Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-06T13:05:54.657Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

‘They really get you motivated’: Experiences of a life-first employment programme from the perspective of long-term unemployed Australians

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 February 2016

RUTH WALKER ,
LYNSEY BROWN ,
MEGAN MOSKOS ,
LINDA ISHERWOOD ,
KATY OSBORNE ,
KATE PATEL  and
DEB KING
RUTH WALKER
Affiliation:
Southgate Institute for Health, Society and Equity, Flinders University, GPO Box 2100, Adelaide, South Australia5001. email: [email protected]
LYNSEY BROWN
Affiliation:
Southgate Institute for Health, Society and Equity, Flinders University, GPO Box 2100 Adelaide, South Australia5001. email: [email protected]
MEGAN MOSKOS
Affiliation:
National Institute of Labour Studies, Flinders University, GPO Box 2100, Adelaide, South Australia5001. email: [email protected]
LINDA ISHERWOOD
Affiliation:
National Institute of Labour Studies, Flinders University, GPO Box 2100, Adelaide, South Australia5001. email: [email protected]
KATY OSBORNE
Affiliation:
Southgate Institute for Health, Society and Equity, Flinders University, GPO Box 2100, Adelaide, South Australia5001. email: [email protected]
KATE PATEL
Affiliation:
Southgate Institute for Health, Society and Equity, Flinders University, GPO Box 2100, Adelaide, South Australia5001. email: [email protected]
DEB KING
Affiliation:
School of Social and Policy Studies, Flinders University, GPO Box 2100, Adelaide, South Australia5001. email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Long-term unemployment can negatively impact health and well-being, and is a central focus of governments seeking to address poverty and social exclusion. Little is known about how individuals experience programmes aimed at addressing long-term unemployment and consequently the client-centred indicators of ‘success’. In-depth interviews were carried out with 31 long-term unemployed individuals engaged in a ‘life-first’ programme integrating vocational assistance with intensive personal strengths-based support. The participants in this programme faced multiple disadvantages including employment and educational barriers as well as a range of significant personal issues. They equated successful outcomes in the programme with receiving a wealth of psychosocial and practical assistance in addition to vocational support, and having a case manager who approached these issues as a whole. Findings suggest that, in order to provide the best chance of gaining and maintaining employment, programmes should address, in tandem, personal and vocational barriers facing those who are long-term unemployed.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Social Policy , Volume 45 , Issue 3 , July 2016 , pp. 507 - 526
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

ABS (Australian Bureau of Statistics) (2011), Australian Social Trends 2011: Long-term unemployment. Cat No. 4102.0. Canberra, ACT: Commonwealth of Australia.Google Scholar
ABS (2013), Labour Force. Cat No. 6202.0. Canberra, ACT.Google Scholar
Australian Social Inclusion Board (2011a), Addressing barriers for jobless families. Canberra, ACT: Commonwealth Government of Australia.Google Scholar
Australian Social Inclusion Board (2011b), Breaking Cycles of Disadvantage. Canberra, ACT: Commonwealth Government of Australia.Google Scholar
Brenninkmeijer, V. and Blonk, R.W.B. (2011), ‘The effectiveness of the JOBS program among the long-term unemployed: a randomized experiment in the Netherlands’. Health Promotion International, 27: 2, 220–229.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Caswell, D., Marston, G. and Larsen, J. E. (2010), ‘Unemployed citizen or ‘at risk’ client? Classification systems and employment services in Denmark and Australia’. Critical Social Policy, 30: 3, 384–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Considine, M., Lewis, J. M. and O'Sullivan, S. (2011), ‘Quasi-markets and service delivery flexibility following a decade of employment assistance reform in Australia’. Journal of Social Policy, 40: 4, 811–833.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dean, H. (2003), ‘Re-conceptualising welfare-to-work for people with multiple problems and needs’. Journal of Social Policy, 32: 3, 441–459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gallie, D., Paugam, S. and Jacobs, S. (2003), ‘Unemployment, poverty and social isolation: Is there a vicious circle of social exclusion?’ European Societies, 5: 1, 1–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hangan, C. (2006), ‘Introduction of an intensive case management style of delivery for a new mental health service’, International Journal of Mental Health Nursing, 15: 3, 157–162.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hardwick, R. (2013), ‘Integrated services for women through a One Stop Shop: a realist review’, Journal of Integrated Care, 21: 5, 263–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Headey, B. and Verick, S. (2006), Jobless households: Longitudinal analysis of the persistence and determinants of joblessness using HILDA data for 2001–03, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research.Google Scholar
Herbig, B., Dragano, N. and Angerer, P. (2013), ‘Health in the long-term unemployed’. Deutsches Arzteblatt International, 110: 23–24, 413–419.Google ScholarPubMed
Lindsay, C., McQuaid, R.W. and Dutton, M. (2007), ‘New approaches to employability in the UK: Combining ‘Human Capital Development’ and ‘Work-First’ Strategies. Journal of Social Policy, 36: 4, 539–560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marston, G. and McDonald, C. (2008), ‘Feeling motivated yet? Long-term unemployed people's perspectives on the implementation of workfare in Australia’. Australian Journal of Social Issues, 43: 2, 255–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDonald, C. and Marston, G. (2005), ‘Workfare as welfare: governing unemployment in the advanced liberal state’. Critical Social Policy, 25: 3, 374–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKee-Ryan, F.M., Song, Z., Wanberg, C. R. and Kinicki, A.J. (2005), ‘Psychological and physical well-being during unemployment: a meta-analytic study’. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90: 1, 53–76.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Milbourne, L. (2009), ‘Remodelling the third sector: advancing collaboration or competition in community-based initiatives’. Journal of Social Policy, 38: 2, 277–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milner, A., Page, A. and LaMontagne, A.D. (2013), ‘Long-term unemployment and suicide: a systematic review and meta-analysis’. PloS one 8.1 (2013): e51333.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moskos, M., Osborne, K., Biedrzycki, K.R., Baum, F.E. and Richardson, S. (2009), Building Family Opportunities: A review of the evidence and options for an evaluation framework, A report prepared for the South Australian Social Inclusion Unit.Google Scholar
Perkins, D. (2008), ‘Improving employment participation for welfare recipients facing personal barriers’. Social Policy and Society, 7: 1, 13–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ritchie, J. and Spencer, L. (1994), ‘Qualitative data analysis for applied policy research’. In Bryman, A. & Burgess, R. (eds.) Analyzing Qualitative Data, London, Sage.Google Scholar
Taris, T.W. (2002), ‘Unemployment and mental health: a longitudinal perspective’. International Journal of Stress Management, 9: 1, 43–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
United States Government Accountability Office (GAO) (2011), Multiple employment and training programs: Providing information on co-locating services and consolidating administrative structures could promote efficiencies. Report to Congressional Requesters, Washington DC: US Government.Google Scholar
Whiteford, P. (2009), Family Joblessness in Australia. Canberra, A paper commissioned by the Social Inclusion Unit of the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet.Google Scholar