Worklessness

04/06/2009 1:50 pm

The renewal.net definition of Worklessness is its simplest form used to describe those without work. It can also be deemed as unemployment claimants; those who are out of work and looking for a job; and those who are economically inactive’.

The Social Exclusion Unit’s definition is – ‘people who are unemployed or economically inactive and who are in receipt of working age benefits’ and that worklessness is the sum of working age people who are unemployed and persons of working age who are economically inactive.

The Job Centre Plus’s definition is – ‘Worklessness is a less familiar term than unemployment and extends beyond the unemployed. It includes those who are economically inactive, that is those who are of working age not in work; full time education or training; and those not actively seeking work’.

The New Deal for Communities defines worklessness as ‘those who are unemployed or economically inactive and in receipt of benefits’.

The Department of Work and Pensions define a workless household as ‘a household where no adults are in paid employment’ and worklessness as ‘people of working age who are not in formal employment but who are looking for a job (the unemployed), together with people of working aged who are neither formal employed nor looking for formal employment (the economically inactive).’

Take your pick!

04/06/2009 8:24 pm

I would certainly think that the word "Worklessness" means someone who is idle, a more correct word would be "Workshy" often associated with those claiming long term benefits and note Alan Savage attempts to justify how those on benefits, keep themselves busy doing volunteering work. I think the word he omits is on the lump or otherwise known as the "black Trade" where people who are in receipt of benefits do work for cash in hand. As for those in receipt of any form of disability or incapacity benefit, they are only allowed in certain circumstances to do work that is therapeutic, this does not mean supplementing their benefits with cash in hand.

The Government certainly have recognised that the Country cannot sustain the rising numbers who claim incapacity benefit and Disability Living Allowance, that is the obvious reason for scrapping incapacity benefit and introducing a benefit that will keep a check on all claimants to ensure they are not slinging the lead and why not, there are too many in the system who are forgotten and who abuse it I would also like to hear views on how someone who is on sickness benefit, incapacity benefit or DLA, can do voluntary work, or stand or serve as a Councillor, yet cannot work because they are too sick.

08/06/2009 11:07 am

@ Alan, I agree, most jargon is strange.
In some ways worklessness is a helpful piece of jargon, because it refers to people who are not in formal employment without suggesting they are econimically inactive. Someone may be economically inactive in benefit terminology but they are not necessarily economically inert.
People may receive money which is spent in the community, they may also be contributing to the community in a caring or voluntary capacity which may not be recognised economically but undoubtedly has a value.

10/06/2009 0:12 am

Joe Halewood...Tue, 9 Jun 2009 21:54 GMT... I strongly agree with your posting... i know institution need to classify people for their statitistics purposes... I only hope the general public is intelligent enough to realise, that's all it it is, statistics and most of them meaningless... In a recession with 3,000,000 of unemployed, that the authorities and powers to be should use terms as 'worklessness' for those out of work is an outrageous and insensitive insult to millions of decent and already victimised citizens who finds tghemselves on the old dole.

11/06/2009 3:09 pm

There seems to be widespread agreement on two points here. The first is that "unemployed" and "workless"are not the same or are interchangeable. The second is that the term "worklessness" is used wrongly - for wahtever reasons???- to describe and label the unemployed.

One final point - I agree the govt stated there were many people economically inactive, such as those with health conditions. I also recall govt stating they should get help and support in finding employment wherever possible- as an aim. Yet I fail to recall any such funding for such initiatives to make that aim a reality.

19/06/2009 8:55 am

Quote: Thank you all, I'm now not only older, but wiser...

You are right Christopher, we live and learn, but as far as a huge number of Worklessness are concerned, some learn faster than others how to bend the system

30/06/2010 10:38 am

Joe Halewood : "Yet I fail to recall any such funding for such initiatives to make that aim a reality."

That is understandable Joe, but there are significant number of commercial companies making a great deal of money from Government contracts, delivering such initiatives.

I recently met a Director of one such company, paying themselves £120k p.a. They would claim 'Payment by Results' of course

TL

30/06/2010 11:18 am

The term "worklessness" needs to be applied to understand its malevolent intent in creating that term.

There is no better topic that the HB cap and cutting proposals in which those who are "workless" are being blamed for the state paying some very unscrupulous profiteering private landlords £50k a year in HB.

The HB cuts (or alleged cuts) are all aimed and quite rightly so at reducing the burgeoning HB bill.  Yet why blame tenants and in particular workshy or workless tenants for private landlords holding the state to ransom.  Worklessness is a very convenient term to use for blame yet the HB bill is rocketing because of the scarcity of social housing and the private landlords coming in to meet demand and charging the earth for it.

As i've said elsewhere its not the odd thousand or so London HB tenants that make the HB bill increase, its the 70% extra they charge nationally over and above what councils charge - £109pw rather than £65pw in the latest official national figures.  Over 1.2m people per week at £45 extra is the real cause of the HB bill spiralling not the isolated few at £5ok per annum.

Worklessness was designed and invented to be used as a convenient scapegoat and also to shift blame away from central government (of any persuasion) for their role in creating jobs and the conditions for work.

We will always have some people who take the mickey out of the system and who are reluctant to work or even hell bent on not working.  Im not making any excuses or apologies for them and they are a parasitic element.  Yet they are not to blame for the HB bill spiralling - that is due to a much bigger parasite - the massively profiteering private landlords that nobosy is pointing the finger at because "worklessness" makes an easier target however erroneously the reality.