It is one means by which job seekers can satisfy the "mutual obligation requirements" to receive the Newstart Allowance, now replaced by the JobSeeker Payment.

[2][3][4] Work for the Dole's suspension was lifted 'where it [was] safe to do so' with the reintroduction of mutual obligations, and eventually being reviewed and modified with new requirements in October 2021.

Transport costs are not separately covered however, and can easily absorb the additional payment – especially for those undertaking the "full time" version.

Work for the Dole was first proposed by the Liberal Party in 1987[citation needed] and was enacted on a trial basis a year after it gained public support at the 1996 federal election in a Liberal/National coalition.

However, this scheme expanded the scope to include work for privately owned agricultural properties in areas deemed to be experiencing exceptional circumstances (generally drought).

[10] In July 2015 Work for the Dole was scaled up, with wider age groups as part of the government's welfare policy under former Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott.

[15] A number of reviews of Work for the Dole have been undertaken; these include: Judith Bessant, in "Civil Conscription or Reciprocal Obligation: The Ethics of 'Work for the Dole'", questioned the Government's justifications for the scheme, which centred on providing a means for young people to get back into the workforce by improving their work ethic.

Bessant argues that there is no evidence that poor attitudes towards work, disorganisation, or other personal failings are the primary source of youth unemployment, which she instead attributes to globalisation, the offshoring of unskilled labour, and increased application of labour-saving technologies in industry.

Shaver suggests this violates the assumption that all citizens are equal in the status, dignity and worth that are necessary for full participation in democratic society.

Little research or debate has centred on the economic imperative of forced labor at approximately half the rate of the minimum wage.

[26] The 2016 ANU's Social Research Centre review found that the scheme improved the probability of an unemployed person finding work by 2%.

[17][18] The Welfare Rights Centre and the Australian Council of Social Service both responded that the scheme was expensive and failed to deliver value for money.