedures, accountability and so on? But then this is the private sector where the wild West rules and piracy seem to be en vogue.
Some people were anxious where they had missed an appointment and had subsequently received a letter telling them that their benefit would be affected if they did not keep their next appointment. One other person who recalled being told that they had ‘better turnup to the next’ appointment or their money would be stopped subsequently felt like they had to attend appointments even where they felt like ‘death warmed up’.Two people had been sanctioned for failing to attend a work-focused interview at the provider. One had been in hospital and had not been at home to readthe letter telling them they had an appointment with the provider. Although this person saw their benefit reduced for failing to attend, the original level of benefit was later reinstated when they explained the situation. Another person had had their benefit stopped completely for failing to attend two appointments. They saidthat they had been unwell on both occasions and that they could not put how they felt at having had their benefit stopped ‘into words.
But as we know the ideology of NL is neoliberalism and the worship of the market. The public sector has been consciously run down by NL by bringing private sector individuals in (see Royal Mail) and/or contracting out large chunks of the public sector to the private sector. NL coulda shoulda invested that money back into the public sector instead we have the private sector taking over in a turbocharged manner, running roughshod and destroying public services. Accountability, transparency, openness and democracy don’t particularly exist in the private sector. And we have witnessed certain private companies being very viciously litigious minded!
Say it once, say it again…the private/third sector can’t run the public sector.
Need not greed!