The myth of organization autonomy: Social workers’ salary under the lump sum grant subvention system in Hong Kong

IF 1.3 Q2 SOCIAL WORK Asian Social Work and Policy Review Pub Date : 2021-12-01 DOI:10.1111/aswp.12244
Haijing Dai, Niantao Jiang, Ruobing Li
{"title":"The myth of organization autonomy: Social workers’ salary under the lump sum grant subvention system in Hong Kong","authors":"Haijing Dai,&nbsp;Niantao Jiang,&nbsp;Ruobing Li","doi":"10.1111/aswp.12244","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Adopting the principles of managerialism, the Lump Sum Grant Subvention System in Hong Kong grants service organizations autonomy to deploy resources. Using organization- and individual-level survey data, this article examines the salaries of social workers under the managerialist subvention system and investigates its impacts on frontline service professionals. We found that when service organizations adopted flexible employment terms to hire social workers, they offered lower minimum wage. Smaller organizations, which are often believed to benefit more from the system, paid social workers lower minimum wage. When individual social workers made use of flexible employment terms and switched their jobs in the welfare sector, there was no evidence that their income levels would be raised—on the contrary, switching jobs for three or more times would in fact lower their income levels. Furthermore, while the system encouraged social workers to get more involved in management work, there was no evidence that increasing work hours on management-related work would increase the income of social workers. As organizational autonomy does not necessarily result in income justice for frontline social workers, clear guidelines, supervision, and policy interventions in the management of service organizations are still needed in social service planning and delivery.</p>","PeriodicalId":44567,"journal":{"name":"Asian Social Work and Policy Review","volume":"16 1","pages":"22-32"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/aswp.12244","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Social Work and Policy Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/aswp.12244","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIAL WORK","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Adopting the principles of managerialism, the Lump Sum Grant Subvention System in Hong Kong grants service organizations autonomy to deploy resources. Using organization- and individual-level survey data, this article examines the salaries of social workers under the managerialist subvention system and investigates its impacts on frontline service professionals. We found that when service organizations adopted flexible employment terms to hire social workers, they offered lower minimum wage. Smaller organizations, which are often believed to benefit more from the system, paid social workers lower minimum wage. When individual social workers made use of flexible employment terms and switched their jobs in the welfare sector, there was no evidence that their income levels would be raised—on the contrary, switching jobs for three or more times would in fact lower their income levels. Furthermore, while the system encouraged social workers to get more involved in management work, there was no evidence that increasing work hours on management-related work would increase the income of social workers. As organizational autonomy does not necessarily result in income justice for frontline social workers, clear guidelines, supervision, and policy interventions in the management of service organizations are still needed in social service planning and delivery.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
组织自治的神话:香港一次过拨款资助制度下的社工薪酬
香港的整笔拨款资助制度以管理主义为原则,给予服务机构自主调配资源的权力。本文采用组织和个人层面的调查数据,考察了管理主义补助制度下社会工作者的薪酬,并考察了其对一线服务专业人员的影响。我们发现,当服务机构采用弹性雇佣条款雇佣社工时,他们提供的最低工资较低。较小的组织通常被认为从该制度中受益更多,它们支付给社工的最低工资较低。当个别社工利用弹性雇佣条款,转到福利部门工作时,没有证据表明他们的收入水平会提高,相反,三次或三次以上的转工作实际上会降低他们的收入水平。此外,虽然该制度鼓励社会工作者更多地参与管理工作,但没有证据表明增加管理相关工作的工作时间会增加社会工作者的收入。由于组织自治并不一定意味着一线社会工作者的收入公平,因此在社会服务规划和提供过程中,仍然需要明确的服务组织管理指导、监督和政策干预。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
32
期刊介绍: There is a growing recognition that major social trends, such as the process of globalization, rapidly changing demography, increasing psycho-social difficulties in individuals and families, growing economic disparities within and between the nations, and international migration, present important challenges for social policies and social work practices in Asia. It also has become evident that social policy strategies and social work methods must be developed and implemented in the context of Asian region''s own histories, cultures, and unique developmental trajectories in order to respond effectively to those emerging challenges. The Asian Social Work and Policy Review seeks to encourage exchanges of original ideas, rigorous analysis of experiences, innovative practice methods founded on local knowledge and skills of problem solving in the areas of social work and social policy between various countries in Asia.
期刊最新文献
Every Life Matters: Empowering Care Leavers on Their Path to Independence Issue Information Link Between Social Relationships and Vulnerability Among Community-Dwelling Older Adults Living Alone in Taiwan Service Providers' Perceptions of Psychological, Emotional, and Behavioral Issues Among Children and Adolescents During COVID-19 in South Korea Cover Image
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1