Abstract
It is now commonplace for governments in Western countries to require the unemployed to work in exchange for their unemployment benefits. In this article I raise some serious doubts about the most promising and philosophically interesting defence of this argument, which relies on the ‘principle of reciprocity’. I argue that it is seriously unclear whether the obligations imposed on welfare claimants by ‘workfare’ schemes are legitimate and justified according to the principle of reciprocity. I do this by reconstructing the arguments for the obligations of the unemployed put forward in both the United Kingdom and Australia.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Abbot, T., Minister for Employment Services, Speech Notes, ‘Work for the dole Round Two National Launch’, 1998, http://www.dewrsb.gov.au/ministers/abbott/speeches/1998/ sp18dec_98.htm
ACOSS INFO 305, Breaching the Safety Net: The Harsh Impact of Social Security Breaches – 13 August 2001, p. 1, http://www.acoss.org.au/media/2001/mr0813.htm
Brown, G., Speech to the Labour Party Conference, Guardian, Sept. 27, 1999.
Department of Employment, Workplace Relations and Small Business (DEWRSB), Work for the Dole 2000 Request for Tender: Community Work Coordinators, Canberra, Australian Government Printing Service, 1999.
Department of Employment, Workplace Relations and Small Business (DEWRSB), What is Mutual Obligation? – Questions & Answers, 2000, http://www.dewrsb.gov.au/wfd/ mutual_obligation/MO_index.asp
Department of Family and Community Services (FACS), Guide to Social Security Law, 3.2.8.20, http://www.facs.gov.au/guide/ssguide/32820.htm (2004).
Department of Family and Community Services (FaCS), Final Report of the Reference Group on Welfare Reform, Participation Support for a More Equitable Society, Canberra, Australian Government Printing Service, 2000.
Gutmann, A. and Thomson, D., Democracy and Disagreement. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1996.
Hume, D., Of the Original Contract, in E. F. Miller (ed.), David Hume: Essays Moral, Political, and Literary. Indianapolis: Liberty Classics, 1987.
Locke, J., The Second Treatise of Government, London: J.M. Dent and Sons, 1984.
Mead, L.M., Beyond Entitlement: The Social Obligations of Citizenship. New York: Free Press, 1986.
Rawls, J., A Theory of Justice, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1971.
Simmons, A.J., Justification and Legitimacy, Ethics 109 (1999), pp. 739–771.
Solow, R.M., Work and Welfare. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1998.
Telecommunications Act 1997, Canberra: Australian Government Printing Service.
Van Parijs, P., ‘Why Surfers Should Be Fed: The Liberal Case for an Unconditional Basic Income’, Philosophy and Public Affairs, 20(4) (1991), pp. 101–131.
Vincent, J. and Dobson, B., JSA Evaluation: Qualitative Research on Disallowed and Disqualified Claimants. DfEE Research Report 15, 1997.
Wartenburg, T., The Forms of Power. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1990.
White, S., The Civic Minimum. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003.
White, S., ‘What's Wrong With Workfare’, Journal of Applied Philosophy 21(3) (2004).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Moss, J. ‘Mutual Obligation’ and ‘New Deal’: Illegitimate and Unjustified?. Ethic Theory Moral Prac 9, 87–104 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10677-006-0595-1
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10677-006-0595-1