tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24338064.post4438631606512613938..comments2024-02-11T19:28:27.997+11:00Comments on Personal Reflections: Why Australia's Fair Work Ombudsmen needs a reality checkJim Belshawhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10075614280789984767noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24338064.post-56929432239662835872013-02-12T22:00:33.457+11:002013-02-12T22:00:33.457+11:00kvd, this is an interesting case for i find that y...kvd, this is an interesting case for i find that you and marcellous are coming at this from such different perspectives to mine.<br /><br />That report strikes me as something of a dog's breakfast. <br /><br />One part of it looks at the relationship between unpaid work including internships and the Fair Work Act. If I interpret the analysis here correctly, it makes unpaid work as work illegal. The way that Act was presented tends to confirm my view that it has silly aspects.<br /><br />A second part of the argument seems to run this way. There have been problems overseas. We should prevent them emerging here. The evidence presented of the form and scale of the "problem" in this country is, as the report says, largely anecdotal.<br /><br />The analysis mixes together a whole variety of experiences and categories. It is useful as a list, but fails to really focus on the distinguishing features of each category.<br /><br />Of course we have to stop exploitation if it forms a pattern. Here I made a point based on the economics of work that there are only certain classes of work where unpaid work may yield a profit to the employer given that there are costs beyond wages. I had a particular focus on services since I know this area especially well. <br /><br />Now here I want to focus on a few key points marcellous made. Here I begin with a quaote: "But on my reading of the Fair Work report it (your daughter's internship) would be permitted in Australia, even if prima facie against the law as it presently stands: the test is really whether the employer is using such un-paid or under-paid labour as a substitute for paid labour in a substantially profit making venture. Commonplace examples are sandwich hands working for a week for free - but it is also becoming more prevalent in some white-collar areas."<br /><br />Now marcellous has articulated an important principle here that I am inclined to agree with. If the employer is substituting unpaid for paid labour, I am not sure that the profit making bit is relevant, then a problem may arise. However, if I interpret the report and subsequent responses correctly. the provisions of the Fair Work Act do not allow for discretion. The prima facie will be enforced even if the arrangement is of benefit to both sides.<br /><br />Now marcellous's second point is more problematic. To begin with, if Indian students need to do some unpaid work as part of their course, it would appear (I stand to be corrected) that that is actually okay under current legislation. <br /><br />In any case, it wasn't an issue. With exceptions, the costs involved are just too high. A far bigger problem with smaller operations is the cash economy.<br /><br />I am a little frustrated on this one. This is one case where i really do know the economics, but i simply cannot afford the time to do the detailed analysis required!<br /> <br /><br /> Jim Belshawhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10075614280789984767noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24338064.post-65619296952350068232013-02-12T16:16:12.520+11:002013-02-12T16:16:12.520+11:00Yes, I have to agree with Marcellous here. I follo...Yes, I have to agree with Marcellous here. I followed the links and came away with the impression that it was the 'serial abuse' as M terms it that is the concern. <br /><br />That is different in emphasis to some sort of general proscription of unpaid work experience - which I think any parent would support, but always with a careful 'eye on proceedings' as it were.<br /><br />kvdAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24338064.post-21456200186022479832013-02-12T12:33:51.439+11:002013-02-12T12:33:51.439+11:00Jim,
I didn't mean to say your reaction was t...Jim,<br /><br />I didn't mean to say your reaction was totally superficial.<br /><br />The nub of your irritation is this:<br /><br />"With possible exceptions, events management or certain not for profits come to mind, you can't build a sustainable business or even increase your profit margins through systematic use of unpaid labour. The real world doesn't work like that."<br /><br />That is the issue which is really up for investigation. The real work may not work like that at present but if the practice is allowed to continue unchecked, it may. I think there is a bit of it going on already in some areas such as, for example, events management.<br /><br />You also comment that work experience workers will walk when they feel they are being exploited. That may be true, but it doesn't solve the problem of serial exploitation. Suppose the workers walk once they realise they have been exploited. That stops them suffering further exploitation but leaves them unremunerated for the time they were "not" employed and the "non-" employer keeps the benefit of their labour and can just "not" employ another.<br /><br />We can have an argument about how many "non-" employers there are like that and whether in turn such practices will, through competition, drive more employers to the same course. I think the Fairwork exercise is more about education and prevention of any increase.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24338064.post-12436254428029561532013-02-11T20:40:05.857+11:002013-02-11T20:40:05.857+11:00Marcellous, I have only had time to quickly skim t...Marcellous, I have only had time to quickly skim the full report. I think that i stand by my position. You also raise other issues worthy of comment as part of the process of clarifying issues. But I am not going to manage this tonight!Jim Belshawhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10075614280789984767noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24338064.post-43117182671609627832013-02-11T12:38:11.493+11:002013-02-11T12:38:11.493+11:00Hi Marcellous. A very quick response. While I take...Hi Marcellous. A very quick response. While I take the force of your comment and have yet to read the full report, my reactions are based especially on the official executive summary plus interviews I heard with the FWO. I also focused on the professions. I will come back with a fuller comment tonight. <br />Jim Belshawhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10075614280789984767noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24338064.post-89109341606289114732013-02-11T11:31:44.928+11:002013-02-11T11:31:44.928+11:00Jim
I think you are over-reacting on the basis of...Jim<br /><br />I think you are over-reacting on the basis of a second-hand report.<br /><br />Any system of award wages has to be able to prevent deals where people work for free or less than the award. <br /><br />Your daughter's internship in Copenhagen was almost certainly governed by Danish labour law. But on my reading of the Fair Work report it would be permitted in Australia, even if prima facie against the law as it presently stands: the test is really whether the employer is using such un-paid or under-paid labour as a substitute for paid labour in a substantially profit making venture. Commonplace examples are sandwich hands working for a week for free - but it is also becoming more prevalent in some white-collar areas.<br /><br />Look at the problem from a different angle: how would your children have been able to have obtained jobs in the hospitality sector in their student days if potential employers had been able to staff their enterprises for free from Indian students on hospitality courses at TAFE who needed to get some work experience as a condition of their course which was in turn a condition of their visa?<br /><br />The law is a blunt instrument but that is because of the ingenuity people to go against its spirit. The sense I got from the Fair Work investigation is that they are trying to work out ways of being less blunt. <br /><br />The problem here is to guard against exploitation. <br /><br />Exploitation itself is a relative concept. For example, if Maccas could employ eleven year olds at $4 and hour to take orders at the drive-through counter, you can bet that there would be eleven year olds who would be happy to take the job. They wouldn't feel exploited! But they are exploited in the sense that otherwise Maccas would need to pay an older person a bit more.<br /><br />That's an easy example. More questionable is the enlistment of teams of interns by Fairfax to go through large amounts of government documents becoming available at the same time as they are letting a big proportion of their journalists go.<br /><br />I'm not saying that the question of how people get their start-up experience is an easy one, but I don't think Fair Work is saying that either.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com