Welfare Policy

Welfare policies for unemployed youth

This essay will evaluate welfare policies for unemployed youth; the current state of the Australian social welfare system and the policies embedded into it, has been a topic of controversial debate for several decades. I will thus be arguing that the current welfare policies in place for unemployed youths is failing the recipients, as a ‘one size fits all’ approach is being adopted by unemployment service organisations (Marston and McDonald, 2008, p. 260). With the Youth allowance payment not being enough to sustain a basic standard of living, in conjunction with the inadequateness of services being provided, it is creating implications for recipients, as policies that are in place allow for payments

Mandatory requirements to agree to an additional activity in return for receiving payments was imposed on young unemployed people aged 18 to 24 years receiving a benefit for six or more months. The Commonwealth Employment Service was abolished in 1998 and was soon replaced by Job Network, whereby agencies were contracted out to assist people in moving back into the workforce. Job seekers were required to fulfil certain activity test requirements by participating in schemes such as Work for the Dole and attending appointments (Carson & Kerr, 2014, p. 185). There were flaws seen in Job Network’s ability to provide sufficient assistance to disadvantaged people, as they were often not receiving as much help as the ‘motivated job seekers’ (Carson & Kerr, 2014, p. 186). Though, failure to comply with Job Network’s requirements resulted in penalties such as payments being withheld. In 2009, Job Network was replaced with Job Services Australia, this program operated very similarly as Job Network in the sense that Work for the Dole and its strict policies were still in place; in spite being labelled ‘by critics as a failed scheme’ (Carson & Kerr, 2014, p. 188). A study conducted by Marston and McDonald (2008, p. 257) on 75 long-term young unemployed people found that 90 percent of participants, had reported that their lack of ability to obtain and retain meaningful employment had a psychological

The adequacy of the current payment was brought into question when in 2012 the Youth allowance payment was so low that people receiving the benefit found it difficult to meet the conditions of the payment; this resulted in Job Services Australia being unable to provide sufficient services to job seekers (Carson & Kerr, 2014, p. 189). The then Federal Employment and Workplace Relations Minister, Bill Shorten, argued that an increase in benefit ‘could lead to welfare dependence’ (Carson & Kerr, 2014, p. 189); regardless at that point there had been no noted increase in the payment in past years. An article published in the Australian newspaper, written by Karvelas (2013) found that at the time the article was written, an increase in the current unemployment benefit was under review; however recipients were warned that ‘it must remain a short term payment’ to avoid long-term welfare dependence (Karvelas 2013). Opposition families spokesman Kevin Andrews acknowledged that the then Labour government at the time had significantly reduced funding for training programs, which created implications for recipients to gain employment (Karvelas 2013). At the time, it was stated that a review of the payment was on the agenda, as it had been an issue that has drawn a significant amount of community interest. In spite of all this information coming to