My Blog

Author: Jim Stanford

  • Unacceptable Risks: Gig Models of Care and Support Work

    New research reveals the unacceptable risks of digital labour platforms and the expansion of gig work in low-paid feminised care and support workforces. Risks are to frontline care and support workers, people receiving care and support and to workforce sustainability.

    The report calls for comprehensive industrial reforms to address gig work as part of broader workforce strategies for the NDIS and aged care sectors.

    The research finds that care and support ‘gig’ workers, treated as independent contractors, are in highly insecure work without minimum standards and effective rights to collective bargaining.

    • Many essential frontline care and support workers earn below award-level pay.
    • Work and incomes are insecure: work is on-demand, working time is fragmented, pay can be unpredictable.
    • Workers must cover their own superannuation, leave and workers’ compensation.
    • Gig work in the feminised workforces poses a serious threat to better recognition and equal pay.
    • Better jobs and careers for frontline workers are vital to closing the gender pay gap.

    Four in every 5 of the 240,000 aged care and disability support workers are women.

    • Care and support workers on platforms are younger, less experienced and more likely to be migrant workers.
    • Platform workers lack access to support, training and progression opportunities.
    • Gig workers lack employment benefits and entitlements, including leave and superannuation.

    Flexibility of work is only possible with short hours work and comes at the expense of decent pay and working conditions. Workers cannot earn a living wage.

    • Risks to workers are also risks to vulnerable people with disability and the elderly.
    • Care and support platform workers are isolated and largely invisible, working in private homes without organisational supervision, support, guidance or training.
    • Workers bear risks and responsibilities for care and support quality and client safety, including for highly vulnerable people.
    • Care labour platforms compete unfairly with other NDIS and aged care providers.
    • Unfair competition poses a significant threat to the sustainability of Australia’s long-term care systems.

    Platforms compete by avoiding the costs and risks of business fluctuations, of employing workers and of accountability for care and support quality and safety. Costs and risks are devolved to low-paid and insecure frontline workers. Platforms profit from retaining public funding that is intended to employ and pay essential workers fairly and to provide them with supervision and support.

    The post Unacceptable Risks appeared first on The Australia Institute's Centre for Future Work.

  • Commonwealth Budget 2023-24: Significant Progress

    This briefing reviews the main features of the budget from the perspective of workers and labour markets. Some of its measures are very positive, such as fiscal support for higher wages for aged care workers, increased JobKeeper benefits, and enhanced Commonwealth Rent Assistance.

    Contrary to concerns that a big-spending budget would exacerbate inflation, this budget will have little impact on overall aggregate demand. In fact, it will pro-actively reduce inflation through its new $500 energy relief plan. Contrary to conservative economists who claim this budget will fuel inflation, in reality the forecasts confirm historically slow growth in public demand in both 2022-23 and 2023-24.

    Despite these positive measures, the budget also contains disappointing aspects. Most importantly, the Stage 3 tax cuts remain on schedule. And while they are only set to begin in 2024-25, they hang over these budget figures like a dark spectre.

    The budget papers also confirm the economy is far from buoyant. The next 18 months are expected to see economic growth well-below average. Households are reacting to three years of falling real wages, and eleven painful increases in interest rates, by severely constraining consumer spending. Slowing job creation and declining real wages are taking their toll on overall economic growth, highlighting again that the key to a strong economy is strong employment and wage growth.

    Please read our research team’s full review of this historic budget.

    The post Commonwealth Budget 2023-24 appeared first on The Australia Institute's Centre for Future Work.

  • RBA Review a Missed Opportunity

    The report represents the most important reconsideration of monetary policy in Australia since the advent of inflation targeting three decades ago. But the “new look” RBA after this review may even do more harm to the economy than in the past. This is because the independent review panel missed the opportunity to question the deeper myths and assumptions regarding the central bank’s infallibility and their ideological bias.

    In this report, Centre for Future Work Associate Dr Anis Chowdhury catalogues the assumptions and failures of conventional inflation targeting policy, and the misleading nature of so-called ‘independent’ central banks. He argues the review panel missed an historic opportunity to reconsider those assumptions, and help craft a more balanced and democratic macroeconomic policy framework.

    The post RBA Review a Missed Opportunity appeared first on The Australia Institute's Centre for Future Work.

  • Inclusive and Sustainable Employment for Disadvantaged Jobseekers (VIC)

    Employment policy and employment assistance for jobseekers focus on individuals’ skills and job readiness, and on job placement. Less attention is given to ensuring placements are into sustainable employment in inclusive workplaces. That is, placement into jobs that people can keep, that support wellbeing and provide opportunity for long-term employment pathways, and in workplaces where people feel safe and are able to participate. Recruiting and placing people experiencing labour market disadvantage into jobs may not lead to positive outcomes if people are not able to retain jobs and benefit from their employment.

    Employment can provide people with benefits that improve wellbeing in various ways, including through increasing income, providing routine and increasing social contact. However, where job quality, pay or working conditions are poor, employment can also have cumulative negative effects. Placing people experiencing disadvantage in jobs in which they are insecure, underemployed, or cannot establish daily routines; or placing them in workplaces in which they experience poor or discriminatory treatment and disempowerment, are not likely to produce sustainable employment outcomes or create social value.

    This report calls for a greater focus on workplace and job-related factors, including employer knowledge, employment practices, work organisation, job quality and employment arrangements, to addressing barriers to employment for disadvantaged jobseekers. Emphasis on employment placement alone is not likely to produce sustainable employment outcomes. Action is required to tackle barriers present in workplaces and in employment arrangements.

    This report was commissioned by Jobsbank, a Victorian-based not-for-profit organisation that works with business and other partners to support sustainable, inclusive employment and make social procurement work. In Victoria, the Government’s Social Procurement Framework aims to improve employment outcomes for people from groups experiencing labour market disadvantage through requiring suppliers and contractors tendering for high value government contracts to employ people from these groups. The Victorian Government’s Fair Jobs Code promotes fair labour standards, secure employment and job security, equity and diversity, and cooperative workplace relationships and workers’ representation. This report recommends that employers be encouraged to develop strategies to meet these standards through collaboration with unions and community groups as one obvious way to address workplace and employment factors that create barriers to sustainable and inclusive employment for disadvantaged jobseekers.

    The post Inclusive and Sustainable Employment for Jobseekers Experiencing Disadvantage appeared first on The Australia Institute's Centre for Future Work.

  • Minimum wages and inflation (2023)

    New research from the Centre for Future Work at the Australia Institute has revealed how rises in the minimum wage have almost no impact on inflation and given the collapse in the value of the minimum wage in real terms over the past 2 years, a 7% increase is a necessary recompense for Australia’s lowest paid workers.

    Each year the Fair Work Commission conducts the Annual Wage Review (AWR) which determines the national minimum and award wages. And each year it is met with a chorus of cries from business groups, conservative politicians and commentators that Australia’s economy will surely break should the minimum wage be raised too much.

    Over the past two years however, the minimum wage has risen by less than inflation, causing a significant decline in the real purchasing power of millions of workers covered by the Modern Award system. This marks the first time in a quarter-century that the minimum wage has had a deflationary impact on the economy (that is, increased by less than the inflation rate) over successive years.

    Despite this fall, once again, submissions from business groups to this year’s AWR have called for rises below inflation, and have cited concerns about a wage-price spiral as justification for advocating a further erosion of low-paid worker’s living standards.

    But research by Greg Jericho and Jim Stanford shows that minimum wage increases over the past 25 years have had little to no impact on inflation at all. It also demonstrates that a 1% increase in the minimum wage and all Modern Award wages – even if completely passed through into higher prices – would result in a virtually undetectable 0.06% increase in economy-wide prices. So small is this that a mere 0.2% fall in profits would be enough to cancel any impact on prices at all.

    The research reveals that the call from the Australian Council of Trade Unions for a 7% increase in the national minimum wage would make up a portion (but not all) of the real wage losses, workers have experienced in the past two years. Even if fully passed on in higher prices, with no reduction in current record-high business profits, a 7% minimum wage hike would at most translate into an increase of just 0.4% in economy-wide prices.

    Alternatively, that 0.4% rise could be offset by just a 1.4% reduction in total corporate profits.

    With inflation passing its peak, there is no cause for concern that a minimum wage rise of 7% (equal to the annual rate to the March quarter) would add fuel to the inflation fire.

    This reinforces recent research by the Centre for Future Work that profit margins are presently at record highs in Australia, because companies have increased prices since the pandemic far more than their own input costs. This gives companies ample cushion to absorb the cost of higher minimum wages, with no impact on prices at all.

    In sum, the impact of minimum wage increases on average prices is thus little more than a rounding error. But for the 20% of employees who earn either the national minimum wage or wages set under Modern Awards, a strong minimum wage increase will be vital. It will ensure that the lowest paid, who have already been most hurt by inflation, are not forced to suffer more due to an inflationary upsurge that was ultimately spurred by higher profits, not wages.

    The post Minimum wages and inflation appeared first on The Australia Institute's Centre for Future Work.

  • Profits and Inflation in Mining and Non-Mining Sectors

    A previous report from the Centre showed that 69% of excess inflation (above the Reserve Bank’s 2.5% target) since end-2019 arose from higher unit corporate profit margins, while only 18% was due to labour costs. The new research provides detail on the distribution of those excess profits across different sectors in the Australian economy.

    By far the biggest profits were recorded in the mining sector, where corporate operating profits surged 89% since the onset of the pandemic. Those profits resulted from sky-high prices for fossil fuel energy (including petroleum products, gas, and coal). Thanks to those price hikes, the mining sector now captures over half of all corporate profits in the entire Australian economy.

    Less spectacular but significant increases in corporate profits are visible in several other sectors of the economy, too – not just mining. Profits swelled rapidly in wholesale trade, manufacturing, transportation, and other strategic sectors.

    In these strategic industries, businesses could exploit supply chain disruptions, consumer desperation, and oligopolistic market power to increase prices well beyond production costs.

    In other sectors (including arts & recreation, hospitality, and telecommunications) profits have been flat or falling since the pandemic.

    Early signs in 2023 that inflation (and corporate profits) had peaked, and were returning to normal, have been thrown into question by a renewed threat of profit-price inflation: the OPEC+ cartel decided earlier this month to curtail oil production to boost world prices.

    Policy-makers need to acknowledge the role of record profits in driving recent inflation – and develop alternative policy responses (such as price caps in strategic markets, excess profit taxes, and targeted fiscal support for working and low-income households) to manage current inflation in a fairer and more effective way.

    The post Profits and Inflation in Mining and Non-Mining Sectors appeared first on The Australia Institute's Centre for Future Work.

  • The Fiscal, Economic, and Public Health Dangers of Water Privatisation (NSW)

    But beyond the obvious importance of good water systems to life, health, and well-being, the water system also constitutes a valuable economic asset in the overall portfolio of public enterprise (see box). Investments in high-quality water and sewage systems represent enormous sums of fixed capital. The financial and operational dimensions of water systems are significant to the fiscal and macroeconomic functioning of the whole state economy.

    In this context, suggestions that the Sydney Water system might be sold to private investors raise a wide range of significant concerns: regarding the efficiency and safety of their continued operation, access to healthy and affordable water services for state residents, and the economic implications for customers, workers, and state government itself. A new research report from the Centre for Future Work reviews some of those concerns, and considers the likely consequences of Sydney Water’s potential privatisation.

    Main findings of the report include:

    • Sydney Water represents an essential public asset, important for both economic as well as public health reasons
    • Sydney Water boasts total assets of almost $24 billion, public equity of $8 billion, annual revenues of $2.8 billion, and dividend and tax payments to the people of NSW that averaged $870 million per year since 2018
    • The state earns far more from dividend payments arising from its equity in Sydney Water, than it would pay in interest on an equivalent amount of public debt
    • Selling the utility would impose a significant fiscal cost on the state through lost dividend and tax revenues
    • Experience with privately-owned water systems in other countries suggests water charges would rise significantly under private ownership, largely because of higher interest costs, higher debt, and higher dividend payouts
    • Based on UK and US studies, Sydney Water customers could see their annual water bills grow under private ownership by 39% to 59% (or by an average of between $174 and $264 per customer per year).

    The report was commissioned by the NSW & ACT Branch of the Australian Services Union.

    The post The Fiscal, Economic, and Public Health Dangers of Water Privatisation appeared first on The Australia Institute's Centre for Future Work.

  • The Times They Aren’t A-Changin (enough) — gender & work

    This report examines the barriers to closing the gender gap by reviewing Australia’s position within the industrial countries of the OECD. The report also uses data from the ABS and the ATO to highlight gender disparities across all levels of income, ranges of occupation and ages, as well as disparities regarding who undertakes the greater share of unpaid work.

    One clear concern is gender segregation, where either men or women dominate an occupation or industry. Men have higher average salaries than women in 95% of all occupations, including those where women dominate the workforce. For example, women account for 99% of all midwives, and yet are paid on average 19% less.

    We identify 80 occupations in which men make up 80% or more of the workforce; these occupations have an average salary above $100,000. In contrast, no occupation where women make up that share of the workforce has such a high average salary. This highlights how segregation has reinforced massive differences in pay.

    The report recommends policies to promote greater access to childcare and parental leave for both parents, family-friendly work practices, and the lifting of wages for industries dominated by women – most urgently in the care sector.

    The post The Times They Aren’t A-Changin (enough) appeared first on The Australia Institute's Centre for Future Work.

  • Australian Inflation Reflects a Historic Redistribution from Workers to Bosses

    Meanwhile, business profits have expanded strongly through this inflationary episode. Companies haven’t just passed along higher input costs to their customers. Rather, they have taken advantage of the conjuncture of factors related to the pandemic (supply shortages and disruptions, consumer desperation and pent-up demand, and oligopolistic pricing power) to push up prices far higher than needed to cover their own costs.

    The result has been a process of ‘profit-price inflation’: higher profit margins are both a cause and consequence of rapid inflation. Centre for Future Work Director Jim Stanford discusses the distributional impacts of recent inflation in this new commentary for The Conversation: Underlying Australia’s inflation problem is a historic shift of income from workers to corporate profits

    The post Australian Inflation Reflects a Historic Redistribution from Workers to Bosses appeared first on The Australia Institute's Centre for Future Work.

  • Profit-Price Spiral: The Truth Behind Australia’s Inflation

    Workers in Australia have suffered considerable economic losses as a result of accelerating inflation since the onset of the COVID pandemic. Reaching a year-over-year rate of 7.8% by end-2022, inflation has rapidly eroded the real purchasing power of workers’ incomes; average wages are currently growing at less than half the pace of prices. Now, severe monetary tightening by the Reserve Bank of Australia (through higher interest rates) is imposing additional pain on millions of workers. Tens of billions of dollars of household disposable income are being diverted away from consumer spending, into extra interest payments made to banks and other lenders. Most ominously, signs of macroeconomic slowdown from higher interest rates portend job losses and even greater income losses in the month ahead.

    The pain experienced by workers through this inflationary episode contrasts sharply with an unprecedented upsurge in business profitability at the same time. Additional profits resulted from businesses increasing prices for the goods and services they sell, above and beyond incremental expenses for their own purchases of inputs and supplies. This dramatic expansion of business profits (taking gross corporate profits to almost 30% of national GDP, the highest in history) has been mostly unremarked on by the RBA and other macroeconomic policy-makers. They have focused instead on the supposed risk of a ‘wage-price’ spiral. However, new empirical evidence confirms the dominant role of business profits in driving higher prices in Australia – not wages. This suggests the focus of monetary policy on wage restraint is misplaced and unfair.

    Major findings:

    • As of the September quarter of 2022 (most recent data available), Australian businesses had increased prices by a total of $160 billion per year over and above their higher
      expenses for labour, taxes, and other inputs, and over and above new profits generated by growth in real economic output.
    • Without the inclusion of those excess profits in final prices for Australian-made goods and services, inflation since the pandemic would have been much slower than was experienced in practice: an annual average of 2.7% per year, barely half of the 5.2% annual average actually recorded since end-2019.
    • That pace of inflation would have fallen within the RBA’s target inflation band (equal to its 2.5% target plus-or-minus 0.5%). Even within the RBA’s own policy rule, therefore, current painful interest rate hikes would be unnecessary.
    • A second scenario considered below allows for modest nominal inflation in unit profit margins, consistent with the RBA’s 2.5% target – once again, above and beyond the costs of other inputs (including labour and taxes) and the growth of profits due to expanded real output. Even in this scenario, inflation would have averaged just 3.3% since the pandemic, only slightly above the target band, and current harsh interest rate changes would again have been unnecessary.
    • Analysis of the income flows associated with excess inflation since end-2019 confirm the dominance of corporate profits in the acceleration of inflation since the pandemic. Excess corporate profits account for 69% of additional inflation beyond the RBA’s target. Rising unit labour costs account for just 18% of that inflation.
    • The distributional dimensions of post-COVID inflation (falling real wages, falling labour share of GDP, and record corporate profits) are completely opposite from the experience of the 1970s (when real wages rose, the labour share of GDP increased, and corporate profit margins fell). This historical comparison confirms that fears of a 1970s-style ‘wage price spiral’ are not justified. Instead, inflation in Australia since the pandemic clearly reflects a profit-price dynamic.

    The post Profit-Price Spiral: The Truth Behind Australia’s Inflation appeared first on The Australia Institute's Centre for Future Work.