SOCIAL SECURITY LEGISLATION AMENDMENT
(WORK FOR THE DOLE) BILL 1997
Navigation: Previous Page | Index | Next Page
CHAPTER 2 - CHAPTER VOLUNTARY AND COMPULSORY PARTICIPATION
3.24 The expectation that participation in Work for the Dole projects
would be largely voluntary has been clearly stated by the Government.
In the pilot projects it is expected that the requirement to participate
would be minimal, if at all. Even so, the inclusion of a provision to
require certain people to participate in Work for the Dole attracted considerable
comment in evidence. As has been noted earlier, this was a major point
of contention for some organisations in their support or otherwise for
the scheme.
3.25 The Committee received much evidence outlining the general benefits
of volunteering within Australia. The Australian Council for Volunteering
(ACV), the peak body representing the volunteer sector in Australia, advised
that volunteering is now a mainstream activity in Australia with no stigma
attached to it and is universally accepted as an activity that is based
on mutuality of benefit between the community and the volunteer. Underpinning
the ACV's work is a philosophical approach which encourages individuals
to make choices, take actions and be responsible. The ACV believes:
that encouraging unemployed, especially younger unemployed, to
take responsibility for contacting the organisations of their choice,
making their own appointments and turning up to interviews will assist
in the development of work related skills. Importantly, our approach
places major emphasis on facilitating the development of the customer's
sense of personal responsibility and self esteem in identifying and
strengthening their own labour market skills. [40]
3.26 ACOSS submitted that experience with previous labour market programs
structured around voluntary work and general research on the benefits
of volunteering has shown that voluntary participation in community activities
can improve the self esteem of unemployed people, indirectly improve their
future employment prospects in other ways, develop employable skills and
put unemployed people into contact with networks which they can use in
their search for jobs. [41]
3.27 The benefits to be gained for both the community and participants
through voluntary work have been equally recognised and are fully supported
by government. As DSS submitted:
The outcomes from approved voluntary work are similar to those
intended from Work for the Dole projects. These outcomes are increased
motivation, self esteem and work skills among the unemployed and bringing
young people back into a work culture, helping instil a positive attitude
to work, and giving participants an opportunity to contribute to and
be involved with the community rather than be isolated from it. [42]
3.28 The Salvation Army referred to its own extensive experience with
the use of volunteers saying that:
The key to voluntarism is a choice of service type plus the freedom
to continue or withhold their services. It should not be confused with
economic liability or accountability to a third party. People volunteer
their services because of an altruistic motivation and as a community
we should nurture and encourage these values and not seek to undermine
or diminish volunteer activities by compelling people to undertake community
work in exchange for income support. [43]
3.29 This was the essence of some people's concern, that the benefits
to be derived from volunteering could be compromised by the inclusion
of the element of compulsion in the Work for the Dole scheme. While some
organisations saw merit in forms of compulsion, others argued that the
compulsory element of the scheme would not assist in achieving the positive
and inspirational qualities intended for the program and which accrue
from voluntary work. If individuals were compelled to participate it would
lead to resentment, a negative effect on self esteem and morale, lack
of cooperation and poor motivation in the workforce. [44]
The fact still remains that a number of witnesses firmly believed that
the need for compulsion would be small, if at all, as most positions in
the pilot projects would be taken willingly.
3.30 The Committee was advised that the national community service bodies
of the Anglican, Catholic, and Uniting Churches and the Salvation Army
had written to the Minister for Schools, Vocational Education and Training,
Dr Kemp, informing him of their opposition to the compulsory nature of
the scheme. [45] The Australian Catholic
Social Welfare Commission, a signatory to the letter, drew attention to:
the large number of potential providers of voluntary work placements
under this scheme which exist through the combined Churches' schooling,
hospital, community health and aged care, welfare centres, charitable,
parish and neighbourhood centre facilities that would be jeopardised
as a result of the punitive compulsory element of the initiative acting
as a disincentive against auspicing particular programs. [46]
3.31 The necessity for including an element of compulsion in the scheme
was outlined by DEETYA. When there is not a sufficient number of volunteers,
`it is fair and reasonable to require others in the same category to make
a contribution'. DEETYA continued that:
The compulsory nature of the initiative will enable people to
be referred who have a severe lack of motivation, self confidence or
personal organisational skill and who may be unlikely to volunteer.
This may be the case where people have been unemployed for an extended
period of time and/or have received a large number of rejections when
applying for jobs. Such people may derive a considerable benefit from
participation in this initiative. This also recognises the investment
by both taxpayers generally and the local community of time, money and
resources. [47]
3.32 Claims were made in evidence that not only would unemployed participants
be affected by compulsion but there were also implications for sponsoring
organisations. Reference was made to unwilling young participants in a
project creating disruption for other participants who may be there voluntarily,
and causing difficulties for management. Organisations mentioned the onerous
and costly administrative burdens associated with a compulsory scheme,
and the development of significant problems with supervision, particularly
the policing function which would be imposed on volunteer based organisations
and the welfare sector. [48]
3.33 The Australian Local Government Association (ALGA) expressed its
concerns about the practicalities of compulsory participation citing Councils'
reluctance to police participants involvement as a critical aspect if
Local Government is to be encouraged to actively participate in the scheme.
[49] The Moreland City Council agreed
that local governments would be loathe to sponsor projects where participants
are not voluntary, due to the consequent problems of supervision. [50]
3.34 While the element of compulsion in the scheme received some criticism,
there were (as has been stated earlier) indications that the 10 000 places
proposed for the pilot work projects could easily be filled by volunteers.
The Belconnen Unemployed Youth Taskforce submitted that from the evidence
of its surveys there appeared to be no need to compel people to participate
in the scheme and it had no doubt that, with improvements `there would
be more than enough volunteers for the scheme'. [51]
AYPAC encapsulated this view stating that:
If the concept of providing work experience on projects that
will benefit communities is as popular as the Government portends (and
AYPAC believes there is popular support for this concept), there is
no need to put in place regulations to make participation compulsory.
It is more likely the case that programs would attract more volunteers
than they have placements. [52]
3.35 The Welfare Rights Centre indicated that it had no doubt that all
10 000 places to be funded under the Work for the Dole scheme could
be filled under the current voluntary work provisions of the Social Security
Act. [53] The WRC and others argued
that the use of compulsion as a means of encouraging people to undertake
work experience programs was unnecessary because the social security system
was sufficiently flexible to enable unemployed people to benefit from
the type of work experience envisioned under the proposed Work for the
Dole scheme. [54] The Department of
Social Security confirmed that `essentially a program that was involved
in people undertaking voluntary work would not require any amendment to
the Social Security Act because there are already provisions in the Social
Security Act for people to do voluntary work.' [55]
3.36 Support for the inclusion of compulsion as a necessary element of
the Work for the Dole scheme was given by organisations which have had
practical experience in arranging labour market projects or similar schemes
in their own regions. The North Queensland Joint Board reinforced the
DEETYA reasoning, submitting that the people most likely to volunteer
for the Work for the Dole scheme are those already with self esteem and
initiative and that therefore those most in need will probably only be
included if some degree of compulsion is included. For these reasons the
NQJB suggested that compulsion might be appropriate. However, it added
a note of caution that with compulsion `the Scheme will need to be well
managed to ensure real outcomes are attained from the Scheme for the participants.
Particularly, paid supervision and detailed work programming then becomes
essential'. [56]
3.37 The Shoalhaven Area Consultative Committee also supported the need
for powers to compel people to participate in the scheme, giving as reasons:
- the superficial manner by which some people `look' for work is insufficient
in terms of mutual obligation;
- community concern at a cash-in-hand economy whereby people do not
declare earnings;
- providing longer term unemployed the opportunity of discovering or
rediscovering the attributes required to obtain employment; and
- the opportunity to gain real self esteem by earning their benefit
and not being labelled `dole bludger'. [57]
3.38 Allowance for compulsory and voluntary participation has also been
included in the ACCI Principles on the Work for the Dole pilot scheme.
[58]
Training and skill development
3.39 The Government has clearly indicated that the Work for the Dole
scheme is not intended as a training or labour market program. Nevertheless,
for a number of organisations the non-inclusion of formal training was
regarded as a significant deficiency. They argued that formalised training
should be included in the scheme even though past experiences have shown,
in many cases, such training not to result in paid work following its
completion.
3.40 Organisations constantly referred to the benefits derived from formalised
training as an essential component in labour market programs for skill
development and improved employability of unemployed, particularly long
term unemployed, people. The linking of education and on-the-job training
to long term and sustainable employment outcomes was regarded as essential
to address the needs of young unemployed people and secure real jobs for
young people, [59] despite its past
limited success.
3.41 The Moreland City Council noted that skills development is widely
recognised as a critical factor in enabling unemployed people to compete
more effectively in the labour market. The Council argued that a key objective
of the scheme `should be to enable participants to gain a range of skills,
including economic and employment-related skills, communication skills,
citizenship training, problem solving and analytical skills, or living
skills'. [60] The Government has argued
that the scheme will in fact provide participants with many of these skills
which they do not have through many existing schemes.
3.42 The Salvation Army summed up the views of many when it commented
that `if the proposed scheme is to go ahead it should have a clear objective
of providing pathways for young people into employment'. [61]
3.43 Mission Australia provided an alternative perspective, submitting
that:
There is no way that program participants actively involved on
a program for 6 months will not have gained extra skills and competencies.
Such skills should be set into the design of the project undertaken,
assessed and appropriate statements of competencies issued in accordance
with the national training agenda.
This will greatly increase the motivation and self esteem of
the participants and will be something that will enhance their employability
in the future and will be a vehicle which will enable participants to
carry the benefit of the experience of the project through the rest
of their life. [62]
3.44 Mr Trev Ward, an industrial officer with the CPSU, speaking in relation
to the capacity of the scheme to provide training leading to the securing
of jobs, referred to one of the scheme's objectives when he stated that
`the essence of a program like work for the dole is that it should aim
to address the self-esteem of young people'. Mr Ward noted that in regard
to accredited training, `we need to be clear that many unskilled jobs
in retail, fast food and hospitality in essence require self-esteem, not
TAFE certificates. Skills training which leads to jobs is already catered
for by TAFE traineeships and apprenticeships and the ideal situation would
be to link accredited training to established job pathways'. [63]
3.45 In response to the comments on the importance of training to assist
the unemployed, DEETYA acknowledged that work experience and training
are very important for getting people back into full-time or sustainable
jobs. DEETYA reiterated that whilst there may be some projects which training
is a part of and where there has to be some preliminary training to ensure
that a person can undertake the activity, training per se is not an integral
element of the Work for the Dole scheme. The scheme is about increasing
work ethic and making a contribution to the community in return for the
support provided by the community. DEETYA advised that `projects offering
training to participants that relates to the project proposal may be supported
as long as costs can be accommodated within the project budget'. [64]
3.46 The Committee was informed that in recognition of the importance
of formal training activities the Government had already introduced a
number of initiatives to address issues of youth training including the
Job Placement, Employment and Training (JPET) program; a significant commitment
to improving literacy and numeracy; the Jobs Pathway Program to assist
young people make the transition from school to work; the Australian Student
Traineeship Foundation (ASTF) which promotes the broadening of senior
school education to include the opportunity for young Australians to acquire
workplace knowledge and experience before they graduate from school; and
a commitment to the development and expansion of vocational education
opportunities for students in senior secondary schools. [65]
3.47 DEETYA reinforced the importance of formal training activities stating
that:
the emphasis that we are putting on traineeships and apprenticeships
shows that for young people we consider relevant training to be very
important. [However,] the issue is the question of relevant training
relevant to the employment. We are saying that that sort of training
can be provided through things such as traineeships, apprenticeships,
jobs pathway guarantee et cetera. We are not seeing that as being a
prime objective of the work for the dole. That is not to say that training
is not important for a particular environment but is very much directed
to the training requirements of the individual, the youth themselves.
[66]
3.48 The introduction of pilot Work for the Dole projects should also
be seen in the broader context of the Government's reforms to employment
services. DEETYA referred to the Reform of Employment Services legislation
which contains a very high level of flexibility enabling the provider
and the job seeker to work out what the individual's requirements are
rather than `shoehorning' a person into a training course which may be
inappropriate. DEETYA emphasised that Work for the Dole forms just one
part of a total menu or package of options that are available to address
these issues, for example, complementary strategies are also being implemented
to address other important youth issues such as family breakdown, youth
suicide and homelessness. [67]
3.49 DEETYA also confirmed that it was not a requirement under the Work
for the Dole scheme, as it has been under previous labour market programs,
that the sponsor should ensure that a participant would obtain sustainable
employment at the end of the subsidised period. DEETYA asserted that an
unemployed participant in Work for the Dole would improve their employability
by meeting the scheme's objectives which through experience in the workplace
would develop the participants' work habits and attitudes (their work
ethics) to assist and improve their capacity for longer-term attachment
to the workforce. [68]
3.50 This view of improved employability has been supported by the findings
of a recent survey of over 3300 employers. The survey found that nearly
60 percent of employers would be more willing to hire someone who had
worked for the dole rather than someone who had spent the same period
receiving only unemployment benefits. According to the survey even menial
labour would instil a work ethic and develop a greater sense of self-worth
in the unemployed. Workplace skills would flow from the scheme with the
strongest advocate being the retail sector. [69]
Project selection
3.51 The scheme provides that the Departmental Secretary has the power
to approve a program of work for unemployment payments. ACOSS, supported
by AYPAC, recommended that `any structured program of unpaid work experience
for job seekers should be selected via a strict set of transparent guidelines
on the basis of its ability to increase the employment opportunities of
job seekers'. [70] It was also suggested
that such guidelines should be in two parts, one for potential participants
and another for potential host organisations. [71]
3.52 Extensive lists of criteria for the selection of projects were proposed
by ACOSS and Mission Australia. These criteria included:
- Ensure organisations are financially viable and have a proven track
record of working with long term unemployed;
- Ensure organisations are committed to best practice standards and
are part of a voluntary accreditation scheme;
- Ensure providers can resource all key components of the program and
provide adequate client supervision;
- Ensure project is for provision of additional employment and not for
existing employment displacement;
- Ensure that work and/or on or off-the-job training can be translated
into appropriate accredited statements of competency. [72]
3.53 The Salvation Army cautioned that, based on its extensive experience
operating various broker type work experience programs, bureaucratic processes
could impede the most disadvantaged job seekers getting access to programs
`because of the specificity of contractual arrangements and overly prescriptive
guidelines'. [73]
3.54 An issue which provided a range of views was how far into the community
should the Work for the Dole scheme operate. Should it be restricted to
community focused non-profit organisations or should it be allowed to
expand into the private sector? ACOSS believed that any program of unpaid
work experience should be restricted to the public and not-for-profit
community sectors. [74] The Australian
Council for Volunteering stressed that volunteers should only be placed
in accredited not-for-profit organisations in support roles, to negate
the possibility of exploitation. [75]
ACCI agreed that the scheme should `involve community based organisations,
not private businesses'. [76]
3.55 Conversely, the Youth Affairs Council of Victoria was concerned
about `the capacity of placements organised by the welfare industry, or
within the public sector to provide opportunities for young people to
learn skills that will make them employable'. The YACVic recommended that
placements should be predominantly targeted at private sector employers,
arguing that `it is unlikely that placements located outside of private
industry will lead to skills and experience which could guarantee employment
opportunities which attract a market income'. [77]
3.56 The Shoalhaven Area Consultative Committee felt that no potential
sponsor should be excluded from the scheme. The SACC believed that the
scheme should be tested in the non private sector initially so as to fine
tune it prior to any consideration for the extension into the private
sector. [78]
3.57 DEETYA described for the Committee the process for project selection
envisaged by the Government. Submissions would be publicly sought nationwide
with proponents being required to submit fully costed submissions outlining
their project, project placements and other project details. DEETYA confirmed
that project sponsors would be responsible for supervision, essential
training, any transportation costs to work sites, minor personal equipment
and required clothing such as safety boots or clothing necessary for public
contact situations. A primary test would be the benefit of the project
to the wider community and not to a private sector interest. The criteria
for project selection would include:
- the needs of the local unemployed young people;
- the capacity of the sponsor to monitor and maintain the project;
- the extent of contribution and support for the project from the local
community;
- the extent of community involvement;
- projects that are a minimum of 3 and maximum of 12 months;
- projects that represent additional work and do not displace existing
or planned activities;
- projects that represent additional jobs and do not displace existing
workers;
- preparedness of the community to support the participants after completion
of their placement; and
- value for money. [79]
3.58 The Committee therefore believes that most, if not all, of the concerns
raised by witnesses will be covered in the planned project selection process.
Navigation: Previous Page | Index | Next Page
Footnotes:
[40] Submission No.29, p.5 (ACV). The ACV provided
additional information on the principles of volunteering and a copy of
the `Manual of Standards for involving Volunteers'.
[41] Submission No.24, p.8; see also `Volunteering
in Australia', ACOSS Paper No.74, April 1996, particularly Chapter 7 Volunteering
as a Pathway to Paid Work, pp.91-101.
[42] Submission No.23, p.4 (DSS).
[43] Additional Information, 1 May 1997, p.6
(The Salvation Army).
[44] See for example Submission No.11, p.12-13
(ACSWC); Submission No.15, p.2 (YACVic); Submission No.19, p.3 (MET);
Submission No.21, p.2 (NUS); Submission No.27, p.2 (AYPAC); Submission
No.40, pp.2, 5 (ACTU).
[45] Submission No.20, (Anglicare). A copy
of the letter is provided as Appendix 1 to the submission.
[46] Submission No.11, p.14 (ACSWC).
[47] Submission No.34, p.6 (DEETYA).
[48] Submission No.11, pp.18-19 (ACSWC); Submission
No.17, p.1 (NEC); Submission No.22, p.4 (AYCWM); Transcript of Evidence
18.4.97, p.144 (MCC). See also Additional Information, 26 May 1997, Attachment
C - Impact of voluntary and non-voluntary participation (DEETYA).
[49] Submission No.13, p.2 (ALGA).
[50] Submission No.33, p.5 (MCC).
[51] Submission No.7, p.4 (BUYT). A similar
view was expressed by the CEO of National Skillshare, see Transcript
of Evidence 18.4.97, p.152.
[52] Submission No.27, p.3 (AYPAC); see also
Submission No.20, p.3 (Anglicare).
[53] Submission No.26, p.2 (WRC).
[54] Transcript of Evidence 18.4.97,
p.140 (BSL); 28.4.97, p.190 (WRC) and p.217 (NCYLC).
[55] Transcript of Evidence 7.5.97,
p.10 (DSS).
[56] Submission No.9, pp.1-2 (NQJB).
[57] Submission No.5, pp.2-3 (SACC).
[58] Submission No.31, p.2 (ACCI).
[59] Submission No.7, p.6 (BUYT); Submission
No.11, p.12 (ACSWC); Submission No.15, pp.3-4 (YACVic); Submission No.20,
p.4 (Anglicare); Submission No.24, pp.9-10 (ACOSS); Submission No.33,
p.4 (MCC); Transcript of Evidence 28.4.97,.p.201 (UNIYA).
[60] Submission No.33, p.5 (MCC).
[61] Submission No.18, p.8 (The Salvation Army),
[62] Submission No.28, p.5 (Mission Australia).
[63] Transcript of Evidence 18.4.97,
pp.160-161 (Mr T Ward, CPSU).
[64] Submission No.34, p.8 (DEETYA); see also
Transcript of Evidence 7.5.97, p.3 (DEETYA).
[65] Submission No.34, p.10 (DEETYA).
[66] Transcript of Evidence 7.5.97,
p.10 (DEETYA).
[67] Submission No.34, p.5 and Transcript
of Evidence 7.5.97, p.10 (DEETYA).
[68] Transcript of Evidence 7.5.95,
pp.3-4 (DEETYA).
[69] Morgan and Banks Job Index survey, reported
in The Age, 7.5.97, p.A2.
[70] Submission No.24, p.17 (ACOSS); Submission
No.27, p.6 (AYPAC).
[71] Submission No.7, pp.5-6 (BUYT).
[72] Submission No.24, pp.16-17 (ACOSS); Submission
No.28, p.8 (Mission Australia).
[73] Submission No.18, p.3 (The Salvation Army).
[74] Submission No.24, p.17 (ACOSS).
[75] Submission No.29, p.8 (ACV).
[76] Submission No.31, p.2 (ACCI).
[77] Submission No.15, p.3 (YACVic).
[78] Submission No.5, p.3 (SACC).
[79] Submission No.34, pp.4, 7 and Transcript
of Evidence 7.5.97, pp.4-5 (DEETYA).