Placeholder Content Image

"Get a job": Ben Fordham slammed over interview with welfare recipient

<p>Ben Fordham has come under fire for a patronising interview with a welfare recipient, in which he tried to get the man, who is unable to work, a job live on air. </p> <p>On Wednesday morning, the 2GB radio host spoke with Jez Heywood, who is president of the Australian Unemployed Workers’ Union, and has been out of work since 2017 due to several health conditions. </p> <p>Mr Heywood had recently spoken to <em>The Australian</em>, sharing his frustration about the $20-a-week increase to Jobseeker, saying he was “angry” and “annoyed” at the federal government, describing the $2.85-a-day increase as “absolutely nothing”.</p> <p>Mr Heywood's commentary on the Jobseeker budget increase caught the attention of 2GB, who invited him to speak to Fordham, saying he “wanted to see whether we can find Jez a job”.</p> <p>Fordham asked Heywood if he was looking for work, to which Heywood shared that he is looking for work, but it is hard to find a job that would be suitable given his physical and mental health barriers. </p> <p>In response, Fordham told Heywood that "there are 54,000 jobs available right now in Melbourne".</p> <p>"That’s on the Workforce Australia website. So none of those 54,000 jobs are suitable to you or you’ve applied for them and they’re just not giving you the nod?"</p> <p>Heywood said he is applying for jobs that are "suitable" for his conditions, and is hearing nothing back from prospective employers. </p> <p>Fordham said a job would seemingly fix everything for Heywood, saying, "I reckon we can help your mental health if we get you into a job."</p> <p>Heywood seemingly appreciated the help, but also said it is important for him to consider what he is able to achieve in a job given his limitations. </p> <p>The tense exchange between Fordham and Heywood continued, as Heywood voiced his concerns and limitations with working, as Fordham seemed to dismiss his worries and said everything would be fine if he simply returned to work as a graphic designer. </p> <p>After the call, Heywood took aim at Fordham on social media, slamming the host as a “coward and a bully who’s been taking potshots at welfare recipients from the safety of his cosy radio studio for years”.</p> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"> <p dir="ltr" lang="en">You're a dog Ben Fordham</p> <p>— Vulgar Boatman (@satisjacktion) <a href="https://twitter.com/satisjacktion/status/1658691768706269184?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 17, 2023</a></p></blockquote> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"> <p dir="ltr" lang="en">I’ve never met a dole bludger. </p> <p>I *have* met plenty of people with unresolved trauma and mental and physical illnesses (often not-yet-diagnosed), who probably LOOK like bludgers, through a telephoto lens. </p> <p>People who are doing okay WANT to be busy and to work.</p> <p>— Catherine Caine (@CatherineCaine) <a href="https://twitter.com/CatherineCaine/status/1658665436916101120?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 17, 2023</a></p></blockquote> <p>He stood by his opinion that the Jobseeker payment should be at least $88 a day to keep recipients above the poverty line, and condemned Fordham for “calling me a dole bludger on national radio”.</p> <p>Fordham doubled down on his condescending treatment of Mr Heywood, saying, "I just want to find you a job, Jez."</p> <p><em>Image credits: Getty Images / Twitter</em></p>

Money & Banking

Placeholder Content Image

Fighting inflation doesn’t directly cause unemployment – but that’s still the most likely outcome

<p>You may have seen the news: in its attempts to tackle inflation, the Reserve Bank is going to increase unemployment. The idea can even seem to come right from the mouths of experts, including the bank’s governor, Adrian Orr. <a href="https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/adrian-orr-beating-inflation-will-mean-higher-unemployment/WO3WLQQUGWEC5NVK3AQTR2BN5A/">Speaking recently</a> to an industry conference, he said:</p> <blockquote> <p>Returning to low inflation will, in the near term, constrain employment growth and lead to a rise in unemployment.</p> </blockquote> <p>Similar sentiments have been expressed by <a href="https://businessdesk.co.nz/article/opinion/inflation-taming-the-costs-are-becoming-more-visible">independent economists</a> and <a href="https://thespinoff.co.nz/business/31-10-2022/the-big-banks-just-cant-stop-winning">commentators</a>.</p> <p>But is it as simple as it might appear? What is the relationship between inflation and unemployment, and is it inevitable that reducing one will lead to an increase in the other?</p> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"> <p dir="ltr" lang="en">Unemployment rate holds steady at 3.3%, wages rise strongly - Stats NZ <a href="https://t.co/IQOPBaNYTn">https://t.co/IQOPBaNYTn</a></p> <p>— RNZ News (@rnz_news) <a href="https://twitter.com/rnz_news/status/1587568087808999424?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 1, 2022</a></p></blockquote> <p><strong>Historic highs and lows</strong></p> <p>Like other developed countries, New Zealand has been going through a period of historically high inflation. The latest figures, for the September quarter of 2022, show an annual <a href="https://www.stats.govt.nz/news/annual-inflation-at-7-2-percent/">rise of 7.2%</a>, only slightly lower than the 7.3% recorded for the June quarter.</p> <p>Inflation is the highest it has been since 1990. The story is similar across the OECD, where inflation averages <a href="https://www.oecd.org/economy/consumer-prices-oecd-updated-4-october-2022.htm">10.3%</a>, including <a href="https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/inflationandpriceindices/bulletins/consumerpriceinflation/september2022">8.8%</a> in the UK and <a href="https://www.bls.gov/news.release/cpi.nr0.htm">8.2%</a> in the US.</p> <p>At the same time, New Zealand is experiencing a period of very low unemployment, with a <a href="https://www.stats.govt.nz/news/unemployment-rate-at-3-3-percent">rate of just 3.3%</a> for September 2022, following 3.2% in the June quarter. These are near-record lows, and the rate has not been below 4% since mid-2008.</p> <p>So, right now New Zealand is in a period of historically low unemployment and historically high inflation. At first glance, that might suggest that in order to return to low inflation, we may inevitably experience higher unemployment.</p> <p><strong>The Phillips Curve</strong></p> <p>The idea that inflation and unemployment have a negative relationship (when one increases, the other decreases, and vice versa) dates back to work by New Zealand’s most celebrated economist, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Phillips_(economist)">A.W. (Bill) Phillips</a>.</p> <p>While working at the London School of Economics in the 1950s, Phillips wrote a <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1468-0335.1958.tb00003.x">famous paper</a> that used UK data from 1861 to 1957 and showed a negative relationship between unemployment and wage increases.</p> <p>Subsequent work by economics Nobel Prize winners <a href="https://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/bios/Samuelson.html">Paul Samuelson</a> and <a href="https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/economic-sciences/1987/solow/facts/">Robert Solow</a> extended Phillips’ work to show a negative relationship between price inflation and unemployment. We now refer to this relationship as the “Phillips Curve”.</p> <p>However, even though this relationship between inflation and unemployment has been demonstrated with various data sources, and for various time periods for different countries, it is not a causal relationship.</p> <p>Lower inflation doesn’t by itself cause higher unemployment, even though they are related. To see why, it’s worth thinking about the mechanism that leads to the observed relationship.</p> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"> <p dir="ltr" lang="en"><a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/LISTEN?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#LISTEN</a> 🔊 The Finance Minister says addressing inflation without increasing unemployment is a difficult balancing act.</p> <p>📎 <a href="https://t.co/CfaopcqjGv">https://t.co/CfaopcqjGv</a> <a href="https://t.co/1gMNat2G99">pic.twitter.com/1gMNat2G99</a></p> <p>— Morning Report (@NZMorningReport) <a href="https://twitter.com/NZMorningReport/status/1587893034351411200?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 2, 2022</a></p></blockquote> <p><strong>Collateral damage</strong></p> <p>If the Reserve Bank raises the official cash rate, commercial banks follow by raising their interest rates. That makes borrowing more expensive. Higher interest rates mean banks will lend less money. With less money chasing goods and services in the economy, inflation will start to fall.</p> <p>Of course, this is what the Reserve Bank wants when it raises the cash rate. Its <a href="https://www.parliament.nz/en/pb/library-research-papers/research-papers/monetary-policy-and-the-policy-targets-agreement/">Policy Targets Agreement</a> with the government states that inflation must be kept between 1% and 3%. So when inflation is predicted to be higher, the bank acts to lower it.</p> <p>At the same time, higher interest rates increase mortgage payments, leaving households and consumers with less discretionary income, and so consumer spending falls. Along with reduced business spending, this reduces the amount of economic activity. Businesses therefore need fewer workers, and so employment falls.</p> <p>So, while the Reserve Bank raises interest rates to combat inflation, those higher interest rates also slow down the economy and increase unemployment. Higher unemployment is essentially collateral damage arising from reducing inflation.</p> <p><strong>Great expectations</strong></p> <p>That’s not the end of the story, though. After its 1960s heyday, the Phillips Curve was criticised by economists on theoretical grounds, and for its inability to explain the “stagflation” (high unemployment and high inflation) experienced in the 1970s.</p> <p>For example, <a href="https://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/bios/Friedman.html">Milton Friedman</a> argued there is actually no trade-off between inflation and unemployment, because workers and businesses take inflation into account when negotiating employment contracts.</p> <p>Workers’ and employers’ expectations about future inflation is key. Friedman argued that, because inflation is expected, workers will have already built it into their wage demands, and businesses won’t change the amount of workers they employ.</p> <p>Friedman’s argument would suggest that, aside from some short-term deviations, the economy will typically snap back to a “natural” rate of unemployment, with an inflation rate that only reflects workers’ and businesses’ expectations.</p> <p><strong>Symptom or cause?</strong></p> <p>Can we rely on this mechanism to avoid higher unemployment as the Reserve Bank increases interest rates to combat inflation?</p> <p>It seems unlikely. Workers would first have to expect the Reserve Bank’s actions will lower inflation, and respond by asking for smaller wage increases. Right now, however, consumer inflation expectations <a href="https://www.rbnz.govt.nz/statistics/series/households/household-inflation-expectations">remain high</a> and wage growth is at <a href="https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/latest-job-numbers-out-unemployment-flatlining-near-record-lows/O4NDE3Y4W5GMHGDRDDS733LX7A/">record levels</a>.</p> <p>So, we can probably expect unemployment to move upwards as the Reserve Bank’s inflation battle continues. Not because lower inflation <em>causes</em> higher unemployment, but because worker and consumer expectations take time to reflect the likelihood of lower future inflation due to the Reserve Bank’s actions.</p> <p>And since workers negotiate only infrequently with employers, there is an inevitable lag between inflation expectations changing and this being reflected in wages. Alas, for ordinary households, there is no quick and easy way out of this situation.</p> <p><em>Writen by Michael P. Cameron. Republished with permission from <a href="https://theconversation.com/fighting-inflation-doesnt-directly-cause-unemployment-but-thats-still-the-most-likely-outcome-193617" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Conversation</a>.</em></p> <p><em><!-- Below is The Conversation's page counter tag. Please DO NOT REMOVE. -->Image: Getty Images<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/193617/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /></em><!-- End of code. If you don't see any code above, please get new code from the Advanced tab after you click the republish button. The page counter does not collect any personal data. More info: https://theconversation.com/republishing-guidelines --></p>

Money & Banking

Placeholder Content Image

How we invented ‘unemployment’ and why we’re outgrowing it

<p>When Labor leader Anthony Albanese couldn’t quote Australia’s unemployment rate in the first week of the election campaign, many said it didn’t matter: the Australian Bureau of Statistics figure was “<a href="https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/employing-the-numbers-when-the-official-rate-is-rendered-meaningless-20220412-p5acyv.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">meaningless</a>”; “<a href="https://nitter.net/headshaker2/status/1513344714640003073#m" target="_blank" rel="noopener">fudged</a>”; “<a href="https://headtopics.com/au/i-m-not-sure-what-it-is-albanese-stumbles-on-unemployment-rate-and-cash-rate-25505788" target="_blank" rel="noopener">manipulated</a>”; and didn’t count <a href="https://twitter.com/antipovertycent/status/1483973901252456454" target="_blank" rel="noopener">all those who had registered for JobSeeker</a>.</p> <p>The truth is the official measure of unemployment does what it says on the box. It counts those without any work who are available to work and looking for work.</p> <p>The result of an astonishingly large survey of <a href="https://theconversation.com/forget-the-election-gaffes-australias-unemployment-rate-is-good-news-and-set-to-get-even-better-by-polling-day-181141" target="_blank" rel="noopener">26,000 households</a> covering 50,000 people each month, there’s little reason to question its accuracy.</p> <p>But there are good reasons to question why the bureau does it in the way it does.</p> <div data-id="17"> </div> <p>“Unemployment” as we have come to understand it is a fairly new concept.</p> <p>As I outline in my book, <a href="https://www.bloomsbury.com/uk/inventing-unemployment-9781509952717/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Inventing Unemployment</a>, before the second world war censuses tended to divide the population differently – into breadwinners and dependants.</p> <p>A breadwinner who wasn’t employed would be recorded as a breadwinner rather than unemployed (with their usual occupation noted).</p> <p>That’s probably because until the 20th century, irregular work was the norm.</p> <p>Late-19th-century Sydney had no extensive manufacturing. Work such as wool washing, tanning, meat preserving and loading sea cargo was seasonal and tied to <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.5263/labourhistory.108.0071" target="_blank" rel="noopener">rural rhythms</a>.</p> <p>Even in more stable occupations, many workers were little more than or sub-contractors or day labourers, their work intermittent.</p> <h2>Unemployment as we know it</h2> <p>The 1947 census introduced three distinct categories: employed, “unemployed” and “not in the labour force”. To be “unemployed” you had to describe yourself as willing and able to work, but without work.</p> <p>Carried into the quarterly labour force surveys which started in the 1960s and continue monthly to this day, the change enabled the creation of an <a href="https://www.rba.gov.au/education/resources/explainers/unemployment-its-measurement-and-types.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">unemployment rate</a>, which is the number of unemployed divided by the total of the number of employed and unemployed, which is called the “labour force”.</p> <p>The categorisation made more sense by then as work was becoming full-time and ongoing. Being “unemployed” (workless but in the workforce) had come to be seen as unusual and worthy of government support. The Curtin Labor government introduced <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/FlagPost/2019/August/Creating-unemployment-benefits" target="_blank" rel="noopener">unemployment benefits</a> in 1945.</p> <p>The changes were in line with International Labour Organisation recommendations which themselves followed changes in the United States which in 1937 had asked all non-workers who’d expressed a desire to work whether they were able to work and were actively seeking work.</p> <p>The context was United States President Franklin D Roosevelt’s determination to fight unemployment through job creation schemes. The advantage of the new measures was that they gave a measure of immediate unmet demand for work.</p> <p>Excluding both those who were unwilling to work at present and those who had any work at all yielded a measure of the minimum number of jobs needed. Policy drove the definition rather than the other way around.</p> <h2>Messy by design</h2> <p>But the definitions were messy. Labour markets confound easy distinctions between working and not working, and there’s no particular degree of desire for work that clearly distinguishes the “unemployed” from “not in the labour force”.</p> <p>Looking back, what was exceptional about the post-war decades is that most of the time the new definitions were easy to apply. If you were in work, the chances were you were in full-time work; if you weren’t in full-time work the chances were you weren’t working at all, and that you were either wanting work or none.</p> <p>And the idea of the “labour force” summed up fairly stable social categories: men who entered at 15 years and were expected to work or look for work for 50 years, and women who also entered in their mid-teens only to permanently withdraw upon marriage or childbirth.</p> <p>Not now. As social researcher <a href="https://www.radstats.org.uk/no088/Threlfall88.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Monica Threlfall</a> points out, whereas once the labour force was an identifiable category,</p> <blockquote> <p>today it is more like an unbounded space that a variety of people of different ages enter, leave and re-enter at a variety of rates.</p> </blockquote> <p>When the headline monthly unemployment rate changes, what has moved is often not the numerator – the number of unemployed – but the shape-shifting denominator, which depends on whether people define themselves as looking and available for paid work at the particular time they are asked.</p> <p>And the main questions don’t pick up underemployment. Australia has one of the largest part-time work forces in the OECD, which is why the Bureau of Statistics also asks workers whether they would like more hours, and reports the answers alongside the unemployment rate.</p> <p>It also measures “discouraged workers”, people who are available for and wanting work but have given up the search and so aren’t counted as “unemployed”.</p> <p>The only way to really understand whether we are succeeding or failing in providing paid work is to take all three measures together – unemployment, underemployment and the count of discouraged workers.</p> <h2>Messier by the month</h2> <p>What this total tells us will be quite different to the count of the number of Australians on unemployment benefits.</p> <p>After tracking each other closely, the number of “unemployed” and the number on unemployment benefits has diverged over the past 25 years and that divergence became even more pronounced during COVID.</p> <p>Australian experts <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-can-more-people-be-on-unemployment-benefits-than-before-covid-with-fewer-unemployed-australians-heres-how-181733" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Peter Whiteford and Bruce Bradbury</a> point out most unemployed people aren’t on benefits, and increasingly unemployment benefits are available to people who are not unemployed.</p> <p>These days unemployment benefits are available to people not seeking paid work but engaged in voluntary work, study, or providing home schooling.</p> <p>And people who once would not have been considered unemployed – such as single parents and people with disabilities – are now put on unemployment benefits and required to search for work in order to get them.</p> <p>After holding together for decades, the post-war administrative and legal construction of unemployment is failing us. We’re outgrowing it.</p> <p><em><strong>This article originally appeared in <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-we-invented-unemployment-and-why-were-outgrowing-it-183545" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Conversation</a>.</strong></em></p> <p><em>Image: Shutterstock</em></p>

Money & Banking

Placeholder Content Image

What happens when you free unemployed Australians from ‘mutual obligations’ and boost their benefits? We just found out

<div class="grid-ten large-grid-nine grid-last content-body content entry-content instapaper_body inline-promos"> <p>During COVID-19 the government ran what turned out to be a giant real-world experiment into what happens when you boost someone’s unemployment benefits and free them of the “mutual obligation” to apply for jobs.</p> <p>On April 27 2020 the government as good as doubled the $565.70 per fortnight JobSeeker payment, lifting it by $550 per fortnight for what turned out to be six months. In September the boost dropped to $250 per fortnight, and in December to $150 per fortnight.</p> <p>Next Thursday the boost vanishes, although the base rate of JobSeeker will climb by a less-than substantial $50 a fortnight, leaving recipients $100 a fortnight worse off than they have been, $500 per fortnight worse off than back when JobSeeker doubled and back well below the poverty line.</p> <p>From Thursday April 1 they will also be subject to much more demanding work tests, having to show they have applied for a minimum of 15 jobs a month, climbing to 20 jobs a month from July 1.</p> <p>On top of that the government has announced:</p> <ul> <li> <p>a return to compulsory face-to-face meetings with Jobactive providers</p> </li> <li> <p>work-for-the-dole after six months of unemployment</p> </li> <li> <p>a dob-in line for employers to report jobseekers who seem not to be genuine</p> </li> <li> <p>increased auditing of job applications to ensure they are legitimate</p> </li> </ul> <p>They are the sort of “mutual obligations” that were scrapped while JobSeeker was doubled.</p> <p>Yet the government’s natural experiment where they doubled benefits and freed recipients of “mutual obligations” provides us with an opportunity to examine how a more generous approach affected recipients and whether, as the government says, a tougher approach is needed in order to compel people to work.</p> <p>During last year’s more generous approach, we conducted an online survey of JobSeeker recipients and found that (contrary to what appears to be the government’s expectation), it was helping get people into work.</p> <p>Freed of “mutual obligations”, many were able to devote time to reengaging with the workforce.</p> <p>As one respondent said,</p> <blockquote> <p>I was able to focus on getting myself back into the workforce. Yes, mutual obligation activities PREVENT people from being able to start a new business or re-enter the workforce as an employee</p> </blockquote> <p>And the extra income freed recipients to do things that would advance their employment prospects; either through study, through properly looking for work, or buying the tools needed to get work.</p> <p>One said</p> <blockquote> <p>I could buy things that helped me with employment — equipment for online work, a bicycle for travel, a proper phone"</p> </blockquote> <p>An Australia Institute review of unemployment payments and work incentives in 33 OECD countries found something similar — that higher payments correlate to lower unemployment.</p> <p>Another respondent said the suspended mutual obligation requirements made it easier to care for an elderly parent during pandemic and their recovery from major surgery.</p> <p>Another said she had been able to focus on her health needs and her children.</p> <p>People on social security are often accused of being dependent on welfare, but it’s often the economy and society that are dependent on their unpaid labour.</p> <p>Yet (except for during the worst of the pandemic) these people have been denied a safety net that ensures their survival.</p> <span class="attribution"><span class="source"></span></span> <p>The inadequacy of payments goes to a major and enduring flaw in the Australian social security system — its inability to recognise all of the productive activities people undertake, including unpaid care  largely undertaken by women.</p> <p>The decisions the government took during 2020 made a major difference to the lives of people outside the formal workforce.</p> <p>They enabled them to turn their attention away from day-to-day survival towards envisioning and realising a more financially and emotionally sustainable future for themselves and their dependants.</p> <p>The flow-on benefits, to all of us, ought to be substantial.</p> <p>The government ought to be very interested.</p> <p>If it was, it would examine the findings further, but they don’t seem to be on its radar.</p> </div> <div class="grid-ten grid-prepend-two large-grid-nine grid-last content-topics topic-list"> <p class="p1"><em>Written by Elise Klein, Kay Cook and Susan Maury. This article first appeared on <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-happens-when-you-free-unemployed-australians-from-mutual-obligations-and-boost-their-benefits-we-just-found-out-157506">The Conversation</a>.</em></p> </div>

Retirement Income

Placeholder Content Image

Newstart unemployment benefit: Could you live on $40 a day?

<p>Since parliament has resumed three Liberal members - Dean Smith, Russell Broadbent and Andrew Wallace - have joined a group of Nationals calling for an <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/jul/22/newstart-liberal-mps-break-ranks-to-join-nationals-group-calling-for-welfare-increase">increase</a> in the A$40 per day Newstart unemployment allowance.</p> <p>Labor has already committed itself to both an <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/labor-backs-newstart-increase-amid-coalition-divisions-on-payment-20190723-p529vu.html">inquiry and an increase</a>, although it won’t specify the size of the increase. The Greens have introduced a bill that would increase Newstart by <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/global/video/2019/jul/22/emotional-scenes-in-senate-over-newstart-rise-with-one-liberal-senator-breaking-ranks-video">A$75 a week</a>.</p> <p>Defending the current level of Newstart, Finance Minister Mathias Cormann told the ABC’s Sabra Lane that the payment was “transitional”.</p> <blockquote> <p>LANE: Could you live on 40 bucks a day?</p> <p>CORMANN: The Newstart allowance which is I guess, what you are now raising is a transitional payment for…</p> <p>LANE: It is, and you’ve diverted straight away. Could you live on 40 bucks a day?</p> <p>CORMANN: Newstart allowance is a transitional payment. It is a payment that is increased twice a year. It is indexed twice a year. Most Australians who are on Newstart allowance are on that payment for a very short period.</p> </blockquote> <p>Greens senator Rachel Siewert actually did try to <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-04-30/siewert-living-on-newstart/3976916">live on Newstart</a> for a week in 2012.</p> <p>She introduced <a href="https://bit.ly/2SARw3s">the bill</a> that would lift it (and the similarly-sized youth allowance, sickness allowance, special benefit, widow allowance, crisis payment and Austudy) by A$75 a week.</p> <p>On Monday she asked the Senate to “<a href="https://bit.ly/2SupTsL">not believe what the government says</a>”</p> <blockquote> <p>This is not a transition payment anymore. The employment situation in this country has changed from when the unemployment benefits first came in, and it’s certainly changed since 1994. People have to survive on this payment long-term.“</p> </blockquote> <p>Liberal Wendy Askew <a href="https://is.gd/yfcG8h">responded</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p>These allowances are not designed as a long-term payment for people, and this is shown by the fact that around two-thirds of job seekers who are granted Newstart exit income support within 12 months.</p> </blockquote> <p>So what’s the truth? Are most Australians who go onto Newstart on it for only a short time, or are most of those who are on Newstart on it for a long time?</p> <p><strong>Short term, or long term?</strong></p> <p>As it happens, both claims are sourced from the same Department of Social Services publication, <a href="https://data.gov.au/dataset/ds-dga-4ccff587-4a46-4ab9-8833-76dadaa10ebe/details?q">DSS Payment Trends and Profile Reports</a>.</p> <p>It says <a href="https://bit.ly/2SuvVti">257,494</a> Australians went on to Newstart between June 2015 and June 2016. Most of them (191,680) hadn’t previously been receiving income support.</p> <p>In the same 12 month period, 274,113 Australians left Newstart, 212,320 of them out of the income support system altogether.</p> <p>If most of those who went on it in that year also went off it in that year then the government would be correct in saying that "two-thirds of job seekers who are granted Newstart exit income support within 12 months”.</p> <p>But it would leave most of the rest of the 732,100 Australians on Newstart on it for an increasingly long time.</p> <p>The table below shows that in June 2016, 73 per cent of Newstart recipients were classified as long-term (one year or more), up from 71 per cent the previous June.</p> <p><a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/285258/original/file-20190723-91860-4ox4yz.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=1000&amp;fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/285258/original/file-20190723-91860-4ox4yz.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" alt="" /></a> <span class="caption">Duration refers to duration on any income support payment and for some will be longer than their current duration on Newstart.</span> <span class="attribution"><a href="https://bit.ly/2SuvVti" class="source">Source: DSS</a></span></p> <p>Graphically, it is possible to see that in June 2016, there were both</p> <ul> <li> <p>fewer Australians on Newstart than in the previous year (more had left Newstart than taken it up), and</p> </li> <li> <p>a greater proportion of them on it for more than a year</p> </li> </ul> <hr /> <p><strong>Number of Newstart recipients by duration on income support, ‘000</strong></p> <p><a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/285256/original/file-20190723-91870-1vb5rdl.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=1000&amp;fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/285256/original/file-20190723-91870-1vb5rdl.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" alt="" /></a> <span class="caption"></span> <span class="attribution"><a href="https://data.gov.au/data/dataset/4ccff587-4a46-4ab9-8833-76dadaa10ebe/resource/d88d3863-b845-4905-84a2-6ed60603bd7e/download/newstart-allowance-payment-trends-and-profile-report-june-2016.pdf" class="source">Source: Department of Social Services</a></span></p> <hr /> <p>The apparent contradiction between most of the people who enter Newstart quickly leaving it and most people who are on Newstart being on it for a long time appears to reflect a confusion between flows and stocks.</p> <p>The <em><a href="https://www.encyclopedia.com/social-sciences/applied-and-social-sciences-magazines/stocks-and-flows">International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences</a></em> illustrates the difference using a bathtub.</p> <blockquote> <p>The level of water in the bathtub is a stock, the water coming from the faucet is an inflow, and the draining of the water through the drain is an outflow. If we plug the drain and turn on the faucet, the net inflow will be positive, and the stock of water in the bathtub will be rising. If, instead, we close the faucet and open the drain, the net inflow of water will be negative, and the stock of water in the bathtub will fall.</p> </blockquote> <p>Between 2015 and 2016 about 260,000 people flowed in to and out of Newstart, and as it happened more flowed out than flowed in.</p> <p>But those who remained were increasingly likely to have been on Newstart for a long time, probably due to the so-called <a href="https://www.iza.org/de/publications/dp/7440/the-scarring-effects-of-unemployment-low-pay-and-skills-under-utilisation-in-australia-compared">“scarring” effect</a> that makes people less job-ready (and less attractive to employers) the longer they have been out of work.</p> <p><strong>Most current Newstart recipients are long-term</strong></p> <p>The proportion of Newstart recipients on payments for more than a year has climbed from 69 per cent in 2014 to 73 per cent in 2016, and according to the latest <a href="https://data.gov.au/dataset/ds-dga-cff2ae8a-55e4-47db-a66d-e177fe0ac6a0/details?q=Social%20services%20demographic%20data">Department of Social Services</a> figures, to 76.5 per cent in 2018.</p> <p>Senator Siewert’s observation that most Newstart recipients have to survive on it long-term is correct.</p> <p>At any one time the overwhelming majority of the people on the $40 per day have been on it for more than a year.</p> <p>What’s more, it appears that the decline in the total number of people on Newstart has not been because more of the people on Newstart have been able to get a job, but because the flow into Newstart has slowed.</p> <p>That is probably a positive development, although there is also the possibility that it is happening because of the onerous <a href="https://www.acoss.org.au/media_release/employment-services-arent-working-acoss-calls-for-major-reform/">compliance burdens of job search</a>, together with the increasing inadequacy of Newstart.<!-- Below is The Conversation's page counter tag. Please DO NOT REMOVE. --><img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important; text-shadow: none !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/120826/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /><!-- End of code. If you don't see any code above, please get new code from the Advanced tab after you click the republish button. The page counter does not collect any personal data. More info: http://theconversation.com/republishing-guidelines --></p> <p><em>Written by <span>Peter Whiteford, Professor, Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University</span>. Republished with permission of </em><a href="https://theconversation.com/are-most-people-on-the-newstart-unemployment-benefit-for-a-short-or-long-time-120826"><em>The Conversation</em></a><em>.</em></p>

Retirement Income

Placeholder Content Image

How to make a career change after 60

<p>Those facing redundancy or who need to upskill in their career could get a leg up thanks to a new Australian Government program.</p> <p>The Skills Checkpoint Program provides eligible Australians with assessment, advice and guidance on transitioning into new roles within their current industry or pathways to a new career, including referral to relevant education and training options.<span> </span></p> <p>The program is available to those aged 45 to 70 who are employed and at risk of entering the income support system, or recently unemployed and not registered for assistance through an employment services program.<span> </span></p> <p>Eligible participants in the program could receive up to $2,200 of funding for suitable training to help them make a career transition.</p> <p>Not-for-profit organisation VERTO runs the Skills Checkpoint Program in New South Wales, Victoria and the Australian Capital Territory, and VERTO chief executive Ron Maxwell said he is proud to support older Australians to stay in the workforce.</p> <p>"The Skills Checkpoint Program is a great opportunity to help eligible older workers to upskill in their current roles, or learn new skills so they can transition to different career pathways," he said.<span> </span></p> <p>Mr Maxwell said that changes in the workforce, particularly around technology, mean many people have to regularly upskill to stay relevant in their career paths, or are facing uncertain times.</p> <p>"Transitioning into new roles or careers can be stressful for individuals, and the program is aimed at providing support and assistance throughout that journey," he said.<span> </span></p> <p>"Through the Skills Checkpoint program, a consultant will assess participants to determine the participant's current skills and areas for improvement. They will also create a career plan outlining job opportunities, training options and incentives available to them."</p> <p>The government contributions will cover 50 per cent of the approved training up to $2,200, with the participant or their employer contributing the other 50 per cent.<span> </span></p> <p>And if you're still trying to figure out what your next career step is, you can also attend a career planning session through VERTO completely free of charge.</p> <p>"At the career planning sessions, we can go through the candidate's skills and look at where they are in life and what their goals are," said Mr Maxwell.</p> <p>"Then we can also look at the eligibility criteria for the Skills Checkpoint Program to see if they qualify, and if they do, we can match them to relevant training. So whether the candidate thinks they're eligible for the program or not, the career planning sessions are a great first step, and they're completely free."</p> <p>VERTO may still be able to assist individuals who are not eligible for the Skills Checkpoint Program through a variety of other services it provides such as its training and employment services.</p> <p>Employers who are facing restructure or downsizing are also encouraged to enquire about the program to look at how they may be able to redirect staff into training for a new role or upgrade their existing skills.</p> <p>To find out more about the program and see if you're eligible, contact VERTO on 1300 4 VERTO (1300 4 83786) or<span> </span><a href="http://verto.org.au/what-we-do/skills-checkpoint">VERTO Skills Checkpoint</a>.</p>

Retirement Life

Placeholder Content Image

Australia’s unemployment rate steady at 6% as South Australia records highest jobless rate

<p>South Australia has the highest rate of unemployment in Australia at 8.2 per cent while the rate for the country remained steady at 6 per cent. South Australia lost 5,700 full-time jobs, while New South Wales had the largest increase in employment for the same period.</p> <p>The Australian Bureau of Statistics announced that the total number of people with jobs rose by 7,300 to 11.769 million in June. This was unexpected after predictions of a fall of 5,000.</p> <p>Unemployment in Australia increased by 12,800 people to 756,100. The number of unemployed people looking for full-time work increased by 27,200 to 541,200. The number of unemployed people looking for part-time work decreased by 14,500 to 214,900.</p> <p>The number of people employed or actively looking for work remained at 64.8 per cent.</p> <p>There were 11,300 new jobs recorded in New South Wales, while South Australia lost 5,700 full-time jobs and Victoria lost 5,500.</p> <p>South Australia’s employment minister, Gail Gago, said the state was “really struggling” with high unemployment.</p> <p>“As we move from a reliance on traditional manufacturing industries, coupled with collapsing commodities prices, we see South Australian unemployment rates really struggling,” Gago said.</p> <p>“This is not helped by the federal government’s withdrawal of support for our auto manufacturing and navy shipbuilding industries, not to mention severe federal budget cuts in the health and education sectors.”</p> <p>The chief executive for Business SA, Nigel McBride, said unemployment in the state had now reached alarming levels.</p> <p>“The state government must make job creation its highest priority,” McBride said.</p> <p>“Even if it means going into debt the government must direct money towards infrastructure which creates long-term, sustainable economic growth.”</p> <p>The downturn of the mining sector in Western Australia has seen the unemployment rate rise from 5.1 per cent to 5.8 per cent.</p> <p>“WA is feeling the brunt of the job losses in mining and probably dampening some of the few positives that are coming out of the other industries which are actually adding jobs,” CommSec’s Savanth Sebastian said.</p> <p><strong>Related links:</strong></p> <p><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><em><strong><a href="/news/news/2015/07/beef-prices-rise/">Get used to paying more for snags and steaks as beef prices soar</a></strong></em></span></p> <p><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><em><strong><a href="/news/news/2015/07/heart-disease-and-diabetes-danger/">Heart disease plus diabetes can knock more than 10 years off your life</a></strong></em></span></p> <p><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><em><strong><a href="/news/news/2015/07/peanut-turtle-litter/">Turtle lives 20 years after being cut free from a six-pack ring</a></strong></em></span></p>

News

Placeholder Content Image

Community farm in Tasmanian helps unemployment

<p>A non-profit farm in Tasmania is the talk of the town as it uses a grant to create work-for-the-dole employment opportunities while supplying fresh and affordable produce.</p><p>Bernie Community House is making use of a $300,000 Tas Medicare Local grant to establish their farm in Shorewell Park, a community which has one of Tasmania’s highest unemployment rates and a shortage of skilled farm labour.</p><p>The Hilltop Fresh Produce Project, which is run by Shandel Pile, is employing 26 work-for-the-dole participants to do about 15 hours of work each week. The experience they gain on the farm and in the store will provide great experience for them as they move forward when looking for further employment. Time spent on the farm is already inspiring some, helping them gain knowledge about fertilisation application, fencing, and planting.</p><p>Set to open soon is a store just up the road from the market garden, which will supply affordable fresh produce to the community, while luring in foodies with its trendy fit out and organic coffee. Project members have even produced their first batches of strawberry and blackberry jams to sell at the store.</p><p>The project’s funding is set to be rolled out over three years, and allows for all revenue created at the Hilltop Fresh Produce Store to be directed back into the project and the community, with an eye for eventually creating paid positions.</p><p><em>Image source:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.facebook.com/HilltopFreshProduceProject/timeline" target="_blank"><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><strong>Facebook</strong></span></a></em></p>

News

Our Partners