Working Poverty: A Relational Challenge

For many people, poverty is equated with joblessness. But there is an increasing awareness of ‘working poverty’, where a person can be employed and still have insufficient means for a decent living. There is an increasing number of such cases, even here in the (relatively wealthy) UK.^[1] This is not only a financial problem: sub-standard employment conditions adversely affect home relationships as well.^[2] Global political, economic and social indications suggest that the times ahead of us will be particularly difficult, making the challenge all the more urgent. But what contribution can a relational approach make?

There is, of course, a complex array of issues behind the rise of working poverty. Taking the employer-worker relationship as a starting point is a helpful angle on this complexity that also yields some concrete steps towards change.

All employment involves a contract, even with minimal requirements (such as ‘zero-hours’). But if the ultimate foundation of the employer-worker relationship is contractual, we have a problem. We have two separate individuals whose only grounds for interaction are the stipulations set out in a written document. There is no reason for mutual concern and often an assumption of a zero-sum game where one tries to get what they can at the expense of the other. In practice, those who are weaker, less resourced (or resourceful) end up with unfavourable and often inadequate conditions.

What if we operated from a different foundation? What if the basis for business – and all social interaction – were covenantal, grounded in our awareness of collective identity? If my own wellbeing is tied to yours and that of others, I will help you flourish where I can. This is not socialism or even altruism as such; it is better described as pursuit of common good: communities work better for everyone when all have what they need.

A covenantal relational basis poses a simple question: how do my actions affect my fellow members of society, who may happen to be my employees? If I, as an employer, am convinced that my own flourishing depends on a certain standard of home life, do I expect my workers to accept any less? Do I assume that my workers should be happy with less? If so, then I’m failing in ethics 101, to ‘do unto others as you would have them do to you’. 

The crucial relational shift begins internally at the level of our fundamental mindset, but it cannot stop there. Only with practical action can this shift be said to have taken place. 

There are, in fact, some concrete areas in which employers can make changes – offering a living wage that supports a household; making sure that work expectations afford the time and energy for home life; taking responsibility for workers’ wellbeing when they are unable to work. 

It could well be that taking such measures is financially challenging, even with some sacrifices at executive or shareholder level. But when an employer’s mindset is truly to ensure that workers do not have to live in a way that they themselves would find unacceptable, a relational change has already happened: both parties are now working from a common basis of concern. They can work together towards the kind of structural transformation that would allow people to access the resources they need to flourish.

The relational outcome of a covenantal approach to employer-worker relationships is a vastly improved situation for those in working poverty and their households. It also begins to heal a breach that has led to different forms of class-based hostility between capital and labour. Such hostility is socially and economically damaging and can be easily exploited by unscrupulous populist leaders.^[3] A relational vision of society, practised in business as much as anywhere else, would be inimical to this narrative of perpetual conflict. Let us choose to make this vision a reality. 

A more substantial paper on the same subject, incorporating additional insights from Christian theology and entitled A Biblical Response to Working Poverty, has been written by Matt for the Jubilee Centre. It can be found here.

---

Comments and discussion are welcome (see below). Please note that comments will be moderated to avoid trolling and spamming, and so will not appear immediately.