Any British Dopers Work In Social Services (Behavioral Health, Drug Addiction, Advocacy For The Disabled, etc.)? Can You Answer Some Questions?

My field, in the US, is called “Social Services,” depending on the region and the context. It’s a broad field that includes such “industries” (for lack of a better choice of words) such as drug rehab, behavioral health (case management for the mentally ill, for example), advocacy for the disabled, etc.

I have some questions about this field in the UK.

  1. Is this industry sufficiently funded? Or are social service agencies constantly dealing with tight budgets?
  2. Is this industry practically begging for warm bodies to fill certain roles, like it is here in the U.S. (in certain regions, anyway)?

Well, i don’t work in the industry, but from what i gather from watching news,
reading newspapers and listening to the radio over here, it seems to me that
the answers are :-

  1. No and Yes
  2. Yes.

HTH.

I work/have worked in various UK charities concerned with many of the same issues that social services departments work on (addiction, mental health, youth employability, offending/rehabilitation, social care).

@pjd is right. My answers would be a less restrained “hahahaha fuck no” and “tight and shrinking”.

Very quickly: the UK is a much more centralised state than the US. We have the UK government at Westminster, and also devolved governments for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. The devolved governments have responsibility for social care budgets and policy; for England the Westminster government holds these powers. The devolved nations budget is determined in part by the central financial planning of Westminster, through a funding formula which effectively means that if England sees changes in its social services budget, these will be reflected in the size of the block grant made to devolved nations.

Actual delivery of social services (and many other government functions) is the responsibility of local authorities, who administer a city or county. Local authorities are funded in part through local taxes, but the majority of their budget is a direct grant from the relevant central government, either direct from Westminster or via devolved national government.

That last is the important point because that central budget has fallen enormously over the last ten years. The Conservative government’s austerity programme, starting from 2010, was an attempt to maintain the UK’s credit rating and keep deficits under control by massively reducing day to day government spending. As there are certain government budget lines that realistically can’t see much in the way of cuts (i.e. pensions and national healtlh) this means that the cuts fell disproportionately elsewhere. Figure 6 in here shows that local government (MHCLG) has seen a 60% cut in funding between 2010/11 and 2020/21. Relatedly, Justice has seen a 20% cut.

The upshot is pretty much what you’d expect. Services are stripped to the bone or non-existent. Centres have closed, workforces have shrunk. An increasing amount of what local authorities used to do in-house is being outsourced to the charity sector which while it might be good for my employment prospects means that there are now more fractured services with more opportunities for people to slip through the cracks.

Some local authorities have now got to the point where they cannot cope. Birmingham, one the UK’s largest cities, recently had to declare that it could not fund its annual expenditures and is now coming under central government control. A number of other large councils are very close to this point. As you’ll know, there’s a close relationship between social services and the justice system - ours is now a joke. It can take years for a case to come to trial, prisons are releasing criminals early because they are literally full. Probation services at strained to breaking point. This of course has knock on effects on social services, with traumatised victims denied justice, offenders not getting a full sentence or opportunities for rehabilitation.

In terms of your second question, very much yes and no. Yes, these services desperately need more warm bodies; staff retention is low and churn is high. But hiring and retaining people costs money, which isn’t available, so no there are not as many job vacancies being advertised as their should be.

There is an additional problem here according to a couple of ex social workers I know. A lot of social workers are no longer employed directly by the council. Just like bin collections and other council services, they’ve been outsourced to private companies in the name of efficiency.

In reality, this just means someone else is taking a cut of the funding and less is spent on actual frontline services. Fewer staff, working longer hours for less money isn’t a great combination. Staff burnout is increasing and no one is caring for the carers.

One friend was sacked after taking too much time off after a breakdown following his fathers death, his own cancer diagnosis and a heart attack. Another one quit to go and work the tills at Tesco as the hourly rate worked out better when you included all the unpaid overtime she had been doing.

Yeah, this is a factor. You see it a lot in “employability” - there’s a lot of money doing a handful of CV writing classes and claiming a “positive destination” for getting someone into low paid dead end jobs.

Yup. I mean, this is very basic economics. We are in an era of very high employment. Ergo there isn’t a pool of people waiting to be hired. Ergo if you want hire and keep someone you have to offer them a better deal than they can get from other jobs. Ergo social services departments need to raise budgets just to keep current staffing levels/skills. However…

Out of curiosity, why do you ask?

I’m thinking about starting the immigration process and looking for a job there, depending on how the next few months shake out. This is not the thread for it, but long story short, I feel like the US is edging ever closer to Civil War II and I want to have a plan to get out should it come to that.

There are a lot of hoops to jump through:

I suppose this is as good a thread as any to ask, but since it is every thread you start, @HeyHomie why do you capitalize every word in thread titles? It makes them not look like sentences and take longer to read.

Hoops, yes, but if HeyHomie could land a job with an agency/council set up to sponsor work visas for foreign workers - and I suspect in this field most do - I wouldn’t see it as insurmountable.

This site might be useful? Social worker | Health Careers

Call me prejudiced, but yes, I’d certainly suggest approaching this through NHS or other public channels rather than commercial middlemen.

One can only hope that there will be proper funding to enable public services to employ the extra people they desperately need.

My apologies, Lord Elrond.

Joking aside, I’ve just always used title case in thread … titles, for as long as I’ve been using the SDMB. Seemed appropriate. Trouble is, I don’t fully remember the rules for title case and may capitalize words that don’t require it. (That sound you hear is my 7th-grade English teacher rolling in her grave.)