Couples balancing work, money and care: exploring the shifting landscape under Universal Credit
Lead Research Organisation:
University of Bath
Department Name: Social and Policy Sciences
Abstract
In the context of radical welfare reforms being rolled out under the umbrella of Universal Credit (UC), requiring both partners in a couple with dependent children to look for and enter work, even when one partner is already in employment, and merging a family's entire welfare entitlement - including money for living costs, children and housing - into a single monthly payment, as UC does, is unprecedented. The government claims that extending work activation and conditionality in couple families will reduce welfare dependency and help the partners achieve a better work-life balance. Decreasing the number and frequency of welfare payments reflects the world of work and will allow families to budget better, they say. Academics, civil society and advocacy organisations are less sanguine. Absorption of benefits intended for children into a single award, they point out, reverses a long established principle in UK social security that child-contingent benefits should be paid to the caring parent (Lister, 2010). Research also attests to the effectiveness of paying child benefits to the main carer in enabling state transfers to be redistributed within households (Lundberg et al., 1997, Goode et al., 1998). Other studies suggests that the labelling, separation and differential timing of benefits often assists rather than impairs money management, helping recipients to understand what the money is awarded for, facilitating budgeting and influencing on what or whom the monies are spent (Kempson, 1996, Goode et al., 1999). If the single monthly payment is made into an account to which one partner has no or limited access, inequalities of power within some couple relationships could also reduce the other partner's access to an independent income (Bennett and Sung, 2013). Reduced financial independence could, in turn, contribute towards relationship instability (Griffiths 2017), countering the government's aim of supporting couple relationships and stable families.
Academics and civil society organisations have sought to raise awareness of UC's potential 'purse to wallet' income transfers and the possible adverse effects on women's financial independence, couples' management of their household finances, women's and children's poverty and couple's relationships (CPAG, 2010, Women's Budget Group, 2011). However, no-one knows how affected couples will respond to UC; these policies are untried and untested anywhere in the world. By conducting the first empirical study to explore UC's wider effects on couple families, findings from this research will help fill this important gap in the evidence base. This three year, longitudinal, qualitative research study will investigate how these aspects of welfare reform are being responded to and affecting work-care patterns, intra-household financial management and distribution, and gender roles and relations among a sample of 75 low-income couples with dependent children. To capture differential effects on men and women and changes in couples' behaviour over time, and to ensure the inclusion new UC claimants, as well as benefit and tax credit claimants migrated onto UC, separate and joint, face-to-face interviews with both members of the couple will be conducted in 4 UK areas - Bath, Cumbria, Merseyside and Inverness - over two phases of research. 50 couples, comprising 100 partners, will be interviewed in phase one, and 50 couples will be interviewed in phase two. Half of the phase two interviews (25) will be longitudinal and involve re-interviewing couples interviewed in phase one. The other half (25) will be couples newly recruited in phase two, giving a total of 75 couples and 150 partners across both phases of research. Findings and policy implications will be written up in relation to the design and implementation of Universal Credit, the reform of working age benefits, gender equality and work-family reconciliation policies, and widely disseminated to academic and non-academic audiences.
Academics and civil society organisations have sought to raise awareness of UC's potential 'purse to wallet' income transfers and the possible adverse effects on women's financial independence, couples' management of their household finances, women's and children's poverty and couple's relationships (CPAG, 2010, Women's Budget Group, 2011). However, no-one knows how affected couples will respond to UC; these policies are untried and untested anywhere in the world. By conducting the first empirical study to explore UC's wider effects on couple families, findings from this research will help fill this important gap in the evidence base. This three year, longitudinal, qualitative research study will investigate how these aspects of welfare reform are being responded to and affecting work-care patterns, intra-household financial management and distribution, and gender roles and relations among a sample of 75 low-income couples with dependent children. To capture differential effects on men and women and changes in couples' behaviour over time, and to ensure the inclusion new UC claimants, as well as benefit and tax credit claimants migrated onto UC, separate and joint, face-to-face interviews with both members of the couple will be conducted in 4 UK areas - Bath, Cumbria, Merseyside and Inverness - over two phases of research. 50 couples, comprising 100 partners, will be interviewed in phase one, and 50 couples will be interviewed in phase two. Half of the phase two interviews (25) will be longitudinal and involve re-interviewing couples interviewed in phase one. The other half (25) will be couples newly recruited in phase two, giving a total of 75 couples and 150 partners across both phases of research. Findings and policy implications will be written up in relation to the design and implementation of Universal Credit, the reform of working age benefits, gender equality and work-family reconciliation policies, and widely disseminated to academic and non-academic audiences.
Planned Impact
For more than a decade, the UK means tested welfare system has been undergoing radical transformation with claimants increasingly subject to increasing labour market activation and work conditionality as a condition of benefit receipt. Extending conditionality to partners in unemployed and working couples with children, and merging a family's entire monthly benefit entitlement - including money for living costs, children and housing - into a single monthly household payment - as Universal Credit does, is however unprecedented. The resulting asymmetric conditionality in which each partner (whether unemployed, working or caring) will have personalised conditionality requirements to meet but without any corresponding right to receive any part of the UC payment, has to date, received little scholarly attention. Yet for the partners in couple families, these aspects of UC could potentially have serious consequences for work-care choices, the distribution of resources and power inside the household, even for the stability of relationships. Not only are these elements of UC's 'regime change' unparalleled for couple families, they represent unchartered territory for academics and policymakers too; none of these policies have been tried or tested anywhere in the world. By investigating actual behavioural effects as experienced by couples claiming UC, this research will help to fill a significant gap in the evidence base, providing the first empirical study of the extent to which this new policy context is helping both the partners in low-income couple families with children enter employment, increase their earnings and achieve a better work/family balance, as the policy intends.
Who will benefit? To date, journal articles, social commentary and media reporting about UC's possible differential effects on families in different circumstances have largely been theoretical, with analyses based on econometric modelling techniques or using outdated research and evidence produced in very different policy environments. By generating new empirical evidence based on actual, rather than hypothetical behavioural effects, findings will benefit a diverse range of research users inside and outside academia with an interest or involvement in supporting and advocating on behalf of a range of low-income and disadvantaged groups and service users, offering the prospect of wide societal impacts beyond interested academics and policy researchers. Beneficiaries outside of academia include:
Policy makers and politicians involved in designing, delivering or scrutinising policies and interventions targeted on low-income families;
Civil society organisations and advocacy groups with an interest in children and families, gender equality and couple relationships including Child Poverty Action Group, Women's Budget Group, Centre for Social Justice, Fawcett Society and Tavistock Relationships;
Statutory and third sector organisations delivering social welfare and support services to low-income individuals and families including local authorities, Housing Associations, welfare advice agencies, children's centres, church groups, voluntary and community organisations.
How will they benefit? Findings will enable policy makers, politicians and practitioners to design and deliver more effective welfare and family policies and support services, while minimising adverse or unintended or effects. Civil society and other third sector organisations who have been hampered by significantly outdated research evidence will be able to advocate and deliver services more effectively on behalf of their clients and service users. Ultimately, this will impact positively on the intended beneficiaries of these reforms; low-income families with dependent children. They will benefit from better designed and delivered polices, interventions and support services intended to increase household income and contribute towards improved, longer term outcomes for their children.
Who will benefit? To date, journal articles, social commentary and media reporting about UC's possible differential effects on families in different circumstances have largely been theoretical, with analyses based on econometric modelling techniques or using outdated research and evidence produced in very different policy environments. By generating new empirical evidence based on actual, rather than hypothetical behavioural effects, findings will benefit a diverse range of research users inside and outside academia with an interest or involvement in supporting and advocating on behalf of a range of low-income and disadvantaged groups and service users, offering the prospect of wide societal impacts beyond interested academics and policy researchers. Beneficiaries outside of academia include:
Policy makers and politicians involved in designing, delivering or scrutinising policies and interventions targeted on low-income families;
Civil society organisations and advocacy groups with an interest in children and families, gender equality and couple relationships including Child Poverty Action Group, Women's Budget Group, Centre for Social Justice, Fawcett Society and Tavistock Relationships;
Statutory and third sector organisations delivering social welfare and support services to low-income individuals and families including local authorities, Housing Associations, welfare advice agencies, children's centres, church groups, voluntary and community organisations.
How will they benefit? Findings will enable policy makers, politicians and practitioners to design and deliver more effective welfare and family policies and support services, while minimising adverse or unintended or effects. Civil society and other third sector organisations who have been hampered by significantly outdated research evidence will be able to advocate and deliver services more effectively on behalf of their clients and service users. Ultimately, this will impact positively on the intended beneficiaries of these reforms; low-income families with dependent children. They will benefit from better designed and delivered polices, interventions and support services intended to increase household income and contribute towards improved, longer term outcomes for their children.
Publications
Bennet F
(2020)
Universal credit and COVID-19
in Poverty
Bennett F
(2021)
How government sees couples on Universal Credit: a critical gender perspective
in Journal of Poverty and Social Justice
Bennett, F.
(2020)
Universal credit and COVID-19
in Poverty
Griffiths R
(2021)
Couples navigating work, care, and Universal Credit,
Griffiths R
(2021)
Universal Credit and the conundrum of the Covid-19 £20 uplift
Griffiths R
(2021)
Universal Credit and the Conundrum of the £20 uplift
Description | Universal Credit is a radical policy change in the UK, merging six means-tested benefits for people in and out of work into a single award paid monthly in arrears. Our longitudinal qualitative research examines how couples claiming Universal Credit make decisions about money, work, and care. Phase 1 (late 2018/early 2019) included 123 face-to-face interviews with 90 people in 53 households in England and Scotland. Phase 2 (late 2020) included 63 telephone interviews with individuals in 39 households. Our first report focused on money and payment issues. This highlighted the challenges in the ongoing management of Universal Credit joint claims. Working couples often had to manage a fluctuating monthly payment, with two-earner couples experiencing the most volatility in income. Those couples with no earnings, reliant only on Universal Credit, had more stable incomes but often found the monthly payment was insufficient to cover their basic living costs. Frequently there was a gap between entitlement and what families received each month, not least due to deductions for advances, overpayments, and arrears. The task of managing the claim, and the regular updating of information, including compliance with mandatory work requirements, often fell to the woman. Overall, many couples struggled to reach a 'steady state', whereby they could have some security of income, and this instability potentially undermines the policy priority within Universal Credit of incentivising work and making more work pay. Our second report focused on work and care decisions, and changes in employment over time. We found that the Universal Credit policy levers had limited influence on what couples did about who worked, for how long, and whether to work more hours. This was in part because work/life balance was often seen as more important than maximising household income, but also because the desire/need to stabilise household income was a key driver of work-care behaviour, and because couples were seeking to reduce the ongoing scrutiny and administrative burden of constant reporting to DWP. There was thus a mismatch between how policy envisaged Universal Credit would change behaviour and how couples are experiencing and responding to it. We also published a policy brief on the experiences of the couples receiving the £20 weekly uplift to the standard allowance introduced as a COVID19 financial support measure. This highlighted the value of the uplift but also that experiences were highly varied depending on circumstances. For some, the effects of earnings, deductions and interaction with other means-tested help could obscure and erode the value of the uplift. Most people got their information not from the DWP but from social media or word of mouth, with implications for DWP communication strategies. Our research thus shows that Universal Credit has significant implications for the decisions that couples make about money, work, and care. We have presented at academic conferences and seminars, including international. We launched each report with a webinar and have discussed the findings with DWP and other stakeholders, including Select Committees and relevant third sector and welfare rights organisations. |
Exploitation Route | Relevant to current debates on the future of Universal Credit specifically and of social security policy generally. This includes international interest in the aims and implementation of welfare reform. |
Sectors | Communities and Social Services/Policy,Government, Democracy and Justice |
URL | https://www.bath.ac.uk/projects/couples-balancing-work-money-and-care-exploring-the-shifting-landscape-under-universal-credit/ |
Description | Ongoing discussions with the Department of Work and Pensions regarding the design and implementation of Universal Credit. Jane Millar and Fran Bennett were specialist advisers to the House of Lords Inquiry, The Economics of Universal Credit, 2020 Participation in the CovidRealities project, linking research projects with evidence on impact of Covid19 lockdowns on families and family poverty. |
First Year Of Impact | 2019 |
Sector | Government, Democracy and Justice |
Impact Types | Policy & public services |
Description | Evidence on Universal Credit Managed Migration |
Geographic Reach | National |
Policy Influence Type | Contribution to a national consultation/review |
URL | https://parliamentlive.tv/event/index/3dc50087-da01-4df1-aef5-54a8a441980e |
Description | Evidence on Universal Credit and cost of living |
Geographic Reach | National |
Policy Influence Type | Contribution to a national consultation/review |
URL | https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/109176/html/ |
Description | Evidence to All Party Parliamentary Group on Poverty |
Geographic Reach | National |
Policy Influence Type | Contribution to a national consultation/review |
URL | https://www.bath.ac.uk/publications/call-for-evidence-into-the-impact-on-poverty-of-maintaining-the-... |
Description | Evidence to House of Commons Public Accounts Commiteee |
Geographic Reach | National |
Policy Influence Type | Contribution to a national consultation/review |
URL | https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/36807/pdf/ |
Description | Evidence to House of Commons Work and Pensions Select Committee |
Geographic Reach | National |
Policy Influence Type | Contribution to a national consultation/review |
URL | https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/22936/pdf/ |
Description | Evidence to House of Commons Work and Pensions Select Committee |
Geographic Reach | National |
Policy Influence Type | Contribution to a national consultation/review |
URL | https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/42327/pdf/ |
Description | Evidence to In-Work Progression Committee |
Geographic Reach | National |
Policy Influence Type | Contribution to a national consultation/review |
URL | https://www.bath.ac.uk/publications/couples-universal-credit-and-in-work-progression-response-to-cal... |
Description | COVIDREALITIES |
Organisation | Research Centre for the Social Sciences, University of York |
Country | United Kingdom |
Sector | Academic/University |
PI Contribution | The project was lead by researchers from the universities of York and Birmingham, and partner Child Poverty Action Group. It includes a collective of 14 research projects with a focus on poverty and families, all of whom are generating data which has a bearing on experiences of poverty during the pandemic. These 14 research groups have met monthly and are working together to synthesise and collate findings, and to share experiences of researching during the pandemic. We have contributed to meetings, webinars and a book (to be published in 2022 by Policy Press, Bristol). |
Collaborator Contribution | The lead researchers carried out new primary research with families. |
Impact | Chapter in edited book: Griffiths, R., Wood, M., Bennett, F. and Millar, J. (2022) Families navigating Universal Credit in the Covid-19 pandemic, in Kayleigh Garthwaite , Ruth Patrick , Maddy Power , Anna Tarrant , and Rosalie Warnock (eds) Policy Press COVID-19 COLLABORATIONS Researching Poverty and Low- Income Family Life During the Pandemic, Bristol: Policy Press |
Start Year | 2020 |
Description | COVIDREALITIES |
Organisation | University of York |
Country | United Kingdom |
Sector | Academic/University |
PI Contribution | The project was lead by researchers from the universities of York and Birmingham, and partner Child Poverty Action Group. It includes a collective of 14 research projects with a focus on poverty and families, all of whom are generating data which has a bearing on experiences of poverty during the pandemic. These 14 research groups have met monthly and are working together to synthesise and collate findings, and to share experiences of researching during the pandemic. We have contributed to meetings, webinars and a book (to be published in 2022 by Policy Press, Bristol). |
Collaborator Contribution | The lead researchers carried out new primary research with families. |
Impact | Chapter in edited book: Griffiths, R., Wood, M., Bennett, F. and Millar, J. (2022) Families navigating Universal Credit in the Covid-19 pandemic, in Kayleigh Garthwaite , Ruth Patrick , Maddy Power , Anna Tarrant , and Rosalie Warnock (eds) Policy Press COVID-19 COLLABORATIONS Researching Poverty and Low- Income Family Life During the Pandemic, Bristol: Policy Press |
Start Year | 2020 |
Description | Blogs |
Form Of Engagement Activity | Engagement focused website, blog or social media channel |
Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
Geographic Reach | International |
Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
Results and Impact | AT MARCH 2022 26th January 2022, Couples on Universal Credit navigating work and childcare (67 views)); 29th July 2021, Universal Credit: Past, present, future (176 views); 9th March 2021, Continuing confusion about Universal Credit and couples (240 views); 10th March 2021, More, please, for those with less: Why we need to go further on the Universal Credit uplift (84 views); 22nd January 2021, £20 uplift debate shines a light on inadequate benefit rates and design flaws of Universal Credit (344 views); 12th January 2021, Criticisms of Universal Credit: How has the government responded? (565 views); 11th November 2020, Universal Credit: Evidence and experience (182 views); 27th October 2020, The five-week wait and beyond: The case for further reforms to Universal Credit (107 views); 5th October 2020, Universal Credit and couples: Policy issues (141 views); 7th August 2020, Universal Credit for couples: What should be done? (130 views); 30th June 2020, Lost your job or income as a result of Covid-19? Living with a partner? You may get nothing from Universal Credit (16140 views); 6 April 2020, Coronavirus - the making or the unmaking of Universal Credit? (846 views); 25 March 2020, Labyrinth: The COVID-19 challenge for the self-employed and Universal Credit claimants (336 views); 4 December 2018, Universal Credit and the welfare system: How do the parties compare? (78 views); 3 December 2018, Universal Credit: Design Matters (4185 views); 19 September 2018, Universal Credit, Women and Gender Equality: A Retrograde Step? (2265 views); 9 July 2018, Universal Credit managed migration: the next big challenge (4378 views) |
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2018,2020,2021,2022 |
URL | https://blogs.bath.ac.uk/iprblog/category/universal-credit/ |
Description | Couples claiming Universal Credit navigating work and care |
Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
Geographic Reach | National |
Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
Results and Impact | Webinar with DWP Universal Credit Analysis Division |
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2021 |
Description | International seminar Universal Basic Income |
Form Of Engagement Activity | Participation in an activity, workshop or similar |
Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
Geographic Reach | International |
Primary Audience | Third sector organisations |
Results and Impact | Jane Millar, 'Universal Credit: designing and implementing the UK's new working-age benefit and how this differs from Basic Income', Visio Green European Foundation Seminar 'Making Basic Income a European Reality', Tampere, Finland, November 2019 |
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2019 |
URL | https://gef.eu/event/making-basic-income-a-european-reality/ |
Description | Podcasts |
Form Of Engagement Activity | Engagement focused website, blog or social media channel |
Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
Geographic Reach | International |
Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
Results and Impact | Four podcasts of webinars |
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2020,2021 |
URL | https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLKOcOEoLBDgj_HnVyt4d09hRMADz1Rt-P |
Description | Presentation to civil service and third sector |
Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
Geographic Reach | National |
Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
Results and Impact | Presentation by Marsha Wood, Exploring the childcare element of Universal Credit, Department for Work and Pensions, Universal Credit Analysis Division, London, Feb 2020 |
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2020 |
Description | Presentation to civil service and third sector |
Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
Geographic Reach | National |
Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
Results and Impact | Rita Griffiths, Universal Credit: couples managing work, money and care, Universal Credit Analysis and Evidence workshop, Department for Work and Pensions, July 2018 |
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2018 |
Description | Presentation to civil service and third sector |
Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
Geographic Reach | National |
Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
Results and Impact | Presentation by Rita Griffiths, Couples balancing work, money and care: exploring the shifting landscape under Universal Credit, Highlights from ESRC longitudinal research project, DWP Universal Credit Analysis Division, June 2020 |
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2020 |
Description | Presentation to civil service and third sector |
Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
Geographic Reach | National |
Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
Results and Impact | Presentation by Rita Griffiths, Universal Credit and Women, DWP Universal Credit Analysis Divsion external stakeholder meeting, March 2019 |
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2019 |
Description | Presentation to politicians |
Form Of Engagement Activity | Participation in an activity, workshop or similar |
Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
Geographic Reach | National |
Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
Results and Impact | Rita Griffiths and Marsha Wood, Universal Credit and Couples, Webinar sponsored by the Social Policy Association and hosted by Baroness Ruth Lister, House of Lords, October 2020 |
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2020 |
Description | Presentation to visiting overseas delegation |
Form Of Engagement Activity | Participation in an activity, workshop or similar |
Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
Geographic Reach | International |
Primary Audience | Other audiences |
Results and Impact | Presentation by Jane Millar, 'Universal Credit: a radical reform', The Federation of Unemployment Funds in Finland, London, September 2019 |
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2019 |
Description | Universal Credit and the Conundrum of the £20 uplift |
Form Of Engagement Activity | Participation in an activity, workshop or similar |
Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
Geographic Reach | National |
Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
Results and Impact | Webinar with DWP Universal Credit Analysis Division |
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2020 |
Description | Webinar Launch of Report, Couples navigating work, care and Universal Credit |
Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
Geographic Reach | International |
Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
Results and Impact | The launch was open and advertised to policy makers, politciians, third sector, organistaions, other researchers, media and general public. c.640 pageviews and c.94 report downloads; Top five performing webpage on our website; c.10,400 impressions and 200 engagements on social media (excluding University of Bath and University of Oxford channels); 86 event registrants; 52 additions to the IPR database/mailing list; 405 podcast listens; 56 video views (data at 7th Mrach 2022) |
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2022 |
URL | https://www.bath.ac.uk/publications/couples-navigating-work-care-and-universal-credit/ |
Description | Webinar Launch of Report, Uncharted Territory: Universal Credit, Couples and Money |
Form Of Engagement Activity | Participation in an activity, workshop or similar |
Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
Geographic Reach | International |
Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
Results and Impact | The launch was open and advertised to policy makers, politciians, third sector, organistaions, other researchers, media and general public. There were: c.2108 pageviews and c.526 report downloads; Top five performing webpage on the Institute for Policy Research, University of Bath; 101 event registrants; 54 additions to the IPR database/mailing list; 788 podcast listens; 41 video views (data at 7 March 2022) |
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2020 |
URL | https://www.bath.ac.uk/publications/uncharted-territory-universal-credit-couples-and-money/attachmen... |