News blog

Workfare: Shiv Malik and James Ball answer your questions

Guardian reporter Shiv Malik answers your questions after the ruling government's employment schemes were unlawful
Join Shiv Malik at lunchtime to talk about the government work schemes ruling Photograph: Dominic Lipinski/PA

On Tuesday judges ruled that the government's "work-for-your-benefit" employment schemes were unlawful - meaning thousands of unemployed people could be entitled to financial rebates totalling millions.

The story started with the Guardian back in November 2011 after we appealed for unemployed people to come forward with their stories of working on government work schemes.

Cait Reilly, a 24-year-old geology graduate, wrote in to the Guardian with her story of being forced to work in Poundland, and many others told of similar schemes and injustices.

Shiv Malik, the Guardian's reporter who broke and has followed the story, answers your questions on how the story came about and developed as well as what this new ruling means for thousands of young people. James Ball was also in the thread answering questions. Do get in touch on if you are directly affected.

FrankTheFrank asked:

Who will pay these financial rebates and will they equal the minimum per hour wage?

shivmalik1 replies:

Shiv Malik

@FrankTheFrank - Well no, the rebates will relate to those who have ben sanctioned by the DWP.

In this case sanctions mean those who have had their JSA (and other benefits) stopped because they failed in some way or another to take part on "work for your benefit" placements.

This includes those on the Work Programe so it does involve tens of thousands of people dating back a few years at least.

NumbingInevitability asks:

Perhaps a bit personal a question, but I had a three month sanction for not attending Mandatory Work Activity in June. Might I be able to claim my JSA back for that period, or is the ruling for a different scheme? There seem to about five different names for essentially the same thing.

James Ball answers:

James Ball

@NumbingInevitability - I'm afraid Mandatory Work Activity is the one scheme not affected by yesterday's rulings, and so your sanction won't be affected. Apologies.

You're right that there are a lot of similar schemes. I did a guide to how five of them work a few months ago, which you can find here


Hi there Shiv, really looking forward to this discussion today!

I'm a Solicitor in Norwich and I've been following this topic for quite a while now with interest as my practice covers Employment Law. I've found that I get asked a lot by young people about their rights concerning Interning and Internships as many seem to work for nothing in organisations that by law should be paying for their time and efforts.

I have found it difficult to point them in the direction of people that can help them for free (as most of them are graduates or students), I have been suggesting they go to the C.A.B. but I would like to be able to offer them some more specific options.

Are there any recommendations you could make?

- Gordon.


@GordonDean As regards internships, which is related to this subject more generally (i.e. unpaid work) then yes I would recommend people getting in touch with Gus Baker from Interns Aware.

They are a brilliant organisation but as the law stands (though it is more complicated than this of course) if people work - they should be paid under National Minimum wage laws.

Our latest story on this is here:

The main exclusions are government run schemes such as Work Experience and Work Programme placements which are deliberately exempted from NMW laws.

SloggerEric asked:

How much of the welfare budget is actually going to welfare-to-work providers such as A4E or TCV?

Do they receive public or private money for putting people within work experience placements?

What incentives are there for these providers to prioitise the interests of the unemployed over businesses?

JamesRBall replies:

@SloggerEric - These programmes are quite expensive – and in theory could be lucrative for the providers – but currently make up a relatively low % of the welfare budget.

The way it works (for the Work Programme at least) is A4E and co get a payment as soon as they find an attachment (paid work etc) for someone, and then an additional payment if they're still in the job after six months.

The difficulty for A4E and co is they're not doing a very good job getting people in to work. Their target is 5.5%, and they're only hitting 3%. So a lot of the providers are actually losing money.

In its first year, A4E got about £41m from the DWP, according to Channel 4. That means we paid about £13k per placement they secured.

pennyanderson asks:

Hi! Workfare and Universal Credit make for unhappy companions, as part-time workers might be forced to take more hours in unsuitable jobs. Tory minister said they were using state support finance hobby... This might include part time Jobcentre workers. Thoughts?

JamesRBall replies:

@pennyanderson - tax credits create a strange mix of issues. It's hard to oppose the principle of supporting people in low-paid, part-time jobs to have enough money to feed and clothe their families with. And that's clearly the intention of the system.

The downside is, it means employers can find candidates for minimum-wage jobs with a small number of guaranteed hours per week, which on their own no-one could live off. If tax credits didn't exist, these jobs would almost certainly have to be better paid. So in effect, tax credits serve as a subsidy to businesses which pay low wages.

The decision comes on whether that's a trade-off we're happy to make.

What you've correctly identified is that Universal Credit could be used to try to wean people off tax credits by 'encouraging' or even compelling people to apply for jobs on a higher number of hours per week. That seems to me quite intrusive to people in work. I'm not sure it would be well-received by the public.

It's also possible when people in work and out-of-work receive the same support, under the same name, it'll be harder to use "strivers vs skivers" as a wedge. We'll see.

HeilCameron asks:

Hi Shiv, thanks for coming on here to answer questions. Regarding back payments, will people who have been sanctioned by the DWP be able to claim all their money back if the claimant refused to go on a Workfare course. The reason I ask is because after the ruling yesterday, Mark Hoban said that no money would be paid back. It's my understanding that the ruling affects everyone who was sanctioned before that date. Even if Hoban changes the legislation it will only affect future Workfare claimants, not past. What's your take on it?

shivmalik1 replies

@HeilCameron - Here's one earlier answer from me which tackles some of the points.

As for what Hoban says, the DWP will have to pay out rebates after all legal avenues are exhausted. I can't see how lawfully they could do otherwise.

The obvious remaining legal avenue is a Supreme Court appeal though they could well decline an appeal given the strength of teh initial judgment.

And yes you're right. Anyone sanctioned as part of not "working for your benefits" before 12 Feb 2013 will be entitled to a rebate following a sanction.

At a rough calculation the total payout would be several millions at least.

FrankPembleton asks:

Is there any statistical evidence of the successes and/or failures of the workfare programme? I guess my question is, is there any evidence that it got people into long-term, full-time employment?

shivmalik1 replies:

@FrankPembleton - Yes. The programme for example that Jamie Wilson was on has been evaluated here:

The summary is that whilst it helped 'soft outcomes' such as people's self confidence (and this is very important) it did not help them get into work.

mattylan asks:

I dont know how much of a question this is, but as someone who was out of work for 6 months following being laid off i did this unpaid employment (altough i did resent it at the time) the reality was the placement they put me on gave me evan more skills and a really good refernece and actually got a job within a week of finishing my placement, it also helped get out of a slump in my life and more of a kick up the a*se. i dont actually think this is such a bad thing when done properlly so i hope there not scrapping this scheme altogether?

JamesRBall replies:

@mattylan - I think it's good to note some people really do find these schemes helpful – including some who initially really hated being put on them (I've had emails from a few).

They won't be scrapping the schemes. At the minute they've signalled they intend to continue them unchanged – the steps they need to take to make them legally sound are relatively simple.

Thanks for all those who took part. The webchat is now closed.

Today's best video