This study explores the ways in which the marginalised and controversial New Traveller community participates in the labour market.
Focusing on the experiences of New Travellers, the report explores their patterns of paid work, benefit receipt and other sources of support, including that of community. In so doing, it provides insights into how New Travellers make a living and challenges the commonly held assumption that New Travellers are entirely dependent on the state. Making a living:
The study sheds light on what facilitates work, the barriers to work that New Travellers face, and how these compare with other marginalised groups.
Download as PDF, 4 pages, 0.03 MB
Little is known about the nature and extent of employment among the 'new traveller' community. Dr Lyn Webster and Professor Jane Millar of the University of Bath have explored how new travellers make a living. Drawing on the material gained from in-depth interviews with travellers, they found that:
The Government has introduced a number of welfare reforms with the central aim of integrating people who can work into the labour market. This study explores the ways in which the marginalised and controversial 'new traveller' community make a living. 'New travellers' are the most recent travelling group. They are ordinary people who live in alternative low cost mobile accommodation and who hold the same sort of values as the wider population. Focusing on the experiences of new travellers, the study examines their patterns of paid work, benefit receipt and other forms of support, including that of community.
In-depth interviews were conducted with travellers on rural sites across four counties of the South West of England, selected because it has a large new traveller population. The South West incorporates such areas as Glastonbury and Stonehenge which hold significance for the travelling community. In addition, the region has a festival scene and also a high prevalence of rural labour markets from which travellers frequently obtain work.
Employment was common among interviewees and many had positive experiences of both their job and work conditions. Many were economically active for at least part of the year. Nevertheless, the mobile nature of their lifestyle limited their access to conventional employment, apart from short periods when some were able to secure temporary agency work. This type of work was only available to travellers who possessed both a mobile phone and bank account and generally interviewees with these facilities had more opportunities than those without them.
Securing a regular and permanent job required a more settled existence that could only be obtained by residing either on an authorised site or at the place of work. As legal sites are few and far between, most participants had to look to the informal labour market for work. Paradoxically, high mobility assisted some travellers to get certain forms of casual work, particularly crop picking. On the other hand, longer periods of casual employment required a more stable existence. This was also the case for interviewees who were self-employed, although those combining this type of employment with the Working Families Tax Credit had more leeway. Only one traveller managed to secure a temporary position and combine it with receipt of Working Families Tax Credit.
Overall, interviewees placed a high value on work-generated income. In addition, the relationship between the collective nature of the travelling lifestyle and employment was important to the participants. Few families would have been able to get work had it not been for the sharing of childcare. The men were also helped by the fact that many time-consuming domestic tasks were mainly carried out by women.
A total of 21 travellers out of the 39 interviewed were claiming social security benefits, most frequently Income Support. Most of the (nine) travellers receiving Income Support were claiming as lone parents. Seven families were working and claiming Working Families Tax Credit. The income of eleven interviewees came solely from paid work. The evidence suggests that most interviewees were not 'dole scroungers': nearly half the interviewees were working and many more were able to obtain some form of employment over the year.
The continuity of social security claims varied. Long-standing lone parents tended to have the longest claims, while claimants of Jobseeker's Allowance tended to have the shortest claim periods, rarely longer than three months of the year.
Thirteen travellers reported that they had made fraudulent benefit claims at some point, eight infrequently and five on a more regular basis. Fraud was generally opportunistic rather than planned, the monetary gains were quite small, and almost all said that they had committed fraud to meet basic needs and/or to avoid the problems that can be caused by declaring small amounts of irregular earnings. In general, fraud was seen as something to be avoided and most travellers preferred other ways to try and make ends meet.
Interviewees experienced a number of problems both with social security benefits and in-work benefits. In relation to social security benefits this appears, primarily, to be the result of how the system tends to classify travellers as having 'no fixed abode'. This effects the frequency of signing-on, the amount of benefit paid and payment methods. In relation to in-work benefits, specifically the Working Families Tax Credit, problems appear to be the result of some lack of understanding about the travelling lifestyle, in that it was difficult for the Inland Revenue to believe that travellers were earning and surviving on so little money. Nevertheless, despite the problems, all the travellers receiving this benefit found it beneficial.
Interviewees were able to draw from a wide range of different resources in order to supplement their income or their lifestyle. The variety of activities helped sustain them through difficult times. The activities could be divided into 'borrowing', 'selling' and 'doing':
Overall, interviewees tended to undertake activities that involved a reciprocal element and that sat comfortably with the nature of the travelling community. They turned to their community first before turning to outsiders, and only turned to family when the help needed was beyond that which could be given by other travellers. For interviewees, self-help strategies were the most acceptable; activities such as selling drugs, begging and burglary were the least acceptable.
The researchers conclude that there are a number of issues to be addressed if policy is to enable travellers to gain greater access to the labour market while maintaining their mobile, community-based and low-impact lifestyle:
Current policy emphasises the need to combat social exclusion. However, the policy agenda focuses on people's ability to participate in the labour market. Interviewees valued paid work and it was an important factor in increasing their quality of living. But for these travellers, 'paid work' meant low quality, low paid and insecure jobs, which did not guarantee any greater level of 'inclusion'.
It is also evident from this study that interviewees wanted policies to help them sustain their way of living, not policies predicated upon them giving this up. A policy approach that involves identifying particular groups as socially excluded can risk stigmatising those groups as 'the problem'. The temptation may be to target, control and assimilate such groups in order to reduce numbers, justified on the grounds that living in such circumstances is self-evidently a bad thing for the individuals involved. The researchers conclude that constructing welfare policy for a diverse society is a major challenge and one that requires both an understanding and an acceptance of that diversity.
This study was undertaken by Lyn Webster and Jane Millar of the Centre for the Analysis of Social Policy at the University of Bath. The analysis is based on in-depth interview material. Interviews were conducted with 39 travellers living on 19 sites across four counties of the South West of England in two batches between February and August 2000. In addition, seven follow-up interviews were carried out, as well as interviews with the Children's Society's Traveller Support Workers. The research included single travellers, lone parents and couples with, and without, children.