Blixtjobb Transfer of social innovation – Round 3
”An honest days pay for an honest days work”
Blixtjobb • A unique form of employment agency. • A scheme that gives people with dependency problems a chance to earn money through temporary work.
•
• • • •
– Without the precondition that they have to be free of their addiction. – Sober the day they come to work. The Blixtjobb workers and the team leaders – who are they? Both men and women living with dependecy problems and/or homelessness. Dependent of variuous form of welfare or supporting them selves through ”the black market”. The customers : 30 % assigments from individual households and 70% from Corporates, NGO and business. The jobs : Easyer construction work, gardening, paintning, cleaning, ”LEGO work” An honest day’s pay for an honest day’s work”. Positive effects both for the individuals and for society.
New and innovative – Tailored for the target group. Originates in an actual need expressed by the individuals themselves. – Offering work to a target group excluded from the labour market. – Entrepreneur approach instead of a traditional social worker approach. – Taxes deducted from the wages – by Blixtjobb.
Sustainable benefits Individual level – Increased sense of self esteem (empowerment) – Sense of belonging and meaning, – Decreased substance abuse, – Income - decreased welfare benefits,
Transferring the idea The rolemodel for Blixtjobb is ”Lønn som Fortjent”(”Wages earned”), part of Kirkens Bymisjon (The Church City Mission) in Oslo. 2009 - Oslo field studies • Interviews with employees and representatives from the target group. 2009 -2011 - Trying to start Blixtjobb in Stockholm • Workshop with the target group and other stakeholders on the subject of offering job opportunities for people with dependency problems, • Application for funding from the European Social Fund, • Policy level – suggesting to the Ministry of Employment that they should promote Blixtjobb as a pilot study conducted by the National Employment Agency in Sweden. Late 2011 - project Blixtjobb starts in Stockholm. • Starting on a small scale within Stockholm City Mission – one project leader together with one part time team leader.
Which elements are transferable and why? Transferable elements The idea - ” An honest day’s pay for an honest day’s work”. • Norway and Sweden similar working ethics/culture • The target group faces similar problems in Oslo/Stockholm. The organisational design – Certain elements are transferable; • Team leaders employed to supervise and support the Blixtjobb workers on actual jobs. The team leaders themselves having a background with dependency problems. • The administration - paying of wages after every day´s work/ tax pay etc. Not transferable (so far) • Recurring bigger jobs offered by the City of Stockholm – comparing with Oslo where all the stations in the subway system and certain areas of the city are kept clean by ”Lonn som fortjent”
Success factors • • • • • • • •
The target group needs to be involved early in the process. Promoting local/recipient “ownership” of projects is recognised as a key issue in the strategy for sustainable development. Similar values in the cooperating organisations – Stockholm City Mission – The Oslo City Mission. Entrepreneur approach – not focusing on the social profession. Recruiting of staff - project leader needs to have entrepreneurial skills and interpersonal skills. The ”brand” of Stockholm City Mission – creating trust with the workers and credibility for the potential customers. Important key individuals in the public debate promoting Blixtjobb. (Fölster mfl) Positive publicity in the form of award for CSR-related activities. (Visa vägen-galan).
Obstacles • • • • • •
Norway not part of the European union – the transfer not eligable for transnational cooperation funded by ESF. In Competition with the local government work integration programs – competing for the same jobs. Difficulties built in the system – the target group is seen as not capable of working or at least not encouraged to do so. Part of the target group is not seen at all since they are not part of the official employment market. Small project – difficulties in balancing incoming jobs with available workers. No funding – neither possible to validate the method, nor to measure social impact (only on individual level)