Everybody wants to work
The other morning I heard Noel Pearson on the radio, talking about a new plan to increase Indigenous participation in the mainstream workforce. It’s an initiative by Andrew Forrest, who has announced a plan to create 50,000 Indigenous jobs.
I know that many will see this as a golden opportunity, and in many ways it is. But as I listened to Noel Pearson talk, he spoke consistently of “entry-level” jobs, ones which didn’t need a high level of literacy and numeracy. In fact, Pearson raised literacy and numeracy more than once as a reason that Indigenous people fail to secure jobs. No doubt, it is a major impediment.
And clearly, it is better across a range of indicators (health, happiness, economic prosperity, etc etc etc) to have a job than to be long-term unemployed.
But let’s say that you’re working for the first time in your life. And your “entry level” job is a full time one. And exhausting. And given that you’ve just had a whole bunch of training from the Federal government, your new workplace is reluctant to give you training leave to attend school or TAFE courses.
In what way is this new scheme NOT a means of creating a guaranteed under-class of Indigenous workers? A group of people who will be forever condemned to work low-level, low-skill jobs because their literacy and numeracy shows only enough improvement to meet the needs of their current job? Make no mistake, this isn't a problem peculiar to Indigenous people: I know truck drivers and process workers who have never developed these skills either: mainly because their job didn't require it of them.
I think industry should take responsibility for employing Indigenous people, because there is no doubt that structural disadvantage extends well and truly into the workforce. But I think industry should take responsibility for providing a pathway, not just a job.
This isn’t only a problem in the Indigenous community, although it can very well be argued that it is a major problem there. It’s also a problem for refugees and Non-English speaking migrants. I know of an employer that almost seems to rely on the fact that their workforce cannot communicate with one another. But if you work in a low-skill manual labour job where not only do very few people speak English but almost no one speaks your language, how are you supposed to develop the language skills to extend yourself beyond that work “opportunity”? More to the point, how are you supposed to “integrate” with society as we seem hell-bent on insisting that people do?
Migrant workers with limited English skills and disadvantaged workers with poor literacy and numeracy will always struggle to move laterally and up through the workforce because without language skills, the jobs which would further develop language skills (as well as a range of other job and life skills) such as hospitality, telemarketing, administration and secretarial jobs, are already out of reach.
I know, I know, some one reading this is sitting there thinking
"Gigglewick is on crack...telemarketing isn't a skilled job. And it kinda sucks"
Well sure, it's not astro-physics, but it does develop all kinds of skills that come in very handy in other work. And if you think that telemarketing or waitressing is no better than other kinds of jobs, perhaps you'd like to go work in a meat processing plant and tell me how good the career pathways are there.
But back to industry and its expectations of government. Industry is far too reliant on government spending when it comes to skilling its workforce. While most businesses are happy to take government money in the form of R and D grants, or infrastructure development, or export grants, they’re more than happy to slag off government for failing to provide heavily or fully subsidised training places for their workers, particularly around “non-job” skills such as reading and writing English. But if industry is not prepared to invest in its workforce, then maybe it will have to live with the fact that it doesn’t have one.
But we need to be more insistent too. Let's argue more strenuously for increased investment in skills, and better pathways for workers. For those of us with staff, let's think about the professional development opportunities we offer them, both in training and in extension of their skills.
And let's agree with Noel Pearson and Andrew Forrest: that discrimination on the basis of race is never, ever, okay.
I know that many will see this as a golden opportunity, and in many ways it is. But as I listened to Noel Pearson talk, he spoke consistently of “entry-level” jobs, ones which didn’t need a high level of literacy and numeracy. In fact, Pearson raised literacy and numeracy more than once as a reason that Indigenous people fail to secure jobs. No doubt, it is a major impediment.
And clearly, it is better across a range of indicators (health, happiness, economic prosperity, etc etc etc) to have a job than to be long-term unemployed.
But let’s say that you’re working for the first time in your life. And your “entry level” job is a full time one. And exhausting. And given that you’ve just had a whole bunch of training from the Federal government, your new workplace is reluctant to give you training leave to attend school or TAFE courses.
In what way is this new scheme NOT a means of creating a guaranteed under-class of Indigenous workers? A group of people who will be forever condemned to work low-level, low-skill jobs because their literacy and numeracy shows only enough improvement to meet the needs of their current job? Make no mistake, this isn't a problem peculiar to Indigenous people: I know truck drivers and process workers who have never developed these skills either: mainly because their job didn't require it of them.
I think industry should take responsibility for employing Indigenous people, because there is no doubt that structural disadvantage extends well and truly into the workforce. But I think industry should take responsibility for providing a pathway, not just a job.
This isn’t only a problem in the Indigenous community, although it can very well be argued that it is a major problem there. It’s also a problem for refugees and Non-English speaking migrants. I know of an employer that almost seems to rely on the fact that their workforce cannot communicate with one another. But if you work in a low-skill manual labour job where not only do very few people speak English but almost no one speaks your language, how are you supposed to develop the language skills to extend yourself beyond that work “opportunity”? More to the point, how are you supposed to “integrate” with society as we seem hell-bent on insisting that people do?
Migrant workers with limited English skills and disadvantaged workers with poor literacy and numeracy will always struggle to move laterally and up through the workforce because without language skills, the jobs which would further develop language skills (as well as a range of other job and life skills) such as hospitality, telemarketing, administration and secretarial jobs, are already out of reach.
I know, I know, some one reading this is sitting there thinking
"Gigglewick is on crack...telemarketing isn't a skilled job. And it kinda sucks"
Well sure, it's not astro-physics, but it does develop all kinds of skills that come in very handy in other work. And if you think that telemarketing or waitressing is no better than other kinds of jobs, perhaps you'd like to go work in a meat processing plant and tell me how good the career pathways are there.
But back to industry and its expectations of government. Industry is far too reliant on government spending when it comes to skilling its workforce. While most businesses are happy to take government money in the form of R and D grants, or infrastructure development, or export grants, they’re more than happy to slag off government for failing to provide heavily or fully subsidised training places for their workers, particularly around “non-job” skills such as reading and writing English. But if industry is not prepared to invest in its workforce, then maybe it will have to live with the fact that it doesn’t have one.
But we need to be more insistent too. Let's argue more strenuously for increased investment in skills, and better pathways for workers. For those of us with staff, let's think about the professional development opportunities we offer them, both in training and in extension of their skills.
And let's agree with Noel Pearson and Andrew Forrest: that discrimination on the basis of race is never, ever, okay.
posted by gigglewick at
4:42 pm
4 Comments:
This may sound like I am taking the piss, but I'm not. I'm agreeing with you. I worked in a customer service call centre getting roundly abused for many other people's mistakes for a few years at uni. I worked in a bar frequented by some seriously scary folks. I shovelled duck shit for several months. Those jobs have made me a better doctor. I interacted with people well outside any social circles I knew existed and I learnt a lot about conflict resolution in the face of irrational anger (over things such as a 1 day late pair of earrings ferchrissake!)
Well written Giggles, and same to you, groverjones.
I worked for DEET during the Keating years in the ATSI education and training unit and it used to make me despair at the lack of pathway in programs that built a recreation shed in a remote community and then ended.
And yes, I did telemarketing, cucumber polishing, babysitting, nannying, waitressing.... Somehow there needs to be a focus on work and life skills right from the first day of school. Budgeting, hygiene, customer service, self respect AND of course literacy and numeracy.
The saddest thing I realised, however, was that I didn't - and still don't - have any solutions. How do we get the kids to regularly attend school? Big business to create pathways? Communities (esp remote ones) to see any future activities (let alone jobs or 'careers') where they are.... I have no idea.....
Great post Gigglewick.
Yes-- I used to do teh "market research", as I mentioned on another thread, when I was a poor young 'un. It introduced me to The Computer, which in those days was a dumb terminal connected to a mainframe - but that was what got me going into "real" work. (And eventually, IT. LOL. The girl least likely...)
awesome post GW.
Me = Average White Male
Mid thirties, 2 kids, recently separated and have a nice cushy corporate job. I live in a predominatley white middle class suburb of Sydney where I spent the majority of my childhood.
I did very poorly in my HSC, got a job in a guitar store while at school which grew into a full time role and I ended up running a store by the time I was 20. In my twenties I was a builder's labourer, warehouse storeman, guitar teacher, professional musician, IT helpdesk guy, IT Manager, project manager etc etc etc.
I did not have a pathway. Well, that is not completely true. I believe I did have a pathway as a result of to whom I was born, where and when.
I am a thirty something average white middle class male.
Because of this fluke of nature and sociocultural development the people I have worked for and with have been willing to provide me with opportunities which I have grabbed onto with both hands, and not let go of.
I would like the same to be available to the indigenous people of Australia. I would like to see every indigenous child achieve at least school leaving certificate level education. Be able to apply for a parttime job, apprenticeshipe, cadetship, traineeship, TAFE Diploma course or University degree just like I can.
I want to see education which is relevant to the people's history, their stories, their culture. Dovetail in "western" or "whiteman" aspects into the curriculum so they too have a choice. Let them learn their stories, their history, the good, the bad, the ugly, the attrocities and the customs of their great great grandfathers.
Why do indigenous people have a life expectancy 17 years less than mine? I have not a right to this because of to whom, where and when I was born. He breathe the same air, we live under the same sky.
the difference?
I am a thirty something average white male.
The challenge is not only providing the resources for the indigenous people of australia, which to be honest only needs money and a plan. It is changing the perceptions of the broader community that these guys can do the job whether it is storeman, guitar teacher, doctor or CEO. The other half of the equation is being able to nurture, teach, coach and bully out the demons of 200 years a effective genocide. The guys have want to live this way. The have to want to live in our society. They have to want to work for a whiteman. They have to want to be part of their culture. We, as a nation must accept that these people may not want to play with us.
I am a 34 year old average white middle class male with a choice and a heritage which supports my pathway.
The indigenous people of Australia do not.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home