نبذة مختصرة : As a well-established part of the UK welfare system, behavioural conditionality is expected by the Government to promote ‘positive’ behavioural changes and enforce work norms by compelling ‘dependent’ benefit claimants into paid work. However, its expansion in recent years to claimant groups such as disabled people and lone parents, together with a harsher regime of benefit sanctions, has raised considerable criticism that intensified behavioural conditionality disproportionally affects ‘vulnerable’ groups. This thesis explores how escalations in the scope and scale of behavioural conditionality in Universal Credit (UC) impact the lives of ‘vulnerable’ claimants. It presents a desk-based review of UC policy which explores how behavioural conditionality operates in relation to ‘vulnerable’ claimants in UC, together with analysis of new empirical data generated through a qualitative longitudinal study which investigated impact on the lives of a group of ‘vulnerable’ UC claimants living in Greater Manchester over a six month period. The evidence presented in this thesis indicates that UC currently fails to adequately protect ‘vulnerable’ individuals. Key findings demonstrate that much of the support available within UC is insufficient and inappropriate to meet the basic and essential needs of ‘vulnerable’ claimants and rarely facilitates movements towards, into and progression within paid employment. Moreover, findings show that extended and intensified behavioural conditionality inherent within UC can often lead ‘vulnerable’ individuals to confront harsh benefit sanctions, resulting in immediate and longer-term hardships such as worsening health, further debts and increasing dependency on family, friends and external services. This thesis contributes to knowledge as it counters ongoing political reassurances that ‘the vulnerable’ will be protected and, instead, indicates how UC frequently exacerbates lived experiences of vulnerability over time.
Processing Request
No Comments.