A UBI won’t reinvigorate labor’s power – it will drive wedges between different tiers of workers.

Focusing on the argument for basic income in support of what we call “strong exit”, meant to enable workers to retain some link with the formal labour market while attempting to use a basic income-induced exit option to improve their job prospects, we have outlined several concerns. In the first place, those most in need of an exit option to escape domination at work may be the least able to effectively use a basic income-induced right to exit. In addition, those who may need exit most are also those least able to present a credible threat of exit and, thus, to improve their bargaining position against employers. Examining the interaction between exit and voice strategies under a basic income, we also identified a plausible scenario where the exit strategy may actually contribute to driving a wedge in between different workers’ factions in ways that would further worsen the bargaining power of the most precarious workers. While these considerations are sketchy, they clearly suggest that the exit-strategy for improving working conditions should not be embraced uncritically, and calls for more systematic attention to the role of exit in discussions of basic income. In this context, it is crucial not to dissociate the case for individual exit from the analysis of how best to support the wider structural empowerment of disadvantaged groups.