The freelancers' views on collective social security and the welfare state

As we could see above, Elena refers to the topic of her own social security as a “black hole”

and evaluates it very negatively. This pattern can be found elsewhere, for instance in Madhi's account. He states when asked about his own social security:

Very, very exasperating topic. Actually I don't want to talk about it, it's always really very depressing somehow. (case excerpt 2, appendix 1, p. 21 / transcript 2, appendix 2) Thus he is problematizing the topic very strongly. He is the only one amongst the German freelancers who is not a member of KSK at all. He has previously been a member of the public social security system (which includes pensions), as he took a vocational education, and subsequently worked several years as an employee before his university education and his freelance career. Since the start of his university education, however, he has not contributed to any kind of old age pension scheme whatsoever.

In general, the German freelancers speak very positively about KSK, which is providing them with access to the public social security system (see also Elena above).

Nina, for example states about the topic of social security:

In my opinion, social security is essential. Everyone who does not have health insurance is nuts. On the other hand, if there wasn't KSK I would have to pay 280 Euro per month only to be insured.[Here she refers to health insurance only, B.F.]

Concerning this I find the regulations in Germany pretty bad. KSK is a real blessing, as it buffers the amount the state requests by being a virtual employer. (case excerpt 4, appendix 1,p. 56 / interview transcript 4, appendix 2)

What is also remarkable in this quotation, is how well Nina is informed about KSK and how it functions: Reiterating the details about KSK from chapter 4, the description of KSK as providing a kind of “virtual employer” is quite fitting. The freelancers in Germany are all really well informed on their social security in general and KSK in particular.

The freelancers in the study also express concerns in relation to KSK's mode of operation and especially its access criteria (most of all the criterion of individual creative achievement (eigenschöpferische Tätigkeit), which has led to ambiguity as well as administrative discretion, see chapter 4). Madhi, for instance, argues that one main reason he did not try to become a member of KSK is that it would be a kind of fraud (although his work probably would be assessed as containing enough “individual creative achievement”

for KSK, it is not completely certain he would be granted access, as he is a graduate from a technical discipline (architecture), see the subject of administrative discretion & ambiguity, e.g. in Schnell 2007 and chapter 4):

Actually it would somehow not be fair in the sense that I am not an artist, I am more a service provider [...] If you then have a real artist, who lives for his art, right? No matter how, right? And he saves all his money for buying a canvas in order to be able to scribble on it, maybe this kind of person exists? [...]Therefore he should rather somehow... yes, and I manage it somehow differently. (case excerpt 2, appendix 1, p. 21 / transcript 2, appendix 2)

It is one of the absurdities of the institution of KSK (which in its full name is actually called

“artists' social insurance”) that the self-definition of a person (possibly eligible for access) as not being an artist can lead to a voluntary exclusion from it. Elena, who in general sees KSK as some kind of “last resort” for her and her family's social security, also expresses some moral reservations:

For instance as a graphics designer I don't find it completely [...] fair, that I get public subsidies for my insurance, whereas others, who are as well at the border concerning the definition of what is artistic or not..., right? If I would only live from fine arts, which is my second education, if I would only live from that eventually, I would understand it better. (case excerpt 7, appendix 1 p. 97/ interview transcript 7, appendix 2)

Thus, at least some of the freelancers are ill at ease with the indeed ambiguous access practices of KSK (see chapter 4), and criticise it as unfair, doubting that the bureaucratic rules and procedures are just. Another doubt the German freelancers are raising, regards the question that the public pension system as such (in which most of them are included via KSK) will be able to provide sufficient pensions (or even if it will provide pensions at

all) in the future, i.e. their own retirement age. We have already seen this in the statement of Elena above. And Nina states quite bluntly:

I have mentally bidden farewell to the thought that this state in my country will give me anything in old age. In my opinion it is a question of time until the whole thing collapses. (case excerpt 4, appendix 1, p. 56 / interview transcript 4, appendix 2)

Summing up the German freelancers' attitudes towards the subject of social security the picture is very pessimistic: Not only are most of them quite downbeat as concerns their own social security status, they also raise doubts on the general functionality of the public social security system in the future. These doubts refer mainly to the pension system.

Furthermore, some of them question the fairness and justness of KSK, which is the public social security institution in charge of them. It is notable as well that the freelancers are generally quite well informed concerning the modes of operation of social security.

Therefore most of the German freelancers in this study try to establish private social security in the form of pension or other saving schemes, which are, due to low incomes, quite limited. Jan constitutes an exemption on this point, as his financial cushion allows him to “buy” himself out of the problem on a level he presents as satisfactory. Madhi, on the other hand, choses the strategy of “ignoring” or, in his words, applies a “portion of stupor”, as he does not pay into any form of pension saving at all. Asked about his plans for old age security, he describes rather cloudy ideas about investing in real estate sometime in the future.

When looking at the freelancers in Denmark and their opinion on the topic of social security, the picture is different. Let us first of all have a look at how the Danish freelancers in the study are “organising” their own social security (concerning those elements which are voluntary for them): Following Andersen's (2007) discussion on the Danish pension system, the labour market pensions (arbejdsmarkedets pensioner) have become the most important pension pillar in recent years. It is exactly here I assumed the “Achilles heel” for the Danish freelancers lay, as they are not (automatically) included in that. Thus I presumed that the voluntary inclusion in a private labour market pension scheme would be of great importance for their individual social security. (see chapter 4)

However, amongst the six Danish freelancers in this study, there is only one, Signe, a 34 years old graphics designer from Western Jutland, who pays into a private labour market pension scheme. Signe is a quite special case amongst the freelancers in this study in general: Suffering from a chronic disease, which is not officially approved as a disease on the one hand and which is making continuous contact with other persons (e.g. in an office, at the workplace etc.) very difficult for her on the other, freelancing constitutes the only possibility for staying in the labour market for her, as it allows her to work in (relative) isolation at home. Thus, she decided that being a member of an unemployment fund does not make any sense for her (because she would not be able to accept practically any other

“normal” job), and that she should rather use the money for pension savings. The story of her disease has also influenced her view on the welfare state and especially her view on bureaucratic rules, procedures and actors connected to it. She describes e.g. the conflict with her unemployment fund after she had left her employment because of the disease as a hard struggle:

I had tried to secure myself, I had also taken out such an unemployment insurance, and I fought with them for over one year before I got the money, right? Because well, it is not an approved disease. [...] And well, they had their own psychologists, who said what they wanted to hear. That's how it is, if you have one of those diseases which are not approved and not on their “who's” list. [...] So it is the expert, they find, right? [...]

And who says, well, that's just something people make up, that's what they make their psychologists say. And so you don't get anything, right. [...] The whole thing went through the appeals board (ankenævnet). (case excerpt 11, appendix 1, p. 145 / interview transcript 11, appendix 2)

These experiences taint her opinion of the welfare state and the social security system as such and therefore her evaluation is quite negative. However, it does not lead her to the expression of problems of insecurity or anxiety, although she states clearly that her only alternative to freelancing is social assistance (kontanthjælp), including (once again) a struggle on the topic of her “employability”. It has to be mentioned that she is well safeguarded concerning the “pooling-of-incomes” dimension, as her husband works as a well-paid engineer.

Ole, a freelance illustrator and graphics designer based in Aalborg, is with his 49 years the oldest freelancer in this study, and thus the one closest to retirement age.

Nevertheless, he does not pay to any pension scheme at the moment and he also states that he cannot expect to get much from the labour market pension he was contributing to during his employment prior to freelancing. When it comes to his general opinion on the welfare state, Ole criticises current reforms and politics very strongly:

I am sure, that with the government we have at the moment, they are turning off the lights[...]. So they have reaped enough for themselves in one way or another, no matter what you sign... ( case excerpt 10 appendix 1, p. 136 / interview transcript 10, appendix 2)

We can clearly see that Ole is not content with current welfare state politics. However, these negative expectations about the future of the welfare state do not lead him to insecurity or even fear. He states several times that he did not really think a lot at all about the subject of social and old age security. As an old age safeguard he names his (and his ex-wife's) house, which is clear of debt and was, at the time of the interview, to be sold soon, which would bring Ole a certain financial cushion.

This certain “coolness” as concerns their missing pension schemes very much characterises all of the freelancers' interviews in Denmark. Although some of them admit a certain problematic when directly asked about their lack of pension schemes, they do not seem to bother too much about it. Lise, a 35 year old freelancer from Copenhagen, described a kind of “light” ignoring-strategy as well, when it comes to the question of her non-existent pension scheme. Even Susanne, who, as described previously, is the only one amongst the Danish freelancers who introduces the topic of insecurity herself and mentions the pension question in this context (see above), states that she has until now not taken care of a new pension scheme and reports that she actually has never really informed herself about it either. This is quite surprising when we take into account how well and thoroughly thought through she has installed safeguards as regards the insecurity stemming from “bulimic career patterns”.

The two young men in the Danish part of the study (Morten, 31 years and Christian, 34 years) are both neither members of an unemployment fund, nor do they have any pension scheme. Their argumentation on why they chose not to be included in these two safeguard mechanisms shows some kind of individualistic values. Morten stresses that the reason he does not want to become a member of a pension fund lies in his wish to have self-determination, to be in charge of his savings and not to give it into the hands of others.

In accordance with this, he is accruing savings in the form of, he claims, his collection of old electric guitars and and an investment account.

In the context of social security, Christian makes some interesting remarks about Denmark and the Danish welfare state in general. This happens against the background of his work biography: Christian has recently been living in New York, USA, for half a year, and being asked about the differences between Denmark and the USA he states:

Well, in Denmark we are so damn spoiled, and we are doing extremely well, and we all have this security net, and this is not right, in principle. An awful lot has to go wrong before you can become totally screwed in Denmark. Because we have all of these security arrangements, and that's why we are also a little bit spoiled and lazy. And that's something, where you really could learn something from the USA, where they are really sharper and they are “on” all the time. Of course, it can be a little bit too extreme sometimes. (case excerpt 13, appendix 1, p. 168 /interview transcript 13, appendix 2)

Thus, he buys into the argumentation that too much social security would cause the individual to give a lower performance. Concerning this line of argumentation, his own account becomes inconsistent – in another passage he states that his financial cushion gives him the possibility to not accept all of the job offers, but to focus on those which are exiting and promising, which contradicts the assumption that the threat of losing one's livelihood is contributing to a better individual performance. However, what is interesting, in the context of this chapter, is how he characterises the topic of social security and the welfare state in Denmark: In his view, there is a lot of social security in Denmark. For him, social security in Denmark is even too generous, including a notion, that nothing can go wrong in Denmark anyway. Because of the proclaimed connection between (a lack of)

achievement and (too much) social security, Christian has chosen not to become a member of an unemployment fund:

So, I want to have a little bit of a dagger at my throat, and to say [...] in this area there is no security. I think, this also gets you going and makes you sharp a little. A little bit like in New York, where it is more difficult to get these security arrangements. So, no, I dropped that. (case excerpt 13, appendix 1, p. 168 /interview transcript 13, appendix 2)

When it comes to the question of the lack of a pension fund however, Christian states that he is planning to pay into one in the future.

Summing up, the Danish freelancers (with the exception of Signe) do not bother too much with questions of social security, also concerning old age security, which is the field where they are excluded from, an important feature of the pension system (namely the labour market pensions). What is very interesting here is that even their quite different political or moral perspectives do not in the end lead to different views on personal social security issues. We could e.g. suspect that Ole, who expresses quite strongly his expectation that the current Danish government is dismantling the welfare state, would also raise doubts about his own social security because of that view. However, this is not the case. Not also are they quite “cool” about their social security in old age (partly despite the fact that it can be doubted that their current provisions are sufficient for securing livelihood in old age), they are also ill-informed about it (especially in comparison with the German freelancers). In their narratives they evoke the understanding that everything will turn out fine, a notion that Christian describes more explicitly in his view of the Danish welfare state.

Comparing the German and Danish freelancers' statements and evaluations on the topic, we can see quite a strong contrast, which can be summed up as follows: The German freelancers are very pessimistic about their own social security and the collective system of social security in general (mainly concerning the pension system), they are generally well-informed about their social security topics, they express a great insecurity and also anxiety connected with these topics, and they try to take measures against it, whereas the Danish freelancers do not seem to bother too much about these topics, they show nearly no sign of

insecurity and practically none of anxiety, they are quite ill-informed, especially as concerns their own old age security, and they do not in general take a lot of measures to organise their own old age security.

How can we now understand this remarkable difference? When we look at the differences in the social security that the respective welfare states are providing for the freelancers in question, we can find rational reasons for this: In chapter 4 I have argued that the social security position for the German freelancers can be described as

“precarious”, whereas the position of the Danish freelancers can be called more “secured”.

Robert Castel (2002) and other proponents of the “precariousness” approach draw a relation between the “precarious” position of individuals and feelings of insecurity and anxiety. Indeed we can interpret the German freelancers narratives on the topic as in line with that. Nevertheless, what about the Danish freelancers' accounts? On the one hand the Danish freelancers, being better included in welfare state institutions, actually have less reason to be affected by insecurity and the fears connected to it. However, when it comes to old age security (the “Achilles heel”) there are not so many rational reasons for the feeling of security. How can we, especially in the case of old age security, explain the absence of insecurity (and anxiety) amongst the Danish freelancers?

Another aspect, which is relevant in this context, is how far the freelancers themselves are aware of the above mentioned rational reasons or not. In the case of the German freelancers, we could see that they are generally very, sometimes even extraordinarily, well informed about social security issues, i.e. they are also very aware of their precarious situation. This is very different in the case of the Danish freelancers, especially in the case of old age security, as they quite frequently describe how they have not thought about it and have not informed themselves about it, i.e. they present quite a low amount of knowledge about their own provisions as concerns old age security. Though despite not really having any rational evidence about the question of their old age security, they seem to evaluate it as good, or at least good enough to not think about it further. Not least because of the latter findings, which appear as a rather naïve handling of their situation at the first glance, I assume that the “insecurity” difference found along country

lines in this study is only partly grounded in differences of the freelancers' social security

lines in this study is only partly grounded in differences of the freelancers' social security