upwords31

35 Hour Week or Share Argentina's Destiny?

By Monika Baker

The recent pictures and news from Argentina painted a grim picture: unemployed people rioting and looting, workers on strike, people queuing to get to their savings which they are not allowed to remove from their bank accounts and four presidents within two weeks. Now the fear is growing that the military will take over government as happened not too long ago in Argentina. During that time of horror 30,000 people disappeared - whole families, the children being given to the military families to raise - and many brutally murdered.
In Argentina we see an example of what could have and may happen when our economy begins to falter. Another example is the US. With growing casualisation of the workforce and deteriorating working conditions, people work three jobs over 16 hours six days a week and often on Sundays to simply rent a flat. Many can’t even afford that and live in their cars and caravan parks. Ten years ago I visited the US, California, New York and Florida. I saw that homelessness was so widespread that all city parks featured a corner for the belongings and cardboard boxes of the resident homeless.
Recently I received an e-mail from the Kensington Welfare Rights Unit in Philadelphia:
[Jan 02,02] 34 homeless people, including men, women and children, in desperate need of affordable housing came to KWRU today. One is dying of Hepatitis C, yet the city refuses to provide emergency transitional housing. KWRU is beginning to experience the serious impact of the 5 year lifetime cutoff of welfare. Help is desperately needed, especially with vehicles and transportation.

These simple words describe only the tip of the iceberg. We can see where welfare reform in the US has led: The five year limit of social security benefits will further increase the already highest prison population per capita in the developed world, all of them engaged in production of goods for a pittance and working in chains. At least as many are employed in the prison industry to guard these unfortunate new kind of slaves, who are also not able to vote. Cutting off welfare to the poor increases debts, and leads to more prison sentences. The US creates a new kind of slavery: economic slavery of its own citizens, where the state sells its prison population to producers and businesses.
The developments in US are very dangerous for Australia. The current Mutual Obligation Initiave with its financially punitive breaching system forces the unemployed to take menial jobs for a pittance pay.
The Salvation Army reported in August 2001 that of all the clients approaching them for assistance in a particular week in SA, Victoria and NT, 25% had been breached. Of those breached 58% were on their first breach, 25% on their second and 17% on their third breach. There were 1417 people in need of assistance of which 357 had been breached totalling a loss of income of $ 388,720. This is from the poorest who cannot afford to get a loan or mortgage their houses, because they have none.

So besides going to the Salvation Army what do those do, who are unable to access social security benefits? The report found that most of them go without food and medication first. Then they cannot pay their utility bills and 14% of those breached indicated they had lost their accommodation and were homeless.
A disturbing one in nine people or 10% of those breached admitted that they had resorted to criminal activities in order to keep going.
“The Salvation Army believes that in a wealthy country such as Australia in the 21st century it is morally unacceptable that people should be placed in a position where they have no income support to pay for basic necessities and shelter. How are they to be expected to meet these costs, let alone maintain job seeking activities, when all they can access is limited emergency relief?”
Meanwhile other countries are more progressive and inventive, such as France. With the introduction of the 35 hour week and restricted overtime, while maintaining pay at the same level, has led to an economic boost and significantly more jobs. It may have caused some resitance at the beginning but the majority of the French employees enjoy working shorter working hours and have invested in recreationals pursuits. And previously unemployed people enjoy their new income and spent it too.

International Human Rights Day: do we count?

The Human Rights Day Picnic in Elder Park on December 9 was a success. Many organisations came and offered their causes and wares.
The outrageous treatment of refugees, the continued abuse of human rights against the indigenous community, the indiscriminate warfare against the Afghan population and the severe human rights abuses against the Tibetan, Chinese and many other peoples were raised by many speakers and community groups.
Whenever we spoke about the human rights abuses against people in Australia, by the Australian government, against Australians, we were told: “But other people don’t even have social security, they are far worse off.!”
While this is so and certainly most members of the Un(der)employed People’s Movement against Poverty Inc. are also engaged in actively pursuing the human rights of others, we will lose what previous generations have fought for so hard and for what they at times have paid with their lives if we do not pay attention to our internal affairs.
The International Covenant on Human Rights is based on their achievements. The document we hold so high is built on the lives of those who fought for our rights. Are we now in the middle of a globalisation of Human Rights, just as industrial rights seem to be in the process of being globalised? We are currently adjusting our industrial relations system to Third World conditions.

While certainly most advocacy agencies have the best interests of all people in mind, here in Australia the rights of those worse off in other countries seem to be more important.
To avoid misunderstanding: this is not an argument about one kind of advocacy versus the other. This is an argument for inclusiveness and mutual support. We also need to guard the high standard of human rights already achieved in the Covenant. It is currently being severely undermined on many home fronts.
We are appalled by the living conditions of our indigenous people, by the abuse of human rights against the refugees, boat people and recently against people of Muslim faith. We are also outraged by the gagging of free speech, as for example the cases against Phillip Adams and Anthony Mundine. And we are appalled by the propaganda machine of the current government, which spends taxpayers’ money on advertising their cruelty in order to win an election.
We support anyone working for social justice, the many community organisations, the union movement and the politicians and parties. Every cause fighting injustice needs support. And we need it too.
While many church-based welfare organisations have spoken up against breaching, while ACOSS has pointed at the unfairness of breaching, no one seems to view it as an abuse of human rights.
For unions an unemployed worker is not a worker anymore. They think unemployment is not their issue. If unions could provide opportunities for volunteers, to do research, to recruit, to go out and talk and train others, maybe membership would rise and they could actually employ some of their former, now unemployed members?

Unless we all pull together and form a community movement, union members, political party members, indigenous community members, grass roots activists, we will not stop the deterioration of our human rights.
We call on all to join together and leave the cheap competition for more resources than other causes behind. That is what the government wants to achieve: a divided community fighting each for their little bit of resources against one another. The Liverpool dockers and community members have shown us in 1997 that the community can come together and that the traitors are often those in power positions. Think about what kind of society you would want to live in and then TAKE ACTION

Reclaim your organisations from the corrupt leadership, demand from the politicians that they represent everyone not just their rich friends and relatives and ...
insist on your human rights!

SA State Election Issue No 1: Jobs

By the time this edition of UpWords comes out the State Election will be only a few days away. Seizing on his popularity Premier Kerrin decided to call a ‘quick one’. But do the Lliberals deserve to regain government? We have looked at some of their promises when they entered their second term in SA.
The South Australian economy has failed in its attempt to create more employment. Their idea of economic policy has been to provide large economic welfare payments to a few big companies which were not allocated on any consistent strategic basis, and their failed privatisations of taxpayers owned assets.
Labor accuses the Liberal Government of operating a “fragmented, disjointed and uncoordinated economic development bureaucracy with inadequate mechanisms of accountability for actions and outcomes.”
Further Labor believes that an innovative manufacturing industry holds the key to employment and outlined their directions in regards to bringing a vibrant industrial sector to life in SA.
There is not much new. Labor trots along Tony Blair’s Third Way and Social Inclusion Policies. While the focus on training and investment into research is promising for some unemployed people, it does not spell out any programs specifically aimed at getting long term unemployed mature aged and/or young people into jobs.
The Labor party says it “is determined to give everyone decent opportunities, regardless of where they live, their income, or their circumstances and background. We are determined to work hard at preventing social exclusion before it harms a person’s or a community’s chances. Where they have been socially excluded, we will work to repair the damage.” However, the promised pilot programmes have not been announced, so far policies have outlined what Labor will do for the industry. Whether such measures can achieve more jobs, and when, remains to be seen.
The Liberals opened their campaign with the promise from Premier Kerin that all enterprises planning to tender for government contracts had to show that they were employing people who were either long term unemployed, people with a disability or from other disadvantaged backgrounds and that they offered apprentice- and traineeships.
This is a plan which was first implemented by a Labor Government in SA in 1984/5. It has existed since that time, with some interruptions and has just been highlighted again under the pretence of a new promise for jobs.
Another promise fell flat when the new deal with Telstra was announced which supposedly was creating 360 full time jobs. Well, 180 of these jobs had already been filleded and Telstra had previously rationalised its workforce by some thousands of workers.
The current Liberal government seems to believe it can con the voters. It is astonishing to read: “... as a significant employer in its own right, the government accepts the responsibility to show leadership by maximising its own employment,...” Well there is enough evidence to suggest that the next part of the sentence carried more weight than the maximisation of employment opportunities: “...subject to the over-riding constraint of good financial management and delivering public sector goods and services in the most efficient and cost-effective manner.” How many public sector jobs were cut since the Liverals came into power? Thousands... and most of the government owned services were privatised.
“Since the Liberal Government came into office, state debt has been reduced by $3 billion less than assets sold,” according to Mike Elliot, Leader of the Democrats. So the State has actually not gained anything, no increase in employment but a huge loss of income and while not reducing the debts.
While it is true that the LIberals have maintained a traineeship program for the public sector they have cut the number of places in the scheme by 50% from 1000 to 500 per year. The demand that the number of traineeships be increased has been made loud and clear over the last several years by many advocates, especially the Youth Affairs Council. But the Liberals are not ashamed to highlight their achievements in their election materials.
The best way to demonstrate the Liberals failure to keep their promises and their failure to come up with schemes that would enhance employment opportunities for all, are the statistics.
The Democrats feature a report on their SA web site titled the “State of the SA Economy”.
Their first graph shows the unemployment rate over the last ten years. While the unemployment rate remained steady on 9.3% in the first year of their term in 1996 it rose to over 10% in August 1998 and from then on fell steadily to its lowest level of 7.6%. The recent economic downturn lifted the unemployment rate to 7.9%. However, the participation rate also gives some indication about the labor market as many unemployed people have given up looking for work.
Morgan Research (finding 3326) found that unemployment in South Australia for July 2000 was 12.3%, compared with an ABS figure of 8.1%. “The reason why the ABS estimate and Roy Morgan estimate differ is obviously due to a large number of people not actively seeking work because they have given up, and an equally large number of people who are involved in government schemes such as ‘work for the dole’ or other welfare schemes.” Gary Morgan, Morgan Research
It would be interesting to find out what they are doing, it does not look as if they have all become self employed, the number of new businesses has not risen significantly. The participation rate was highest, around 61.7%, when the Liberals came into power, dropped significantly at the height of the first wave of breaching (December 97/June 98), rose slightly towards the Olympic Games, and has been falling ever since.
As Bob McMullen, Shadow Treasurer said in his press release on 17 January 2002:
Today’s ABS Labour Force data show a significant loss of 16,500 full-time jobs, more than wiping out any tentative gains of the last few months. In fact, over the last year, 60,000 full-time jobs have been lost and job vacancies have declined 23% - a troubling social trend which the Government is ignoring.
It is also disturbing to note that the ABS estimates trend employment growth at precisely 0.0%. This suggests that the recovery in the labour market has stalled."
The participation rate also continued its slide, as another 9,400 job seekers gave up the search for full-time work in December in a flatlining market.
It is a sad state of affairs when a Government relies on people losing hope of ever finding a job, and giving up the search for work, to merely hold the unemployment rate constant.
Another scourge is casualisation. 30% of all jobs were casual positions in December 2000 in South Australia, while the rest of the nation averaged 26%.
The Liberals clearly could not keep their promises. Any headway that was made was due to the general recovery, not to any specific measures taken or due to innovative programs.
Once again it is hard to decide for whom to vote. The two major parties have not yet shown any innovation although the Labor Party is trying to remodel the whole of economic growth, employment, training and research.
The two minor parties, Democrats and Greens have promising platforms and ideas. They ought to be in government. But would voting for their candidates just hand government back to the Liberals, who would cause worse impoverishment for our communities?

UPM against Poverty Inc. asks all politicians and candidates to consider the situation of long term unemployed young and mature people.
1) Support the introduction of the 35 hour week and restriction of overtime which according to recent research from France boosts the economy and creates new employment!
2) It is time to expand and fund programs which create new employment opportunities such as ecotourism, cottage industries in food and craft production, tourism developments, alternative energy projects and niche markets;
Support the foundation of group enterprises (co-ops, associations) by interest free loans, mentoring, business incubators, training, and some core funding. Some elements are already in place and just need to be linked (New Enterprise Initiative Scheme NEIS and Self-Employment Development Scheme SEDS) and some elements need to be developed or extended;
3) Provide training funds and accreditation of competencies to volunteers in community organisations;
4) Expand programs to assist people with a disability into the workforce, including concessions for access cabs, creating accessable public transport and providing access for all people to information, public places and housing;
5) Build more public housing to reduce unemployment and homelessness;
6) Protest against the high costs put upon the States resulting from the Commonwealth government’s practice of leaving unemployed people without any income!
That will win you votes!

My Experience with the Job Network
By David Farrant

My dealing with Centrelink has been fair and equitable, my getting unemployment benefits was not a problem. I was given a Job Search Diary when I first registered for unemployment benefit. Most of the entries I just made up (it was obvious that I fabricated the entries), but Centrelink accepted these and did not give me another diary. Approximately six months later Centrelink contacted me for a group interview to discuss job search training. Most of the other people there were employed part-time or doing some study. I volunteered for some training.
Five or six months later I got a letter telling me to make an appearance at a Job Network provider (Workskil) ‘at a certain time or be disciplined’. The person I saw at the job network was the usual robot type character: “Oh, you’re not registered with us so fill in this form and we expect to see you next Monday!” I told her that Monday was not convenient, as I had a meeting that week, so he begrudgingly changed the training for the week after.
I was early for the job search training, some people got there a bit late and said that they couldn’t find anywhere to park their cars. The tutor told them that being a few minutes late at work would upset the employer. The tutor also told us that we should come in wearing a shirt and tie, ready to go for an interview. I told them that it doesn’t work like that, that Centrelink sent us for job search training and that is what they expect, not cold canvassing, so the tutor quickly changed the subject.
Some of the participants in the course had no computer skills so Workskil employed someone to write these people’s CVs or letters. She was the only one who knew the word processing software for the computer she was working on, it was different from the general use computers, but she kept saving files in a format only her computer could read. No one could access their CV’s when she was not present.
There were a few other really ridiculous factors included in the training. For example, the general use computers had no key word protection with internet access, so one person was looking up things on terror and bomb making. Every time someone put a floppy disk into a computer they you got a virus on their disk, I don’t know if it was the same virus or they were just to lazy to scan for viruses and clean all the viruses from their computers.
So we learned how to clean a virus from our systems at home. For some people that was quite costly. There was also a public speaking component in the course and some people spoke for five seconds on the benefits and history of prostitution!
The building had stairs and a lift that was slow (sometimes it took about 10 minutes to get to the floor we wanted to go), but we were not allowed to use the stairs, because we weren’t employed there. Even doing a course did not allow you to take the stairs. Consequently we had to be there ten minutes before the time and count on a ten minute delay when trying to catch a bus after the course. This was a bit of a problem in the breaks as it took twenty minutes out of a thirty minute lunch break.
Most of my dealings with a Job Network Provider have been a joke, to say the least. The first agency I was with, Drake, was not interested in the work or confused about it, as the new Job Network system had just been introduced. I also registered with Employment Plus, who did not help me at all.
My experience with Intensive Assistance has been mixed. The first Job Network Provider to provide me with this kind of assistance was Status Employment. I actually made a request for Employment Plus to provide me with that kind of assistance, but Centrelink gave my details to another agency, without my know-ledge.
Status Employment have information sessions before you join the agency, people needing Intensive Assistance have no choice, but to register or be breached. The case worker read my CV and told me it was very well written, but there is not much they can do for me (in other words it will be difficult to find you employment so go home and vegetate).
At the time I was doing a course myself, the case worker told me off for doing this. After the case worker found out the course was about operating a photographic minilab (I did this course because I was only interested in the photographic aspect of the course) and that it had a retail component, she tried to get me into a retail course. I told her that I would think about doing the course. I was not really interested in a career in this industry. Part of the course was some work experience in a retail minilab and retail did not really interest me, a few weeks later I did some work experience/observation in a camera shop in the city and decided that the industry was not for me. I told my case worker this and even showed her evidence that I was not suitable, in the form of a career counselling report, but she kept telling me that I should do this retail course as it would assist me to find employment. Later she let slip that they will only actively assist me if I do one of their courses, which were quite limited in their breadth of careers. After I had ignored her for a about three months, she phoned to make an appointment to update my agreement.
When I went in to update the agreement, she suggested that I become a lab assistant. She told me that I did not need any skills in that area. This I thought strange so I phoned a employment agency which deals with scientific staff and they said, that to be a lab assistant one would need a TAFE course or have other suitable qualifications. When I told my case worker this, she quickly changed the subject back to a retail course. This time I had registered at TAFE to do a Printing course. It was my only avenue back into the industry, my knowledge in the area was a bit out of date. I was waiting for an interview to be accepted into this course, while she sent me to a job selling cameras. I told the employer that I wanted to do this course so I did not get the job.
When TAFE sent me a letter telling me that I was unsuccessful in my pursuit, I e-mailed my case worker that day. I did not hear from her for weeks. I phoned her to check whether she got the e-mail, she got it the day I sent it. So I invited myself to her office for a chat about what/where to go next. When I got there she told me that they had just got a job on the system that would suit me. When she read the details of the job out, it was for a tradeperson bookbinder or someone with a lot of experience in that line. I told her that she couldn’t send me for that job as I am not a bookbinder, I am a printer and I didn’t know much about bookbinding. She got rather annoyed and started shouting at me, so I shouted back, it was only when she told a colleague of my behaviour that she backed off. I believe, her colleague told her that if she would breach me for refusing to apply for the job, I would get this decision overturned and she would look rather silly or something to the effect. After this she told me that in a month I would need to renew my contract or they would exit me. This was the last time I saw her. (I had always thought she was employed for her looks and her ability to act dumb).
So I was back on job search or flex 2 once again and nobody bothered me. About 8 months later I got a letter from Centrelink telling me that I was eligible for another round of Intensive Assistance and to pick a Job Network Provider. I phoned the number on the form and was a bit indecisive and said that there are a few providers on this form I would not want to go to. The Centrelink worker offered to give me a one week extension to check out the agencies. I told him that I wanted to go to ARA Jobs, as I knew they were part of the Australian Council for Refugees and had the highest success rate in finding employment for their job seekers.
I went to ARA Jobs to see my case worker and my first question was what his qualifications were for doing his job. I explained that I had come across a lot of people in the sector who didn’t know what they were doing (like my first case worker). He was a bit startled at first, but he replied that he had worked in the field in the UK and also for the old CES for years and yes, he agrees that there are quite a few people in the sector who should not be working for any Job Network providers, and that some providers should not be in the sector.
I told him that I was working at the Welfare Rights Centre for half a day a week, an organisation which appeals Centrelink’s decisions, and that I was going to do an Advocacy workshop at Disability Action, an organisation concerned with the rights of people with a disability.
So he offered to give me some petrol vouchers and buy me a text book. I could not believe my luck, so I asked for “The Law Handbook” which is handy to have and he ordered it for me. I also told him that I am doing a paralegal course in 2002, and he wished me good luck and offered his help if I needed anything. He asked me to come back when I have achieved any outcome to my pursuits.
Recently I returned a dole form two days late, when I told the person on the counter this, they said that they would accept the form even if I got somebody else to return it, as long as they were the same gender!
I believe knowing your rights within the Social Security system has its benefits and eases your progress. Some may be scared of you (I believe my first Intensive Assistance Caseworker was) if you know your rights, but many start to co-operate with you.

Insist on your rights and when you are in trouble in any way with Centrelink, call Welfare Rights Centre on 8211 4123 and/or write your story up and get it published in UpWords!

Back to the top of the page Home Up-Words Home Sitemap

35 Hour Week or Share Argentina's Destiny?

International Human Rights Day: do we count?

My Experience with the Job Network By David Farrant

My Experience with the Job Network
By David Farrant