Home

From
Challenge # 93
September-October 2005
The Wisconsin Plan in Israel
Punishing the Poor
Assaf Adiv
IN EARLY
August 2005, steps were taken to implement the Wisconsin Plan in Israel –
known here as Me-ha-Lev: “From the Heart.” Applied in the American
state of Wisconsin in the mid 1990’s, it signals a new stage in the
privatization of social services, with the aim of eliminating the welfare
state. The proportion of Israelis receiving welfare (AKA “income
maintenance”) is indeed way out of line in comparison with most Western
countries. If there were jobs, it would certainly make sense to help them
shift to “workfare.” The problem is that there are no jobs. In the Israeli
version, the Wisconsin mechanism is set up to strike thousands of people
from the caseload without assuring them of employment. The implicit goal
is to reduce expenditures by punishing the poor.
Israel’s
annual Poverty Report, published on August 9, puts it first among western
countries in poverty among children. After distribution of welfare
payments, a third of Israel’s children (714,000) are below the poverty
line (half the median income). The western country occupying second place
in poor children, with 27%, is the US. Like much of what arrives these
days bearing the tag “Made in America,” the Wisconsin Plan will deepen
poverty.
With
the rise of the second Sharon government, in partnership with the
neo-liberal Shinui Party, the conditions were ripe for Wisconsin. The
Knesset approved the plan in 2003. It jibed well with the reforms of then
Finance Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, which included privatization (of the
ports, the pension funds, the major telephone company) and drastic cuts in
welfare (for the jobless, the physically challenged, single-parent
families, and families with children).
During its initial stage, “From the Heart” includes 17,000 of the 160,000
who receive income maintenance. The plan will proceed on an experimental
basis for two years in four centers: East and West Jerusalem; Nazareth and
Nazareth Ilit; Hadera and the villages of Wadi Ara; and Ashkelon. Of the
participants, 30% will be Arabs and 20% new immigrants.
The
program will be run by four companies, each consisting of an Israeli firm
and a foreign one that has already “done
Wisconsin”
in its own land. Altogether Israel has budgeted NIS 80 million ($18
million) for the plan.
The
crux of the program is this: every participating welfare recipient will be
required to remain in the Wisconsin center between 30 and 40 hours per
week, receiving counseling, training and job referrals. If he does not
succeed in finding salaried employment, the counselor may assign him to
full-time non-paid work in a community institution such as a hospital or
charity. Only by doing this work will he continue to receive a welfare
check (NIS 2200 per family = $488 monthly).
Are the
unemployed to blame?
In
1982, when Israel passed legislation providing income maintenance, the
number of eligible households was less than 10,000. By 2003, the number
had grown 16-fold – to 158,000 households! (Source: Nehemia Strasler,
Haaretz July 17, 2003.) What happened in between? The main event was
that Israel globalized its economy, canceling protective tariffs,
privatizing government corporations, dispensing with labor-intensive
industries while promoting hi-tech, and importing migrant workers. These
measures created nearly irreversible unemployment but found favor with
local and international capital. Welfare payments purchased social calm.
Until
Netanyahu’s reforms in 2003-04, a couple with more than two children that
was living on welfare received monthly income maintenance amounting to NIS
3200, plus child allowances that could bring the total – say, for a family
with four children – up to NIS 6,000. For many people it paid not to work.
The
huge welfare outlay did not tally with the kind of economy that modern
investors prefer: one with a lean public sector and an anorexic national
budget. After Israel had globalized itself, the time had come for Phase
Two: Netanyahu’s cuts. Today the income maintenance for a family with more
than two children has dropped to NIS 2200, and child allowances have been
reduced to NIS 150 per child. One cannot live on that. (The average
Israeli family spends NIS 10,000 per month!) The spur to work, therefore,
has become very strong. Why then don’t people shift to “workfare”? In most
cases, for the reason already stated: no jobs.
All stick, no carrot
Israel’s
version of the Wisconsin Plan suffers from three
basic problems:
1.
Lack of means to create jobs.
Israel’s
economy creates zero jobs for non-professionals. Consider, for example,
some of the firms discharging workers at the end of July 2005. Delta, the
biggest textile producer, fired 500 from its flagship plant in Carmiel.
Club Market, the third largest supermarket chain, went bankrupt, failing
to pay suppliers, who in turn dismissed hundreds. The firm has recently
been bought by a rival chain, but there is concern about the fate of Club
Market’s 3500 employees.
In
the Arab sector, most people used to work in textiles, construction and
agriculture. Half the jobs in textiles – 23,000 – disappeared in a decade.
In construction and agriculture, the government permitted almost unlimited
import of migrants. These have edged the Arabs out of the “three D’s”: the
difficult, dirty, dangerous jobs that alone were open to them. Between
1995 and 2000, for example, 35,000 Israelis – almost all of them Arabs –
lost their construction jobs to migrants.
2. The
second basic problem: a business venture.
“From
the Heart” will be judged on the basis of its ability to reduce welfare
expenditures more than on any success it may have in shifting people to
productive work or raising their standard of living.
In a
meeting at the Finance Ministry, one of the plan’s external advisors,
Attorney Adam Eytan, explained that the “reduction in government
expenditures doesn’t have to be a result of
placement. It is assumed that it is the result of people hearing about the
new requirements and they don’t want to work or are already working so
don’t come in.”
(www.moital.gov.il/NR/exeres/F8B4C069-A688-4921-B8BD-EB24790C9E30.htm)
How
then will Wisconsin reduce caseloads?
a.
Many of those summoned will either fail to report or drop out. The Finance
Ministry assumes that about a third of the chronically unemployed are
faking: some work in various unofficial jobs, and others don’t want to
work. Because the plan requires their presence for 30-40 hours per week,
they will prefer to sacrifice the benefits.
b.
Others will refuse to do what the Wisconsin companies require, giving the
latter a pretext to deny them benefits for two months per refusal.
c.
Some will be placed in jobs.
The
program contains a contradiction. The apparatus is so structured that the
less the companies invest in the services they are required to provide
(e.g., financing daycare so that parents of small children can work), the
more their profits will increase. In fact, the companies who won the
tender to operate the centers did so by stressing low costs and bigger
savings. Time is also a whip. A company will not get paid unless it
reduces welfare expenditures by 35% within seven months.
The
plan, in short, puts the company and the welfare recipient at odds with
each other. The company has the authority to deny benefits and, by using
it, can increase profits. This raises the suspicion that the profit motive
will take precedence, and benefits will be denied to people who need them.
(Ibid.)
In
fairness, the plan includes an incentive. The company will get a bonus if
40% of those who leave the welfare lists move to registered jobs in which
they remain for at least six months. In the present labor market, however,
such a goal seems unrealistic. It is stated, one suspects, for the sake of
appearances, in order to offset the bad impression given by the negative
incentives described above.
A
program quite contrary to the Wisconsin Plan has been implemented by the
Workers Advice Center (WAC) in the Arab sector for the last three years.
WAC understood that unemployment and dependence on welfare are social
banes. In addition to aiding the needy, WAC initiated a project called “A
Job to Win.” Here it helps people return to work at a fair salary and with
social benefits. The results demonstrate that when companies are willing
to pay a fair wage, people want to work.
(See:
www.workersadvicecenter.org )
3.
Third problem:
Wisconsin
helps break the labor market.
As
mentioned, the plan permits the Wisconsin companies to send participants
to voluntary work in hospitals and charities. In a press release on
January 12, 2004, the Ministry of Industry wrote: “The purpose of
community service will be to instill work habits.” Hogwash. The purpose is
to make it not worthwhile for shirkers to claim that they can’t find jobs.
But the availability of this costless labor may encourage employers to
fire existing salaried workers.
That
would be an instance of the more general problem described by Professor
Robert Solow, a Nobel Prize winner in Economics:
The labor market
is like a game, or several games, of musical chairs. When the music stops,
the players scramble for the available chairs. Since there are fewer
chairs than players, the losers are left standing. They are, you might
say, the unemployed....Adding
more players – which is what forcing welfare beneficiaries into the labor
market would do – can only increase unemployment. Some former welfare
recipients will find jobs,
perhaps many will,
because among other reasons, they are hungry but only by displacing
formerly employed members of the assiduously working poor. (Robert
M. Solow from The New York Review, Volume XLV Number 17, 5 November 1998.)
(See:www.jobsletter.org.nz/art/artsolow.htm).
In
addition to these three basic problems, there is a fourth: Wisconsin has
the same nominal goal as the National Employment Service. If successful,
it could make the latter redundant. Therefore, the clerks at the Service
are in no big hurry to refer the most suitable participants. See the next
section.

A rocky beginning
On
August 2, as the Wisconsin Plan was about to be inaugurated in Nazareth, a
riot broke out, resulting in damage to the company’s offices. The program
was shut down for a week.
Asma
Agbarieh, monitoring Wisconsin for WAC in the Arab Sector, explained the
frustration and confusion that the welfare recipients feel:
“The
Wisconsin companies receive the names of the candidates for participation
in the program from the National Insurance Institute (NII). The NII has a
data base on the unemployed. But there is no cooperation between the NII,
the Employment Service, and the companies. One gets the impression that
the government clerks are worried that the plan may make them redundant.
This conflict lies behind the lack of any substantive discussion in
choosing participants for the project.
“According to my information, the Employment Service sent the lists of
participants to the companies just one month before the starting date. The
companies didn’t have a chance to check the chances of placing these
people. For example, when I interviewed the head of Amin, the company for
the center in Jerusalem, he told me that a check of the names revealed
that several were no longer among the living.”

The
people who have been referred to the Wisconsin centers include a high
proportion of the sick, the disabled and the elderly. In Hadera, the Agens
Company discovered that 67% of the referred participants are 40 or older.
“In the US the situation was completely different. In the state of
Wisconsin, for instance, more than 80% of support-recipients in the
program were under 40. Many of them were young, single-parent mothers.” (Ruti
Sinai, Haaretz July 4, 2005.)
In
the Arab sector the problems increase exponentially, Agbarieh explains.
“During the golden age of welfare benefits, if there were children under
seven in the family, only the father would need to report once a week at
the Employment Bureau. Netanyahu’s reform has forced women with children
older than two to report. For an Arab woman this is harder than it sounds:
having reached the Bureau, she must wait on line four or five hours. In
Jerusalem the waiting is outdoors, exposed to the weather and with no
facilities – an impossibility if she must bring children with her.”
Only
17% of the Arab women in
Israel
work outside the home, compared with 50% of Jewish women. The problem
results not only from lack of jobs, but also from the fact that Arab
society looks down on working wives. Now, with Wisconsin, Arab women will
be compelled to appear in the placement centers for 30-40 hours a week. It
is unlikely that the economy will have jobs for them, except unpaid work
in hospitals and such. The Plan is supposed to finance daycare for the
children, but even if such a miracle were to occur, the central problem
would remain: the husband and his family frown on a working wife. This
attitude should be changed, but this won’t happen through shock treatment
like Wisconsin. It certainly will not happen unless real jobs are
available under fair conditions. “Our worry,” says Agbarieh, “is that
entire families in which the father is really unable to work, or stands no
chance of finding a job, will lose what little is left in welfare
benefits.”
If
the fakers and shirkers are dropped, there remain the estimated 70% who
have already been hit so hard in the last three years. It is difficult to
believe that these people would not accept work if they could find it.
What family in Israel can live on benefit checks amounting to NIS 2200?
But there is no work. Where the Employment Bureaus failed to lower the
caseload, the Wisconsin Centers may succeed – not by shifting recipients
to “workfare,” rather by getting them to drop out.
The
bottom line: there is no serious effort in Israel to increase the number
of jobs. Those who implement the Wisconsin Plan accept, as an accomplished
fact, a weak job market where labor rights are not enforced. That is why
the riot broke out in Nazareth on August 2, and that is why it will repeat
itself if there isn’t a basic change in the official attitude toward the
unemployed.
For related articles, please visit WAC's
web page: WAC Home