The Paradoxical Reality of Welfare Professionals:Encounters Between Welfare Professionals and Citizens Within Social Security in the Netherlands

Welfare professionals work with a paradoxical reality. They should treat all citizens the same, and at the same time they must act responsively in individual cases when appropriate. Based on in-depth interviews with welfare professionals, this chapter provides a picture of the daily activities of welfare professionals and their interactions with citizens in the Dutch social security context. Based on a typology of enforcement styles, the chapter shows variation between and within agencies in how welfare professionals interpret the rules and how they respond to rule violations. It shows that, despite stricter legislation, welfare professionals are still able to leave their mark on enforcement

A new instrument – motivational postures in practice:Action research into the role of motivational postures in the enforcement of social security legislation in the Netherlands

Based on previous research on enforcement of social security in the Netherlands, we introduced the perspective “smart enforcement” (Hertogh, Bantema, Weyers, Winter & De Winter). When we ignore other factors and circumstances, we see that the (experienced) sanctioning is not, but the (experienced) persuasion is related to compliance. The extent to which beneficiaries comply with the obligations of their benefit depends on the perceived chance of being caught and the profit that is expected from the violation. Our research shows that the motivational postures of beneficiaries are important for compliance. The individual profile of beneficiaries can be mapped based on five "motivational postures" distinguished by Valerie Braithwaite: commitment, capitulation, resistance, disengagement and game playing. The first two attitudes are characterized by a positive attitude toward the law and law enforcement, and the remaining three attitudes are characterized by an increasing negative attitude. A person can have multiple motivational postures at the same time. "Commitment" and "capitulation" have a positive relationship with compliance, while "resistance," "disengagement" and "game playing” are negatively related to compliance. The level of compliance in social security benefits not so much from "more" enforcement, but from "smarter" enforcement. In other words, the effectiveness of enforcement in social security is not only determined by tougher or softer measures, but also by the extent to which the enforcement style is tailored to the specific backgrounds and expectations of the beneficiary. The principle of "smart enforcement" is that the individual profile of the beneficiary must be taken into account as much as possible when setting up the enforcement relationship. Enforcers should be able to match their behavior to the profile of beneficiaries. To help employees determine the profile of their clients, we developed an electronic analysis tool (the ‘prototype’). We tested the prototype at one social assistance agency in the Netherlands. After the test-phase, we interviewed beneficiaries and employees about their experiences with the prototype

Tussen de regels:een rechtssociologische studie naar handhaving in de sociale zekerheid

‘Fraud should never pay off’ is a commonly heard statement in the Netherlands. The Dutch political and public debate is currently dominated by the notion that fraud in social security must be severely punished. The Tightening of Enforcement and Sanctions Policy Social Affairs and Employment legislation came into effect on January 1st, 2013. This law introduced a stricter system for the legal sanctions of Social Assistance Agencies (municipalities) and the Employee Insurance Agency (UWV) with the intention of deterring stubborn fraudsters. The law is therefore often referred to as the ‘Fraud Act’. With the introduction of the act, the Dutch legislator has expressed its wish that social security agencies should enforce the law more strictly. The question is how this is done in practice. This dissertation focuses on the role of front-line officials who are involved in the enforcement of social security legislation. For this purpose, I have observed various employees in the course of their daily work. I have analysed the implementation practice of social security legislation by using two perspectives. The first perspective is the enforcement styles of front-line officials and the second perspective is the possible alignment of the enforcement choice with the attitude and behavior of the beneficiary (responsive regulation). The bottom-up approach of this research provides a new perspective on the - often closed - world of enforcement