The Staggers

The New Statesman’s rolling politics blog

Syndicate contentRSS

Workfare goes underground as Holland and Barrett pull out

DWP pitches for small businesses instead

Chris Grayling, Minister for Work and Pensions. Photograph: Getty Images
Chris Grayling, Minister for Work and Pensions. Photograph: Getty Images

Holland and Barrett, one of the largest companies using unpaid workers from the government's various employment schemes, has pulled out, citing the bad press and in-store protests its participation prompted. It will now pay its workers on through government's apprenticeship program, guaranteeing them a wage of at least £2.60 per hour.

The company made the announcement on its Facebook page, writing that:

At Holland & Barrett, we take our responsibilities as a retailer and employer very seriously, and any possible compromise to the safety of our staff and customers from opponents of our work experience scheme is treated with great importance.

This factor, together with the planned introduction of a new full time, salaried apprentice scheme, means that the 60 people currently undertaking the work experience scheme will be the last to complete the eight week placement. After this time Holland & Barrett will not participate further in that scheme.

Speaking to Shiv Malik at the Guardian, Solidarity Federation (Sol Fed)'s Jim Clark, one of the organisers of the series of protests, responded:

Holland & Barrett's claim that pickets of stores could offer a possible compromise to the safety of staff and customers is completely baseless. On our pickets, the first people we spoke to were the staff, many of whom told us they agreed with the aim of our campaign and that overtime was no longer available in some stores as it was being done by unpaid workfare labour instead.

The workfare program has been a mess for the government since attention was first drawn to the compulsory nature of some of the unpaid work this spring. The Department for Work and Pensions was revealed to be telling claimants on one of the "voluntary" schemes that attendance was mandatory, and a number of high-profile companies stopped taking on workers under the schemes after a fraught meeting with Chris Graying, the minister in charge. And last month, the government's own research showed that mandatory work activity is "largely ineffective", according to NIESR's Jonathan Portes, who wrote:

Briefly, what the analysis shows is that the programme as currently structured is not working. It has no impact on employment; it leads to a small and transitory reduction in benefit receipt; and worst of all, it may even lead to those on the programme moving from Jobseekers' Allowance to Employment and Support Allowance.

Despite that, the government has decided to expand the MWA scheme; but it appears that the government is attempting to avoid the PR hits that has often come with businesses taking on workers from the scheme. Various small businesses have reported being offered participants directly, in a move which is seemingly an attempt to drive participation underground. If campaign groups like Boycott Workfare have to protest 60 businesses each with one worker, rather than one with 60, they will have their work cut out to effect a change.

That said, it is probably the case that if government is having to enact policy designed around making it difficult to protest, that is at least a symbolic win for the protestors. Gettin an actual win, however, will get a bit harder.

14 comments

hugh markey's picture

'Elf and Safety!

Happy Pill

New Stateswoman's picture

Look up Planet Nibiru - heading this way

Eddy S's picture

the other good thing is it bridges an important part of the labour market, especially for step in the stone employment which would help lead the young and long term employed into bigger and better things.

Matron's picture

But it's already been proven not to work, even the DWP know that!

Al Cider's picture

Funny how most of the youngsters are mums that have had children, forced into employment at slave rates. Hardly anything good for the young people there in the first place.

Celeriac's picture

Is there any point in your employment where you would have worked for £2.60 an hour? That is a derisory £20.80 for a full day of work.

People shouldn't have to eat shit in hope of tasting honey some time in the future. Everybody is entitled to a fair wage for a day's graft.

Eddy S's picture

i think there's nothing wrong with a workfare for a limited duration only when the person is long term unemployed.

this provides would help instill a good work ethic and helps the person get out of a rut.

employers who rather employ EAST EUROPEANS for there 'WORK ETHIC', employers would also be more likely take on the long term employed.

don't therefore stigmatise WORK FARE (we are shooting ourselves in the foot) you are reducing the options for the long term employed, by removing the option of work experience gained from HIGHER QUALITY employers.

fuzzy spider's picture

"WORK ETHIC" is all well and good, but if someone works they should get paid for that work.

Unpaid, coerced labor is slavery. State sanctioned slavery in Britain is something we'd only ever see under this corporate-communist system re-labelled as "libertarianism".

Robert Taggart's picture

This scrounger has never shopped at H&B - no reason to.
Now ? - our trade could be our thankyou !
Then again, £2.60 per hour = slave wages = still no trade !!

Eric Greenwood's picture

The Government wants to stop the Democractic Right to Protest.. The fact in the press release and other stories H&B are stating protestors were violent and damage stock, when If they had grayling and IDS, would be shouting in the press look nasty people.. This is another way to slander people who are fed up with the work programme that even the DWP own figures say it doesnt work.. Whatever happened to a fair days wage for a fair days work.. There must be work there or they wouldnt want free workers to do the job.

andyg's picture

" An institution an "abominable crime," a "moral depravity," a "hideous blot," and a "fatal stain" that deformed "what nature had bestowed on us of her fairest gifts." (Thomas Jefferson)

andyg's picture

Slavery is back in the UK!

Herbert's picture

'Wage slavery' has been here since feudalism went. This is a return to feudalism.

Peters son's picture

However, even if small firms only take one workfare victim all he/she has to do is inform the Boycott Workfare website who will publish that information and the vast number of protesters and consumers who fully support boycotting this abhorrent use of coerced free labour will blacklist that business. A boycott of a small business is potentially likely to be very harmful so surely they are better actually paying their staff. Old fashioned or radical?

Latest tweets