This dynamism is achieved by concentrating on those who have effectively ‘fallen out’ of the labour market, that is, the long-term unemployed. Cyclical unemployment ‘gets stuck’ because of the reduced job-search activity of the long-term unemployed and employer reluctance to employ them (Layard et al., 1994, p. 59). By tackling this problem, labour supply is increased and overall levels of employment are likely to rise
(Layard, 1997, p. 63). The young are particularly important because they have higher than average rates of unemployment (Layard et al., 1994, p. 67). Ensuring adequate levels of training and education is also important, since the demand for low-skilled labour is falling (Layard, 1997, p. 29). A well-educated workforce will prevent skills shortages and prevent the wages of skilled
workers rising disproportionately. If we revisit the definitions of decommodification discussed above, we can identify a form of ‘recommodification’ in New Labour’s policies. Offe (1984, p. 61) defined decommodification as ‘the withdrawal and uncoupling of an increasing number of social areas and social groups (surplus labour power) from market relations’. Yet New Labour’s goal is precisely the elimination of ‘surplus labour power’, since the core principle of its policies is the maximisation of labour supply. This does not mean that there is no unemployment, but that
those who are not currently employed are actively engaged in either job-search activities or training for work. This enhances competitiveness by ensuring that increases in employment are not inflationary, and that workers compete with each other on the basis of skills. As David Blunkett put it when Education Secretary: ‘firms have more potential recruits to choose from, wage pressure is diminished and non-inflationary growth is promoted’ (Blunkett, 2001). Yet this
‘recommodification’ is achieved not through the withdrawal of the state, but by an increase in its intervention. Esping-Andersen’s definition of decommodification was that it ‘occurs when a service is rendered as a matter of right, and when a person can maintain a livelihood without reliance on the market’ (1990,pp. 21–2). However, the character of social rights has been significantly altered through the attachment of responsibilities to them.
这种活力是集中在那些有有效的“堕落”，劳动力市场，实现，长期失业者。周期性失业“卡住”由于减少了求职活动的长期失业者和雇主不愿雇用他们（莱亚德等人。，1994，p. 59）。解决这个问题，劳动力供给增加和就业的总体水平可能上涨
（莱亚德，1997，p. 63）。年轻人尤其重要，因为他们有高于平均失业率（莱亚德等人。，1994，p. 67）。确保足够的培训和教育是重要的，因为低技能劳动力的需求正在下降（莱亚德，1997，p. 29）。一个受过良好教育的劳动力将防止技能短缺和防止技能工资
工人上升不成比例。如果我们重新去商品化上述定义，我们可以识别的形式的“新工党的政策recommodification”。奥菲（1984，p. 61）定义为“退出去商品化和解耦，越来越多的社会领域和社会群体（剩余劳动力市场关系）。然而，新工党的目标正是“剩余劳动力”的消除，因为其政策的核心原则是劳动力供给的最大化。这并不意味着没有失业，但
那些不是目前采用的是积极从事任何工作搜寻活动或培训工作。这增强了竞争力，确保增加就业并不是通胀，而工人互相竞争技能的基础上。戴维布朗奇把它当教育部长：“企业有选择地潜在的新兵，工资压力降低和非通胀增长是促进了”（布朗奇，2001）。然而，这
“recommodification”不是通过国家撤军，但其干预增加。艾斯平-安徒生的定义去商品化是它发生在一个提供服务作为一项权利，当一个人可以维持一个没有对市场的依赖的生活”（1990，页21–2）。然而，社会权的性质已显著改变，通过责任扣押他们。
