‘the good, the bad and the ugly’: welfare reform and the work capability assessment dr donna...

‘The Good, the Bad and the Ugly’: Welfare reform and

the Work Capability Assessment

Dr Donna Reeve (Independent researcher)Dr Karen Soldatic (University of New South Wales)

Normalcy Conference,Chester University, 26-27 June 2012

2

Introduction Builds on work of Karen Soldatic Welfare reform and the Work

Capability Assessment Experience of the WCA through the

stories of Sally and Katherine Disabled people as ‘good, bad or

ugly’ … work makes you normal


3

Employment, welfare reform and disabled people Government anti-poverty strategy:

Incapacity Benefit (IB) replaced by Employment Support Allowance (ESA) from 2008

One million people on IB to find employment No concept of ‘partial capacity’ to work

‘Scroungerphobia’: media harassment of disabled people (Piggott & Grover, 2009)

Distinguishing between the “‘bad backs’ and the ‘genuinely disabled’” (Alan Johnson, DWP)


4

The Work Capability Assessment (WCA) Key part of welfare reform/neoliberal workfare New WCA sorting people into

‘no limited capability’ (JSA/work group) ‘some limited capability’ (WRAG group = work-focussed

interviews and regular assessment) Too ‘sick or disabled’ (support group) Production of hierarchy of disabled people according to

employability (Grover & Piggott, 2010) WCA is a technology of governance used by ATOS Harrington report (2010, 2011) highlights

problems with WCA, government slow to respond April 2012 for new ESA claimants: 54% fit to

work, 19% WRAG and 27% support group (DWP, 2012)


5

Background to research Karen Soldatic – visiting International

British Academy fellow at Lancaster/CeDR Study aimed to highlight the

intersectionality of rurality, disability and gender under welfare reform

Focus group + 7 interviews with disabled women in NW England

Rural themes missing in data – overshadowed by concerns about ongoing changes to ESA


6

Case study: Katherine Developed osteoarthritis/spinal stenosis Social worker for 34 years Disabled husband and daughter, cared for

terminally ill mother Now lives alone Applied for ESA, attended WCA (0 points) Recently changed to 15+ when sent in

appeal form (without going to appeal), now in WRAG


7

Case study: Sally Worked for 27 years before claiming IB

when developed rheumatoid arthritis Lives with family, husband in paid

employment (part of interview) After 10 years on IB now being migrated

across to ESA Initial letter indicated this benefit

change was ‘in name only’ WCA outcome placed her in the WRAG

group, now appealing


8

WCA: Tool of surveillance … ‘Staged’ assessment Starts with journey to ATOS office: Temporality test

(Soldatic, 2012) Geography of ATOS office“You go in there completely honest and open and yet

the first question is 'how did you get here?' As if, if you've got there by yourself then you have absolutely no right to be here and I just kind of looked at her. 'A friend gave me a lift.' 'Well where did she drop you off?' It's like the Spanish inquisition over something as --. And then the stairs and the lift obviously and how did you negotiate entrance, did you use the stairs or did you use the lift? How long did it take you to get from --? And I just was stunned.” (Katherine)


9

WCA: Tool of surveillance (cont’d)

Camera surveillance“Everything's recorded. There's cameras in

the waiting rooms, everywhere, it's all, everything that you say can be heard, they can see everything that you do even before you go in there. The doctor actually comes out for you and watches you walk in. You go in, and as I say, it's the same, the lower chairs, chairs with no arms.” (Sally)


10

WCA: Crude ‘sorting hat’ … Disembodied assessor“She could have been anybody, she could've just been a

cassette that they'd plugged in (laughter) because there was no, absolutely no human contact at all apart from when she went [mimics dropping pen]. (laughs) It's like something off the telly!” (Katherine)

Binary nature of assessment“There's no grey areas, is there? There's no anything in

between.” (Katherine)

Use of words e.g. ‘Cannot do’ or ‘refuse to do’?

“And she said, 'I'll have to record that you refused.' I says, 'But I didn't refuse to do it.' I said 'I told you I can't, I can't do it.' “ (Katherine)


11

WCA: Crude ‘sorting hat’ (cont’d)

Failure to take account of fluctuating conditions, pain, fatigue“Because the questions are the same for everybody

and every disease. It's a set list of what he's got to ask and it's all ordered up on his computer.” (Sally)

Concentrates on functional abilities rather than capabilities for work

Misrepresentation of information“The question is, it's one of the questions, ‘How did you

get here today?' I said ‘Well I dropped her off outside'. He said 'what just outside round the corner?' 'Just outside the door.' But of course, the report came, 'husband brought his wife and they parked the car 50 metres away‘.” (Sally’s husband)


12

WCA: A (re)productive outcome

“If you can go in, clued-up and know how to play the system instead of being honest and upfront, you get it. And it's like I said, it's not anything to do with the money, it's they've got people, me included, they make you feel as though you're scroungers. [cut] The people who are doing all these, these ATOS doctors, and then looking at the tribunal results and they've got us thinking that 'I'm a fraud'.” (Sally)


13

WCA: Acts of erasure Erasing impairment“On the bottom of the report, the doctor that had done my

assessment -- they don't call them medicals, they're assessments -- because it doesn't even need to be a doctor, it just needs to be a medical professional. [cut] 'It will improve within 12 months with medication.' I says, ‘Oh I can't wait, I'm going to be better'. It's an absolute farce.” (Sally)

Erasing the unreliable body - lack of questions about pain/fatigue/lack of sleep “Something that sits uncomfortably outside the box” (Katherine)


14

Summary WCA as technology of governance Techniques of surveillance in WCA

(temporal/spatial/camera) Measures functionality not capability for work

(Harrington, 2011) Sorting of disabled people as good (entitled), bad

(fraud/fit to work) or ugly (‘entitled fraud’) Importance of access to information/support

ESA via WCA supports certain impaired bodies/minds: The ‘deserving sick’ (support group, predictable

impairments, incontinence scores highly – uncontained body)

Those with the potential to work (predictable bodies, nearest to autonomous neoliberal body) who will get enough points to score above 15 and enter WRAG)

But erases unpredictable bodies/minds (WCA < 15)


15

Contact details

Dr Donna ReeveE-mail: [email protected]

Dr Karen SoldaticE-mail: [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

‘the good, the bad and the ugly’: welfare reform and the work capability assessment dr donna...

Documents