Back to Work - how, when and why?

With huge rises in UC claims, many thousands on furlough, and vacancy rates plummeting, there is going to be a long and complex challenge to support people back to work over the coming months and years. It is likely that some people currently on furlough will face redundancy as the government scheme scales back later in the summer, before its planned end in the autumn. Job-seeking conditions for UC claimants have been relaxed for now, but are unlikely to stay that way for long.

Although we’ve seen large numbers of people unemployed before, the picture we’re going to be faced with later this year is likely to be more complex than any in recent memory. Some sectors haven’t contracted, so they haven’t laid off any workers; some are all but non-existent at present. Some sectors will bounce back relatively easily, others may never recover.

For some people, a speedy return to work might be possible, if they have a solid work history and transferable or in-demand skills. Others, particularly those with additional barriers such as health conditions or who have already been unemployed for a long time, will struggle to find a way forward. The picture will be different for different demographics, and there will be big geographic variances. Finding a way through this maze will be extremely challenging for individuals and organisations providing employment support.

There will be pressure from many sides to deliver back-to-work programmes that shift large quantities of people into work as quickly as possible. That’s likely to be DWP’s preferred model, to rapidly reduce their claimant count and minimise the number of contracts they have to design and manage. Judging by the biggest welfare to work programme of recent years, the Work Programme, this will probably result in a pretty formulaic offer to individuals, delivered by large providers focused on numbers rather than quality of outcomes.

However, given this period has enabled many of us to reassess how, when, where and why we work, should we not subject job-seeking and welfare to work to the same critiques?

We know that programmes driven by high-volume, low-cost imperatives are of limited value, particularly to those who need more than the most basic provision. Many thousands of people spent two years on the Work Programme and came out the other end no closer to sustainable employment.

There is evidence demonstrating the importance of one-to-one support, tailored to and with the individual, working with them as a whole person rather than just treating the lack of employment as a standalone issue. These approaches are often delivered by small, specialist providers rather than large national prime contractors. But they cost, in time and frontline staff to work one on one or in small groups.

Overall, very few employment support programmes, regardless of scale, cost, or approach ever manage to achieve sustained job outcomes for even half of their participants. There are pockets of innovation within this field, but there are rarely any big leaps forward in policy or practice.

This all points to some big questions that need to be asked of any future welfare to work and employment support programmes, particularly those coming from DWP. Should there be proper investment in rigorous testing of genuinely innovative approaches? Who should deliver programmes, how, and to whom? Should the focus be on volume and speed, or personalisation and job quality? When should job-seeking conditions be re-introduced to UC (if ever)? What role should technology play, seeking to balance concerns around privacy and ethics with potential gains in targeting or labour market information?

Given the scale and speed of the incoming recession, these questions may well be left unanswered, missing an opportunity for real progress.

(c) Anna Dent 2020. I provide social research, policy analysis and development, writing and expert opinion, and project development in Good Work and the Future of Work / In-Work Poverty and Progression / Welfare benefits / Ethical technology / Skills / Inclusive growth