Chapter 2
Jobs and Small Business
2.1
This chapter summarises certain key areas of interest raised during the
committee's consideration of Budget Estimates for the 2019-20 financial year
for the Jobs and Small Business portfolio.
2.2
On 5 April 2019 and 10 April 2019, the committee heard evidence from:
- Senator the Hon. Michaelia Cash, Minister for Small Business and
Family Business, Skills and Vocational Education; and
- Senator the Hon. Marise Payne, Minister for Foreign Affairs
(representing the Minister for Jobs and Industrial Relations).
2.3
The committee also heard evidence from officers from the Department of
Jobs and Small Business (the department) and several agencies responsible for
administering jobs and small business policy. These agencies were:
- Asbestos Safety and Eradication Agency;
- Comcare and the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation
Authority;
- Office of the Fair Work Ombudsman; and
- Safe Work Australia.
Department of Jobs and Small Business
Cross Portfolio
2.4
The committee briefly discussed advertising campaigns run by the
department. Ms Kerri Hartland, Secretary, noted that advertising was split into
a jobs campaign and a small business campaign and that during the 2018-19
financial year, $15 million was attributed to jobs and $7 million to small
business.[1]
2.5
Further questioning arose regarding the breakdown of spending on each
campaign by platform. Ms Moya Drayton, Group Manager, People, Communication and
Assurance Group, stated:
For the 2018-19 financial year we [the department] spent $5.2
million in television, $1.3 million on radio, $1.5 million in the press, $1.7
million on digital, and we had the specialist publications, the CALD
[Culturally and Linguistically Diverse] and indigenous, which was $258,000 and
$148,000. For the small business campaign for the same current financial year
we spent $269,000 on television, $174,000 on radio, $137,000 on press, $9,800
for indigenous publications and $540 for CALD publications.[2]
2.6
Questions were also raised about the protocol for advertising government
initiatives during a caretaker period. Dr Jill Charker, Deputy Secretary,
Corporate, noted that 'in the event that caretaker was to commence, it would
cease immediately'.[3]
Outcome 1
2.7
There was questioning into the new Employment Services Model. The
rollout of the Digital First self-service platform was of particular interest.
When questioned if the digital platform was currently available, Mr Nathan
Smyth, Deputy Secretary, Employment, responded:
We are currently running a digital trial. That platform will effectively
form the basis of our new digital platform for the pilots as well. We currently
have a number of participants in that digital online servicing trial, and that
will become the basis for the new digital trial that we're going to roll out as
part of the pilot. So that platform already exists and it will be enhanced
continually. When we get into the actual pilot phase, there will be a process
where we'll go through consultation with providers, and with participants as
well, to help better inform us about how the design of that new digital
platform will evolve over the three years of the trial.[4]
2.8
The committee also questioned funding arrangements for the new
Employment Services Model. Ms Hartland noted that '$249.8 million will be
invested in the new employment services arrangements over the five years'.[5] She further stated that the funding includes 'the new employment services trial
and includes extending jobactive and the complementary programs'.[6]
2.9
Further questions were asked about the funding breakdown for the pilot
sites of the new Employment Services Model. Ms Benedikte Jensen, Group Manager,
Employment Services 2020, stated that $176.8 million had been allocated to the
pilot overall. Of this, $31.5 million was allocated for information and
communications technology costs, $102 million for new employment services
payments, $11.6 million for contact centre support, $4.3 million for the impact
on the Department of Human Services and $27.4 million for related costs to
establish and administer the new arrangements such as evaluation and
communication costs.[7]
2.10
The committee inquired into the status of the Harvest Labour Services
program. Mr Smyth noted the 'Seasonal Work Incentives Trial ceases in the
middle of this year [2019]' and that 'the government has made an announcement
about expanding and reforming the Harvest Labour Service program'.[8] When questioned on the funding for the Harvest Labour Services program, Mr
Smyth noted it was '$24.1 million over the forward estimates'.[9] Mr Smyth further noted that the department was expecting an increase in uptake
of the program from 'around 1,200 currently to around 7,200 annually from
2020-21'.[10]
2.11
During the second day of hearings for the Jobs and Small Business portfolio,
questioning focussed on the Youth Jobs PaTH program. The committee inquired
into the current costs for the program. Mr Greg Manning, Group Manager, Youth
and Programs Group, noted that 'in relation to the internships, $15.92 million
has been expended since April 2017. In relation to Employability Skills
Training, it is $44.5 million'.[11] Mr Manning further noted the cost for the Youth Bonus wage subsidies was
roughly $297.4 million.[12]
2.12
Mr Manning was further questioned about the number of participants who
had completed the Youth Jobs PaTH program. He responded that 'in relation to
PaTH internships, there have been 9,216 internship placements between 1 April
2017 and 28 February 2019. That was for 8,495 individuals, so some did
more than one'.[13] Mr Manning further stated that 'in relation to employability skills
training, there were 36,007 people who did the training between 1 April 2017
and 28 February 2019'.[14] He further noted that there were 51,710 commencements in employability skills
training courses'.[15]
2.13
There was a significant line of questioning into the ParentsNext scheme.
The committee discussed potential privacy issues with the scheme and
allegations regarding participants being coerced into signing privacy waivers.
Mr Ali Jalayer, Branch Manager, Youth and Programs Group, noted that the
department had taken action to counter this, stating:
There have been a number of communications and directions
provided to all providers, CEOs and frontline staff, reminding them that
signing the privacy forms is not compulsory. They cannot coerce someone to sign
them. You cannot have your payment suspended. You cannot be threatened. It is a
consent form for getting access to sensitive, private information.[16]
2.14
The committee further inquired into complaints made against providers
under the ParentsNext scheme. Mr Manning, when questioned about current matters
under investigation, replied that 'there are some complaints that are still
being investigated or that are unresolved' and that as at 31 January 2019 there
were 10 unresolved complaints.[17]
2.15
The committee also inquired into the announced savings for the Better
Targeting of Support for Refugees program. When questioned how changes to the
program would save an estimated $77.9 million, Ms Hartland replied:
Basically, it's a sequencing issue. We know through research...that
refugees get their language skills up to a point of maximising their
employability. What we have had in place is a bit of a mixture of things that
are happening through jobactive without some of this cohort actually having the
language skills available to them. This is really a sequencing to get language
skills up to a good level to maximise employability and then move into
jobactive.[18]
2.16
The Time to Work Employment Service was also briefly discussed. This scheme
is a nationwide voluntary in-prison employment service for Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islanders. In regards to questioning on the number of
participants in the program, Mr Manning noted that as of the end of February 2019,
331 people had volunteered for the program of which 45 had completed the
service with an approved transition plan.[19]
2.17
Future funding for the Work for the Dole program was also raised. Ms Janine
Pitt, Group Manager, Activation and Work for the Dole Group, when questioned
about participant numbers for the program noted that from 1 July 2018 to 31
January 2019 there were over 45 000 unique participants.[20] Ms Hartland further noted that since the program's inception on 1 July 2015 the
total cost had been $424 million.[21] Upon questioning on the average number of Work for the Dole placements that an
individual participates in, Mr Stuart Watson, Branch Manager, Activation and
Work for the Dole Group, responded that 'across the whole contract it's 1.9'.[22]
2.18
The committee further inquired into the range of activities that Work
for the Dole participants undertook. Ms Pitt noted that there are a wide range
of Work for the Dole activities, stating:
...they might be working supporting animals at an RSPCA, they
might be digitising records for a historical society, they might be doing
Landcare work, they might be building community gardens or they might be doing
office admin work for a community organisation.[23]
Outcome 2
2.19
The committee commenced its examination of Outcome 2 by discussing the
differences between the pilot Seasonal Worker Programme and the existing
arrangements for seasonal workers. Ms Hartland noted:
There are four key areas of difference between the pilot and
the existing arrangements. The first is around the ability to move workers
between the pilot and existing arrangements. The second is around a change to
the deed of agreement for approved employers that are participating in the
pilot... The third is around some increased compliance presence on the ground,
and the fourth is around labour market testing.[24]
2.20
The committee inquired into the steps taken by the department to ensure
that Seasonal Worker Programme participants receive proper pay and work
conditions. Mr Martin Hehir, Deputy Secretary, Workplaces and Small
Business, noted that the department would be 'using existing approved employers
who have a good track record'.[25] Mr Hehir further noted that the department has worked 'closely with the Fair
Work Ombudsman in relation to any complaints or issues, and we [the department]
have referred approved employers to the ombudsman for investigation where
issues have been identified'.[26]
2.21
The committee further inquired into the Fair Entitlements Guarantee (FEG)
and the recovery action taken in regards to Queensland Nickel. Ms Sue Saunders,
Acting Group Manager, Workplace Relations Programs Group noted that the 'FEG scheme
advanced $66.86 million to 759 employees who were retrenched from Queensland
Nickel when it went into liquidation in April 2016'.[27]
2.22
The committee concluded proceedings with questions into findings of the
2017-18 Australian Government Pay On-Time Survey which were released in
February 2019. Ms Hartland noted that the survey findings found that:
...97 per cent of invoices covered by the policy were paid on
time, which was an increase from 96 per cent in 2016-17. So it went from 96 per
cent to 97 per cent. There's also been a large improvement in the number of
invoices paid within 20 calendar days. It went from 57.5 per cent to
71.2 per cent. It indicates that payments are going faster to small
businesses—that's around providing goods and services to government.[28]
Comcare
2.23
Inquiries were made into the current satisfaction rates for employers
and injured workers. Ms Lynette MacLean, Acting Chief Executive Officer, when
questioned on potential policies Comcare could undertake to increase
satisfaction rates noted that the agency was constantly reviewing their key
performance indicators and looking at ways to improve satisfaction.[29]
2.24
When further questioned on specific steps taken by the agency to improve
satisfaction levels, Mr Aaron Hughes, General Manager, Scheme Management,
stated:
From a scheme and subordinate legislation point of view of
rehab and return to work, Comcare has been engaged with our stakeholders for
some time on a review of the section 41 guidelines for rehabilitation
authorities. There is also work happening through the Heads of Workers'
Compensation Authorities in relation to the framework for approval of workplace
rehab providers....we [Comcare] sometimes hear from rehab authorities that providers
are part of the issue as well. A raft of work is happening in the subordinate
legislative space. There are also pieces like further e-modules or e-products
which we're making available to the jurisdiction to help rehab case managers
work through the processes and understand what's better practice in these
spaces. There is a long list of things we're doing in that space.[30]
2.25
The committee also inquired into the support provided by Comcare to its
inspectors and health and safety representatives. Mr Justin Napier, General
Manager, Regulatory Operations, responded that 'Comcare runs training programs
for health and safety representatives'.[31]
2.26
This progressed into questioning into the number of workplace fatalities
that fell under the jurisdiction of Comcare. Mr Napier noted that in 2017-18,
24 fatalities were notified to the regulator.[32]
Fair Work Ombudsman
2.27
The committee commenced questioning of the Fair Work Ombudsman (FWO) by
inquiring into new structuring measures for the sham contracting unit. Mr Michael
Campbell, Deputy Fair Work Ombudsman, Operations, noted that the 'sham
contracting unit would be effectively a compliance team within the operations
group'.[33] When questioned where the unit will be based, Mr Campbell responded:
We tend to try and base it where the work is but also where
we can get the best candidates for it. So we would look to have a presence
certainly in Sydney and Melbourne, where the largest portion of our
inspectorate operations are, but we would also look to do some analysis and
testing about where else we might want to place some of our inspectors to make
sure we get them most involved in this work.[34]
2.28
The committee further inquired into litigation and compliance cases
being undertaken by the FWO. Mr Campbell noted that the FWO's 'enforcement
outcomes are up year‑on-year. Litigation...is about steady'.[35] The committee further noted that the FWO was involved in a series of high
profile prosecutions during the previous year. Ms Sandra Parker, Fair Work
Ombudsman, responded:
We do have 50. Not all of them are high profile. We do get
media coverage—there is no question. In terms of big-name companies and so on,
that's probably what you notice more than others, but we're certainly getting
very positive outcomes from courts. So, I don't think it's changed that much.
We have priorities and we're reviewing that and we're reviewing pretty
carefully what we litigate. I think what you are getting at is right—that we
have to litigate where it is going to have a big impact so that people get the
message and it sends a message out to the community.[36]
2.29
Questions also arose regarding problematic industries and sectors in
regards to the underpayment of workers. Ms Parker noted:
We have a set of annual priorities we focus on. Some of those
are sectors and some of those are cohorts, if that makes sense. One of the
sectors I mentioned was horticulture. We have ongoing concern about the horticultural
industry and we're working with the sector pretty closely on all of that. Then
we have cohorts such as vulnerable workers. 'Vulnerable workers' is a pretty
board thing, but, in particular, we're interested in migrant workers. Migrant workers
have a number of categories. They're often young, they often don't have English
as their first language, they don't understand the laws in Australia necessarily
and so on. You know all these things, of course. They're a cohort we focus on
across all our sectors.
Fast-food restaurants and cafes are another big one for us.
They've been getting quite a bit of attention in the media, too, as you probably
know. Another one we have in highlights—and these are not the only areas we
focus on—is supply chains, particularly new franchisees, new franchisors.[37]
2.30
The committee also looked into the increase in court ordered penalties
awarded to the FWO since 2015. Ms Janine Dennis, Senior Counsel, when questioned
whether the FWO was expecting a similar increase in 2018-19, responded:
In terms of penalties, at the end of last month we were at $3.8
million, and the year before—so in the last complete financial year—we got
about $7.2 million. So last year we did have record penalties. As I said,
it was an increase of about 42 per cent on the year before that, because in 2016-17
we got about $4.8 million. So we're on track for exceeding, I would think, the 2016-17
court-ordered penalties. Whether we exceed the $7.2 million will remain to be
seen, because you can't exactly tell what penalties a court will order in the
next few months, towards the end of the year. But I think
we're on track to exceed certainly the year before, 2016-17, and we'll be close
to last year this year as well, I would think.[38]
Safe Work Australia
2.31
The committee commenced questioning of Safe Work Australia by inquiring
into its response to the silicosis issue. Ms Michelle Baxter, Chief Executive
Officer, noted that in December 2018, 'Safe Work Australia took to its members
a proposal for a work plan in relation to occupational lung disease more
generally'.[39] Ms Meredith Bryant, Acting Branch Manager, Hazards, further stated:
The comprehensive lung diseases work plan will be implemented
throughout 2019 and 2020, and the aims of it are to raise awareness of the
duties and control measures for eliminating and minimising airborne
contaminants that cause occupational lung disease at the workplace and also to
inform the development of effective national policy. Our work plan is based on
identified issues and includes key initiatives that supplement the compliance
and education activities being undertaken by the states and territories.[40]
2.32
The committee further discussed the response of Safe Work Australia to
the findings laid out in the Review of the model WHS laws by Ms Marie
Boland as well as the recommendations from the Education and Employment
References Committee report entitled They never came home—the framework
surrounding the prevention, investigation and prosecution of industrial deaths
in Australia. Ms Baxter responded:
There are two separate streams of work occurring in relation
to those at the moment. In relation to the independent review of the model work
health and safety laws—the Boland review for short—that report went to Safe
Work Australia members at their December [2018] meeting. They commended the
report to work health and safety ministers as well as asked work health and
safety ministers for early release of that report so that members of the public
could be made aware of exactly what's in that report. The work health safety
ministers gave their agreement to early publication of the report. It was
published on the Safe Work Australia website on 25 February this year. The
Safe Work Australia agency is at the moment working through the COAG regulatory
impact statement process in conjunction with the Office of Best Practice
Regulation with a view to developing a consultation RIS that will be released
next month for a public consultation period, after which a decision RIS will be
drafted by the agency. Office of Best Practice Regulation
approval will be sought. That decision RIS will then go to work health and
safety ministers, who are the decision-makers in relation to the
recommendations in the Boland review, who will then make a decision in relation
to that suite of recommendations.[41]
2.33
In relation to actions taken to implement the recommendations from the
aforementioned Senate inquiry, Ms Baxter noted that:
Minister O'Dwyer has written to her work health and safety
ministerial colleagues across Australia to ask that they agree that Safe Work
Australia give consideration to implementing and acting upon those
recommendations that the inquiry report directed towards Safe Work Australia.[42]
Asbestos Safety and Eradication Agency
2.34
The committee inquired into the status of the Asbestos Safety and
Eradication Agency's (ASEA) strategic plan. Ms Justine Ross, Chief Executive
Officer, noted that the plan is still in draft form.[43] Ms Ross further noted that the ASEA held a conference in November 2018 and
subsequent workshops to discuss the eight targets of the strategic plan.[44]
2.35
In addition, Ms Ross stated that the Minister for Jobs and Industrial
Relations wrote 'to state and territory ministers with responsibility for work
health and safety seeking their approval [of the draft strategic plan]. She did that, and letters were sent on 12 March [2019].
At the moment, it's sitting with state and territory ministers to get their
approval'.[45]
Navigation: Previous Page | Contents | Next Page