Topic: Should we be obligated to work for the dole?

Assessment Notes

Topic: Should we be obligated to work for the dole?

My chosen debate: My chosen debate is whether the work for the dole policy addresses unemployment in Australia. The debate concerns whether the Dole program is the right response to unemployment or produces more harm to job seekers.

Stakeholders involved:

Stakeholders supporting the policy include the liberal party and independent studies.

The Liberal Party argues unemployed individuals should be obligated to give back to the community to earn government benefits (Abbot, 2000).

The Centre for Independent Studies backs the dole policy for its effective job readiness and skill development of job seekers (Sander, 2008).

Lecture Notes around the stance of these stakeholders supporting the policy

Lecture: Stakeholders supporting WFTD = Liberal party of Australia and centre of independent parties.

Tony abbot (2000), (Representative of liberal party): his view was on the logical grounds on the basis teaches us values, such as responsibility, self-reliance and neighbour less. Argues that moves people form thinking from whats in it for me and it fight for fair go and means not only what I deserve from you but what individuals deserve from the state or taxes and what you deserve from me.

Center for independent Studies: based more tangible benefits. Peter Sanders (2008) They agree that the main issue job readiness. Work for the dole works as a policy because it provides people with both confidence and job-hunting skills. It pushes people off and way from their reliance of benefit and forcing them to find work and may not find due to lacking of will (wanting). Ending the bad habit of idleness and instil good habits readiness for work by providing skills and training and allow to give back to the communities. Work for the dole make life on welfare less attractive especially when the alternative to this is low paid boring works. Studies have should great effectiveness.

Own words: They believe in mutual obligation as make the most political sense, that if the individual is getting support from the gov that they dont get it for free, they need to earn it through working like everyone else. The believe unemployment is an individual problem and is not the fault of the government but he individual because there is no fault in system but their individual themselves. It teaches values such as responsibilities and self-reliance and neighbourliness. These are bug part of the Australian tradition. The fair go- individual move from what you deserve from me mindset but instead will have responsibilities to the community and vice versa. In fair and light society, it is only reasonable that individuals give back what they take.

Stakeholders opposing includes the Evatt Foundation and Anglicare Australia.

Evatt Foundation argues against the flawed idea of mutual obligation, as it avoids addressing the lack of jobs and employment (Moss, 2001).

Anglicare Australia (2019) found the WFTD policy to be ineffective in addressing the real issue of unemployment.

Lecture Notes around the stance of these stakeholders supporting the policy

They take the stance on the ideological issue of citizenship and tend to side with older idea that the state should provide to individuals in times of need or the state should be responsible for managing risk. Questioned intangible term whether it produces tangible outcome in terms of useful training skills and eventually reemployment.

Jeremey Moss: makes 3 claims. 1st argues mutuals obligation is a flawed idea of citizenship (social contract between the individual and state. Those forced in obligation to give back have little agency in respect to their obligation to give back. Contracts should be freely entered into in any society that embodies liberal principles. That the work for the dole contract gives induvial no means is subsistence that it is not a free contract but based on cohesion. The circumstances that make the individual require assistance is usually out of the individuals control. Argues that the issue is the availability of jobs. 2nd closing of Australias manufacturing industries and off shoring of many jobs. Focuses more on the free market then the protecting the industry. 3rd he argues that obligation implies to the unemployed but does not extend to business and government and their obligation to provide a fair and robust labour market. Why should an unemployed person be obligated to give back in a society where business and government are not obligated to provide work which us sunder liberal thinking, they have offshored work. Argued that there is little tangible who are forced to work for the dole, this argued by the community centre.

Anglicare: WDTD or More Jobs (Anglicare Australia 2019): Argue the work for the dole has little effect on assisting unemployed individuals. As the issue is not the people who arent actively looking for work or dont have skills to find worm but that they are not enough jobs. Argues that the inability to find work is not induvial failing but structural issue. There also argue that most job seekers who obligated to find work are seeking work that is unskilled or low skilled because they are unskilled labours looking for unskilled or low skilled work. Many of these job seekers also face barriers to finding work such as not finish school, re-entering the work force after periods being out for a while and living in an area with limited opportunities and having a mental illness. Argues that there are not enough jobs and support ending work for the dole and replacing it with other policy initiative which include raising levels of welfare payment of unemployed people and person-centered models for finding work and emphasised that we must see unemployed as a structural problem

Key Issues of Work for the dole -Provided lectures that we must use

Who should be responsible for risks individuals or government?

Those for work for the dole believe individuals are responsible for the risks of unemployment. Whereas those against believe the state are responsible for the risks of unemployment. They believe that it is the government that should be managing these risks.

Lecture: Question is whether individuals or the state (government should be responsible for managing individual risk in respect to be able to support ourselves through working and wage. However, we all face risk that could impact these such as becoming ill, disabled, of have to care for someone or lose job and become redundant but income needed but from where or whom.

So, who should be responsible dealing with the risk unemployment? Should in unemployment be expected to look after ourselves or should the state look after us through policy innate by tax players. Should tax payers put our money in welfare in case unexpected circumstance occur the government will be able to look after us or should we keep our money to ourselves and when unexpected circumstances occur who should be able to look after ourselves

Which form of citizenship social democratic or neoliberalism (should welfare be an obligation or a right

Citizenship: is social contact between the people and government

Lecture: Question what do we think we owe the state and what does the state owe us?

Social democratic approach: emphasis the social, where welfare is a citizens right and paying taxes is a citizens duty. That we as a society are in this together and therefore are obligated to help each other. Those who are against the for work for dole think this

Neoliberal approach: where welfare is privilege a

nd individuals are encouraged to look after themselves. Those for work for the dole believe in mutual obligation

Mutual obligation: John Howard 1999, is an ongoing responsibility of government to support those who are in genuine need but in return should be obligated to give back to society. In other words, those who are unemployed receiving active income support should do their best to find work through undertaking these training to improve their skills allowing them to contribute back to their community.

Australians do have some sympathy with unemployed people resist the notion that they are all welfare cheats

Proposed in both Australia and New Zealand, welfare state has been suspended by a policy regime that no longer proclaimed the ideals of full employment and unverdal set

Who is to blame for unemployment? Individuals or labour markets

Lecture: who to blame for unemployment and the need to access unemployment benefits. Neoliberal: Those supporting the work for dole, tend support mutual obligation and emphasis individual responsibility as well as individual failings (it your fault you are unemployed). Opposition tends to emphasise on social responsibility in other words there is a greater social problem that frames employment and oppose mutual obligation and work for the dole. Do we need a safety net due to the unexpectedness of a pandemic and less workplace or should we as individuals be responsible for our own risk and know that the unexpected circumstances will happen and we need to prepare and retrain be flexible ourselves to take any available work they can in an economy where work/ employment is short

Does the work for the dole work as policy? Is it effective in achieving its aim to assist unemployed people?

Lecture: Debate regarding if it actually works and is decreasing unemployment figures and assisting unemployed individuals those supporting argue that is very successful and effective I, opposing argue that it is not effective and that it only punished the unemployed creates, stigmas and make it looked like the government is doing something

Note:The key issues that are bolded are the ones that I focused on in the first assignment

The second assignment require me to 'take a position' in this debate. Which of the major policy reform positions do you take (or do you take a different position)? You are required to explain your case and provide evidence to support it.

NOTE: the position I take is work for dole is not an effective policy solution to unemployment particularly the obligation to welfare benefits

I will also attach in the email a Policy position paper assessment pack that was provided by the lecture to follow as a guide while utilising the check list at the end using my chosen debate. Please read through. I will also attach Journal articles that were utilized in my first assessment that can help but feel free to find nay other relevant evidence and research available.

If you need further clarification please text me via whatsapp