The quarterly figures released by the Office for National Statistics earlier this month show that the number of people unemployed has risen to 2.53 million – an increase of 27,000. This is the highest level of unemployment in the UK since 1994.
In November, the Government announced that anyone without a job who refuses community work, the offer of a job, or fails to apply for a job if advised to do so, will lose their benefits. This could be for between three months to three years, depending on their intransigence.
Almost regardless of the political arguments, or indeed the state of the public purse, there seems to be something out of kilter with Government policies. This push to make it better to be in work than out of it, is beginning to force the employment relationship into a transactional frame. This appears to completely work against the McLeod report and Government exhortation to businesses to “engage” employees.
This edict for the unemployed seems to imply that they would be willing to go to work purely to earn sufficient money to live.
So will ANY job will do for more than two and a half million people, just so they can get some money - whether earning a wage or keeping their benefits? The majority of academic studies on employee well –being and engagement talk about a sense of connection with their organisation, some elements of control in their job. They talk a lot less about the wage. I think that those forced into taking jobs won’t feel any sense of control and indeed, if they are asked to work for nothing, won’t even feel any sense of satisfaction that they have something in their pocket at the end of the month.
As for engagement – I wonder if this would be possible with people forced into jobs over which they have little choice and where potential poverty is the main motivation for applying.
