Navigating indifference: Irish jobseekers’ experiences of welfare conditionality

Abstract

This paper analyses the impact of the intensification of work-related conditionality on the lived experience of jobseekers in Ireland. Post-crisis Ireland has witnessed the emergence of a definitive policy trajectory which seeks to enable a lifelong attachment to the labour force through work-related conditionality buttressed by sanctions. This mode of governing unemployment attempts a restructuring of the caseworker–claimant relationship through increased engagement, claimant adherence to mandatory conditions, and surveillance underpinned by potential reduction, suspension or loss of benefit. The paper provides a qualitative investigation of the lived experience of this impact through a thematic analysis of forty-two interviews with jobseekers in a county in the east of Ireland. The focus on the agency of jobseekers illustrates a system based on superficial engagement in which conditionality primarily operates as bureaucratic formality. This is reflective of a systemic indifference to claimants’ needs and circumstances, producing a performance of feigned compliance in response.

The Marketisation of Welfare-To-Work in Ireland

“…So, don't be submitting purple paper, or pink paper".' (Anna, service-user, 30s, Dublin) These service-users' experiences of a heavily routinised and 'work-first' oriented programme echo the lived-experiences of activation reported by claimants in other Irish studies (for example Finn, 2021;Whelan, 2022). There is, of course, always a danger that qualitative studies of this kind will invariably be skewed towards documenting the most negative of service-users' experiences.…”

“…This was to ensure that the sample captured a balance of service-users across different providers. A limitation of previous qualitative studies of people's experiences of JobPath is that they are focused almost entirely on people's experiences of services delivered by Turas Nua (Finn, 2021;J Whelan, 2021;Boland et al, 2022;Whelan, 2022). This stems from the locations of that research (Cork, Waterford, Wexford, and Kildare) which are all counties where Turas Nua is the only JobPath provider.…”

‘You had to be the Detective’: Implementing Workfare in British Employment Services

“…The workfare project in street-level practice Claimant non-compliance can take a variety of forms. It can occur directly, in public service interactions-in discreet, non-confrontational forms (Finn, 2021;Whelan, 2022: 87-104) or in overt, hostile forms (Fletcher and Flint, 2018). Non-compliance can occur indirectly, outside of public service interactions-in refusals of undesirable work or engagement in illicit/informal activity (Casey, 2021;Redman, 2021).…”

“I’m Not Worthless, I Do Help Society”: Exploring the Lived Experience of Community Placement in Activation Schemes

“…The literature has critiqued this rationale that implies the unemployed are responsible for their situation and reflects a morally charged construction of the weak agency of the welfare recipient that justifies the enforcement of conditionality and work requirements (Dean, 1995;Crespo Suarez and Serrano Pascual, 2007;Wright, 2012Wright, , 2016Fletcher, 2015). Research on the lived experience of these measures has critically signalled the impacts of conditionality on the well-being and living conditions of welfare recipients (Boland and Griffin, 2015a;Patrick, 2016Patrick, , 2017WelCond, 2018;Finn, 2021;Whelan, 2022). These measures are depicted as imposing standard rules and requirements on welfare recipients as a homogeneous category, ignoring specific needs and disadvantages (Reeves and Loopstra, 2017;Dwyer et al, 2020).…”