THE NSW Government has turned its back on mature-aged workers in NSW, claiming that employment issues along with immigration issues were the responsibility of the Federal Government. It made the claims in axing the long running and highly successful Mature Aged Workers Program.
THE NSW Government has turned its back on mature-aged workers in NSW, claiming that employment issues along with immigration issues were the responsibility of the Federal Government. It made the claims in axing the long running and highly successful Mature Aged Workers Program.
The program, which supports jobseekers 40 years of and age and over, in what is a tight labour market, was canned in the recent NSW mini budget. Its doors will close to Australia’s older work seekers as of 30 June.
This program is highly regarded in both employment and welfare sectors and has served the community well in the 14 years since it was established. Under the auspices of the Department of Education & Training, and costing the taxpayer only $3.1 million per year, there are 65 separate projects around the State. These projects provide both practical and emotional support to about 12,000 mature age people annually who are seeking employment.
The Minister for Education & Training Dr Andrew Refshauge under whose portfolio the program is administered has said that employment programs are the responsibility of the Commonwealth. A spokesperson for Dr Refshauge’s office told Human Resources that the position had not changed and that the NSW Government viewed the issue as a Federal responsibility.
Federal Workplace Relations Minister Kevin Andrews told Human Resources magazine exclusively that “I think this is the domain of all governments. The ageing of the population is greatest demographic change in our history since the baby boomer generation at the end of the second world war. It’s going to affect every aspect of economic, social life in Australia, and it’s something which every sector of government should be looking at, right across the board.”
He said the issue was largely cultural, both on the part of workers and business. “I think there’s been a sense in businesses going through the economic transitions of the last decade or two, that where they’ve had to downsize they’ve looked to older workers as being the first in line in that process,” he said.
“There’s also a culture in Australia that the ideal notional age to retire at is closer to 55 rather than 65, and therefore when some people get into their 50s they’re thinking of retiring rather than looking at how they re-skill and update themselves to continue for longer. So it’s a combination of things, but overall it’s a cultural issue we have to overcome.”
Shadow Minister for Workplace Relations Craig Emerson also said it was an issue for all governments, but acknowledged that Federal Governments do have a responsibility for mature age unemployment through the Federal Job Network.
“I don’t think the Carr Government is saying anything highly remarkable that there is a responsibility upon Federal Governments to address the problem of mature age unemployment,” he said.
Michael Whitehead, Coordinator for the Ryde Mature Workers Program, employed and partly funded by Christian Community Aid Service at Eastwood, is one of the 60 project officers around the state who will lose their jobs as a result of the cutback.
“What I’m concerned with is the loss of opportunity for mature-aged workers. The history is that once [mature workers] become unemployed, they stay unemployed longer. The longer you are unemployed, the more detrimental effects you suffer in terms of depression, self-esteem and motivation. This is where the program is really important. We can give them hope, elevate their self-esteem and give them practical ways of obtaining employment,” he said.
“It is unfortunate that the program has been used as a political football between the State and Federal Governments and that the State Government has lost sight of what the program is all about,” he added.
“You can’t just after 14 years say that the program is a Federal area.”
Each centre could handle as much as 200 clients at anyone time. The service had a strike rate of around 60 per cent, successfully placing this percentage of people back into the workforce.
Julia Perry, who authored a paper Too Young To Go in 2002 for the NSW Committee for Ageing, described the decision to axe the program as “most regrettable”.
“In the richest State in the country you would think that we would be able to do something like that. We can afford fireworks every five minutes it seems,” she said.
In her paper it was found that the Commonwealth Government has never, in a quarter of century since it started labour market programs, been able to come up with any effective schemes for mature-aged workers.
“[The NSW government] knows that the Federal System is completely ineffectual for this group. There’s been a switch around for providing labour market assistance for the unemployed to encouraging people to work by bullying really. They call it active labour market support rather than passive welfare programs. But the active just means you get a complicated set of massive financial penalties for not looking for a job every fortnight – you don’t get any help.
“It’s a little bit ironic with everybody saying how important it is for everybody to be working longer now that it’s been abolished.
“I think we all have a responsibility to turn around the drop out from the mature-age workforce. It’s good for the needs of employers to have the potential for these people to be employed. So it’s good for industry in the State and important for the population in the State.”
