From: To: jobseekersinquiry Cc: Subject: Date: …...2019/07/31 · and technical skills. Amongst the most disadvantaged ‘young’ job seekers it needs to be better quantified and

From:To: jobseekersinquiryCc:Subject: Submission to the Inquiry into sustainable employment for disadvantaged jobseekersDate: Wednesday, 31 July 2019 3:48:38 PMAttachments:

Good afternoon

Please find attached the submission from the Greater Dandenong Regional EmploymentTaskforce to the VLA Inquiry into Sustainable Employment for Disadvantaged Jobseekers. Anattachment to the submission is also included as well as a research piece on this topic by TheAustralian Centre for Social Innovation.

This submission is made on behalf ofMr Paul KearsleyGroup ManagerGreater Dandenong BusinessCity of Greater Dandenong225 Lonsdale St Dandenong Vic 3175Ph: E:

ShareFile Attachments Expires January 27, 2020

Addressing Disadvantage in Southern Melbourne.pdf 25.9 MB

Attachment to GDRET submission - MPB_V...7).docx 38.2 KB

Greater Dandenong Regional Employment ...5).docx 32.6 KB

uses ShareFile to share documents securely. Learn More.

Warm regards

www.greaterdandenong.com

LA EIC - Disadvantaged Jobseekers Inquiry Submission no. 54Received: 31 July 2019

https://www.sharefile.com/?src=system-email-outlookplugin-new&utm_medium=system-email&utm_source=outlookplugin-newhttp://www.greaterdandenong.com/

Disclaimer

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of theindividual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, anydissemination, copying or use of the information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email inerror please delete it immediately from your system and inform us by email [email protected].

Unless otherwise stated, any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author.

1 | P a g e

Submission to the VLA Economy & Infrastructure committee ‘An inquiry into the social and economic benefits of seeking to place disadvantaged jobseekers into sustainable employment’

Background Since its inception in 2014 the Greater Dandenong Regional Employment Taskforce, under the auspices of the City of Greater Dandenong has been committed to supporting economic and social inclusion throughout Greater Dandenong.

Comprising local influential stakeholders, the Taskforce includes representatives of community organisations, employment service providers, education and training providers (including the TAFE sector) as well as employer organisations and all levels of government - local, state and federal.

In 2017, the Taskforce was the recipient of a three year state government funding package with a charter to explore innovative approaches to assisting disadvantaged jobseekers to become more job ready and move into sustainable employment. Provided by DEDJTR (now DJPR) the Community Revitalisation (CR) funding has provided an evidence base of ‘what works’ in supporting disadvantaged jobseekers.

This submission was formed from learnings from the CR project, input from Taskforce members and the contribution of the City of Greater Dandenong’s Youth & Family Services team who applied a youth specific lens to the questions posed by the inquiry.

1. The social and economic benefits of seeking to place disadvantaged jobseekers intosustainable employment

For young people who experience long periods of unemployment at their first entry to the labour market, the detrimental effects can be long lasting. Social Ventures Australia (2016) have linked youth unemployment with reduced productivity, lost tax income and increased demand for welfare, health, justice and community services. This supports the case for intervention and investment in supporting disadvantaged young jobseekers to gain early access to employment, to prevent a long-term cycle of disadvantage.

For the jobseeker cohort overall, gaining and maintaining employment contributes to a reduction in cost to Government (not just in reduced welfare payments, but reduced health, policing, justice, housing etc.), increased health and wellbeing (particularly mental health), increases in local economy, social and community engagement reducing feelings of isolation, reducing crime rates and reduced justice costs.

2 | P a g e


2. The jobseekers who may be considered as being ‘disadvantaged’ in the labour market and the types of barriers to employment theymay face.

Lack of understanding or the Australian work context

Lack of relevant skills

Lack of local work experience

Age Discrimination

Other Discrimination

Limited English skills

Lack of access to objective career counselling

Lack of knowledge of the job seeking process

Transport barriers

Lack of financial resources (Inc. SRSS payments)

New entrants to the workforce (young people) X X X X X X X X X X

New arrivals (people seeking asylum/refugees/migrants) X X X X X X X X X X

Long term unemployed X X X X X X Mature aged jobseekers X X X X X X Parents returning to the workforce X X X X X X

Jobseekers with mental/physical health barriers

X X X X X X

Jobseekers with a disability X X X X X X

This table is an overview of common barriers experienced in Greater Dandenong however the problem needs to be considered in all its complexities. “It is critical that we begin to understand at a much more nuanced level what it takes and what it costs to support people with a diversity of barriers to be work ready or to maintain employment over time”1

1Addressing Disadvantage in Southern Melbourne: Towards Outcomes, The Australian Centre for Social Innovation (2017), p.4

3 | P a g e


3. How well current efforts, programs or activities meet the needs of disadvantagedjobseekers and/or employers looking for workers, and potential improvements

There are a plethora of employment services provided by federal, state and localised programs, resulting in an over-representation of services, without any clear guide of client targeting, suitability or eligibility criteria. Vulnerable communities do not know which service to access, and often get the run around. With outcomes based targets (often directed at specific industries from contract managers), the harder to place are left to fend for themselves or pushed into inappropriate industries.

Limitations of the current employment services model also includes waiting times to access services, as well as a lack of (meaningful) follow up and ongoing support to ensure disadvantaged jobseekers can maintain employment once a position has been secured.

Equally, employers are approached by many services asking the same questions. Feedback from both jobseekers and employers indicates that the current system is neither efficient nor effective.

Employers have long expressed a frustration in working with organisations servicing disadvantaged clients, with very few of them now willing to use ‘the system’. To employers ‘the system’ could be Federal/State/Local employment programs and/or organisations set up to place disadvantaged job seekers into employment. They are all one and the same as far as the employer is concerned, a couple of bad experiences with one means they are all tarred with the same brush. Result is that now many employers have lost trust and are reluctant to work with ‘the system’.

The frustrations that employers face are: 1. the mismatch between the skills/attitude required for the workplace and the jobseekers

presented2. the number of unsuitable job applications they need to wade through taking up their

valuable time3. the competition between providers who contact employers promising that they can deliver

where other providers have failed4. the length of time it takes for suitable applicants to be sourced/presented

Employers want: 1. to know where/how they can advertise their jobs for best results2. job applications from people who have the ‘must have’ skills/experience3. help with getting a shortlist of most suitable applicants4. jobseekers that really want to work and demonstrate that from day one5. to deal with just one or two providers at most – and the reps don’t change too often.

4 | P a g e


Trust needs to be built with employers by delivering on these needs and only then can we hope to get them more engaged and willing to give the most disadvantaged jobseekers employment opportunities.

4. Outcomes of efforts to encourage greater labour participation of disadvantaged jobseekers

Jobseekers who are disadvantaged in the marketplace often have multiple complex barriers to sourcing sustainable employment. The approach that has proved most effective through the CR project is to have a single access point for job seeking support that remains the pivotal contact throughout the jobseekers journey to sustainable employment – with this access point embedded in their community. For the CR project, the City of Greater Dandenong was the community access point with CEAV Career Counselling Australia (CCCA) providing the ongoing support, career counselling, employment readiness assessment and referrals to appropriate interventions.

This is a long-term, ongoing endeavour with jobseekers often requiring support to initially gain and maintain a ‘survival’ job then continuing engagement as they build their capacity to transition to a preferred role in their chosen sector.

Support post placement for both the employee and the employer is critical, and needs to be provided for an extended time period (12+ months).

The CR project also provided the funds to prototype various interventions to meet jobseeker needs that emerged through the work of the CCCA as well as those indicated by the research outcomes from the work of The Centre for Social Innovation (TACSI). The needs of jobseekers proved to be various and individual – the ‘one size fits all’ approach being inadequate for jobseekers who are disadvantaged – as was reflected in the range of activities prototyped and the various interventions accessed.

It is also important to note that the most critical criteria for access to the CCCA program at CGD was the genuine desire of the jobseeker to gain employment. Compelling jobseekers to attend a program that leads to an outcome they do not want is a fraught and fruitless task.

The CR project has increased the work readiness of the participants and resulted in employment outcomes for both job ready and minimally job ready clients. Jobseekers experiencing disadvantage can succeed in the employment market with tailored, individualised support from a trusted intermediary who is available for as long as they are needed, not just until they gain employment or until the end of a funding period.

5 | P a g e


5. Education and training needs to support disadvantaged jobseekers transitioning intowork

Young people, employers and education providers have different perceptions about what constitutes work readiness (and who is responsible for developing work readiness skills). The nature of the changing workforce is seeing an increased demand for ‘enterprise skills’ such as digital literacy, communication, team work and problem solving (amongst others). For already vulnerable young people, there is a risk of being left further behind. Approaches to embedding enterprise skills in the curriculum need to be considered to ensure that young people are developing both soft skills and technical skills. Amongst the most disadvantaged ‘young’ job seekers it needs to be better quantified and acknowledged that a significant number are not yet ‘work ready’ and that investment needs to be targeted towards building their work readiness skills.

There continues to be an ongoing disparity between local industry (employment opportunities) and course offerings. This means that young people may be undertaking study without a likely prospect of employment upon completion, whilst local industry is struggling to fill vacancies.

Education and training needs for jobseekers is as individual as each jobseeker and ranges from pre-accredited training through to industry specific certification (RSA, White Card) and higher level tertiary qualifications. Financial barriers are the most common barrier to education and training. In addition to offering free TAFE for some industry areas and not others, it may be more effective to reduce training costs, or increase hourly rates for training that is attached to employment.

Training specific to job seeking is usually generic (resume writing, preparation for interviews, finding the vacancies, how to network) and while a good starting point for jobseekers it is only the first step for those with complex barriers. For those with limited English skills and lacking any exposure to Australian workplace a whole raft of activities need to be undertaken before they could compete on the open market with locally born jobseekers. Even those with professional qualifications and significant professional experience overseas struggle to enter to enter the local job market – even at the ‘survival job’ level.

Again, it requires individual tailored interventions for those with complex barriers to employment to move towards job readiness and sustainable employment.

6. Interstate and overseas best practice models that could be implemented in Victoria.

See the further submission attached

6 | P a g e


7. Other points relevant to the issue of disadvantaged jobseekers.

• It is important to note that whilst unemployment is often framed as an individual problem,there are a range of settings, structures and processes that impact on a person’s ability tosecure and maintain meaningful employment. These may include access to transport, familyrelationships and caring responsibilities, past experiences of education and employment,generational poverty and a lack of role models ‘employed’ within the family; and eligibility toaccess support services (including employment services). Addressing unemploymenttherefore requires a ‘whole of community’ approach, involving education providers,employers, jobseekers, community services and employment services workingcooperatively.

• Uni of Melbourne Policy Lab (2018) advocates for a not-for-profit environment providingassistance for disadvantaged jobseekers ensuring it is separate from the for-profit sectorprecisely because disadvantaged jobseekers require more help for a longer period of timewhich isn’t viable for a for-profit organisation.

• This article examines why the Job Active agencies struggle to meet the needs ofdisadvantaged jobseekers.

Attachments

1. TACSI – Addressing Disadvantage in Southern Melbourne: Towards Outcomes

2. An additional submission is attached. This response has been framed by a consultantcurrently working with the City of Greater Dandenong and is additional to this submission bythe Greater Dandenong Regional Employment Taskforce.

https://arts.unimelb.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/2947382/Improving-Outcomes-for-Disadvantaged-Jobseekers-2018.pdfhttps://cpd.org.au/2018/02/big-impersonal-opaque-jobactive-failing-jobseekers/

Submission to VLA’s Economic and Infrastructure Committee – ‘Inquiry into sustainable employment for disadvantaged jobseekers’

For the purposes of this submission the following Definitions have been used:

‘Disadvantaged’ – ‘of unfavourable circumstances especially with regard to financial or social opportunities’

‘Jobseeker’ – ‘a person who is unemployed and looking for work’

‘Core Disadvantage’ – a core disadvantage is one that cannot be removed. It both forms and contextualises the individual’s state of being

‘Exponential Disadvantage’ – ‘an individual whose disadvantage is compounded at a factoring scale, by the presence of more than one Core Disadvantage identifier.’

‘Exacerbating Impact’ – an exacerbating impact is a present but solvable issue that increases the difficulty faced by a disadvantaged jobseeker in their quest to gain employment’.

Submission Context

In order to be able to develop effective solutions to the Disadvantaged Jobseeker challenges, it is important that discussions are centred on clear and unambiguous language. The Terms of Reference seeking submissions does not do this and it is the view of this submission that the lack of clarity is problematic for any future design or performance criteria for models that respond effectively to the current challenges. Without specific clarity it becomes possible for accountability to wane or effective performance measures to be ignored.

Taking that position, this submission aims to offer a system assessment rather than one based on isolation of any one factor or one group of factors.

Response to Issue One:

This submission contends that this framing statement is ill-defined and that the Economy and Infrastructure Committee would benefit greatly by embracing the offered stronger and more accountable measure. The current request is:

‘…the social and economic benefits of seeking to place disadvantaged jobseekers into sustainable employment’

1. ‘…benefits of seeking to…’a. The act of ‘seeking to’ in no way requires an ACTUAL outcome on behalf of the jobseeker. It could be argued that currently there exists a

myriad of providers who accrue significant economic benefits as a result of ‘…seeking to place…’ and that any links to widescale benefit fordisadvantaged jobseekers is more tenuous.

The stronger and more accountable measurement is:

‘The social and economic benefits of placing disadvantaged jobseekers into sustainable employment’.

If the terms of reference were interested in social and economic benefits of a successful job placement with specific inclusion of the person placed into the job, then one does not have to look far.

• Sustained employment will typically see lower rates of crime & lower policing costs, the supporting data of which is easily unpacked through resourceallocation comparisons across LGAs.

• Stemming from lower crime rates, typically higher employment rates mean lower associated court and legal costs.• There will usually be a widescale drop in medical costs, both at the General Practitioner level and at the Hospitalisation level. Use of pharmacology

can decrease in both legal (prescribed) and illegal uses. Unfortunately, neither GP practises nor hospitals are immune from the ongoing deleteriousimpact of alcohol consumption across society. As Prof David Nutt highlighted in his research for the UK Government, researching 20 commonly useddrugs, the number one drug of harm in society is alcohol. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-11660210 It should be noted however that some of thecore Disadvantaged Jobseekers do not consume alcohol and as such are non-contributors to the hospital, policing or GP workloads that result foralcohol related interventions.

• Higher employment rates within the Disadvantaged Jobseeker ecosystem overtime, leads to a reduction and or reallocation of social work costs. Insome cases, there is an initial increased work level as support workers are required to engage more heavily in the early stages to be able to effectivelyassist a disadvantaged jobseeker transition into employment and critically RETAIN their employment.

• And higher employment rates also assist with increased Federal and State taxation bases and may help lower damage to Government properties andinfrastructure in specific geographical areas.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-11660210

The question then is whether the reduced hard costs (less policing, fewer legal system interventions, lower hospital demand, and less property damage costs) outweigh the cost of a more individual, customised support process. This submission would suggest that it does, by a significant factor.

2. The terms of reference do not define ‘sustainable employment’. If we apply the definition of sustain as ‘to maintain overtime’ then the request iseither for strategies that value continuity of employment, or requests for strategies that seek employment within jobs likely to continue. Given therate of change due to robotics, software and artificial intelligence, this is possibly a more difficult task.

Given that employment opportunities for Disadvantaged Jobseekers are often found in low skill or manual level jobs, and that automation, software and robotics are likely to reduce the numbers of those roles over time, then consideration must be given to the impact of those dwindling roles on any assessment of future strategic choices aimed at assisting Disadvantaged Job Seekers.

Paradoxically, the rise in automation is seeing a bigger shortage of skilled workers able to assist organisations. The paradox lies in the fact that a number of Disadvantaged Jobseekers have arrived in the country possessing advanced degrees and experience in robotics, software design, automation, pharmacology and more, yet few of their qualifications are recognised or treated at ‘Australian Level’. As such, despite the brainpower available, these people are offered few opportunities to deploy their skills for the wider benefit of the Australian economy. It might be that sooner, rather than later, conversations over validity of experience or overseas qualifications assess whether there is an unfair or unwarranted barrier to recognition of existing capabilities.

3. There is no clarity as to for whom ‘social and economic benefit’ ought to accrue. Using the language of ‘…seeking to place…’ the economic benefits canalready be assigned to the Job Active style entities. Whether there is an economic benefit to a disadvantaged jobseeker who has been part of a systemthat is ‘seeking to place’ but not ACTUALLY place’ is open to debate.

Beneficial socio-economic results are also relatively easy to identify. LGA mapping of socio-economic areas combined with Policing statistics of certain crime rates and resource allocations matched to those crime rates tell a ready tale of social and economic advantage and disadvantage. Some crimes are more prevalent in some areas, but crime exists in all areas. If it can be reasonably held that increased employment = lower overall crime rates (and anecdotally the suggestion shows a strong correlation) and that such lowering of crime rates also increases social benefits, then a more troubling issue arises – why has there been an apparent unwillingness to invest in purposeful strategies that work to enhance employment participation of disadvantaged persons?

One could argue ‘costs’ for interventions. But as can be shown, the reduction in costs associated with dealing with social issues arising from unemployment, could easily account for any increased cost in a customised and or bespoke intervention for the disadvantaged.

Response to Issue Two:

‘…the jobseekers who might be considered ‘disadvantaged’ in the labour market and the types of barriers to employment they may face’

This table attempts to map an array of elements that exist in the ‘Disadvantaged Jobseeker’ space. ‘Identifiers’ are the labels used for a specific category of disadvantage; ‘Barriers to Entry’ flags the likely challenges for that Job Seeker which have then been framed through one of 3 Lenses – ‘Biological’ challenges, ‘Psychological’ challenges, and ‘Sociological’ challenges. This Table does not imply that all ‘disadvantaged’ are represented, or that all challenges are represented, nor that cross over challenges do not exist. Rather it aims to provide an essential snapshot or core features of the Disadvantaged Jobseeker ecosystem, such that a ready handle of the challenges that are present might be more easily considered;

Table 1 – Disadvantaged Jobseekers Barriers to Entry

Barrier to Entry Identifier

Lens Core Barrier Type:

Asylum Seeker CALD Women DisAbility Youth Aged

Biological Physical Disability

Minimal support services

Accessibility challenges, transport challenges and onsite tools suitable for use

Lack of specific housing options sees them placed into aged care facilities

Movement & workload challenges esp. in manual occupations

Biological Physical Health

Lack of access to health services to enable wellness

Lack of workplace flexibility in some cases

Some disabilities present ongoing physical impairments requiring medical attention

Insufficient body strength for some manual and often low-skill tasks

Insufficient body strength for some manual and often low-skill tasks

Biological Non Binary Still examples of preference for Binary applicants

Psychological Mental Health

Challenges with self identity

Impact of moving into workplaces after long periods of displacement

Increasing rates of anxiety

Increasing use of prescribed pharmacology to assist coping mechanisms;

Exacerbates those with temporary housing or inconsistent job access crating negative feedback loop

Psychological Held Skillsets

Restricted opportunities to develop bridging skills from previous country of origin

Lower ability to read and or take instructions in English

Lack of experience and operational skill sets for jobs available – minimal task based training opportunities

Unable/unwilling to develop additional skills/ lack of access to skills training made only available to youth

Psychological Employer Wants

No onsite capabilities for support; Still examples of preference for Binary applicants

English proficiency (but see also the Deakin U report)

Still examples of preference for males esp. in ‘traditionally male’ role

Minimal change to workplace design, minimal disruptions to onboarding person with a disability

Positive attitude, low cost of acquisition, rapid skill take-up

Psychological Jobseeker Wants

On the job learning opportunities not matching real life demands

Equal pay, opportunity to prove worth and capability; work hour flexibility

Opportunity to prove value and worth

Social Language Skills

Lack of proficiency in English; often skills that are outdated or have been lost during asylum period

Insufficient dual+ language in both writing and verbal skills reduces opportunities

Poor written communications at CV / application stage

Social Minimal Experience

Overseas exp not recognised

Language impedes ability for gaining experience

Women returning to work find past skill sets not recognised

Lack of entry level opportunities

Perceptions of inability to adapt to new roles

Social Outdated Skills

Long journeys often see once proficient and valuable skill sets lost

Skills from O/S not recognised or deemed of lower quality

Women returning to work after long periods in charge of child rearing often lack up-to-date skills (or perceive they lack them)

Skills have not been maintained

Social Sexism Still examples of preference for males esp. in ‘traditionally male’ roles

Social Background See Deakin U research *

See Deakin U research *

In some cultural backgrounds,

Unspoken bias against hiring of

women must gain ‘Permission to work’ from their spouse or main male family member

people with a disability

Social Transport Distance barriers rule out opportunities

Challenges with ability to get to workplaces, especially for roles that are ‘variable location’ (trades support

Social Housing Housing often within friends or others

Many face housing dislocation through relationship breakdown, avoiding violence or due to sexually transmitted debt attributed to them during a relationship.

Independent persons may face few suitable housing options thus restricting the localities suitable for work

Disadvantaged youth often present with housing challenges. This can make contact with employers or support services sporadic

Plus 55yo (especially women) with housing challenges are on the rise and face similar issues for work consistency

Lens Barrier Type

Asylum Seeker CALD Women DisAbility Youth Aged

What Table One suggests is that there is unlikely to ever be a ‘one size fits all’ model for assistance or intervention. Equally this table highlights the impact on those facing what is best framed as ‘Exponential Disadvantage’. The presence of each ‘lens’ has a Factor inducing impact rather than a mere ‘doubling’ or exacerbating impact. By way of an example, an Asylum seeker with a transport challenge has a significantly better chance of finding work than an Asylum seeker with a Disability even if transport is readily available to them.

Missing in the terms of reference such as they are, is the much-needed conversation on employment retention. Table Two aims to map some of the factors that answer the question ‘Why do Disadvantaged Jobseekers, fall out of work once placed?’

* Lack of English language skills may not be the problem -

https://www.sbs.com.au/news/even-with-good-english-skills-muslim-migrants-say-they-can-t-land-jobs-in-australia?cx_cid=edm:newsam:2019

Expanding the View of the Disadvantaged Jobseeker Ecosystem

One area missed within the Disadvantaged Jobseeker ecosystem is the impact caused by a job loss. It can be difficult enough for a qualified job seeker with experience to locate a new role, let alone being a person who has had constant challenges with gaining an entry into employment. The ‘place and forget’ approach can cause ongoing harm to any improvement in employment suitability as periods between employment tend to be longer and the psychological health impacts far more negative.

The Barrier to Employment retention suggest some of the opportunities to help a Disadvantaged Jobseeker maintain longer periods of employment (Sustainable Employment) and thus move further away from the position of ‘disadvantage’.

Table 2 – Disadvantaged Jobseekers Barriers to Job Retention

This Table suggest Barriers to Retention of employment. It does not suggest this table is a complete assessment of known or likely contributing factors.

Here this table considers that falling out of work is NOT a preferred outcome

Disadvantaged Jobseekers

Barrier to Employment Retention

Why do Disadvantaged Jobseekers fall out of work after a successful placement?

Performance Issues Tasking Issues Skills Based Actions Operating Related Actions Redundancy of Role Care Issues

Unable to acquire needed skills for performance of allocated duties

Unable to consistently

perform skills at the level of quality

expected or demanded by

employer

Substance issues impacting quality

of work or exposing risk of OH&S problems

Relational issues impacting quality of workplace for

individual and co-workers

Role was short-term or has been

replaced by equipment

upgrade

Inconsistent reliability of work

attendance

Work hour commitments

impeding need for carer

responsibilities

Attendance to Existing issues

prevent attendance to

work

Lack of training opportunities, or challenges with learning skills

through training that is offered

Lack of attention to detail, or

physical overwhelm given

workload

Lack of self- confidence; self-

sabotaging behaviours;

unsupportive workplace support

No transition options inside

workplace beyond short term role

Coping strategies lacking for

movement into workplace

(psychological overwhelm)

Inflexible workplace

requirements; loss/withdrawal of

a support carer that had enabled access to time for

employment

Hospitalisation, pre-standing court requirements etc

Response to Issue Four:

‘Outcomes of efforts to encourage greater participation of disadvantaged jobseekers’

We can ‘encourage’ all we like but if the barriers identified at Q2 have not been resolved, we’re cheering people on to roles that functionally, do not exist or cannot be retained. It goes against the call for ‘sustainable employment’ if Disadvantaged Jobseekers are shoehorned into roles that are ill-fitting or without enough structural, procedural and personal support to enable them to secure that role for extended periods of time – what might become ‘sustained employment’.

Response to Issue Five:

‘Education and training needs to support disadvantaged jobseekers transitioning into work’

The support structures needed to ensure that placement opportunities can be converted into retained opportunities (see Table 2) are not difficult to identify and arguably there is some consistency as to the kind of support required at each stage of the process. However, this can be especially critical for one Disadvantaged Jobseeker group only just touched on by the challenges listed in Table One and could warrant their own category marker – the illiterate school leavers.

Illiterate school leavers are those that have survived the schooling system and have completed their ‘time’ but have left or graduated without legitimate or sufficient literacy skills. This group is for most part, hidden from support structures despite a core barrier being present. These Disadvantaged Jobseekers cannot fill out a job application sheet and may depart a potential employment interview at the point where they are asked to fill in basic information in a paper-based form. Lacking readership skills, anecdotally, many have said they have walked out of an interview before being ‘found out’. That many have proven themselves inside the school system despite reading difficulties shows a significant degree of problem-solving capability. Unfortunately, the ‘normal’ requirement to provide contact information proves a step too far with regard to employment opportunities.

Response to Issue Six:

‘Interstate and overseas Best Practice models that could be implemented in Victoria’

The challenge for a response here is whether the request is for ‘siloed’ responses (singular aspects of the Disadvantaged Jobseeker ecosystem), or for an assessment of whole system interventions or even system critical interventions.

In that light, the Bio/Psycho/Social barriers nominated in Table One suggest that the most apt interventions are likely to be system-critical such that they address parts of the system that impact many of the others. However, in developing or redesigning those elements for improvement of the overall system, we’d be looking for outcomes that at the individual granular level, enable behaviours that provide for the greatest level of variety – (Law of Requisite Variety).

Although the perceived cost of offering bespoke support at the individual level may seem high, given the mid to long term benefits to the whole system that accrue it is likely to be a far more effective and far cheaper option. Additionally, when considering the kinds of interventions likely to provide the biggest impact across a number of Disadvantaged Jobseeker groups it is possible to identify actions that maximise benefits not only to the individual but also to the whole Disadvantaged Jobseeker ecosystem.

There are a number of positive outcomes seen in Victorian offerings that we can look at, not just options from overseas (some of which are included here), although it would be fair to say that few if any offerings work for all of the people all of the-time. Some of the system approach concepts include:

Bio-Social Interventions:

House them first – resolve social and mental health problems by offering housing upfront – allow for locational stability and safety such that mental health issues are removed/resolved/manageable. This approach allows for increased safety and security in the social barrier so that more conducive psychological and biological barriers can be managed/negated or removed and as such lead to more positive workplace outcomes - https://www.vox.com/2014/5/30/5764096/homeless-shelter-housing-help-solutions.

Living Wage – as a concept the overall idea is to provide Disadvantaged persons with sufficient income without them being required to face the ongoing stress of dealing with a system geared toward making them feel unwelcome or unworthy of support. The positive impacts on mental health have been widely documented but other factors, like having enough money to be able to afford to travel to a job interview are also addressed. Sweden’s example can be found here https://tradingeconomics.com/sweden/living-wage-individual and this SBS story offers an additional overview of the concept https://www.sbs.com.au/news/what-is-a-living-wage-and-is-it-the-answer-for-australia-s-working-poor

Literacy Teaching That Works – the shift in teaching of literacy towards one that is evidence and research based has taken an arduously long time. Thankfully there are signs of shift in thinking with the literacy model being led by Sarah Asome of Bentleigh West Primary School in Victoria and winner of the Outstanding teacher of the Year Award - https://www.ldaustralia.org/client/documents/LDA%20Bulletin%20Autumn%202017_WEB.pdf and https://nationaleducationsummit.com.au/sarah-asome/ and Dr Rosie Nash in Tasmania https://www.utas.edu.au/profiles/staff/health/rosie-nash have been achieving exceptional results that ought act as the guideline for all training of Disadvantaged Jobseekers whose core disadvantage is literacy.

Psycho-Social Interventions:

Fitted For Work – this model looks at pre-employment skills and factors often at the Psychological barrier stage and then spilling over into the social barrier area. Have the candidates had job interviews before? Do they know how to put a CV together? Do they have a budget that allows them to buy clothes so that they can present and attend as ‘ready for work’? Do they have enough self-belief or a chosen direction for their life? https://fittedforwork.org/

https://www.vox.com/2014/5/30/5764096/homeless-shelter-housing-help-solutionshttps://tradingeconomics.com/sweden/living-wage-individualhttps://www.sbs.com.au/news/what-is-a-living-wage-and-is-it-the-answer-for-australia-s-working-poorhttps://www.ldaustralia.org/client/documents/LDA%20Bulletin%20Autumn%202017_WEB.pdfhttps://nationaleducationsummit.com.au/sarah-asome/https://www.utas.edu.au/profiles/staff/health/rosie-nashhttps://fittedforwork.org/

Social Interventions:

Future Skills Centre – Canada. The Centre for Australian Foresight (and others) have been calling for a Ministerial level position specific to addressing emerging and anticipated future issues. In Finland https://www.centreforpublicimpact.org/swedens-ministry-for-the-future-how-governments-should-think-strategically-and-act-horizontally/ the office has been helping inform Government policy for over a decade, working to support individual Ministry portfolios with research and strategic thinking, and now Canada joins the process - https://www.universityaffairs.ca/news/news-article/future-skills-centre-looks-at-scaling-up-best-practices-for-canadas-workforce/. Others have called for a similar Departmental body in the United States - https://www.politico.com/agenda/story/2016/12/department-of-future-trump-000258 . The implications of applied futures thinking is the ability to take a system wide approach able to work beyond vested interests and sunk costs associated with historical patterns of operation

Systemic Interventions:

The Sustainable Development Goals July 2019 report provides a sobering view of the changing face of the workplace. The quick take from the report is that:

• Economic Growth needs to be inclusive and job led – ‘…one should not assume a correlation between economic growth, productivity and decent work…’

• Technology is changing how we work – ‘The digital revolution is bringing productivity gains along with increasing inequality…’ and there is a recognition that new technology is goingto displace workers. Additionally when assessing the ‘gig economy’ the report states that:

‘While the gig economy provides some workers with flexibility and helps to diversify income sources, it lacks job security and a predictable career path. The gig economy is largely unregulated, both at national and international levels, which risks the exploitation of workers in some sectors as they often have little bargaining power.

• Lifelong Learning is imperative – ‘…one set of skills will not be enough…transferable and soft skills are critical for success…businesses have the responsibility to upskill employees…’

• Skill mismatches in labour markets requires a multi-stakeholder approach – ‘…employers need to communicate to education providers the skills they need…business/educationpartnerships need investment…Governments will need to collaborate with businesses in the design of skill building…NGOs & Unions need to be a voice for civil society…’

Forum participants believe that decent work for all will be challenging to achieve if we do not address pressing social issues such as poverty, inequality, weak governance, youth unemployment, and human rights

Systemic barriers are currently inhibiting decent work, especially for the most marginalized. Access to education, providing opportunities for people of low socioeconomic status, reducing

inequality of opportunities, and providing strong social protection systems are seen as essential to achieving Goal 8. Greater efforts are needed to provide youth, particularly those in emerging

economies, with the education and skills training they need to thrive in the workplace

‘Future of Work: Decent Work and Skills’ Sustainable Development Goals Leadership Series

July 2019

https://www.centreforpublicimpact.org/swedens-ministry-for-the-future-how-governments-should-think-strategically-and-act-horizontally/https://www.universityaffairs.ca/news/news-article/future-skills-centre-looks-at-scaling-up-best-practices-for-canadas-workforce/.Ohttps://www.politico.com/agenda/story/2016/12/department-of-future-trump-000258

054_Greater Dandenong Regional Employment Taskforce_2019.07.31_Redacted.pdf054_City of Greater Dandenong_2019.07.31.pdf054A_City of Greater Dandenong_2019.07.31.pdf‘An inquiry into the social and economic benefits of seeking to place disadvantaged jobseekers into sustainable employment’‘An inquiry into the social and economic benefits of seeking to place disadvantaged jobseekers into sustainable employment’‘An inquiry into the social and economic benefits of seeking to place disadvantaged jobseekers into sustainable employment’‘An inquiry into the social and economic benefits of seeking to place disadvantaged jobseekers into sustainable employment’‘An inquiry into the social and economic benefits of seeking to place disadvantaged jobseekers into sustainable employment’‘An inquiry into the social and economic benefits of seeking to place disadvantaged jobseekers into sustainable employment’

054_Greater Dandenong Regional Employment Taskforce_Attachment 1_2019.07.31_Redacted.pdf

Documents

From: To: jobseekersinquiry Cc: Subject: Date: …...2019/07/31 · and technical skills. Amongst the most disadvantaged ‘young’ job seekers it needs to be better quantified and