“Fit for work” assessments should be scrapped, say MPs

25 July 2014

Changing provider is not enough to reform the work capability assessment (WCA) as it is in desperate need of a “fundamental redesign”, according to the Work and Pensions committee.

Changing provider is not enough to reform the work capability assessment (WCA) as it is in desperate need of a “fundamental redesign”, according to the Work and Pensions committee.

The test, introduced in 2008, is used to determine eligibility for employment and support allowance (ESA), a crucial benefit for those with “limited capability for work” or “work-related activity”.

The assessment was previously provided by Atos, but after a catastrophic run the DWP have negotiated an early exit from the £100m a year contract.  Throughout the run of its contract Atos’ management of the WCA has gained widespread attention for the inaccuracy of assessments and punitive mistreatment of claimants.



While government plan to secure a new provider by early next year, the committee argues that “Just putting a new private provider in place will not address the problems with ESA and the WCA on its own”, but that the system is not achieving its purpose and needs to be improved immediately, in face of the ‘considerable distress and anxiety’ it is causing, in the words of committee chair Dame Anne Begg.

The committee states that barriers to employment should be identified for individual claimants, in order that support be tailored for their personal requirements and circumstances.  It also stressed that “unnecessary and too frequent reassessments” should be avoided.

The committee’s report notes, “Many reported feeling dehumanised, ignored or questioned inappropriately. Some felt that the progress they were making towards recovery, and then moving back into work, was hampered rather than aided by the anxiety caused in facing the WCA”.

Responding to the report, Steve Ford, chief executive of Parkinson’s UK said, “This report simply confirms what we have known for years – ESA is a shambolic and hopeless system that cruelly penalises the most vulnerable amongst us.”

In order to reestablish a genuinely strong economy, where rising GDP is met with wage increases and improving quality of life for many, those able to must be helped back into work, rather than thrown by the wayside in order to cut the benefits bill. Evidence suggests that this is counter productive and more costly in the long-term. The creation of a reserve army of the vulnerable unemployed inevitably puts downward pressure on wages, increasing the fragility and superficiality of any economic recovery.