The Myth of the Work Shy

It seems to be fairly commonplace amongst the mainstream (read: right wing) media to place the blame for much of the unemployment firmly on the shoulders of the 'work shy' benefit scroungers or that the "the welfare system discourages Britons from seeking work, just as it punishes parents who stick together" (Daily Mail Online:2009). Rarely is any of the blame for why some people apparently feel disinclined to work apportioned to the employers of this nation. I have recently had first hand experience of the way companies are exploiting our workforce's dire need for a job as a way of getting away with poor pay, terrible working conditions and total disorganisation. 

My first example comes from a job I was recently offered with a marketing organisation working on behalf of some of the biggest UK charities doing door to door sales. Whilst the job itself was not one I considered myself to be 'above' after attending the 9hr (!) long job interview, I, and everyone I spoke to, agreed that I would be better off poor and eating Asda Smart Price Baked Beans for the rest of my university days than working there.

For starters, the role was commission only - £30 per person signed up to donate monthly. This apparently rewarded those who were the best sales people, and motivated others to improve their technique. Besides the moral ambiguity of becoming better at talking people who already sadly claimed they did not have a spare £6.50 a month (a surprisingly large number of people) out of what little spare cash they had, this simply didn't work. My partner for the 9 hour interview was a young woman who was apparently about to be promoted to manager for her fantastic sales record. In the day I was with her, she worked a total of 11 hours and took home £60 having only managed to secure 2 sign ups which averaged around £5.45 per hour. This is less than the minimum wage of £6.08 per hour for over 21s. On the very same day a new recruit to the company also worked 11 hours earning just £30 and another worked the same hours and took home nothing. Upon buying train tickets for the group to go and work Worthing, 3 out of the 4 people there had not enough money in their account to pay the £15, despite being paid less than a week previously. This was by no means the end to the shocking conditions I was told I was only too lucky to be offered. If you were lucky enough to make a sale, you were then expected to enter the person's house to sign the paperwork without any security measures to ensure your safety. I was also expected to attend 5 days worth of unpaid training before i took up the job and I was expected to wear suits or similar everyday. Altogether to work for this company I could potentially go on a very expensive shopping trip, give up 11 hours a day for work and then end up financially worse off for the experience. I suppose it could be argued that although the pay and conditions were pretty appalling, a job is a job and the work experience and life lessons I could learn from this would still be beneficial to me in the future. So yes, for future job applications I would have had an extra employer to add to my list and it is true that my customer service skills would probably have improved. However, this is little use to me and many others like me, who still have rent and bills to pay at the end of each month. What became apparent to me though, was that although I had the luxury of walking away from this job, somebody on Job Seekers Allowance would not. They would have been forced to take the job and potentially end up financially worse off for doing do. 

Even when I got a job with a high end retailer yet had to leave for health reasons (allergic to the cleaning fluid) the organisation and working conditions were poor. Although the pay was reasonable (£7.14 per hour) the organisation was shocking, training levels dangerous and staff satisfaction very low. Yet the company could get away with this, as people need jobs. A desperate workforce is a loyal workforce. Rule number 1 of a capitalists handbook.  

My experiences are by no means unique either. My boyfriend recently worked the Farnborough Air Show through a manual labour agency. On two occasions he showed up for a shift only to find no one there to work for and when he did work, he was given dangerously low training, encouraged to sexually harass female employees and left waiting in the pouring rain unnecessarily. So why didn't he tell them where to shove their job? Because he has rent to pay, a student loan to pay off and the Bank of Mum and Dad is dwindling. 

On a wider scale, another discovery was made in these jobs. In the advertising job, my fellow applicants included a woman with an MA in International Marketing and another with 10 years marketing experience. This was the best job they could get. In the the retail job, one woman had a degree in retail management, one was a graduate from Sheffield University with a first in Maths and one took the job simply because he needed the staff discount. This is what our economy has come to. 

We have a highly educated yet very desperate workforce; an employers wet dream. You are now expected to count your blessings if you are in a job at all and that the luxury of one that pays a living wage and treats you as a human being is one luxury we cannot afford. So it therefore hardly seems surprising that people aren't champing at the bit to accept any job that comes their way when this is what is out there to greet them. Appalling conditions, terrible pay and a general lack of respect: it's a scary world out there. Yet the likes of Tescos are being rewarded and applauded for taking on more people on a Workfare scheme and it is the so called work-shy shirkers who are having their benefits slashed to make work more appealing. What good is that going to do? Those who are in work are even more desperate to stay there as they cannot afford not to be and those who are out of work are just as desperately poor and even less willing to work as before. Unions will become weaker as desperate workers are unlikely to rattle the cages of their employers so everyone will suffer, unionised or not. 

Overall, punishing workers and rewarding employers for an economy rigged in favour of the latter is a recipe for disaster. We currently have an economy where work is not rewarding and the problem will only be made worse by reducing benefits. It can be psychologically damaging to be out of work, yet people aren't going to be thrilled about coming back to work when they can still suffer psychological damage in the form of stress from being over worked and severely underpaid. It is also rather damaging to self esteem if you are trained in engineering after studying for 16 years to get there, and are stuck behind a coffee machine. Yet the culprit here is larger than the employers who are reaping the benefits of this system, although they should not be totally absolved of responsibility. The culprit is capitalism. In a system where the powerful equal the rich, the poor will always be desperate for work and the working conditions and pay will reflect this. A safety net of the Welfare State will help, but when the main problem lies at the heart of our economic foundations, nothing but a total overhaul of the system will do. In the mean time, creating a living wage rather than minimum wage and keeping benefits to a good standard is a small step in the right direction. A workforce who can pay their bills is a workforce who will fight for better conditions for everyone, which overall will encourage and inspire people to enter the working world.