Suchergebnisse

EPDF and EPUB available Open Access under CC-BY-NC-ND licence.
This book assesses how the practice of contracting-out public employment services via competitive tendering and Payment-by-Results is transforming welfare-to-work in Ireland.
It offers Ireland's introduction of a welfare-to-work market as a case study that speaks to wider international debates in social and public policy about the role of market governance in intensifying the turn towards more regulatory and conditional welfare models on the ground.
It draws on unprecedented access to, and extensive survey and interview research with, frontline employment services staff, combined with in-depth interviews with policy officials, organisational managers and jobseekers participating in activation.

Over the past decade, social policy in Ireland has taken an increasingly 'workfarist turn'. This has proceeded through benefit cuts, tighter eligibility criteria for payments, and claimant activation via penalty rates for breaching new conduct conditions. However, key to understanding the post-crisis reconfiguration of welfare is not just the increasingly workfarist content of social policy but also how the delivery of public employment services has been reorganised through processes of marketisation and tightening performance management of delivery organisations and the staff who work within them. Positioning these governance reforms as processes of 'double activation', and drawing on survey and interview research with frontline staff working for agencies contracted by government to deliver activation, this study explores how frontline staff experience performance management as a disciplinary regime: the degree to which frontline workers are subject to management control and performance management in their jobs, what forms this takes, and how it shapes their field of action and choice. In so doing, the study draws attention to the ways in which the governance of caseworkers and the governance of claimants are inter-related, and the degree to which performance management regimes influence frontline practices to motivate the enforcement of workfarist policy practices.

Quasi-markets in employment services often follow social policy turns toward activation. Critics see this as no accident, arguing that marketization is intended to raise the odds that workfare policies will be implemented. Drawing on surveys of Irish frontline activation workers, this study harnesses a natural policy experiment whereby Ireland introduced a Payment-by-Results quasi-market alongside a parallel program contracted without outcomes-based contracting. Although the demandingness of activation remains modest in Ireland, the study finds that regulatory approaches are more common under market governance conditions, which in turn has been associated with significant workforce changes and stronger systems of performance monitoring.

Abstract
Since the financial crisis, Ireland's welfare state has been reorientated around a regulatory, 'work-first' activation model. Claimants now face penalty rates for non-compliance with activation requirements that have been significantly extended since 2009. Alongside these formal policy reforms, the organisations delivering Public Employment Services, and the modes by which they are commissioned, have also been reconfigured through a series of New Public Management style governance reforms, including, most notably, the creation of a quasi-market for employment services (JobPath) in 2015. This article addresses the intersection between activation and quasi-marketisation, positioning the latter as a form of 'double activation' that reshapes not only how but also what policies are enacted at the street level. It unpacks their shared logics and mutual commitment to governing agents at a distance through a behavioural public policy orientation, and reflects on the extent to which marketisation is capable of producing lower-cost but more responsive employment services.

Over the past decade, social policy in Ireland has taken an increasingly 'workfarist turn'. This has proceeded through benefit cuts, tighter eligibility criteria for payments, and claimant activation via penalty rates for breaching new conduct conditions. However, key to understanding the post-crisis reconfiguration of welfare is not just the increasingly workfarist content of social policy but also how the delivery of public employment services has been reorganised through processes of marketisation and tightening performance management of delivery organisations and the staff who work within them. Positioning these governance reforms as processes of 'double activation', and drawing on survey and interview research with frontline staff working for agencies contracted by government to deliver activation, this study explores how frontline staff experience performance management as a disciplinary regime: the degree to which frontline workers are subject to management control and performance management in their jobs, what forms this takes, and how it shapes their field of action and choice. In so doing, the study draws attention to the ways in which the governance of caseworkers and the governance of claimants are inter-related, and the degree to which performance management regimes influence frontline practices to motivate the enforcement of workfarist policy practices.

Within months, Covid-19 has fundamentally reconfigured the relationship between the market and the state in Ireland. The 'Great Lockdown' has administered a shock to global patterns of production and consumption not seen since the Great Depression (Gopinath, 2020) causing unprecedent levels of job-loss. In Ireland, the hardship of this job-loss has been partially cushioned by the social security response to the crisis, and the introduction of a Pandemic Unemployment Payment. For the hundreds of thousands of citizens receiving this and related payments, welfare has replaced market earnings as their means of subsistence. This is a major adjustment not only in the economic lives of these citizens but also in the 'productivist' footing of Ireland's welfare state.

AbstractWithin recent public policy and administration scholarship, there has been a growing focus on the concept of "administrative burden" to describe the learning, compliance and psychological costs incurred by citizens when trying to access services and exercise social and political rights. Specifically, in the context of activation and welfare‐to‐work programmes, scholars have highlighted the effects of administrative burdens on claimants' autonomy, dignity and well‐being. We bring critical social policy scholarship on administrative harm into conversation with Adam and Balfour's concept of "administrative evil" to highlight the underlying dynamics of masking, moral inversion and dehumanisation that facilitate street‐level workers to adopt dispositions of enforcement of administrative burdens. To illustrate the applicability of Adam and Balfour's work to understanding how experiences of administrative burden can be intensified by the practices and dispositions of street‐level workers, we draw on examples of from an ethnographic study of the delivery of welfare‐to‐work in Australia.

Public employment services (PES) have undergone significant change since 2011, reshaping the roles of the market, state, and community sector within Ireland's mixed economy of welfare. The post-crisis years saw the replacement of FÁS with a new network of one-stop-shop Intreo activation services, and the procurement of new employment services for the long-term unemployed through competitive tendering and Payment-by-Results. This process of marketisation is now being extended to other PES currently delivered by community organisations under block grants, such as Local Employment Services and Job Clubs. We position Ireland's PES landscape as a strategic action field wherein various providers compete with one another for position, power and resources during episodes of contention. Applying this lens to the ongoing reform of activation policy and PES institutions, the paper considers how the recent trajectory of PES marketisation has remained politically contentious. It examines the strategies of various providers and policy actors in shaping the politics of reform, focusing especially on the position of community organisations within the field and the degree to which they have been able to strategically mobilise against marketisation. Lessons are drawn about the nature of Irish politics and policy reform.

Contemporary models of welfare capitalism have frequently been critiqued about their fit-for-purpose in provisioning for people's basic needs including care, and longer-term ecological sustainability. The Covid-19 pandemic has also exposed the need for better institutions and a new welfare architecture. We argue a post-productivist eco-social state can deliver sustainable well-being and meet basic needs. Arguing Universal Basic Services are an essential building block and prerequisite for a de-commodified welfare state, we focus on examining the form of income support that might best complement UBS. The article develops, from the perspective of feminist arguments and the capabilities approach, a case for Participation Income. This, we argue, can be aligned with targeted policy goals, particularly reward for and redistribution of human and ecological care or reproduction and other forms of socially valued participation. It may also, in the short term, be more administratively practical and politically feasible than universal basic income.