Welfare‐to‐Work, Structural Injustice and Human Rights

Abstract

This article discusses welfare-to-work schemes, places schemes with strict conditionality in the theoretical framework of structural injustice, and argues that they may violate human rights law. Welfare-to-work schemes are schemes that impose obligations on individuals to seek and accept work on the basis that otherwise they will be sanctioned by losing access to social support. The schemes are often presented as the best route out of poverty. However, the system in the UK, characterised by strict conditionality, has ended up coercing those who are poor and disadvantaged into precarious work, and conditions of in-work poverty. Because schemes with strict conditionality force people to work in these conditions, structures of exploitation are created and sustained, becoming widespread and routine. The article further situates the problem in the theoretical framework of structural injustice, and argues that a framework of 'state-mediated structural injustice' is the best way of explaining the wrong. It finally claims that this injustice violates principles that are enshrined in human rights law, which the authorities have an obligation to examine and address.

Which social security regime for platform workers in Italy?

“…Therefore, these schemes coerce "the poor and disadvantaged into precarious work, and conditions of in-work poverty" (Mantouvalou, 2020, p. 929). 58 According to Mantouvalou (2020) "forcing people to work in these conditions creates and sustains widespread and routine structures of exploitation". Moreover, welfareto-work schemes often do not (fully) consider the situation of those who are the most vulnerable, who can barely fulfil the entitlement conditions necessary to "deserve" the social benefit.…”

Structural injustice

“…Structural injustice theory is being used in bioethics and public health (Chung, 2012, 2021; Ganguli‐Mitra, 2013, 2017; Powers & Faden, 2019). Articles published in education (Unterhalter, 2008), social work (Clifford, 2013), law (Mantouvalou, 2020), and transitional justice (Balint, Evans, & McMillan, 2014) have all used the structural injustice approach. Any field that is concerned with structural inequalities, disadvantage or oppression, can utilize structural injustice theory.…”

“…The majority of secondary literature in this area takes Young’s conception of structural injustice and applies it to case studies, in order to illuminate the previously neglected structural aspects of a phenomenon. These range from the macro: gender inequality (Parekh, 2011), colonialism (Lu, 2011, 2017), climate change (Godoy, 2017); to more specific case studies, such as human egg freezing (Browne, 2018), labour migration in the EU (Nuti, 2019b), the ‘workfare’ scheme in the UK (Mantouvalou, 2020), undocumented care workers (Meghani & Eckenwiler, 2009), beauty standards (Widdows, 2021) and obesity (Schrempf, 2014). By in large, philosophers working on the application of the concept of structural injustice to various real‐world phenomena take Young’s conception for granted.…”

The Austerity of Lone Motherhood: Discrimination Law and Benefit Reform

“…Mantouvalou demonstrates that the work conditionality regime channels all people into exploitative work. 119 This is particularly pronounced for women, who already cluster into this type of employment. Lone mothers also suffer a greater gender pay gap.…”