A SPECIAL REPORT TO WOMEN ON WELFARE IN NEW YORK

(Article published in HWW Oct 2007)

Have you heard, there’s a loud argument going on about your future in the working world?

On one side, there’s the position that the best plan for helping recipients of public assistance is to get them back to work as quickly as possible, even in low paying jobs, so they can start building a work record. That’s the official stand taken by Mayor Michael Bloomberg of New York City and Governor Eliot Spitzer of New York State.

On the other side are those who believe that putting women (and they make up most of the welfare population) in low-wage, mostly dead-end jobs — while it may get them off public assistance — will commit them to a lifetime struggle against poverty.

That argument came to a head in August when Gov. Spitzer vetoed a bill called the Living Wage Bill that aimed to steer women on welfare into higher wage jobs and suggest they consider fields that require more skills and usually employ more men. The bill, passed by both houses of the legislature, would have ordered state welfare offices to encourage welfare recipients to seek training for "sustainable wage jobs" and consider jobs in "nontraditional" fields.

The bill defined "sustainable" as 185% of the poverty level. That means $31,764 for a family of three.

"Nontraditional" means jobs in an industry in which one gender is more than 75% of the work force. So for women, "nontraditional jobs" would be in fields dominated by men such as taxi drivers, carpenters, construction workers, chemists and aerospace engineers.

The Governor had no quarrel with the purpose of the Living Wage Bill. But explaining his veto, he noted that a third of parents on public assistance have only a high school diploma, and he felt low wage jobs combined with education and training were a better "opportunity" for them. He said the bill "ignores the realities of the marketplace, which has fewer ‘sustainable wage’ positions available." And he said he worries that New York would be penalized by federal work requirements that require a percentage of welfare recipients to hold jobs.

State Senator Liz Krueger, co-sponsor of the bill, countered "People have misunderstood this bill. It didn’t require placing people in jobs that don’t exist. It would simply broaden people’s options. Besides directing people to a job search firm or GED prep, welfare workers would say ‘Can you imagine yourself being a construction worker, or an electrician’s assistant, or a utility worker?’ Why would the world end if that was one of the options available for directing poor women into jobs that can finally get them the opportunity to move out of poverty?"

State Senator Tom Duane added "I am someone who believes that women can work in the aerospace industry. I think women can do anything."

A few days later, David Hansell, commissioner of the New York State Office of Temporary and Disability Assistance, seemed to come down on both sides of the argument. But in fact Hansell’s statement reflected the consensus of just about everybody who is serious about trying to help people escape welfare.

"Research tells us," writes Hansell "that the most successful programs for getting welfare recipients into good jobs, and helping them stay there, involve a blended strategy of rapid work engagement combined with other activities to build their skills. Many welfare recipients have little or no experience in the workplace, and we all understand that it’s necessary to start somewhere on the career ladder and work our way up. But work experience alone won’t necessarily address the skill deficits that keep people from advancing to better and higher-paying jobs. Education and training of various kinds, tailored to each individual’s needs, will help to do that."

The Governor, according to Hansell, has ordered him to "make sure we increase the vocational training and educational opportunities available to welfare clients, consistent with federal law." To that end, Hansell said, New York State would

1. •enroll more adults in vocational education training
   

2. •encourage employment sectors that disproportionately hire men to employ more women on welfare with the required skills
   

3. •collaborate with community colleges to develop approaches leading to jobs in high demand occupations.