Reconceptualizing social work in times of crisis: An examination of the cases of Greece,Spain and Portugal

Introduction: Bringing politics back to global social work

The year 2010 has been of great importance for international social work for two interrelated reasons: the spiralling economic crisis in the Eurozone periphery and the re-politicization of social work debates as reflected in the Global Social Work conference. The 2010 Global Social Work conference in Hong Kong, organized in the shadow of the looming financial crisis, signalled the repositioning of political action at the heart of social work. Notwithstanding its vast attendance, an extraordinary aspect of the event has been the eagerness of many of the delegates to debate an alternative political future for social work. At a formal level, the culmination of such a shift was reflected in the commitment of the three leading international social work organizations (IFSW, IASSW and ICSW) to explore ways of tangible political action, which later took the form of a broad global consultation leading to the social work ‘Global Agenda’ (for more information on the Global Agenda and its practical, conceptual and ethical challenges, see Jones and Truell, 2012).

At a grassroots level, during the same event, the Social Work Action Network (SWAN), a radical social work organization based in the UK, co-organized three thematic sessions debating the impact of neoliberalism on social work practice and explored ways of collective resistance (Ferguson, 2010). These sessions were characterized by large attendance and vigorous discussions, which exceeded the formal boundaries of the conference. Local social work groups led by striking practitioners and radical academics invited SWAN delegates to attend a politically alternative social work event organized simultaneously, yet beyond the confines of the main conference. The radical spirit of this grassroots event was later reflected in a manifesto written by local social work practitioners, who declared, ‘we must launch a campaign for progressive social work and social welfare, and insist upon protecting the spirit of social work that is to promote human rights, justice, democracy and equality. We must resist any oppression against social welfare and its service users in order to establish a society that respects human rights and secures social justice’ (PSWN, 2011).

Even though the Hong Kong conference can be seen as a turning point in the process of re-politicization of social work, a reality encapsulated by the Global Agenda, it is important to recognize that this has not been a ‘top-down’ process. Representatives of international social work organizations were urged to recognize, reflect and work towards a political process, which had been advocated by frontline social workers in certain regions and countries (see later) for a long time.

In the years prior to this conference, and despite inevitable variations, regional particularities and the lack of homogeneity, large numbers of social workers in different parts of the world had expressed disapproval against the marketization of social services, professional imperialism and oppression towards service users (see for example, Ferguson et al., 2004). In an edited collection published in 2004, academics and practitioners from nine different countries in six different continents ‘found first, that in none of these countries had social work services escaped the pressures of neoliberal globalization, whether that meant – as in Britain – the growing dominance of care management approaches in a social care (…) Second, and more positively, what the collection also identified was that in many of these countries, social workers and community workers were developing new ways of working which helped local people and oppressed groups resist these economic and political pressures’ (Ferguson and Lavalette, 2006: 311).

2010 was also the starting point of the unprecedented Eurozone crisis, whose cataclysmic effects soon escalated to a humanitarian crisis, particularly affecting the countries of Southern Europe (Lapavitsas et al., 2012). In this article we argue that such an extraordinary crisis has resulted in watershed political responses from social work practitioners, academics and service users. In particular, social work in Southern Europe has been witnessing a wide, spontaneous and organic wave of politicization, mobilization and scepticism towards theoretical, ethical and professional orthodoxies that had dominated the profession since its inception. Even though it is still too early to assert with confidence whether Southern European social work will head towards its own reconceptualization process, in this article we suggest that the unprecedented external and internal tensions and contradictions have already contributed towards a profound ideological and professional transformation in the profession. As in the case of Latin American reconceptualization, the necessary examination of the character, origins and scope of social work cannot avoid the traditionally ‘inconvenient’ issues of vast poverty, sharp inequality, endemic corruption and state violence. We also argue that the nature of social work’s current self-examination in Southern Europe bears similarities to the Latin American reconceptualization movement which had ‘spread throughout the region sparking intense debates on the role of social work, its ethical and political dimensions’ (Saracostti et al., 2012: 471).

A note on methodology

As this process is still ongoing at multilevels, we are careful of avoiding theoretical oversimplifications and political exaggerations. Therefore, the purpose of this article is primarily to map and provide an initial assessment of this process focusing on external and internal transformative factors. Factors external to the profession triggered overwhelming ‘cuts’ in the profession’s resources, client base and operation. As we demonstrate below, the impact on the working conditions of social workers has been acute and particularly damaging. Internally, social work has been going through a period of self-examination and redefinition of its role, largely abandoning individualistic approaches of the past and advancing political action as a legitimate social work method (see later).

In order to document this ideological and professional transformation, we have followed a research and contextualization process based on two main stages: a) evaluation of primary sources and b) examination of the emerging narratives and concepts through selective ‘key interviews’ with people who have been actively involved in the recent movements and debates within social work. Our decision to focus on, mostly, primary sources was informed by the dynamic and rapidly evolving nature of the discussed theme, which also accounts for the very limited research literature available. As a result, we investigated minutes, press releases and other available empirical data, from trade unions, national social work associations and activist social work networks (such as SWAN-Greece and the ‘Orange Tide’ in Spain). We have also evaluated raw statistical data from services of national statistics both at national (National Statistical Associations in Greece, Spain and Portugal) and EU level (Eurostat).

In order to contextualize our findings and develop coherent social work narratives, we complemented these data with a limited number of interviews with ‘key persons’ in the field of social work. As a result we conducted 11 interviews with social work activists, trade unionists, academics and practitioners involved in the recent mobilizations (four interviews took place in Greece, three in Spain and three in Portugal). The two main criteria for selecting our ‘key informants’ were: a) established and active involvement in the current movements and debates within the social work profession; and b) a role of elected or de facto representative, either in national social work associations or in grassroots movements which involve social workers. Even though some of the interviewees were positive to the possibility of publishing their names, not all of them agreed and consequently we decided to maintain anonymity for all participants. Finally, in the case of Portugal, where current literature on the experiences of social workers has been scarce and access to primary sources was limited, we decided to ‘fill the gap’ with the use of two online surveys targeting social work practitioners. Eighty social workers responded to these surveys, following a sampling, which resembled ‘snowballing’ techniques due to time limitations. Although, these surveys are not strictly representative, the responses seem to be consistent with findings from the other research methods and therefore we are confident that they significantly contribute in contextualizing and confirming statistical data in a qualitative way. The presentation of our arguments and analysis follows a thematic rather than ‘country-based’ sequence. We have attempted a synthesis of experiences and sources, consciously avoiding the model of ‘parallel monologues’ which is often followed in country reports.

Southern European economies at a time of crisis: From ‘Europeanization’ to ‘disintegration’

In this comparative study we have focused on the Southern European countries, which account for the three out of four letters in the mischievously used ‘PIGS’ acronym. This acronym stands for Portugal, Ireland, Greece and Spain; countries of the Eurozone periphery that have been heavily indebted and subsequently bailed out, directly or indirectly, by EU, IMF and ECB (also known as the ‘Troika’). In this article we focus on Greece, Spain and Portugal which, we believe, share some common political, historical and social characteristics that are reflected in the historical development of social work.

There is a great amount of irony and cynicism behind the playful ‘PIGS’ acronym, as the economies of the aforementioned countries had been previously celebrated by their eventual lenders as ‘success stories’ and ‘tiger economies’ (see Dorgan, 2006), a fact indicative of the myopic and irrational way financial markers operate. Even though tracing the reasons behind the bailouts is not within the scope of the present article, we cannot ignore the fact that much of the available literature focuses on the structural inadequacies and ideological failures of the neoliberal EU project (see Lapavitsas et al., 2012; Nelson et al., 2011; Roubini and Mihim, 2011; Varoufakis, 2011). The scapegoating of the peoples of the EU periphery and their labelling as ‘corrupt’ and ‘lazy’ follows a long tradition of victimization rhetoric endemic in capitalist economies, both at an international and national level (Varoufakis, 2011). Such a moralistic approach, has been very important in justifying punitive macroeconomic interventions which otherwise would have been rejected as inhumane and unacceptable by European public opinion.

The Greek government was the first one to accept, amid social unrest, a bailout from the Troika in 2010. Portugal and Spain followed in 2011 and 2012, respectively. Despite minor variations in the terms of the Memoranda of Understanding signed between the lenders and recipient countries, the scope and objectives of these agreements were essentially identical. Competitiveness was to be restored through waves of strict austerity measures that seemed to be so violent and sharp that they were described by financial analysts as ‘internal devaluations’ at best and ‘recipes for disaster’ at worst (Lapavitsas, 2010).

Social and Health Services (see later) as well as working conditions and salaries were at the core of these reforms in all three countries. In Spain, between 2007 and 2012 the average annual income of households had fallen by more than 10 percent and average purchasing power deteriorated to lower levels than in 2001 (FOESSA, 2013: 4–5). This represented a much more pronounced decline in average income than in most countries of the EU-27, with the exception of Greece, Ireland and the United Kingdom. Key determinants of the decline in family income included the large job losses as unemployment reached the overwhelming rate of 26 percent (55% for under 25s) at the end of 2012 (INE, 2013a). This suggested a 2.5 times higher rate than the average for EU-27, increased income and consumption taxes, and the reduction of social benefits, including unemployment benefits, pensions and minimum income benefits (FOESSA, 2013). Along with the income decline, an unprecedented increase in inequality has been observed (Eurostat, 2013a). As a result, the number of people experiencing poverty and social exclusion has soared during the crisis. In 2012 alone, 21.1 percent of the population resident in Spain was below the at-risk-of-poverty threshold (INE, 2013b) and the number of households with no income at all – the harshest expression of severe poverty – reached 3.7 percent, having doubled during the crisis (FOESSA, 2013: 12).

In Portugal, the impact of the austerity measures has been equally grim. Two large waves of austerity policies were launched between 2010 and 2012 abiding to the conditions of ‘stability program for growth’ (Assembleia da República Portuguesa, 2010). These policies included freezing of public sector appointments and career progressions. Salary cuts which varied between 3.5 percent and 10 percent for public sector workers who earned more than 1500 euros a month were also introduced in 2011 and were followed by a second wave of income cuts in 2012 that affected all private and public sector workers (5% on average). Moreover, pensions and unemployment benefits as well as bonuses linked to Christmas and summer holidays were drastically reduced. These measures were also accompanied by substantial increases in VAT, council and central taxation (Online 24, 2012).

The human cost of austerity

The impact of the aforementioned austerity measures was devastating. In 2011, 24.4 percent of citizens reportedly were at risk of poverty and social exclusion. By 2013 unemployment reached a historical high (18%) while inequality had spiralled out of control. According to the Caritas Report (Leahy, 2012: 3), ‘Portugal is the EU country with the highest income distribution inequality – the share earned by the range of 20 percent of the population with the highest income is more than 7 times higher than received by 20% of the population with the lowest incomes’.

However, the country that suffered the most catastrophic consequences of the internal devaluation has been Greece. In the last quarter of 2012, and after 18 consecutive quarters of GDP contraction, overall unemployment was 26 percent while unemployment for the age group 18–24 reached the unprecedented level of 58 percent (National Statistical Service of Greece, 2013). The national GDP, as of December 2012, had contracted by 22 percent since the beginning of the crisis, which translates to a startling reduction of real income for Greek households in the range of 45 percent (Efimerida Syntakton Daily, 2013; National Statistical Service of Greece, 2013). As a result, 31 percent of the overall population already experiences or is at risk of severe poverty. The broad pattern of ‘internal devaluation’ is nearly identical in all three countries of reference: significant cuts in funding health and welfare services, extensive privatization schemes, salary cuts for both private and public sector workers and substantial rises in direct and indirect taxation. Such measures seem to have pushed large sections of the former middle classes into poverty, creating a new section of new-poor (Eurostat, 2013b).

Beyond statistics, everyday reality already resembles a state of humanitarian catastrophe. The international NGO Caritas, in its report (2012: 15) on the impact of austerity, concluded that:

This points to a further risk for vulnerable groups in the peripheral countries. In many ways the welfare systems in these countries were at the outset of the crisis less well placed than those of other European countries to withstand the shock to incomes that the crisis involves, and less well able to protect the poorest people from the austerity measures and structural reforms that followed.

Informal and familial means of providing welfare, traditionally important in Mediterranean countries, are under extreme pressure and no longer available to maintain a safety network for their members (Papadopoulos and Roumpakis, 2012). In both Greece and Spain, the rate of suicides, a historically infrequent phenomenon in Southern Europe has increased sharply. In particular, Spain has experienced a surge in suicides, which seem linked to the more than 400,000 repossessions of houses and evictions over the last couple of years (Reuters, 2012). Similarly, in Greece one year into the structural adjustment programme the rate of suicides has doubled (Kathimerini Daily, 2012). However, the strongest indication of a looming humanitarian disaster among these countries is linked to the decision of local branches of large international charity organizations to suspend operations in developing countries and concentrate efforts on tackling homelessness and severe poverty in the capital cities of Greece, Spain and Portugal. Organizations like the Red Cross and Doctors of the World have now redirected their resources in Southern European countries, operating food banks, soup kitchens, temporary shelters and even makeshift street-level health services for those not entitled to healthcare access (see Doctors of the World, 2013). The Spanish Red Cross, which traditionally focuses its work on immigrants and asylum seekers made its first ever public appeal to help more than 300,000 Spanish families affected by the economic crisis by providing food handouts (IFRC, 2012).

The damaging impact of austerity measures, unique in the modern history of Europe, poses significant socio-legal and constitutional challenges for the governments which have been assigned with the task of meeting the Troika targets. Greece, Spain and Portugal are considered to be ‘young’ democracies in Europe as all of them have experienced, until relatively recently, the authoritarian rule of military juntas. After a short period of prosperity and relative democratic stability, the recent crisis has created a socio-legal context susceptible to state violence and state-sponsored violation of human rights. This process appears to be developing at two different levels. On the one hand, legislative and political processes that underpin the austerity measures have been characterized by a deficit in democratic legitimization and most importantly in the cases of Greece and Portugal have been openly deemed as outright unconstitutional. In early 2013 Portugal’s Supreme Court challenged four out of nine proposed austerity measures that the government had embedded in the annual budget (Financial Times, 2013). A few weeks earlier, the Greek Supreme Court had suggested that the decision of the Greek state to collect a disproportionate and urgent head tax through electricity bills also violated the country’s constitution (Greek High Court, 2012). In both cases, governments pushed ahead with the unconstitutional reforms, after minor superficial changes and resorting to the ‘law of necessity and exception’, which justifies overriding the constitution in conditions similar to these defined by the ‘state of emergency’. Apart from the legalistic acts of constitutional manipulation, states have also used excessive police force in order to contain public discontent. State violence was noted by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights who observed that:

In Greece, social tensions inflamed by the economic crisis have led to violent attacks on migrants, and allegations that anti-racism protestors suffered torture and ill-treatment at the hands of the police. In Spain, there have been allegations that the police responded excessively to the 25 September demonstrations, and I welcome the fact that an investigation has been launched into the police operation at the Atocha train station in Madrid. (Pillay, 2012)

Post-welfare capitalism and the new social work landscape (structural pressures)

Social workers are nowadays forced to operate in a landscape radically and irreversibly transformed. Such a landscape is shaped by external (structural) pressures and internal (social work based) contradictions. As we discuss in this part of the article, broader structural changes in society and consequent challenges within the profession operate in a dialectic relationship, which dynamically forms the material and theoretical foundation of a social work ‘reconceptualization’.

The economic and political environment within which contemporary social work operates has been shaped by the drastic reduction on social spending. As many from the middle classes have been pushed into poverty and exclusion, they now occupy the historical territory of social work’s clients; they are the ‘new poor’. The vast expansion of social work’s client base, which now includes social classes that starkly differ from the stereotypical and systematically demonized poor service users – also pejoratively described as the ‘underclass’ (Murray, 1994) – has resulted in challenging some of the certainties defined in orthodox and mainstream social work theories (see below).

In Spain, further to the structural reforms introduced over the last couple of years, the government recently announced the suspension of funding towards the local/community network of public social services, which has historically been the main gateway to the welfare state (CGTS, 2013a). Such reform at the local level deprives front-line services of essential resources and competencies necessary for the provision of basic social services, opening the door to further privatization. Available evidence suggests that the assault on the already weak welfare system of the country has resulted in further job losses and pay-cuts in the public sector, which do not leave social workers unaffected (FOESSA, 2013: 38–40).

Working conditions for social workers have deteriorated, although at a different pace depending on the sector and time of appointment. Our research suggests that social workers working in the public sector for more than 10 years appear to be less affected. This is not the case for practitioners who were employed relatively recently under short-term and precarious contracts. Ioakimidis and Mpithimitris (2009) have demonstrated how Greek state social workers working in the same organization and having identical duties may experience significant variations in income and working conditions. V.K., a Greek social worker and trade unionist in the ‘Home Care’ project explained that:

Even before the crisis we felt like hostages. It has been almost nine years since I was initially appointed in the project and I have been renewing short-term contracts nearly every two years. In the local authority I am working at there are colleagues who do the same job and are paid significantly more than I do. Most importantly, they do not experience the agony of losing their job every two years. Did you know that sometimes several months pass and we do not get any salaries? This is typical divide and rule policy. They want to turn half of the public sector workers against the other half. They have done the same with the private sector workers.

A.P., a Greek social work practitioner who has been working for a large NGO explained how:

It has always been difficult income-wise. However, nowadays we do not even receive a salary that could help us survive. Payment dates are irregular and we might wait of two or three months. The only consistent thing is the pay cuts. Last month’s salary was 550 Euros. Who can survive on that?

These comments are consistent with existing literature on working conditions of Greek social workers (Ioakimidis and Teloni, 2013; Teloni, 2011) which suggests that the majority of social workers, especially those working for charity organizations or under short-term contracts, are at risk of poverty and exclusion and often face conditions similar to those of social workers.

In Spain, even though the deterioration of social workers’ working conditions has faced a less sharp deterioration, the same pattern has been visible. A recent study (Gómez García and Torices Blanco, 2012: 464) reveals significant variations among social workers working in similar environments but under different contracts. According to this research about a third of state social workers experience the insecurity of temporary contracts, while 20 percent of the total number have seen their income dropping to less than 1000 euros per month. Although this study does not disaggregate by age, there is evidence that suggests it is the younger generation of social workers who have experienced the most precarious and volatile working conditions (De la Red Vega and Brezmes Nieto, 2009: 144; Gómez García, 2010: 223). Already by 2000, another study conducted by the National Association of Social Workers (CGTS, 2000, cited in ANECA, 2004) had highlighted that the increased privatization of social services was likely to engulf half of all social work posts and provide working conditions significantly worse than those in the public sector. These studies had also suggested that the new environment for social work would be based on low employability rates, and the domination of temporary and precarious contracts (ANECA, 2004: 73–86). Consequently, the eventual retirement of the ‘older’ practitioners who still enjoy secure contracts will lead to a full reversion of the working conditions and professional standards, which historically guaranteed the continuation of social work as a middle-class profession.

The most telling and powerful finding of this mapping exercise has been the realization that large sections of social work activity – if not the profession as a whole – is at risk of extinction. At a time when the demand for social services has increased dramatically, Southern European societies witness the withdrawal of basic welfare services. Recently, the Greek government, in line with the targets set by lenders, announced that there would be no more appointments replacing retired practitioners, while thousands of public sector workers would face dismissal (IMF, 2012).

Moreover, ‘restructuring’ of the welfare state has also meant that most of the benefits and services available to service users with a disability, or facing unemployment and poverty have been either suspended or curtailed (see Ioakimidis and Teloni, 2013). Therefore, mainstream core social work activities such as benefit assessments and psycho-social case work are no longer in use due to lack of resources or outright ineligibility of most service users.

Paradoxically, even though one would expect that at a time of crisis the workload of social workers would increase dramatically, often state social services experience a reverse effect. According to our interviewees, core social services linked to benefit provision have witnessed a dramatic workload decline. This can be interpreted as a clear indication of the end of the welfare state – and possibly social work – as we know it. Draconian eligibility criteria, demonization of service users and a sharp decline of available resources have excluded much of the traditional ‘client base’ from social services. K.G., a social worker in the regional social services, confirmed this pattern:

Two years ago, during the first stage of the crisis, we were overwhelmed by the workload. Given the limited number of social workers in our agency and the rapid increase of service users due to looming poverty and unemployment, we simply could not cope any more with the workload. Nowadays, two years into the structural reforms the landscape is very different. The workload has decreased significantly and some days may pass without seeing more than one or two service users; and these cases are only linked to child abuse or adoption. No more generic social work here. Of course, this does not mean that poverty has been reduced, quite the opposite. Most of the people now know that they have nothing to expect from the state. And we have nothing to offer them!

A similar trend has been also observed in Spain. Amat (2013), in a presentation discussing ‘minimum income’ policies in the region of Catalonia highlighted the contradiction between the rhetoric of inclusion through the operation of a universal ‘safety net’ and the harsh reality of outright exclusion for most service users. As in the case of Greece, this study indicated that despite the dramatic increase in poverty, state social workers have witnessed a decline in workload. Some interviewees have suggested that ‘service users have nothing to expect any more from state social services and now turn to charity organizations’ (interview with G.A., Greek practitioners). Therefore, even the use of the term ‘service users’ seems inadequate in this context, as in this ‘post-welfare state’ context there are hardly any services available for people who are in need of support.

Further to the disintegration of services, social work education seems to be under pressure. In April 2013 the Ministry of Education announced plans to close down the only university level social work school in the country and merge or close two out of three polytechnics (Greek Ministry of Education, 2013). Should these plans go ahead, only one social work school will remain unaffected in the country. This will be the first time that social work education in Greece will be provided through a single tertiary level programme, since the creation of the first social work school in 1946. The Greek Association of Social Workers and the Greek Social Work Action Network suggested that such development, although unprecedented, cannot not been seen as a surprise. ‘In a country where the welfare state is already inexistent, the government simply decided that social work is now a luxury’ (GASW, 2011).

Finally, the last parameter of the ‘external factors’ shaping the new social work environment is related to the phenomenon of welfare regression. The traditional structures of familial and informal welfare, a historic characteristic of the Southern European model, appear to be unable to cope with the intensity of the current social transformations (Papadopoulos and Roumpakis, 2012). As a result, ‘primitive’ and pre-welfare forms of urgent charity care have re-emerged. Social workers involved in charity organizations face a new professional and political reality. Instead of mainstream social work interventions, many practitioners find themselves involved in anachronistic charity soup kitchens, makeshift medical surgeries and pharmaceutical handouts. ‘Urgent Care’ charity organizations in Spain have witnessed a surge in demand higher than 200 percent (CGTS, 2013b). The work of practitioners in these organizations is rather atypical for a developed European state, mostly resembling parochial models of support for families and individuals who struggle to cover basic needs.

Portuguese social workers who responded to our surveys also recognized the steady transformation of mainstream social work into a parochial and charitable activity. One of the respondents explained that social work under the current crisis:

not only has become more bureaucratic, but has also adopted more charitable characteristics that put into question crucial ethical and political principles of our profession: the right to dignity and the development of a fair and just society. As executors of state policies in the front line, social workers often become the face of these policies of indignity, inadequacy and lack of future perspectives.

Tensions created by spending cuts, pressing working conditions and harsh eligibility criteria for service users have also been noted by the Portuguese Association of Professional Social Work, stating that ‘severe restrictions successively verified under the protection measures and social support’, while social workers are asked to implement ‘measures that contradict the principles and core values of their profession and safeguard the dignity of citizens’ (Faria, 2013).

Redefining social work practice and theory from below (internal contradictions)

Apart from external sociopolitical pressures, social work is currently experiencing an unprecedented transformation from within. Social workers in Portugal, Greece and Spain, for the first time in the profession’s history, have initiated a broad process of reclaiming the political role of social work. Such a process has been characterized by active mobilizations, activist interventions, facilitation of grassroots alliances and articulation of powerful political arguments, which have largely replaced the mainstream academic and professional jargon of the past.

In order to contextualize the intensity and impact of this transformation, one has to recall the historical and political origins of social work in these countries, largely defined by local conservative and religious elites. Politically grim periods of authoritarianism, which covered substantial parts of the modern political history of these countries, provided the politically and epistemologically formative context for the creation of social work.

In Spain the outbreak of the civil war (1936–9) and the subsequent establishment of the Francoist dictatorship (1939–75) meant that the welfare state and social work education were controlled primarily by Catholic Church and to a lesser extent by the regime’s political establishment (Sanz Cintora, 2001). During the first couple of decades of the dictatorial administration, social workers, whose stereotypical profile was that of archetypal ‘Catholic ladies’, were assigned paternalistic and assistance-focused roles organized around the relief and moral control of the poor. The Portuguese case has not been very different, as the origins of welfare and social work are linked to religious and philanthropic principles (Santos, 2009). Similarly, the right-wing authoritarian rule, which emerged victorious from the Greek civil war, took over the training and supervision of social work. Ioakimidis (2011) in his study of the history of Greek social work explains that the profession was tightly controlled by the ruling classes, the church and women from the local aristocracy. He also concludes that

Even though Greek social work itself is a product of such socio-political developments, the profession has never undertaken any reflection over its origins and position in these politically complex historical periods. More important, such an omission prevents Greek social work from examining alternatives and redefining its future directions. (Ioakimidis, 2011: 11)

Thus, the knowledge base of the profession systematically ignored and excluded radical currents that developed in society, and remained directed towards the political elites. Until recently, and despite the influence of Latin American critical approaches, in Portugal and Spain radicalism has always been a visible yet sideline current.

In Greece, the first signs of political discontent within the profession emerged in the summer of 2011, during the hugely popular mobilizations and general strikes that led to the occupation of the central square in front of the Greek Parliament. During this period, a radical social work grassroots network (SWAN-Greece) reported that many practitioners had actively participated in the mass mobilizations, contributing not only to the peoples’ assemblies but also supporting grassroots groups of mental health professionals who followed a radical street-work model facilitating support groups for children and adults in the heart of the occupied square (SWAN-Greece, 2012). These signs of ideological transformation became much more evident and widespread after the government’s decision (in December 2011) to introduce an urgent head tax which disproportionately affected the most disadvantaged and poorest in society. In order to ensure that everybody would be forced to pay the head tax the government decided to deem this extraordinary tax payable through the electricity bill, a choice which directly put thousands of poor households at risk of electricity disconnection. In order to avoid allegations of human rights violations the government suggested that it would be social workers who would decide which households would be deprived from electric as a result of their inability to pay the tax. However, strict targets did not leave any space for discretion. In an unprecedented act of civil disobedience many social workers refused to follow state orders and approve electricity disconnections. They based their decision on human rights legislation and their professional ethics. This spontaneous reaction was immediately embraced by the trade union of local council workers (POE-OTA) which declared that ‘POE-OTA does not accept the legitimacy of the head tax through the inclusion of social workers in the committees. We also demand the abolition of the head tax which is nothing more than punishment of the poorest’ (POE-OTA, 2011). After public outcry and facing the possibility of political embarrassment, the government withdrew its plan to introduce these phony assessment committees. A few months after the first ever recorded rebellion of social workers, another incident confirmed the political shift within the profession. In the spring of 2012 the Minister of Interior, responding to a parliamentary request submitted by the neo-Nazi party Golden Dawn, ordered that all state nurseries provide detailed information on children who come from immigrant families. Fearing that this information would be used by the neo-Nazis in order to identify and attack immigrant families, social workers and nursery teachers decided to openly defy the government request and engage with techniques of civil disobedience for the second time within a year (POE-OTA, 2012). Meanwhile, on the education front, social work students at the Polytechnic of Patras decided to occupy their school for several weeks demanding the withdrawal of government proposals for the closure of social work schools. Eventually, social work students were violently attacked by thugs who allegedly attempted to suppress the protest (Teloni, 2013).

These grassroots responses forced the Greek Association of Social Workers to overcome its political passivity and assume a more active role in representing practitioners and service users in their struggles for social justice. GASW has historically been a politically conservative organization with close links to the ruling classes (Ioakimidis, 2011). Over the last couple of years the organization has been under extreme pressure from social workers who demand a radical change. As a result, in the association’s 2013 elections a new radical platform emerged breaking a long tradition of a ‘single list’ consensus. The new group, which prioritized political action over introvert professionalism and public relations, received almost 50 percent of the votes in the largest urban areas (Athens and Thessaloniki) confirming the dynamics of new radicalism that informed acts of civil disobedience was not a temporary trend (GASW, 2012).

Discontent and indignation in the basis of the profession has also informed a more radical stance in the National Associations of Spain and Portugal. In Spain the National Association of Social Workers has been instrumental in orchestrating one of the most powerful and largest mobilizations of social welfare workers in the history of European social work. The Marea Naranja (The Orange Tide) movement grew from the massive popular anti-austerity mobilizations of May 2011 (known as ‘15M’ or ‘los indignados’). After the violent repression of the indignados’ mobilizations, the 15M movement spread across the country creating local assemblies and has since kept organizing protests. The extraordinary public support achieved by the movement in 2011, when at least three-quarters of the population supported the protest manifestos (Castells, 2012: 116), was suggestive of an emerging anti-capitalist critique.

‘La Marea Naranja in defence of public social services’ was initiated by a group of welfare professionals in the region of Aragón as part of the broader anti-austerity protests. The movement quickly became popular and covered several Spanish cities. The mobilizations of this particular group have so far included repeated anti-cuts protests, legal appeals against the withdrawal of school meals, the facilitation of political debates in support of service users, and grassroots welfare initiatives which attempted on the one hand to support vulnerable people but on the other hand to denounce the regression to past charitable practices (http://mareanaranjaragon.wordpress.com/). The Marea Naranja movement, despite its heterogeneity, has been acting as a common platform for welfare workers, service users, trade unionists and social activists united in their commitment to defend public services.

La Marea Naranja has now taken the shape of a wide ‘umbrella’ movement which brings together very diverse, welfare state related, groups and institutions. Interestingly, in this broad alliance, top-down and grassroots initiatives are converging, enriching, challenging and debating with each other. At the time of writing this article (November 2013), more than 1300 Spanish social workers came together in Marbella for the Consejo General del Trabajo Social (IFSW, 2013b). The conference, one of the largest social work gatherings in Europe, explored the positive and dynamic experience of anti-austerity mobilizations in the country and debated the character of current re-politicization of social work. The motto displayed on the event’s poster was rather telling of the critical character of the gathering and read: ‘(Say) No to austerity, Do not shut up!’

M.R., a mental health social worker active in the movement, explained that:

‘They [the ruling class] are taking everything away from us and people are deeply indignant and protesting a lot in recent years… I strongly support that social workers need to come together and join other professions and the broader society in defence of what had been achieved… I have observed that the social work professional associations I know are being quite critical and combative, organizing mobilizations and offering a very substantial social critique based on good evidence and proposing alternatives…

Similarly, I.H., a recently qualified social worker and one of the pioneer social work bloggers in Spain, described the organic links between the popular protests and the ‘orange tide’:

The day after the first demonstration I was walking through Sol square and started listening to a meeting of people that I quickly noticed that was different than usual. People were not arguing about who was right and who was wrong… but they/we all agreed something was wrong with the system, and were saying ‘to change it, let’s spread the example, let’s set a campsite where we will demonstrate alternative ways to run the system, based on other values’ … These were values that we shared but had kept within us, and we were suddenly externalizing them. The people there had different ideas and stood for multiple struggles, but we were sharing common feelings that united us… During the next two weeks I dropped by the campsite every day because it seemed to me something interesting to live as a person … but I also thought ‘how interesting this process is from the point of view of social work … how much we have to learn from this’.

It is exactly these grassroots and organic alliances that provide a solid basis for the new reconceptualization of social work in Southern Europe. Professional insecurity and petty antagonisms among ‘neighbouring’ professions which had preoccupied much of formal social work’s energy in the past, have now been replaced by a commitment to collective and inclusive actions. In Portugal almost 60 percent of the respondents suggested that the profession needed to overcome its passivity and ‘disorganization’ and develop coherent ‘class thinking’ (consciousness). Such organization will provide the necessary confidence in order to overcome the limitations of a traditionally inward looking professionalism. As one of the respondents mentioned:

[Social work] should not be about looking at itself and seeking its legitimacy in competition with other social sciences. We need to reassert legitimization by looking at society, focusing on the changes which are taking place and assuming an active part in structural changes. This may even require the construction of international movements…

The question of internationalism and co-ordinated international action appears to be fundamental in the emerging radicalization of Portuguese social work. In October 2012 the Portuguese Association of Social Workers openly condemned the neoliberal reforms adopted by the European Union, highlighting the damaging effect of these policies on a number of countries (IFSW, 2012). Moreover, in recent years and despite the crisis, Portuguese social workers have been more active than ever at international level. At the time of writing this article, Portuguese social workers have been elected to the EC of both leading European social work organizations (EASSW and IFSW) committed to agendas that promote active political action.

Grassroots mobilizations within much of European social work have pushed the priorities of international social work organizations towards a more critical and politically informed direction. On the 2013 International Social Work Day, IFSW members of Greece, Spain, Portugal and Ireland visited the headquarters of the European Union and met with László Andor, European Commissioner for Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion, in an effort to engage the EU ‘in understanding the dire social affects of austerity upon the people of their countries’ (IFSW, 2013a). The actual and symbolic value of such action was of monumental importance in confirming the need for a politically engaged social work at a time of social upheaval caused by neoliberal politics. Such urgent need for ‘reconceputalizing social work’ was powerfully presented by Sonia Guadalupe, representative of Portuguese social workers in this meeting, who stated ‘This is not a crisis of the euro, it is a crisis for people, we need new approaches where people are put first not profits’ (IFSW, 2013a).

Instead of a conclusion: Towards a radical reconceptualization of social work

In this article we attempted to record and present broader structural and intra-professional factors, which have triggered the process of social work’s political transformation in Southern Europe. It is our contention that the same conditions, which have pushed mainstream social work to the brink of extinction, might as well act as a catalyst for the radical reconceptualization of the profession. By this we mean a fundamental political transformation of social work in a way that allows the profession to reassert its priorities, overcome its inherent conservatism and create social alliances on the basis of social justice and broader structural political change. Even though we cannot predict future directions for social work, it is with some confidence that we suggest that current political challenges and contradictions within the profession are so immense that they have provided fertile soil for a radical transformation; and the seeds are already visible. Currently, reconceptualization still appears to be amorphous in shaping a clear political ‘alternative’. However, as social work faces a historical dilemma over its future scope and function we believe that Alayon’s reflection provides a useful direction: ‘It is only an alternative when it is a popular alternative to social order; when the interests of the popular sector become hegemonic’ (Alayon, 1989: 104).