Criticisms of "workfare"

[Questionable]

I've noticed that a common sentiment among the workers I meet is the notion that social welfare is fine, "as long as they're working." They accept that sometimes people sink into poverty due to conditions beyond their control, but to prevent them from becoming parasites on the rest of society, they should be put into work programs while they're on welfare.

To me, this concept basically amounts to slave labor. However, I would need to see more information regarding the topic before I tried to convince people of my view. Does anyone know anywhere that I can read more about the topic of "workfare"? Criticisms, problems, etc regarding it?

[blake 3:17]

I was heavily involved in an anti-workfare campaign in Ontario in the late 90s. A relatively small coalition, but which had people representing pretty broad constituencies, unions, and other organizations, targeted a particular "progressive" organization/employer which started accepting people on to a work for welfare scheme.

Exactly how you argue it depends on who you're arguing with, BUT I would start with a very basic socialist argument -- Everyone should have the right to safe and healthy employment at a living wage. The fact that unemployment is good for capitalist economies is a sign of capitalism's basic insanity. How far you go with that argument, I'd leave to you, but it's a hard one to argue against.

There are a number of very basic problems with workfare.

Do you kick people off benefits if they don't show up or don't perform well enough? If it is about economic efficiency, who oversees it? Do you get welfare workers to become job supervisors or job supervisors to suddenly to become welfare workers? How could one expect competency and fairness if these roles are getting shifted around arbitrarily?

Why should someone perform work for less than the minimum wage? Or do a union job and not be in the union? What guarantees are there against unsafe work? When we're working on this in Canada, there was some poor guy who was killed on a dock in England a couple of hours into his first day of workfare duties. They'd privatized the docks, gotten rid of the unions and experienced workers, and put people on who didn't know what they were doing. In New York City, the city administration got rid of unionized parks and street cleaners and had folks on welfare out doing it.

There are real psychological and social benefits to working (at least at some jobs) and one of issues we wrestled with in the anti-workfare group was around what was a "good job" or a job that could be considered educational or helped develop skills. Social benefits here are terrible, you can't live off them unless they're supplemented, and the rate at which benefits are clawed back from wages earned is ridiculous. People end up better off financially NOT working a lot of the time, when various costs (commuting, work clothes, eating out) are figured in as well as loss of other supplements like medical benefits.

A couple more reasons to not cut people off of welfare: People will create their economic opportunities, and the more desperate people are, the more desperate these attempts will be. The costs of these, economically and socially, can be massive.

From a totally centrist petty bourgeois perspective, there's a very good reason to support decent welfare rates -- poor people spend all their money.

[blake 3:17]

Worked to death: 32 disability benefit claimants die after being forced into jobs
1 Aug 2012 00:00
Over the last three years 32 people have passed away while challenging decisions to take away their entitlements

A company that tests the sick and disabled for benefits told dozens of people they were fit for work – shortly before they died.

Over the last three years 32 people have passed away while challenging decisions to take away their entitlements.

Doctors paid by private health services firm Atos to make assessments are given a quota.

They should rate only one in eight as so *disabled that they will never work.

Labour’s shadow energy minister Tom Greatrex said: “How can Atos get things so wrong that 32 people they believe are fit for work die within weeks of their *capability assessment?

“It is hard enough for anybody going through the tortuous appeals process when they have been wrongly assessed as fit for work.

"That dozens have had to do so in their final days is outrageous.”



Source : http://www.mirror.co.uk/money/personal-finance/32-disability-benefit-claimants-die-1197304#ixzz2TkpoQAm0

[blake 3:17]

For folks in the UK please see: http://www.boycottworkfare.org/ I've started following it even though overseas -- these are crucial issues and if there are winning strategies, please share!

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

What about the point that people on workfare are taking up vacancies that would otherwise be going to paid workers?

After all, if companies can get free labour out of this workfare scam, why bother actually hiring anyone?

[Questionable]

What about the point that people on workfare are taking up vacancies that would otherwise be going to paid workers?

After all, if companies can get free labour out of this workfare scam, why bother actually hiring anyone?

Would this really be a good way of arguing the point? It would seem to add fuel to the "WELFARE BUMS ARE RUINING OUR COUNTRY" fire.

[RATMfan1992]

I'm on one of these so called ''work programmes'' and recently i got sent to a recycling company to do a two month placement taking apart old electric items. I didn't complain much because it was only three hours in the morning and the job was easy going. I basically see it as a way of punishment for those who through no fault of their own have been made unemployed or sick/disabled, and are claiming social welfare. Let's think of it this way if you're a big company and you needed to employ some extra workers for work needing done would you advertise a proper paid job or get people to do the work for free from the workfare programme? easy choice, it's slave labour.