Command over time: examining the role of time demands in work-related conditionality

Time-demands are embedded in activation policies and are an important dimension of conditionality. They include but extend beyond work search and availability requirements. Despite their prominence in UK policy, they are yet to receive focussed attention from scholars. This thesis offers a mixed methods investigation, across three papers, of the experiences and implications of the time demands embedded in work-related conditionality. The first paper draws on 33 semi-structured interviews with people subject to intensive work-related conditionality in Greater Manchester. It examines how work-related expectations were understood, and whether people were expected to comply with a standardised expectation of ‘35 hours’, which is evident in the policy design of Universal Credit. Building from an understanding of the multi-layered nature of conditionality in paper one, a second conceptual paper revisits work on discretionary time (Goodin et al., 2008). Here time is viewed as a resource which may be directed toward different activities and goals according to an individual’s resources and responsibilities. The framework is used to highlight key dimensions that influence a person’s availability for paid work, highlighting recognition gaps in current activation policy. The third paper estimates, through secondary analysis of time-use survey data, the feasibility for people to meet work-related conditions alongside their other minimum obligations. The paper explores the potential feasibility by simulating different activation implementation conditions and labour market scenarios. The thesis makes four contributions. First, it demonstrates the value of time demands in examining the implementation and experience of work-related conditionality. Second, it develops and applies a framework for critically examining the feasibility of the time demands that are integral components of benefit conditionality, given people’s other commitments. Third, it exposes the disconnect between policy rhetoric around tailoring conditions attached to benefit receipt (‘personalised conditionality’) and actual experiences. Fourth, it stresses the need for a broader employment support policy agenda which moves away from an individualized framing of the influences over people’s availability and working hours.