Menu
Ireland's political and cultural magazine
October 2016 4 9
he modern State is a hybrid, an
extraordinarily complex machine.
Beyond the well-established remit of
setting laws, collecting taxes and
managing international relations, the
Irish State has been involved in incarcerating
women and children, commemorating the past
and exploring outer space.
Often, the State is idealised as a sort of referee
who sets and implements rules for society,
although this occurs through the highly emo
-
tional process of politics. Separate from the State
there is the ‘economy’ and its ‘markets’, collec-
tions of individual actors who seek out their own
profit and desire. This separation is imaginary.
Arguably the welfare system is the greatest
creation of the State, alleviating the
vicissitudes of life whether age,
health or employment status,
by social solidarity. However,
recent years have seen the
transformation of the wel
-
fare office into a State-wide
Human Resources
department.
Nationwide, the ‘dole
office’ is now a contact point for
employers who want workers.
Within these offices, jobseekers are
instructed to apply for certain posts, accept
certain offers and take training courses. From
simply providing citizens with their entitle-
ments, the State has now become the
hand-maiden of the labour market, a match-
maker who can provide any employer with labour
power, anywhere, for any job. So, Ireland is rap-
idly developing a low-wage economy.
Obviously, a human resources department is
a reasonable thing within a large firm which
matches skills with tasks, managing the talents
of a diverse work force who voluntarily have con
-
tracts with management. It is unreasonable when
the State replaces the social safety net with a
human resources department, so there is no way
out of the company, bar emigration.
Perhaps this seems like a radical critique, but
really, this is government policy, announced in
Pathways to Work from 2012 to the end of the
FG/Labour coalition. Furthermore, it is reflected
in the jargon of economists and the ESRI who
stress the ‘supply side’ of labour, and the impor-
tance of ‘upskilling’, making people ‘work-ready’
or ‘maximising labour market participation’,
which basically translates into making jobseek-
ers take any job they are offered and giving them
compulsory courses, often of dubious benefit.
Refusal results in sanctions, the reduction or
suspension of welfare entitlements, which means
hunger, cold, debt and potentially homelessness.
Despite the falling unemployment rate, the num-
bers of people sanctioned continues to grow.
What are the consequences?
Firstly, the State facilitates exploit
-
ative employers. Short term,
part-time, insecure and high
pressure ‘precarious’ work
become compulsory. ‘Zero-
hour contracts’ or
‘if-and-when contracts’ are
an offer that jobseekers
can’t refuse, even if it is only
a few hours a week, without
guaranteed times.
At Waterford Institute of Tech-
nology, an ongoing research project
examines the experiences of jobseekers.
This year, in addition to pressure from the wel-
fare office, many reported being forced to accept
poor-quality employment. Of course, not all
employers are exploitative, but clearly employ-
ment law is not yet stringent enough to prevent
these kinds of abuses.
Several respondents described how they were
forced to accept unskilled work with no security
after spending years gaining qualifications.
While work was available, many reported hope-
lessness or despair about ever getting a full-time
job with a living wage. The new ‘normal’ was
shuttling between unemployment and poor-
quality work: “It’s kind of like a revolving door,
because one person is gone and another person
is put in their place”.
Secondly, hybrid mixtures of ‘work-experi-
ence’ and social service emerge. Those on social
welfare can be compelled to join up to schemes
which have little justification in terms of building
skills beyond keeping them ‘work-ready’. Within
these schemes, paid their basic entitlement and
a negligible top-up, jobseekers perform work for
the public good, like gardening, landscaping and
cleaning public areas. This used to be the pre-
serve of FÁS and now is contracted out to a host
of organisations.
This is publicly beneficial and necessary work,
but the State doesn’t pay the minimum wage for
it, much less offer full-time contracts. The tax-
payer gets an unfairly good bargain, because the
‘human resources department’ has extraordi-
nary control over jobseekers. These are not the
‘scroungers’ envisaged by tabloid newspapers,
but workers who support the State. Indeed, to
reverse the usual stereotype, it is now the State
that ‘sponges’ off the hard work of jobseekers!
Thirdly, there are long-term consequences. In
Ireland welfare entitlements have been reposi
-
tioned as ‘benefits’ only given to those who fulfil
their ‘contractual’ obligations, to seek work,
accept any offer and comply with the require
-
ments of the State-run human resources
department. This involves scrutiny, pressure and
threats, and occasionally harmful sanctions. All
of this assails the well-being of jobseekers, with
mental-health implications.
The State is inevitably involved in the labour
market, but should protect the common good
rather than being a human resources depart
-
ment for all employers. Jobseekers should not be
used as a reserve army of cheap labour for public
projects. Up-skilling and education should be
voluntary and high quality, rather than compul-
sory dead-end courses. Those who have
qualifications should be given supported oppor-
tunities, rather than faced with an offer they
can’t refuse.
Tom Boland and Ray Griffin lecture at Waterford
Institute of Technology and are the authors of
'The Sociology of Unemployment'
National
From simply providing citizens with their entitle-
ments, the State has now become the hand-
maiden of the labour market, a match-maker
and
To reverse the usual
stereotype, it is now the
State that ‘sponges’ off
the hard work of
jobseekers
