Making welfare conditional: A street‐level perspective

Abstract

This article looks at how welfare conditionality is delivered at the street level. It argues that the street‐level delivery of welfare conditionality is structured by policies, the governance context in which workers deliver welfare conditionality, the organization in which they work, and the occupation they are part of. Characteristics of these contexts present street‐level workers with a variety of signals and incentives that direct their decision making. The article elaborates on this proposition on the basis of a review of academic studies analysing the street‐level delivery of various aspects of welfare conditionality: the use of sanctions, service personalization, and the treatment of vulnerable clients. The review shows that context characteristics together have a significant impact on the street‐level transformation of welfare conditionality policies into practices. Street‐level decision making concerning the use of sanctions is far more complex than can be captured by a perspective on street‐level workers as merely policy implementers. Sanctioning practices are sometimes harsher, sometimes more lenient than policies lead us to expect. The “soft” side of welfare conditionality—represented by service personalization—is often under pressure at the street level, potentially strengthening welfare conditionality's tough side. This affects vulnerable jobseekers most: Street‐level studies show that the balance between disciplining and enabling aspects of welfare‐to‐work is most at risk for more vulnerable groups. The article concludes that the contextual pressures street‐level workers have to deal with in their daily work hardly reflect the “delicate equilibrium” that they need to deliver welfare conditionality in a professional, responsive, and responsible way.

Hva gjør individuell tilpasning av aktivitetskrav utfordrende?

“…Tilsvarende kan det, som nevnt over, vaere konkurrerende hensyn som forventes å bli vektlagt. Mål-og tiltaksstyring har som formål å legge føringer på praksis i frontlinjen og skal bidra til å vri oppmerksomheten mot visse hensyn, som ofte også skal rapporteres (Fossestøl, Berg, Borg, Gleinsvik, Maximova-Mentzoni & Pedersen 2016;Roaldsnes 2018;Van Berkel 2020). Denne type hensyn kan komme i konflikt med ambisjonen om å individualisere aktivitetskravene.…”

“It’s not even the leaders out here who have any say at all in how long they’re gonna have to wait”: A study of waiting time, power, and acceptance

“…However, when and how frontline workers use these tactics depends on the context of the frontline work (Caswell et al, 2017; Van Berkel, 2020). In contexts where frontline workers have to enforce vaguely specified rules, or when they share socioeconomic characteristics with citizens, studies show that they use their discretion to make decisions that vary on a case-by-case basis (Dubois, 2010; Maynard-Moody and Musheno, 2003; Schram et al, 2009).…”

“…Moreover, similar to activation policies in the US and UK (see e.g., Brodkin, 2017; Soss et al, 2011a, 2011b; Sainsbury, 2017), the aim was to solve the “passivity” of the unemployed by imposing work obligations upon them (Nielsen, 2014, 2019). However, citizens and frontline workers encounter each other in a unique organizational and occupational context (see Caswell et al, 2017; Van Berkel, 2020), which makes waiting time a salient feature of the activation. Frontline workers with little formal social work education manage citizens several hours everyday for more than three months.…”

Street-Level Judgements about Welfare Deservingness: How Jobcentre Advisors Decide about the Individual Mix of ‘Support’ and ‘Demand’ in the Delivery of Activation Policies

“…Given the fact that social and labour market policies are put into practice in welfare organisations, professional judgements about welfare deservingness are a crucial aspect in the implementation of activation policies. Street-level workers in welfare organisations transform policies into practice, and their practices make a difference in shaping what policies mean for the individual (van Berkel, 2019). Moreover, in personal encounters with welfare organisation staff, citizens experience the concrete functioning of the welfare state (Dubois, 2014).…”