 |
The Broken Promise:
Welfare Reform Two Years Later
Equal
Rights Advocates
January 2000
INTRODUCTION
| When President Clinton signed
federal welfare reform into law in 1996, he promised
that it would reduce the welfare rolls and “increase
independence.” Many welfare recipients remember
hearing him talk about both “ending welfare
as we know it” and working with companies to
hire welfare recipients. A welfare recipient in Los
Angeles described her reaction: “I was excited
kind of. Because what I heard on TV is that a lot
of companies were going to be hiring off the welfare
rolls. That was the reason that I actually volunteered
myself to go through the GAIN1 program.”
Now that welfare reform has gone into effect, many
welfare recipients and their families view it as
a broken promise. They have neither received help
to access decent jobs, nor experienced economic
independence. As the Los Angeles recipient said:
“Once I got in there, it wasn’t what I was
expecting. There [were] no resources. There [were]
no jobs, like American Airlines or anything.”
In late 1999, Equal Rights Advocates (ERA) asked
welfare recipients throughout California about how
welfare reform was working. This executive report
contains the recommendations and findings from six
focus groups that ERA conducted in three California
counties: Sacramento, Tulare and Los Angeles.
The consistent thread from our interviews is that
welfare reform has not met its promise. The line
of employers waiting to hire off the welfare rolls
does not exist. Moreover, ERA found rampant violations
of CalWORKs law, ranging from failing to consider
welfare recipients’ interest in developing a job
search strategy to failing to assess properly welfare
recipients’ barriers to employment.
We hope that the voices of the women with whom
we spoke will carry to Governor Davis’ office, welfare
offices and the Legislature. The message they carry
is clear: California must leave behind the approach
of Work First, a practice that forces mostly single
parents into unstable, low-wage jobs that offer
no hope of independence. Instead, California must
develop and implement a welfare reform system that
will move families out of poverty permanently. |
“You’ve
spent twenty years telling them [employers] we are
lazy, and now you want them to hire us?”
—A Focus Group Participant |
RECOMMENDATIONS
| The participants in our
focus groups had several recommendations for improving
California’s welfare reform system. ERA also convened
a meeting of advocates and community-based service providers
to discuss the preliminary findings and develop additional
recommendations. The following are key recommendations
that we believe are needed to mend the broken promise
of welfare reform. Legislature
- Make Talk About Empowering Welfare Recipients
a Reality. The Legislature wants to empower welfare
recipients to move into the workforce but has not
provided them with the tools to do so. It should start
by amending CalWORKs to provide up-front assessments
of then skills, interests and barriers to employment.
As one focus group participant suggested: “Assess
when you first see us.”
Then, caseworkers should provide welfare recipients
with the information they need to make decisions about
what they want to do and help them accomplish their
goals. As one participant suggested: “Start
people off with something they want to do, be it a
job, school or training. Stick with them until the
end, until they can make it on their own…Don’t
leave them when they make $5 an hour flipping burgers.”
- Amend CalWORKs’ County Incentive Provisions.
Currently, California provides financial incentives
to counties that have reduced their caseloads due
to employment lasting a minimum of six months. Caseload
reductions, however, are not an accurate indicator
of success. Instead, the State should reward those
counties that do a good job at developing and connecting
recipients to: (1) quality on-the-job training programs
(including training in nontraditional occupations
for women); (2) education (GED, ESL, certificate and
degree programs); (3) career counseling and (4) employers
that pay livable wages.
- Establish a State Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC).
California should set up a state-operated tax
credit for welfare recipients who are moving from
welfare to work but do not earn self-sufficient wages.
This tax credit also should be offered to the “working
poor” who are not welfare recipients. To ensure
success, California must devote resources to conducting
outreach, training and technical assistance about
the state EITC.
State and County Administrators
- Properly Train Caseworkers and Reduce Their
Workload. Many caseworkers are trying hard. With
little support and training, caseworkers are charged
with helping welfare recipients locate stable employment.
ERA recommends continuous caseworker training and
oversight to ensure that they understand the CalWORKs
rules and provide recipients with accurate information,
either through workshops or individualized meetings.
The practice of waiting for welfare recipients to
ask the right question before providing helpful information
must stop. Counties also should evaluate and reduce
caseworker workloads.
- Monitor CalWORKs Implementation. California
has not met its responsibilities to monitor and evaluate
welfare reform to ensure that counties comply with
CalWORKs law. In many instances, the State
does not know what is happening in the counties and
what is or is not working. For CalWORKs to work, the
State must conduct careful oversight of its 58 county-run
programs.
To facilitate monitoring, the State must ensure that
counties collect and report data about their welfare
recipients, including the wages and duration of employment;
the number who receive vocational assessments, education
and training services; and the number who receive
various supportive services, such as mental health
counseling, domestic violence services and substance
abuse treatment. Although counties currently are required
to submit monthly reports containing much of this
data, many have not done so. The State must enforce
this requirement.
- Develop a Model Program for Addressing Criminal
Histories. California should identify a best practices
program that addresses participants’ criminal histories
as an employment barrier while respecting participants’
privacy rights. The model program should provide caseworkers
and other social services providers with information
about when they or employers may inquire about criminal
histories, when criminal histories can preclude certification
or licensing required for certain jobs and “do’s
and don’ts” for counseling participants with
this barrier. The program also should connect welfare
recipients to legal services to help them seal, expunge
or correct their criminal records, as appropriate.
- Make CalWORKs Work Better. Our focus groups
identified many specific recommendations for improving
the current CalWORKs system. These include, but are
not limited to:
- Pay childcare providers on time
- Count study time toward a self-initiated program
participant’s requisite work hours to enable her
to stay in school
- Develop sector employment intervention projects
that target higher wage jobs towards which participants
can work, and build in more career counseling about
a range of available jobs
- Integrate “Know Your Workplace Rights”
training into the CalWORKs system
- Match recipients with mentors who have “graduated”
from welfare
Media
- Portray Welfare Recipients Without Stereotypes.
The media, caseworkers and government agents should
strive to portray welfare recipients accurately. Welfare
recipients are individuals who are trying hard to
succeed, despite many obstacles and few resources.
No family wants to be on welfare.
Advocates
- Build a Constituency of Working Poor Families
that Includes Welfare Recipients. Advocates and
unions should focus more attention on organizing welfare
recipients to build a coalition of the “working
poor” who vote. Only then will welfare recipients
be able to influence Governor Davis and the Legislature.
Organizing welfare recipients to form unions also
makes sense because many recipients have been, are
now and will be in the workforce; they need employment
protections, increased wages and medical and other
job benefits.
|
“They
keep preaching that you are in charge of your life. You
determine the outcome and stuff like that. But then they
turn around and they won’t let you.”
—A Los Angeles Woman |
FOCUS
GROUP METHODOLOGY
ERA collaborated with a key community-based organization
in each county: Community Services, Education and Training
in Tulare; Asian Resources in Sacramento; and Women at Work
in Los Angeles. These organizations were in charge of recruiting
participants and identifying women who were on their way to
economic self-sufficiency. ERA also engaged a professional
focus group facilitator, Ana Rivera, who conducted all six
focus groups.
All focus group participants were women who had participated
in at least one Work First component of their county’s CalWORKs
plan (e.g., job search). One group in each county was comprised
only of women of color (Tulare: Latina; Sacramento: Asian-American;
Los Angeles: African-American). ERA conducted all six focus
groups in English; each ranged from five to twelve participants.
Each participant filled out a questionnaire to provide baseline
information, which included demographic data, past work experiences,
current work experience and work aspirations. All focus groups
occurred in September and October 1999.
COUNTIES’ DEMOGRAPHICS
All three counties are quite diverse ethnically.
In all three counties, the number of racial minorities who
are on welfare or are economically disadvantaged exceed their
percentage in the general population. Since implementation
of CalWORKs, caseloads in California have plummeted 30%. In
Los Angeles, as with other large cities across the country,
whites are leaving welfare more quickly than people of color,
particularly African-American.
ABOUT
THE COUNTIES
|
Sacramento
|
|
|
General Population1 |
Welfare Population2 |
Economically Disadvantaged3 |
|
White |
63% |
44% |
52% |
|
Latino |
15% |
32% |
16% |
|
African-American |
10% |
18% |
16% |
|
Asian-American |
12% |
15% |
15% |
|
Native American |
1% |
1% |
2% |
|
Unemployment Rate: 4% |
Total Caseload (1999): 31,000 |
| |
|
Tulare
|
|
|
General Population |
Welfare Population |
Economically Disadvantaged |
|
White |
47% |
32% |
33% |
|
Latino |
46% |
59% |
58% |
|
African-American |
2% |
3% |
1% |
|
Asian-American |
6% |
6% |
7% |
|
Native American |
2% |
1% |
1% |
|
Unemployment Rate: 20% |
Total Caseload (1999): 11,770 |
| |
|
Los Angeles
|
|
|
General Population |
Welfare Population |
Economically Disadvantaged |
|
White |
47% |
15% |
18% |
|
Latino |
27% |
50% |
60% |
|
African-American |
18% |
29% |
10% |
|
Asian-American |
8% |
6% |
11% |
|
Native American |
0.3% |
0.2% |
1% |
|
Unemployment Rate: 6% |
Total Caseload (1999): 224,790 |
|
|
|
1
Population Estimates Program, Population Division,
U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1998.
2 Public Welfare in California, Department
of Social Services, 1998.
3 U.S. Census, 1990. Economically Disadvantaged
is defined in the Job Training Partnership Act as
being 1) on welfare, or 2) below either the Federal
poverty level or 70% of the Lower Living Standard
Income Level. |
Los Angeles
In Los Angeles County, about 80% of CalWORKs recipients who
are assigned to an activity are assigned to job club and job
search. Recipients participate in one week of job club followed
by three weeks of job search. If they do not get a job, they
must complete another session of job search. If, at the end
of the second session, they are unable to get a job, they
are referred to a vocational assessment. The remaining 20%
participate in an education or training program. In Los Angeles
County, 85% of CalWORKs clients who secured employment remain
eligible for welfare cash aid. On average, they earned $6.81
an hour.
Sacramento
The Sacramento program is structured as a neighborhood-based,
one-stop center. The Sacramento sequence of activities starts
with an evaluation that leads to an employment services orientation.
Subsequently, a “personal plan” is developed for
each individual. This plan may include “job services,”
ESL, GED or SIP activities. Job services consists of job club
workshops, job search, jobs or work experience.
Tulare
Tulare has many significant challenges to moving welfare
recipients to work, including a lack of jobs. Moreover, 25%
of cash aid recipients live in areas that are not accessible
by public transportation. TulareWORKs refers people to other
community resources and tries to avoid having them go on welfare
in the first place. Once an individual is on aid, the county
conducts the initial appraisal. Clients then are referred
to job search. If they are unable to find a job, a plan is
developed that may include education or training. It appears
that significant numbers of recipients are unable to find
employment and instead receive short-term job training or
work experience.
About
the Participants
| |
Sacramento |
Tulare |
Los
Angeles |
| Currently
Working |
50% |
24% |
59% |
| Participated
in Job Search |
87% |
72% |
82% |
| Average
# of children |
2.47 |
3.05 |
1.76 |
| Average
Age |
30.3 |
26.9 |
36 |
|
Average Level of Education |
|
Eighth Grade or Less |
0% |
26% |
0% |
|
Some High School |
33% |
26% |
0% |
|
High School/GED |
40% |
26% |
35% |
|
Some College |
20% |
16% |
29% |
| AA
Degree |
0% |
0% |
24% |
| BA/BS
Degree |
0% |
0% |
6% |
|
Other (training certificate) |
40% |
0% |
6% |
| Length
of Time on Aid |
6.4
years |
5.8
years |
9
years |
CalWORKs
On August 11, 1997, Governor Wilson signed
California’s welfare reform law. California Work Opportunity
and Responsibility to Kids, CalWORKs, establishes a five-year
lifetime limit for receipt of aid, which started ticking
on January 1, 1998, for all California adult recipients
then on aid.
Under CalWORKs, adult recipients must engage
in “work activities” and must find work within
18 or 24 months. “Work activities” can include
job search, English as a Second Language (ESL), GED, on-the-job
training, work experience and vocational training.
CalWORKs adopts a “Work First”
approach to moving people from welfare to work. Work First
policies emphasize welfare recipients getting the first
job they can, no matter what kind and typically at the least
expense to the government. Consequently, Work First generally
places recipients into activities such as job club (where
one typically learns how to prepare a resume and apply for
a job) or job search, rather than educational or training
programs.
When a recipient enrolls in CalWORKs, she
generally attends an orientation, followed by an appraisal,
job club and job search. In developing a job search strategy,
the county is supposed to consider the interests and skills
of the participant.
If the participant has not located a job after
completing her job search, she receives a vocational assessment
of her work and education history, skills and barriers to
employment. She then signs a welfare-to-work plan based
on the assessment, which describes her work activities and
the supportive services she needs. The welfare-to-work plan
also is supposed to take into account the participant’s
interests. Once she signs or refuses to sign the plan, her
18- or 24-month clock starts ticking.
CalWORKs requires that domestic violence survivors
are to receive referrals to domestic violence agencies and
other resources and may be considered for a waiver of their
work requirements and time limits. Recipients with disabilities,
mental health problems or substance abuse problems are supposed
to receive evaluations and appropriate services. Recipients
are entitled to supportive services (e.g., childcare, transportation,
clothing) while they engage in work activities.
| FINDINGS
Getting Information
Written Mailings
Insufficient
ERA asked the women in our focus groups how about their
understanding of CalWORKs. We found a widespread lack
of understanding about the time limits and the availability
of education, training and supportive services.
Communication is a predominate problem, one that has
many layers. Although several participants acknowledged
getting some written material in the mail, low literacy
levels or the lack of “user-friendliness”
of some written materials was a barrier. It was clear
that they need verbal reinforcement of that information.
Our participants, and particularly the Latinas, received
most of their information by word of mouth: either off
the street, from neighbors or friends or on the bus.
A Los Angeles woman who learned about going to school
and getting work study “off the street”
said: “They [need to] tell people about the different
programs out there, rather than you have to meet somebody
on the street or on the bus and you hear about it.”
The participants felt that it is important for welfare
agencies to provide the same information to all welfare
recipients, notwithstanding different caseworkers, levels
of assertiveness or reading ability. As a Sacramento
woman said: “I think they need to let you know
more about [training and educational programs]. The
reason I know that is because I read through the book
at the office. A lot of my friends or my neighbors don’t
know nothing about it…I see a lot of my neighbors
[who] don’t know how to read.”
Confusion Reigns
The overwhelming majority of participants were confused
about their time limits. Only a few completely understood
that CalWORKs establishes two important time limits.
Most understand one time limit, but not the other. “The
only thing I knew was that there was a five-year limit,”
said one woman. A few had no conception of what either
time limit was.
Differences in receipt of information were particularly
pronounced in relation to transitional services. CalWORKs
recipients who are working and no longer eligible for
cash aid are entitled to two years of childcare; most
remain eligible for MediCal. Most of the women with
whom we spoke had no idea that they are entitled to
these transitional services. Most participants also
did not know about the availability of other supportive
services, such as domestic violence, substance abuse
treatment or mental health counseling.
Several women discovered during the focus group sessions
that they did not receive services that other women
received. For example, in the two Los Angeles groups,
some women received more money for bus passes than others.
Most who received less did not understand the reason
for the difference. Fortunately, one woman explained
that full-time students qualify for a discount. No one
from the welfare office had ever explained that to them.
Unless welfare recipients receive information about
why they receive different services, many will believe
that the system is unfair and capricious. |
“I didn’t
find…out [about domestic violence services until
after they almost dumped me out of the GAIN program.”
—A Los Angeles Woman |
| If You Don’t Ask, They Won’t
Tell
Exacerbating
the communication problem is what many women in Los
Angeles described as an “If you don’t ask, they
won’t tell” policy. A Los Angeles woman frustratingly
described the Catch-22 situation in which so many welfare
recipients find themselves: “If you’re not educated
enough to ask questions or be resourceful, they don’t
tell you. You have to know to ask these questions to
get that information.” Several women in the other
counties agreed that “they don’t tell you about
programs, you have to ask.”
One woman offered a possible explanation for this practice.
Caseworkers “assume we know all this stuff. Assume
that we’ve been manipulating the system all this
time. When you ask them something they look at you like
you are crazy.” The participants reported that
caseworkers both look down on them as ignorant and lazy
and assume that they know an extraordinary amount about
the system and have the know-how to manipulate it. Meanwhile,
crucial information about available services is kept
from recipients. Available resources remain largely
unused.
Often, caseworkers do not know enough about CalWORKs
or available resources for welfare recipients. As a
Sacramento woman said: “I’ve had some real experience
with welfare workers who had no idea what [certain programs]
were.” |
“One social worker told a friend of mine,
‘It’s not our responsibility to tell you
[about these programs]. If you ask me about a program,
I have to tell you. But if you don’t ask me [then
I won’t tell you.]’”
—A Los Angeles Woman |
| Women
Need Individualized Treatment Welfare recipients
told us that welfare reform should be real reform, not
just cutting the rolls in half. They want real jobs,
ones that offer the possibility of supporting their
families. To access higher-wage jobs, welfare recipients
need help. As one participant stated: “It is encouraging
that they are trying to get us to work, but we need
more help.”
For CalWORKs to provide that help, it must provide
as much individualized attention as possible. The women
in our focus groups emphasized the importance of viewing
each woman as an individual, with her own needs and
goals, and providing her with appropriate services.
Individualized attention includes a range of conduct,
from “[t]ak[ing] time to get to know the individual
person, instead of shuffling us around like a piece
of paper,” as one Los Angeles woman suggested,
to finding out what the recipient wants or needs and
connecting her to appropriate services.
A few women described how their caseworkers helped
them. One Los Angeles woman told us that her caseworker
asked her about what she was interested in, gave her
a year to finish her degree for business administration
and explained the rules to her. A Tulare woman said:
“I have to say with my worker, he has been more
than helpful. He has made sure that I had the same opportunities
as everybody else, if not more. He’s really helped me
make sure that I’ve found what I’ve wanted to do. When
I go over to pick up a piece of paper, he’s like ‘How’s
it going for you? I’m so happy that you’re happy with
what you have.’ He’s really nice.” A few other
women who were satisfied with the services they received
described how they received specific job leads in the
fields in which they were interested through the job
search program.
A crucial component of individualized attention is
an up-front, accurate assessment of skills, interests
and needs. Many welfare recipients lack sufficient basic
skills to obtain and retain decent employment. Without
an up-front assessment, many women are channeled into
inappropriate job club and job search services. CalWORKs
requires that recipients be evaluated for disabilities
and barriers to employment. Yet some of the women with
whom we spoke appeared to have learning or other types
of disabilities that had not been assessed or addressed.
For example, one woman described that although
she is a whiz at math, she cannot “put that on
paper.” Another woman said that she can type but
not spell.
Many recipients understand that caseworkers are overburdened
with cases and must work within a system that elevates
paperwork above clients: “They have too big caseloads.
It’s not an individualized scenario and they don’t have
time to call you back. They don’t have time on a one-on-one
basis to sit with you.” One Tulare woman suggested
hiring more caseworkers to decrease the workload. |
“Everyone has different needs [but the
system] treats welfare recipients like we are all the
same…It is ludicrous to thing that everybody’s
life is the same and have the same rules for everybody.”
—A Tulare Woman
“Each worker has like thousands of cases
to handle and maybe...that is why they just don’t give
enough information of what we need.”
—A Tulare Woman |
| Job Search:
The Good, The Bad, The Really Bad Forty out
of fifty-one focus group participants completed job
club and job search programs. The majority of these
women, however, did not find any employment that way.
Of those currently working [21], only eight indicated
that they found their jobs through CalWORKs. Despite
the fact that none of them found a job through job search,
several of the women in the Latina-only focus group
in Tulare seemed to appreciate their job club and job
search services.
The few women who enjoyed the job club services did
so because it exposed them to new skills or new ideas
or connected them to other women in similar situations.
For example, a Tulare woman described what she liked
about job club: “The first two weeks you’re in
a conference room and she teaches you how to prepare
for an interview, how to fill out job applications,
how to dress for success. I thought it was cool. It
was something new to me.” A Los Angeles woman
liked “a self-esteem class that showed us how
to be women. It was very helpful to me. We had a black
lady who came in and showed us how to dress, how to
feel about ourselves. When you are out there and you
are not used to doing things for so long, that helped
me a lot.” Another Tulare woman said: “What
I did get out of job club was that it helped me get
out there, because I was like a hermit. I was stuck
at home and I’m scared of going out there.…So
I started getting more of a social life, more talking
to people, more friends and that helped me a lot.”
Unfortunately, the overwhelming majority of our participants
did not benefit from either job club or job search.
These women reported: “I didn’t learn anything
that I did not know how to do myself.” Most of
the women we spoke with have held jobs in the past.
Thus, “they know how to dress, how to fill out
an application, about a resume.”
Many women told us that job search merely puts them
into a room and gives them a telephone book to make
cold calls.
Our participants also described being sent to the same
kinds of jobs they had held in the past or going to
interview with employers that clearly did not want to
hire them. A few of the women felt frustrated because
they complied with the rules, went through job search
and a short-term training program, but did not find
employment and were told they had to go through job
club again.
Worse, several women described experiences with job
search services that were counterproductive to the philosophy
behind job club to develop recipients’ self-esteem.
One woman reported that during job search, instructors
made such comments as, “‘I am not the one who
has to be here. I have a job.’ She made us feel really
bad.” A Los Angeles woman described her job club
class: “People were genuinely trying to come up
with what they wanted to do with their lives and what
they had to go over in order to reach their goals, and
she was in the front of the class making faces at people.
That was just not helpful to anyone in the room. That
woman had us in tears. She did not motivate us at all.”
Under CalWORKs, welfare recipients who have disabilities
are supposed to be given a good cause reason for not
engaging in work activities, such as job search. One
woman described this blatant violation of the CalWORKs
rule: “I had a cyst in my ovary. The job club
instructor told me even thought my stomach was really
swollen and I was going in for surgery that I had to
finish the program.” |
“Obviously we are under educated and under
skilled. And you are putting us in this room and saying
do this by yourselves. Who the heck do we contact?
We don’t know who to contact to get a good job.”
—A Los Angeles Woman
“I felt like I was going in the circle again
all over…I haven’t been able to move anywhere.”
—A Tulare Woman
“[Job search] is just trying to prepare you for
an interview. It doesn’t prepare you for
a job.”
—A Sacramento Woman |
| Women Need Experience,
Job Training and Education We asked participants
whether they had received vocational assessments of
their skills and developed “welfare-to-work”
plans as provided under CalWORKs, what services they
have received so far, whether the services were helpful
and what they need to get decent jobs.
Many women seemed unaware that they had signed written
welfare-to-work plans. A few peers, however, reminded
them of the written paper they signed sending them to
various work activities. A Los Angeles woman said: “After
I went to my orientation, I talked to my GAIN worker.
He said, ‘Well, you already signed your plan.’ I said,
‘What did I sign?’ He said, ‘You are going to GAIN and
job club.’ I said, ‘That can’t be right, I didn’t get
to say anything about what I wanted.’”
The education and training programs included in most
participants’ welfare-to-work plans are short-term and
do not improve their ability to find decent jobs. As
one woman said: “They only approve the kind of
training that will get you the same minimum wage job
you’d had before.”
Any Job Is Not Enough
The overwhelming majority reported that just getting
a job is not the answer. Work First leads most women
to temporary, low-pay, gender-stereotyped jobs that
do not offer a path out of poverty. In one Los Angeles
focus group, none of the women could support their families
with the jobs they currently or recently held. Said
a Tulare woman: “I would like a job that would
in the future get more advanced and actually [become]
a career. A job is just a job.” A Los Angeles
woman commented: “It’s time to stop working these
penny ante jobs. GAIN tells you to get a job. A job
is not going to support your family.” Another woman
explains that with CalWORKs, “You actually have
to go to work and make less than you were making when
you were on welfare, which isn’t anything to be happy
about.”
A recent Urban Institute study of welfare recipients
who recently left welfare reported that they earned
on average $6.61 an hour. Approximately 29% returned
to welfare at some point within the three-year study
period. Unlike other low-income families who have not
received public assistance, welfare recipients tended
to: (1) have jobs that do not provide health benefits;
(2) retain their jobs for fewer months; (3) be single
parents with younger children; (4) not have other family
member incomes and (4) face more serious struggles with
providing food and housing for their families.
Many women talked about the need for permanent jobs,
not temporary ones. Yet through job search, most of
our participants simply received connections to temporary
agencies. As one Sacramento woman said: “I don’t
want to work temp. I want a permanent job where I’m
stable. I want to get off of welfare I’m tired of being
on welfare.”
Several women who completed short-term job training
still were unable to locate stable employment. These
women identify the need for more outreach and connections
to employers to make sure jobs are available.
|
“[F]or me it’s ‘I got this training, but where
is the job?’ They say unemployment is low but
you wouldn’t know it looking at me. I look for work
but can’t find any.”
—A Sacramento Woman |
Melanie
Studying during odd hours, patching together
childcare and rides to school from her cousin, Melanie has
been determined to finish her education from the start. That
determination helped convince her CalWORKs counselor not to
track her into milking cows or working retail, two of the
top choices available to women leaving welfare in Tulare County,
but to support her degree in Human Services and Psychology.
During a recent interview, Melanie said, “CalWORKs wants
me to get a human services certificate, but I want to get
a degree. Nothing guarantees a job, but with a degree, they
know you have a college-level education.”
Melanie, a single mother of three, who started
on Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) at age 16
when she was pregnant with her first child, knows what it
takes to make it. She says that at that time, “[Welfare]
was all I knew to do; my mom was on it. I dropped out of high
school my freshman year because of the pregnancy.”
Now, with a 3.9 grade point average, Melanie
says it is her grades that make her happy. “I’ve had
straight A’s for three semesters.” She is proud “knowing
that I had it in me all along.”
Still the rigors of her schedule can be overwhelming.
In addition to school, Melanie works 35 hours each week. “What
gets me down is when I’m just on overload—the house
is a mess, my boyfriend’s working late and I have lots of
homework to do.” Melanie starts her homework after her
kids fall asleep. “Sometimes I am up until three in
the morning because they don’t go to bed until nine in the
evening.”
Melanie had been working on her general education
requirements when she received a notice to attend a CalWORKs
orientation. She worried when the counselors announced that
her class would be the “guinea pigs.” “They
are saying ‘you have to go to [job club] classes, otherwise
we’ll cut off your aid, we’ll cut off aid to your children.’
The classes they had were just pushing everyone in the same
direction.”
Melanie says she will never forget the day she
went in to develop a welfare-to work plan. She told her counselor
that she was studying for a degree in Human Services. “He
told me that my major was not an approved major for the CalWORKs
program. He handed me a list of the top 50 jobs, according
to the unemployment office. They were all certificate programs,
not degree programs. I remember three of the jobs: agriculture
technician, retail sales and preschool teacher. “I was
angry,” says Melanie. “I don’t usually cry very
easily, but when he gave me that list, I just broke down.
I just knew I wouldn’t be able to support my kids on a minimum
wage job. That’s why I was in the degree program.”
Melanie fought to pursue her degree and was
able to stay in her degree program. “I think people
should be able to do what they’re good at, otherwise it doesn’t
work and people just go back on welfare. That list—it’s
just that what I wanted to do wasn’t there. I love children,
but I don’t want to be a preschool teacher. I hate cows. And
I did retail when I was 18; I know what I want to do. With
the world the way it is today, don’t we need more counselors?”
Melanie’s cousin cares for her two-year-old
and watches her seven and ten-year-olds after school. Her
cousin also drives her to school, otherwise Melanie would
have to commute two hours each way, taking at least four buses.
CalWORKs pays for her childcare and mileage reimbursement.
“The childcare has been really helpful,” says
Melanie.
This support from her cousin and her college
CalWORKs counselor, combined with her determination and hard
work, are moving Melanie toward a better future. “I’m
not here for a job,” says Melanie. “I’m here for
a career.”
| On-The-Job Training
and Education Many women identified education as
their path to economic self-sufficiency. One
Tulare woman who was able to go back to school under
CalWORKs finds that aspect of the program valuable:
“I didn’t have an education. I only went
through seventh grade. When I found out that they would
send you back to school and do this and that, I said,
‘Wow’. To me, that was really neat. They pay for the
books and everything.” Many of our participants
echoed this theme: “Give us access to education
because the more education we have the more we get paid.”
Some consider themselves extremely fortunate to be
able to continue their educational programs, with CalWORKs
paying for books, transportation and childcare. But
those who are permitted to continue are in the minority.
In violation of CalWORKs’ protections for Self-Initiated
Program participants, many women were told they could
not go to school or had to quit. |
“I don’t want a job, I want a career.
Someone can come and take your job away, but when you
have education, they can’t take your job, you can move
up and you can go on to the next step.” —A
Sacramento Woman |
Self-Initiated Programs
Welfare recipients who enrolled in education
or training programs (typically at community colleges, adult
and vocational schools) on their own before being assigned
to CalWORKs activities may be allowed to continue in their
education or training programs, despite Work First requirements.
These self-enrolled programs are called “Self-Initiated
Programs” or SIPs.
A recipient enrolled in a SIP that meets all
the following criteria must be allowed to continue her SIP
program for 18 or 24 months and cannot be assigned to other
CalWORKs work activities that interfere: (1) participant does
not already have a bachelor’s degree (unless the SIP is a
teaching credential); (2) the SIP is for a degree or certificate;
(3) participant is making satisfactory progress; (4) the SIP
will lead to employment and (5) participant engages in 32
hours per week of classroom, internship, work-study or other
CalWORKs work activities.
| Several of our participants described
being pulled out of school. They were told that their
options were to work or be cut off of any government
aid. Others, even if their self-initiated programs
were approved, education was an impossible task, given
that they still had to work part-time to make up the
CalWORKs’ 32 hours and juggle school, homework and
care for their families.
Faced with the choice of quitting school to take
any kind of job or incurring sanctions, several
participants went to school on their own, without
support from CalWORKs. A Los Angeles woman said:
“I went to school on my own because I wanted
to start getting my education…They told me
if you don’t stop going to school, we’re going to
cut your cash.” A Tulare woman, whose request
for education was denied, was sent to short-term
training instead. She finally had to work two jobs
before the welfare office would allow her to attend
school. She felt frustrated and angry.
Women who are not eligible SIPs often do not have
access to education. A Los Angeles woman told us:
“I get kind of tired of feeling like I am
getting the short end of somebody’s political stick.
You know, like this welfare-to-work program. I can’t
get what I want out of this program…I needed
the opportunity to go to school.”
|
“I was going to…college
for medical assistant and they didn’t let me finish
going because they weren’t going to pay for it…I
would have had a job.” —A Tulare Woman |
Other women liked the idea of on-the-job training
because education was inappropriate for them. Said one woman:
“I have no problem with working. My thing is, I need
training.” These women generally appreciated the short-term
training programs but wanted to acquire skills on the job.
Another woman in Tulare, who was initially put into a short-term
training program which she did not like, spoke with her worker
and was transferred to a training program where she is learning
a trade. She reported: “[A]ctually, I love it. I’m learning
a trade that I’ve always wanted to learn.”
Kathy
Kathy once described herself as a troubled youth
and a high school dropout who could see no way out. Today
she earns $10.18 an hour as a mechanical drafter and travels
to construction work sites to map their electrical systems
and heating ducts. When she meets new people she pushes her
bangs away from her eyes. Although she feels her progress
is slow, she is developing confidence. For the first time
in her life, Kathy is able to make eye contact. She says her
new employer is even offering to pay to remove her tattoos.
After a promising start and several years of
training, it almost didn’t work out this way. Kathy clearly
remembers the moment she knew she wanted to leave welfare.
She did not know where to start and made an appointment with
a community-based organization’s job counselor who asked
her what she wanted to do. This question inspired Kathy to
set her sights on an unconventional goal—one that would
truly lead her out of poverty. Her counselor helped her enroll
in school to prepare for a career in a nontraditional field,
one that employed mainly men, where the pay and the opportunities
were far better. She saved her financial aid and mileage reimbursements
and made a down payment on a car so she could work with companies
in different areas.
For nine months she took day classes to finish
her high school certificate and an orientation for working
in “nontraditional fields.” “They told us
how to do interviews and warned us on what to do about sexual
harassment, but we weren’t trained for any specific jobs,”
says Kathy. Unfortunately, when she completed her studies
and training, her job search proved fruitless. She wanted
to go back to school but couldn’t find an opportunity. Instead
she occasionally cleaned houses for $30 per day. “I
was barely making it,” she remembers.
When her job counselor from the training program
called to see how she was faring, Kathy shared her disappointing
news and her growing despair. Her counselor helped her enroll
in a three-semester community college architectural drafting
certificate program where she took night and home study classes.
Federal funding through the Job Training Partnership Act paid
for her son’s childcare. With her newly acquired skills, Kathy
found a job right away.
A single mother of three, without family support,
Kathy believes you must “decide on what you want and
make it happen.” Habitually shy and quietly unassuming,
Kathy drew inspiration as her friends began accomplishing
their goals, leaving welfare for work.
What carried her through was determination to
“show my kids you can accomplish something and get ahead
in life.” She wants a better life for them. What’s most
important, says Kathy, is that her children can look at her
and feel proud.
“People who work with GAIN are told to
get a job,” reflects Kathy. “School is the best
thing I’ve done.”
Welfare Recipients Experience
Mistreatment and Discrimination We asked women
whether and to what extent they experienced discrimination
based on race or gender. Interestingly, the women talked
about being mistreated due to their status as welfare
recipients just as much as, if not more than, due to
their race or gender.
One woman described experiencing a potential sexual
harassment situation that discouraged her from seeking
services. Several women reported being discriminated
against by employers and welfare offices but were unsure
whether they were treated that way because of their
race, gender or welfare status. For example, one of
our participants in Los Angeles quit a job cleaning
homes when she discovered that she was paid less than
other employees but had no explanation of why.
From Employers
Many of our focus group participants felt ostracized
by employers because of their status as welfare recipients.
As one Los Angeles woman described: “I don’t think
[employers] will take you seriously. They feel like
you are going through a program initiated by the county.
They don’t feel that you really want to work…I
put in an application and I seen my application go in
the wastebasket before I even got on the elevator. I
cried. They didn’t even give me a chance.” A recent
national study similarly found that employers are often
reluctant to hire welfare recipients.
As a result, many participants tried to hide the fact
that they are welfare recipients. They recommended that
CalWORKs stop forcing them to do things that make them
stand out as welfare recipients. For example, participants
from Los Angeles felt that the job search requirement
that they complete two applications and turn one in
to the CalWORKs office hurt their chances of getting
jobs. Asking for two applications was a “dead
give away” of their status.
Even on the job, the participants fear that they will
be mistreated because they are welfare recipients. As
one woman said: “When I was working for the government
agency, I felt I was being treated badly because I was
on welfare. I didn’t feel good about myself. Apparently,
no matter how good I did, it was never good enough.”
Race discrimination also keeps many welfare recipients
who are women of color from getting and keeping jobs.
One Sacramento woman described how she was fired from
a job, where she was the sole African-American employee,
after only a few days. Another Sacramento woman said:
“I went to a couple of temp agencies and one of
them sent me to this chiropractor’s office and they
knew that the employer wanted Asian [employees]. They
sent me there, I guess to make a fool out of me.”
From the CalWORKs System
One of the most significant findings of the focus groups
was the way that many caseworkers look down on welfare
recipients and do not comply with CalWORKs. Participants
in all three counties, regardless of race, reported
problems such as:
- “I would get a job with American Express—$15
an hour and I tried calling my worker to approve
my clothing. He was insulting to me. He sent me
to some church for clothing. Those clothes were
worse than second-hand. I told him, ‘Do you ever
walk into American Express and see how those people
dress going to work?’…A week later he didn’t
approve for the clothing or my transportation.”
This participant lost her opportunity to work at
American Express.
- “Going through the GAIN program, it seems
like these GAIN representatives are telling people
anything. They’re not actually there to help. They
come in with these preconceived notions of who you
are and what you’re about and that you are nothing…‘You
are going to go through this and you are going to
try this.’ You will be ordered like this no matter
where you are yourself.”
The Los Angeles groups, which had the largest percentage
of African-American women, reported having the most
negative experiences with their caseworkers. It appeared
that these women experienced discrimination based on
both race and welfare recipient status. Said one African-American
woman: “I am treated differently because of my
race by everybody—the police department, the welfare
department.”
Our participants had differing views about the role
race played in their relationship with their caseworkers.
A few of the African-American women from Los Angeles,
for example, complained that their caseworkers were
not African-American and did not speak English well.
Others, however, commented that having a caseworker
of the same race did not guarantee respect. For example,
a few of the Latina and Asian women complained of mistreatment
from same-race caseworkers, along the lines of: “You
are a disgrace to your race.”
There is no simple solution to this problem. Caseworkers
should treat all welfare recipients equally, fairly
and with respect, regardless of race. Additional research
should be done to document gender, race and national
origin discrimination in the delivery of welfare services,
particularly because of the important role that caseworkers
have in connecting recipients to vocational assessment,
supportive services and employment. Time limits underscore
the importance of ensuring nondiscriminatory treatment
in the provision of welfare-to-work services.
Other Barriers to Employment
Childcare and Transportation
As numerous other studies have found, childcare and
transportation pose serious barriers to finding and
keeping jobs for many welfare recipients. While it seems
that CalWORKs currently helps many welfare recipients
with their childcare, crucial gaps exist.
Our participants also told us that the county’s failure
to make timely payments to childcare providers jeopardizes
their ability to maintain quality childcare. Moreover,
many women worry about what they will do once they are
no longer eligible for childcare subsidies.
Participants, particularly those in Sacramento, identified
various transportation problems, including delays and
lack of public transportation at night. |
“[Employers] treat you like you have dirt
on you, like you are trash.”
—A Los Angeles Woman
“I followed my job description.
I don’t know if it was just because I was Mexican or
I’m on welfare. She treated me like I didn’t belong
there. Just because we are on welfare doesn’t mean we’re
this low.”
—A Sacramento Woman
“I think they shouldn’t
look at all the participants as if they don’t want to
make a change. They are threatening you like it’s their
money.”
—A Los Angeles Woman
“I couldn’t find any adequate
childcare. I found some for two of my children, but
not the other two…That is the whole reason why
I couldn’t go to job search.”
—A Tulare Woman
|
Criminal
Records
Several participants mentioned they had a criminal record,
which was a significant barrier to gaining employment. A few
of them described their situations. “If you have a criminal
record, they don’t even bother to read the rest of your application.”
A Tulare woman told us: “I have a criminal record. It’s
just for petty theft, a misdemeanor, but it’s an issue, especially
when I apply for retail… People change, everybody needs
a chance. You can’t just keep pulling them back because of
something that happened years ago.”
CalWORKs does not address this barrier, nor does it offer
guidance to counties about how to counsel such participants.
One Tulare participant told us that she recently completed
a nursing program through CalWORKs but did not get a job because
of her criminal record. Instead, she watched while her classmates
got jobs. It is unclear whether anyone told her she cannot
pass state clearance to be a certified nurse if she has a
criminal record. It is also unclear whether her caseworker
will place her in a different program. Meanwhile, her time
clock is ticking. A participant in Los Angeles reported: “At
job club they told me to lie about my criminal record—to
mark no on the application and then explain during the interview.”
Obviously, this is no solution to the problem.
CONCLUSION
The CalWORKs system needs an overhaul, not a
fine-tuning. Welfare recipients have stepped up to the plate
to meet their obligations under CalWORKs, but the State of
California, despite being flush with federal welfare dollars,
has not. The Governor and others must work together to ensure
that California makes good on its promise of true welfare
reform.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
| Equal Rights Advocates
produced this report as part of its Californians for
Family Economic Self-Sufficiency (CFESS) Project, in
partnership with Wider Opportunities for Women (WOW).
The project is made possible in part by The Rosenberg
Foundation.
Authors: Doris Y. Ng and Ana J.
Matosantos
Profiles: Emily Katz Kishawi
Editor: Beth H. Parker
Production: Terri Witherspoon
We greatly appreciate the enthusiastic
involvement of the more than 50 women who participated
in our focus groups and those who agreed to be interviewed
for this study. We could not have completed this project
without their dedication and willingness to share their
experiences. We also collaborated with the following
CFESS members: Community Service, Education and Training
(CSET), Asian Resources and Women at Work. The staff
at each of these organizations did an incredible job
recruiting for the focus groups. We also thank our skillful
facilitator, Ana Rivera.
Many agencies, individuals and organizations
collaborated with ERA to develop the recommendations
and themes of this report. They include: Center on Poverty
Law and Economic Opportunity, Coalition for Ethical
Welfare Reform, Coalition on Homelessness, Community
Legal Services, East Bay Community Law Center, Employment
Law Center, Family Rights and Dignity Project, LIFEtimE,
Cindy Marano, National Economic Development and Law
Center, Northern California Coalition for Immigrant
Rights, San Francisco Neighborhood Legal Assistance
Foundation, We Interrupt This Message and Western Center
on Law and Poverty. We appreciate their valuable contributions
and look forward to continuing our collaborative work
on behalf of welfare recipients and the working poor.
Equal Rights Advocates works to achieve
women’s equality and economic security through litigation,
education, legislative advocacy and practical advice
and counseling. ERA focuses on assuring equal opportunity,
advancing workplace rights, preventing sexual harassment
in the workplace and schools and reforming welfare-to-work.
To order copies of this report, please
contact us at:
Equal Rights Advocates
Publication Department
1663 Mission St, Suite 550
San Francisco, CA 94103
Telephone: 415/621-0672
Fax: 415/621-6744
info@equalrights.org
www.equalrights.org
Hard copies of booklets are available
for $2.50 each or $20 for 10 copies.
|
|
|
