Tom Stephens
@tcstephens.bsky.social
Senior Fellow @neweconomics.bsky.social | Fellow @lsepublicpolicy.bsky.social | PhD from @lsesocialpolicy.bsky.social | Fmr Jobs/Ed Lead @ Brent Council | Worked on infected blood campaign & abortion decriminalisation w/ @damedianajohnson.bsky.social
Our analysis suggests Govt's ambition to raise employment rates risks being undermined unless it shifts more fundamentally from the welfare system it inherited - which pushes people into "any job", without the personalised support to enable decent work and career progression.
November 5, 2025 at 8:39 PM
Our analysis suggests Govt's ambition to raise employment rates risks being undermined unless it shifts more fundamentally from the welfare system it inherited - which pushes people into "any job", without the personalised support to enable decent work and career progression.
We're dominated by focus on compliance, processes and automation (often with bad data). For DWP, there's clear evidence this undermines delivery of more and better jobs:
neweconomics.org/2024/07/term...
We should learn from cases like this, and Carer's Allowance, to design a person-centred system.
neweconomics.org/2024/07/term...
We should learn from cases like this, and Carer's Allowance, to design a person-centred system.
Terms of engagement
Rethinking conditionality to support more people into better jobs
neweconomics.org
October 30, 2025 at 11:37 AM
We're dominated by focus on compliance, processes and automation (often with bad data). For DWP, there's clear evidence this undermines delivery of more and better jobs:
neweconomics.org/2024/07/term...
We should learn from cases like this, and Carer's Allowance, to design a person-centred system.
neweconomics.org/2024/07/term...
We should learn from cases like this, and Carer's Allowance, to design a person-centred system.
We find this would be better at supporting working families to increase hrs, more progressive, & simpler - combining current complex mess of free hrs, Tax Free CC and UC into single offer. And - if parents increased working hrs/earnings - it'd have virtuous fiscal benefits vs. current system. [5/5]
July 31, 2025 at 1:25 PM
We find this would be better at supporting working families to increase hrs, more progressive, & simpler - combining current complex mess of free hrs, Tax Free CC and UC into single offer. And - if parents increased working hrs/earnings - it'd have virtuous fiscal benefits vs. current system. [5/5]
We've looked at the effects of an alternative offer which combines universal and contributory elements:
- A core free 15hrs for all children;
- For working familes, a % cap on childcare spend above that.
To do this, we've built a detailed & dynamic childcare model using a large-scale survey. [4/]
- A core free 15hrs for all children;
- For working familes, a % cap on childcare spend above that.
To do this, we've built a detailed & dynamic childcare model using a large-scale survey. [4/]
July 31, 2025 at 1:14 PM
We've looked at the effects of an alternative offer which combines universal and contributory elements:
- A core free 15hrs for all children;
- For working familes, a % cap on childcare spend above that.
To do this, we've built a detailed & dynamic childcare model using a large-scale survey. [4/]
- A core free 15hrs for all children;
- For working familes, a % cap on childcare spend above that.
To do this, we've built a detailed & dynamic childcare model using a large-scale survey. [4/]
Even for existing working families, the fully expanded free hours aren't enough to support full-time childcare.
It'll remain prohibitively expensive for low-to-middle income families - costing them 2.5-3.5 times more than a family on 90th earnings percentile (& way more for multi-child fams) [/3].
It'll remain prohibitively expensive for low-to-middle income families - costing them 2.5-3.5 times more than a family on 90th earnings percentile (& way more for multi-child fams) [/3].
July 31, 2025 at 1:00 PM
Even for existing working families, the fully expanded free hours aren't enough to support full-time childcare.
It'll remain prohibitively expensive for low-to-middle income families - costing them 2.5-3.5 times more than a family on 90th earnings percentile (& way more for multi-child fams) [/3].
It'll remain prohibitively expensive for low-to-middle income families - costing them 2.5-3.5 times more than a family on 90th earnings percentile (& way more for multi-child fams) [/3].
To realise economic benefits from childcare, you really need to support poorest families to access it - where social & labour market gains by far the highest.
Yet current system denies support to those very same families: the richest 8x more likely to benefit from expanded expanded free hours. [2/]
Yet current system denies support to those very same families: the richest 8x more likely to benefit from expanded expanded free hours. [2/]
July 31, 2025 at 12:46 PM
To realise economic benefits from childcare, you really need to support poorest families to access it - where social & labour market gains by far the highest.
Yet current system denies support to those very same families: the richest 8x more likely to benefit from expanded expanded free hours. [2/]
Yet current system denies support to those very same families: the richest 8x more likely to benefit from expanded expanded free hours. [2/]
See also my talk at #LSEFestival with LSE's Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion, where I delve into more of the trends in job quality and the state of local labour markets:
www.lse.ac.uk/Events/LSE-F...
[2/2]
www.lse.ac.uk/Events/LSE-F...
[2/2]
A society free from poverty: how do we get there and what would it look like?
1pm Mon 16 Jun | Abby Jitendra, Abigail McKnight, Thomas C. Stephens | Free event at the LSE Festival: Visions for the Future | Ticket required
www.lse.ac.uk
June 19, 2025 at 12:23 PM
See also my talk at #LSEFestival with LSE's Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion, where I delve into more of the trends in job quality and the state of local labour markets:
www.lse.ac.uk/Events/LSE-F...
[2/2]
www.lse.ac.uk/Events/LSE-F...
[2/2]
Reposted by Tom Stephens
Here we see a slightly different UK pattern: young men appear more liberal than they used to be, but women becoming more so [this is 'two-speed liberalisation' in the UK vs 'polarisation' in the US/South Korea]. But nb the indicator here is patterns of party support so unpicking this tricky
February 8, 2025 at 7:06 AM
Here we see a slightly different UK pattern: young men appear more liberal than they used to be, but women becoming more so [this is 'two-speed liberalisation' in the UK vs 'polarisation' in the US/South Korea]. But nb the indicator here is patterns of party support so unpicking this tricky