According to a new survey, a majority of job center employees consider the citizen’s allowance to be too high. The study by DIW and the University of Bochum shows: There is still a lot of persuasion to be done in the SPD prestige project.
“Citizens’ money will be one of the larger social reforms in 20 years,” said Labor Minister Hubertus Heil one morning in October 2022. The Bundestag spoke about the introduction of citizens’ money – an issue that is close to the minister’s heart.
It should not become an unconditional basic income, he explained. But when it comes to sanctions, the focus will be on the stubborn cases where it is appropriate: “The spirit of citizens’ money is different: it is the spirit of encouragement and empowerment.”
That was 18 months ago. The SPD had big plans for citizens’ money. It should strengthen social cohesion and help those in need. It was intended to heal the wounds inflicted by the Hartz reforms, including in the SPD itself. And it was intended to show voters that the party’s heart beats on the left. The project has not yet been a complete success: the SPD is struggling with the spirit it summoned.
Skepticism and rejection predominate
“Citizens’ money has, above all, an image problem,” says social scientist Jürgen Schupp, who has just carried out a study on it. For the study by the German Institute for Economic Research in cooperation with the University of Bochum, he and colleagues evaluated the answers they received from 1,894 employees from seven job centers in North Rhine-Westphalia in January and February of this year. His result: “Skepticism and rejection predominate among job center employees. They only see a few improvements.”
The majority rejects the increase in the standard rate. Citizens’ allowance was increased to 563 euros for single people at the beginning of the year, increasing by around 12 percent. More than 60 percent of those surveyed believe that this increase was too high.
Almost three quarters of job center employees reject lighter punishments
73 percent of employees also reject milder penalties for those receiving civil benefit who miss appointments or deadlines. So far, recipients have been able to have their standard rate reduced by up to 30 percent, but only over several steps and months. It is now also possible to completely cancel the citizen’s allowance for two months. This has been in effect since the end of March, so it was not yet in force during the survey.
“Citizens’ money has massively weakened the sanction options for those who refuse to work,” criticizes Stephan Stracke, spokesman for labor and social affairs for the Union parliamentary group, with a view to the study. A new balance is needed between supporting and demanding. The employees in the job centers also seem to be missing them since citizens’ money was introduced. According to them, citizens’ benefit recipients are less accessible (say 59 percent of those surveyed), less motivated (59 percent) and less likely to participate (62 percent). The incentives to take up a new job have worsened (63 percent).
“The criticism is a warning signal”
“The criticism from job center employees is a warning signal that we have to take seriously,” says Pascal Kober, labor market policy spokesman for the Liberal parliamentary group. “It would be negligent to close oneself to the reality of life in the job centers because of party political interests.” The FDP recently called for stricter sanctions on citizens’ money in a draft resolution for its party conference.
When it comes to citizens’ money, the SPD now has to compensate for the centrifugal forces in the traffic lights. In an initial reaction, the Ministry of Social Affairs stated that they had not yet received the study, but that it was still too early to make a judgment on the effectiveness of the new regulations. Only seven job centers in North Rhine-Westphalia were surveyed for the study, but the ministry mostly received feedback from job centers that the new regulations were generally welcomed. The ministry also points out that the requirements of the Constitutional Court have also been implemented in the new calculation of the standard rate and that as a sanction it is now possible to completely withdraw the citizen’s benefit for two months.
For Heidi Reichinnek, social policy spokeswoman for the Left, it is clear: “Sanctions increase the mistrust of those affected in the state and exclude them even further from society. Instead of sanctions, we need to meet at eye level.”
Researcher calls for better communication
The summary of the study is nine pages short. Social scientist Schupp is aware of the lengthy discussion the numbers can trigger. Even if there are definitely positive aspects in the study. The job center employees are in favor of the higher standard rates for children (55 percent approval), as are the improved coaching offer for the long-term unemployed (78 percent) and the introduction of a trivial limit for reclaims (47 percent).
Schupp warns against “well-known clichés and stereotypes” in the debate about citizens’ benefit recipients and against deriving direct recommendations for action from the investigation. That would have been too short, he said, the study’s findings were not representative and could only represent a first piece of the puzzle. New concepts should wait until more comprehensive research results are available. This is expected to be the case in the fall. The best political reaction is to explain the restructuring process better: “Communication must be improved and the debate must be made more objective.”