The Shifting roles of Employers: At the Intersection of Employment and Social Work: A case study from Norway
Active labour market policies (ALMPs) are often seen as a panacea for dealing with labour market exclusion, especially when it comes to young people with mental health issues. Such policies demand considerable involvement from employers, placing more responsibility in their hands. Yet, there remains a notable knowledge gap concerning the actual role that employers play in processes of inclusion in the labour market. In this article, we provide knowledge about what employers do in order to include young people with mental health issues into the workforce, what roles they play in these processes, and what motivations underlie their endeavours. We argue that, due to organizational changes to occupational rehabilitation in Norway, employers must increasingly occupy a vacancy left open by social workers. While this situation has demanded further responsibility from employers, they are quite often insufficiently educated or trained to deal with such issues.We address what consequences this could have for young people with mental health issues striving to enter the labour market.
Andreassen, T. A., & Fossestøl, K. (2014) Utfordrende inkluderingspolitikk: Samstyring for omforming av institusjonell logikk i arbeidslivet, helsetjenesten og NAV [Challenging inclusive policy using governance to transform institutional logic in working life, health services, and the Norwegian Labour and Welfare Administration]. Tidsskrift for samfunnsforskning, 55(2), 174–202. https://doi.org/10.18261/issn.1504-291X
Benda, L., Kosta, F., & Van der Veen, R. (2020) Activation is not a panacea: Active labour market policy, long-term unemployment and institutional complementarity. Journal of Social Policy, 49(3), 483–506. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047279419000515
Bond, G. R., Drake, R. E., & Campbell, K. (2016). Effectiveness of individual placement and supported employment for young adults. Early Intervention in Psychiatry, 10(4), 300–307. https://doi.org/10.1111/eip.12175
Bredgaard, T. (2018). Employers and active labour market policies: Typologies and evidence. Social Policy and Society, 17(3), 365–377. https://doi.org/10.1017/S147474641700015X
Farnsworth, K. (2004). Corporate power and social policy in a global economy: British welfare under the influence. Policy Press.
Frøyland, K. (2018). Vital tasks and roles of frontline workers facilitating job inclusion of vulnerable youth. European Journal of Social Work, 22(4), 563–574. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691457.2018.1423547
Frøyland, K., & Spjelkavik, Ø. (2014). Inkluderingskompetanse: Ordinært arbeid som mål og middel [Inclusion competence: Ordinary work as goal and means]. Gyldendal akademisk.
Grønlien, E. (2020). Utviklingen i mottakere av arbeidsavklaringspenger og personer med nedsatt arbeidsevne per 30. juni 2020 [The development of recipients of work assessment allowance for persons with low work ability, per 30 June 2020]. NAV Arbeids- og velferdsdirektoratet / Statistikkseksjonen. https://www.nav.no/no/nav-og-samfunn/statistikk/aap-nedsatt-arbeidsevne-og-uforetrygd-statistikk/arbeidsavklaringspenger
Gustafsson, J., Prieto Peralta, J., & Danermark, B. (2013) The employer’s perspective on supported employment for people with disabilities: Successful approaches of supported employment organizations. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 38(2), 99–111. https://doi.org/10.3233/JVR-130624
Hanssen, J. K., Hutchinson, G. S., Lyngstad, R., & Sandvin, J. T. (2015). What happens to the social in social work? Nordic Social Work Research, 5(1), 115–126. https://doi.org/10.1080/2156857X.2015.1060895
Hardoy, I., Røed, K., von Simson, K., & Zhang, T. (2017). Effekter av arbeidsmarkedspolitikk rettet mot ungdom i Nord-Europa – en meta-analyse [Effects of labour market policies for youth in Northern Europe – a meta-analysis]. Søkelys på arbeidslivet, 34(3), 167–181. https://doi.org/10.18261/issn.1504-7989-2017-03-02
Heitmann, L., & Kydland, R. (2017). Arbeidsplassen som tilfriskningsarena [The workplace as recovery arena]. Tidsskrift for psykisk helsearbeid, 14(2), 178–184. https://doi.org/10.18261/issn.1504-3010-2017-02-09
IA- avtalen 2014- 2018. Intensjonsavtale om et mer inkluderende arbeidsliv. 4. mars 2014-31.desember 2018
International federation of social workers (IFSW) Retrieved 30.9.2020 from: https://www.ifsw.org/what-is-social-work/global-definition-of-social-work/#:~:text=%E2%80%9CSocial%20work%20is%20a%20practice-based%20profession%20and%20an,respect%20for%20diversities%20are%20central%20to%20social%20work.
Ingold, J., & Stuart, M. (2015) The demand-side of active labour market policies: A regional study of employer engagement in the work programme. Journal of Social Policy, 44(3), 443–462. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047279414000890
Jönsson, J. H. (2015). The contested field of social work in a retreating welfare state: The case of Sweden. Critical and Radical Social Work, 3(3), 357–374. https://doi.org/10.1332/204986015X14417170590583
Lima, I., & Grønlien, E. (2020) Flere mottar uføretrygd og sosialhjelp etter innstramming i AAP-regelverket [More people receive disability benefits and welfare benefits after AAP austerity measures]. Arbeid og Velferd, 2, 61–79.
Lindqvist, R., & Lundälv, J. (2018). Activation, medicalisation and inter-organizational cooperation in health insurance – implications for frontline social work in Sweden. European Journal of Social Work, 21(4), 616–627. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691457.2017.1293010
Lundberg, K. G., & Syltevik, L. J. (2016). Everyday interaction at the front-line: The case of the Norwegian all-in-one bureaucracy. Journal of Organizational Ethnography, 5(2), 152–166. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOE-12-2015-0026
McDonald, C., & Chenoweth, L. (2009). (Re)shaping social work: An Australian case study. The British Journal of Social Work, 39(1), 144–160. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcm094
Munford, R., & Sanders. J. (2020). Transformative practice: Social work practice with vulnerable young people. European Journal of Social Work. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691457.2020.1819205
Nilssen, E., & Kildal, N. (2009) New contractualism in social policy and the Norwegian fight against poverty and social exclusion. Ethics and Social Welfare, 3(3), 303–321. https://doi.org/10.1080/17496530903209550
Plé, L., & Chumpitaz Cáceres, R. (2010). Not always co-creation: Introducing interactional co-destruction of value in service-dominant logic. Journal of Services Marketing, 24(6), 430–437. https://doi.org/10.1108/08876041011072546
Røysum, A. (2013). The reform of the welfare services in Norway: One office – one way of thinking? European Journal of Social Work, 16(5), 708–723. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691457.2012.722982
Røysum, A. (2017). ‘How’ we do social work, not ‘what’ we do. Nordic Social Work Research, 7(2), 141–154. https://doi.org/10.1080/2156857X.2017.1284150
Solstad, A. (2018) Kort om NAV [Short on the Norwegian Labour and Welfare Administration]. Universitetsforlaget.
Spjelkavik, Ø. (2012) Supported employment in Norway and in the other Nordic countries. Journal of vocational Rehabilitation, 37(3), 163–172. https://doi.org/10.3233/JVR-2012-0611
Voorberg, W. H., Bekkers, V. J. J. M., & Tummers, L. G. (2015). A systematic review of co-creation and co-production: Embarking on the social innovation journey. Public Management Review, 17(9), 1333–1357. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2014.930505
Wu, L.-W. (2017). The bright side and dark side of co-production: A dyadic analysis. Management Decision, 55(3), 614–631. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-11-2016-0789