Thread by @Dr_CalumCarson

What do employers know about Universal Credit, and how does it impact on them? How can Jobcentres and other employment services work more effectively with employers? This week in Manchester we launched our final report exploring these questions and more (1/24)

Drawing on 124 interviews with employers and wider stakeholders, this is the first major independent research project to explore employers’ views and experiences of this important policy area (2/24)

As the cost-of-living crisis deepens and the need to more effectively support people into (and to progress in) work becomes more complex, it is important to address the critical omission of employers’ voices in this debate and demonstrate how valuable their insights are (3/24)

Our report finds that employer awareness and understanding of UC varies considerably. Most were aware that out-of-work UC claimants could be expected to engage in job seeking activities, and that UC payment varied in response to changes in earnings (4/24)

Knowledge of the extent to which their own staff were in receipt of UC while in work also varied considerably. Although UC has important implications for the UK workforce, industry intelligence is lacking (5/24)

Employers were critical of the Work First approach which underpins UC: rather than effectively supporting recruitment, this approach (which emphasises moving into any job quickly) instead results in a high volume of inappropriate applications that is costly to manage (6/24)

Employers also felt that broader policy efforts focused on #goodwork could be undermined by the continued emphasis on taking ‘any job’. They instead advocated for a greater focus on supporting candidates into roles that matched their skills, capabilities and circumstances (7/24)

Employers reported varied experiences and engagement levels with Jobcentres, but many felt the service had an ‘image problem’. Most employers want to recruit people who both want and are able to do their jobs, and are reluctant to engage in a system widely seen as punitive (8/24)

While some employers had positive experiences of specific programmes (for example Kickstart) and demonstrated a motivation to play their part in supporting people into work, participants highlighted a series of shortcomings with them too (9/24)

These included a sense that processes to get involved were too slow and onerous, and that clear lack of consultation with employers (especially small employers) about the design of programmes inhibits more positive outcomes (10/24)

Inconsistent communication, combined with a broader fragmented employment and skills system also means the door is far from being wide open for employers to engage with interventions designed to support work entry and progression on a wider scale (11/24)

Employers were sceptical about the introduction of conditionality to those in work and were concerned about the negative impact this could have on staff well-being, performance and commitment, as well on their recruitment, retention and progression practices (12/24)

Employer views on how best to support progression included the importance of personalised support and ensuring low-income workers can access appropriate childcare, transport and skills support, in line with previous findings (e.g. the McGregor-Smith review) (13/24)

However, ultimately, delivering on policy focused on progression will be impossible without improvements also occurring more widely in employer practices to ensure that many more jobs offer inclusive and sustainable employment opportunities with scope for progression (14/24)

Policy development to date has been almost solely focused on individual jobseekers rather than employers and the demand side. However, both employers and stakeholders overwhelmingly believed that employers should play a much greater role (15/24)

Furthermore, employer engagement is considered largely transactional, with policy viewed as something devised by government to which employers were expected to respond, rather than viewing employers and their representatives as strategic partners in policy development (16/24)

Participants also emphasised the importance of involving a wide selection of employers – in terms of business size, sector, and geography – in the development, delivery and scrutiny of ALMP and UC, rather than a "one size fits all" approach (17/24)

But this is not something the DWP can do alone. There is a clear need for more co-ordination between Government departments with a shared emphasis on supporting transitions into and progression in work, and who currently engage with employers in different ways (18/24)

Effective partnership working beyond government is also critical – alongside a recognition that what effective employment support looks like in different areas of the UK will vary (19/24)

More generally, there is a need for employer representative organisations to be a much more active stakeholder on this agenda – at local, national and sectoral levels (20/24)

Effective partnership working beyond government is also critical – alongside a recognition that what effective employment support looks like in different areas of the UK will vary (21/24)

Throughout this report a wide number of policy and practice recommendations for local and national policymakers, employers and their representatives, unions and other worker representative organisations, Jobcentres and the wider employment support sector are identified (22/24)

Supporting people to move into and progress in work should be a shared agenda – and one in which employers play a central role. This research helps to redress employers’ relative exclusion from research and policy debate relating to Universal Credit and related ALMPs (23/24)

We also hope that it provides a useful evidence base from which more effective policymaking and practice can develop. The report can be read in full here: bit.ly/404eSkj
(24/24)