|
Current Issues
Job Network, the 3rd Contract
E-Brief: Online Only issued 11 August 2003; updated 26
September 2003
Steve O'Neill,
Analysis and Policy
Economics, Commerce and Industrial Relations Group
Background
Over 1997 98 the Commonwealth Employment
Service and its related agencies and labour market programs were
terminated, ( cashed-out see Library publication Changes
to Employment Services for background), with employment
assistance services instead being delivered through a collection of
for profit and community-based providers (the Job Network, JN)
under a purchaser-provider contract determined by the Department of
Employment and Workplace Relations (DEWR, see the
Australian Workplace website).
The first contract (JN1) with these providers came in at May
1998, the second (JN2) early 2000, and the third contract commenced
on 1 July 2003. The initial value of the latest 3-year contract is
approx $2.5 billion ($926 million for 2003 04, in addition to other
non-JN programs, although JN allocations from the Commonwealth
Budget have had a tendency to underspend by up to 20 per cent in
recent years (noted by Senate
Employment, Workplace Relations and Education Committee (EWRE)
20 February 2002). Thus this 3-year estimate should be seen as a
possible maximum which the Commonwealth could be
liable for. Under
JN3, 109 JN members will operate from 1129 sites, while
JN2 started with 205 providers at 1710 permanent and 404
outreach sites (2045 sites at its end), so the trend has been for
preferred suppliers to operate at a larger business unit level,
across fewer outlets, and under both JN2 and JN3, the sites provide
other contracted employment services as well as JN services.
However, if, under the new JN3 arrangements, job placement
organisations (JPOs) are included, then the number of sites of JN3
(2540) exceeds those under JN2. Questions might be raised as to
whether the inclusion of these sites is reasonable given that they
are primarily advertised to assist employers with placement and
presumably supply a restricted range of services to the unemployed.
As DEWR advised the Senate
EWRE Cttee on 3 June 2003:
A job placement organisation is employer
focused. It is about getting vacancies from employers onto the
national jobs database so that they can be matched with the
vocational profiles.
The first 2 rounds of Job Network paid
providers for a placement in a job of a client with extra payments
made according to the difficulties in placing the client. The
payment system under JN3 has been changed so that JN members will
be paid to monitor clients more closely (discussed below).
Back to top
Active Participation
Job Network 3 implements an Active
Participation Model of employment placement and jobsearch
(announced in May 2002). Under this new system fees are paid to a
JN provider when a client presents for an interview (following
registration for benefits or limited JN service with Centrelink).
At this interview with the JN member the jobseeker s resume is
reviewed and his/her business plan or jobseeker plan of finding a
job is determined. Now, importantly, there is associated with JN3 a
regimen of scheduled interviews which track or correlate with the
client s unemployment record. This is explained by the department
(DEWR) as:
the concept of all job seekers having a
guarantee of access to a continuum of service, with the nature of
that service ramping up over time or, if the individual is at high
risk, they will go immediately into front-end service points. (DEWR
response to
Senate EWRE Cttee 3 June 2003)
The intention behind JN3 was to bring in
labour placement and hire agencies into JN (under license) and have
them add their vacancies to the national vacancy database (called
Australian JobSearch). Job Matching is the old Commonwealth
Employment Service (CES) service of applicants being matched to
registered vacancies. Job matching will be carried out by some JN
members and other non JN businesses, called job placement
organisations. It may be possible for both a JN provider and a JP
organisation to receive a DEWR payment for the placement of an
unemployed person.
The previous three tiered system of Job
Matching, Job Search Training and 2 levels of Intensive Assistance
of JN2 is to be replaced under JN3 by 2 streams: Job Search Support
Services and Intensive Support Services. Intensive support
customised assistance increases the level of intensive support,
when the client is assessed as needing a higher degree of
assistance.
DEWR provides the following
advice to job seekers as to how these levels of assistance will
interact with each other:
Training Account
If you are an Indigenous or mature age job
seeker (aged 50 years when you start Job Search Training or aged 49
years and 6 months when you start Customised Assistance), your Job
Network member may access a Training Account to provide additional
work related training to help you get a job in your local
area.
Mutual Obligation
Mutual Obligation is about helping you improve
your chances of finding work while giving something back to the
Australian community.
If you are receiving payments such as Newstart
or Youth Allowance, as well as looking for work, you must undertake
some approved activities.
Mutual Obligation activities are outlined in
your Preparing for Work Agreement (an agreement you will develop
with Centrelink), or in your Job Search Plan.
Within Customised Assistance, as part of your
Job Search Plan, you may receive:
- ntensive work preparation
- work experience
- training and counselling.
Depending on your needs, your Job Network
member may also give you:
- more intensive job search activities and contact you each
fortnight
- additional services, facilities and activities such as
interpreter services, or some money for fares if you cannot afford
to get to a job interview
- help with work experience, counselling or training to get a
job
- support while you are settling in to a new job.
While receiving Intensive Support, your Job Network member will
meet regularly with you to talk about job search approaches and
refine your personal details on JobSearch. Job Search Support
services will continue to be provided while you remain
unemployed.
Intensive Support services will continue while you participate in
Mutual Obligation activities for 6 months. If you don t have any
Mutual Obligation requirements, your Job Network member will
continue to provide support to you.
The key changes between JN2 and JN3 are the replacement of
commencement fees with a schedule of fee for service, and the
introduction of outcome fees based on length of time that a
jobseeker is unemployed. (see Productivity Commission Independent
Review of the Job Network, p. F.10)
Back to top
Fees and likely costs
The schedule of fess payable for job matching was canvassed in the
release of information on the Active Participation Model by the
Hon. Mal Brough MP in September 2002: Job Network members
will have access to a Job Seeker Account to purchase or provide
assistance to job seekers to address their barriers to employment.
The account will be credited with $11 for each job seeker when they
have been unemployed for more than 3 months. For job seekers with a
locational disadvantage, an amount of $22 will be credited to the
account from registration (total cost $27.2m over 3 yrs). This is
over and above fees for service, job placement fees and outcome
fees
A further amount will be credited to the Job Seeker Account in
respect of each job seeker as they commence Intensive Support
customised assistance. For most job seekers, an amount of $900 will
be credited. For those job seekers identified as highly
disadvantaged, this amount will be increased by $450 ($1350 in
total) and for those with a location disadvantage, the amount will
be increased by $225 ($1135 in total). If job seekers remain
unemployed and commence a second period of Intensive Support
customised assistance, the Job Seeker account will be supplemented
by a further payment of $500. This amount will be supplemented by
an additional payment of $250 for those job seekers identified as
most disadvantaged ($750 in total) and $125 for those job seekers
with a location disadvantage ($625 in total). (Total cost $556m
over 3 yrs). An Active Participation Model also recognises the
disadvantage of job seekers living in rural or remote parts
ofAustraliaand introduces supplements to the Job Seeker Account for
those job seekers identified as having a location disadvantage.
(Fact
Sheet)
There are also fees paid to JN members for outcomes: the
commencement fee, the primary interim outcome fee, the secondary
interim outcome fee, the primary final and the secondary final fee.
For hard to place clients the outcome fee may reach $6600. Job
Network members will be able to claim outcome fees for placing job
seekers in sustainable jobs from 4 months unemployment. (JN3 fees
and payments can be found at the
JN3 tender)
However the Productivity Commission in its Independent
Review of the Job Network also considered the operation of JN3
in its
Appendix F, The Impact of the Business Cycle .
This appendix also maps out the schedule of proposed interviews
and accompanying fees and compares these to what occurred under
JN2:
|
Month
|
JN2 Fees$
|
JN3 Fees$
|
|
1
|
|
$52.50 New
referral interview, 45 minutes
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
4
|
JST: $500
|
$671.00 JST fee of
$660, plus $11 JSA
|
|
5
|
|
$81.70 5 month
review of 70 minutes
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
$29.20 7 month
review of 25 minutes
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
$29.20 9 month
review of 25 minutes
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
11
|
|
$29.20 11 month
review of 25 minutes
|
(with further payments to 39 months unemployment)
The Productivity Commission s Independent
Review of the Job Network, estimates of potential total costs
of JN3 under its new fee structure differs to that presented by Mr
Brough. For example it compared the average job matching fee of JN2
($362) and its estimate for JN3 at $309 (based on the DEWR
submission to the Productivity Commission). The lower figure
derives from the predicted (fewer) placements which would earn a
bonus for employment of 50 hours over 2 weeks. The PC also noted
that comparatively fewer clients would access Customised Assistance
(165 000) under JN3, compared to those who accessed Intensive
Assistance in a year under JN2 (276 000). While 69 000
mature age and indigenous job seekers will have access to Training
Account funds of up to $800 each (announced in Budget 2001 under
Australians Working Together ), Training Account access was
initially budgeted by DEWR to average $267 per eligible client (see
PC footnotes at p. F.11
Appendix F)
Back to top
Glitches with the new system
In the lead-up to the first day s operation of JN3, reports
circulated concerning disputes between the Minister for Family and
Community Services, Senator Vanstone, and the Minister for
Employment Services the Hon Mal Brough MP. As reported in
The [J.1] Age, 3 July 2003, the
ministers have reportedly sent letters to the Prime Minister
complaining about each other s departments. Senator Vanstone
, the Family and Community Services Minister responsible for
Centrelink, expressed her concerns about the extra work created for
public servants by the technology hitches plaguing the introduction
of the new system. The article went on: Senator
Vanstone has also written to Workplace Relations Minister Tony
Abbott, Mr Brough s senior minister, complaining about the
custom-built Job Network computer system, which until late last
week was breaking down regularly. She sent a copy of the
letter to Prime Minister John Howard. Mr Brough responded by
writing to Mr Howard about his concerns regarding Centrelink s
unwillingness to punish unemployed people who don t turn up to
appointments with their new Job Network providers. About
67 per cent of unemployed people who have so far been
called in for compulsory appointments with Job Network providers
have failed to turn up. Mr Brough has promised to cut their welfare
payments if they do not cooperate, but it is understood Centrelink
staff are unwilling to inform recipients that they have been cut
off, particularly as some suspect the low compliance rate is
connected with the IT problems. Thereafter
followed allegations of the consequences of both the IT glitches
and the failure of 40 per cent clients to present for JN interviews
resulting in a cash flow crisis for the JN network. The Government
proposed to advance $30 million to maintain cash flow for JN
members who were advised of this on 10 July, see:
$30m bail-out to stem crisis in Job Network . The
Australian 11 July 2003 and
Bail-out saves staff from dole , AFR 11 July 2003.
Jobseekers had alleged in the early weeks of July that they
had been wrongly matched to jobs, some of the allegations were:
On the other hand, there are examples of the system working as
intended. Minister Brough reports that:
I'll give you an example - a man in Wyong this week, I was there
at Salvation Army Employment Plus, he had been a screen printer for
eight years, he walked into Centrelink on the Tuesday, he was
connected to his job network member on the Wednesday, he had his
vocational profile put on system that day and getting automatic
matching. (Insiders 20 July)
For reasons such as letters not being received, IT problems,
placement of the client under personal support programs by
Centrelink and similar teething problems, clients have not been
turning up for these scheduled interviews. Mr Brough claimed that
as at 20 July, 145 000 clients had not presented for a
scheduled interview. IT problems were discussed extensively on 3
June 2003 in Senate Estimates (Senate
EWRE Cttee) by Mr Parsons
on behalf of DEWR who explained some of the teething problems of
the new IT system. For whatever fault, and because fees are now
associated with these interviews, JN members are losing income as
JN3 swings into operation. Thus DEWR has advanced $30 million to Jn
providers to cover these shortfalls.
The Australian Council of Social Services (ACOSS) which
traditionally represents the interests of those receiving benefits
has also claimed that the new system is impersonal:
the transition to the new Job Network system relied upon a
system of computerised automatic referrals in which unemployed
people were directed to sign up with a particular Job Network
agency for help. They must then have a face-to-face interview to
put their resume on a national database but large numbers of job
seekers are failing to attend the meetings. "This referral process
has been plagued with significant IT problems and is cumbersome and
impersonal. Reports that the government has been forced to offer a
$20 million bail-out to employment service agencies are proof there
are serious problems with the transition to the new Job Network
system," Mr McCallum said." ACOSS tells government to fix
IT problems (AAP Newswire, 10 July)
Back to top
Issues to date
It is very likely
that the initial glitches with JN3, such as with the IT system,
will be overcome. One suspects that registered jobseekers (with
Centrelink) are likely to be shuffled from mutual obligation
activities towards jobsearch activities if the JN3 members are to
be kept viable.
The closure of
agencies particularly in regional Australia is generating a degree
of resentment particularly in areas of persistent unemployment, as
highlighted by this editorial from the
Sunday Mail:
The Federal
Government's revamped Job Network is failing South Australians. The
failure of the taxpayer-funded scheme to find jobs for more than
35,000 out of work for more than a year in this state is
unacceptable. The army of long-term jobless - 25,000 of
whom have been out of work for more than two years - would nearly
half fill AAMI Stadium.
Adding to this
hardship facing those unemployed is the closure in South Australia
of more than half the agencies that are meant to find them work.
The fact that nine country towns have lost their agency only
reinforces the isolation, loss of self-esteem and dignity so many
unemployed are experiencing ...
In a move that
defies explanation, many of the agencies which have been shut are
in areas of high unemployment in this state. The government is
quick to boast that the jobless should receive the most appropriate
training for their needs, not be parked in inappropriate training
courses while the network providers collect government money from
helping the most job-ready find work.
The Job Network is
as impersonal, inflexible and bureaucratic as the Commonwealth
Employment Service it was meant replace five years ago. This is
illustrated by the man who was sent for only three job interviews
during his four years with an agency. (27 July 2003)
It should be noted
that the numbers of long-term and very long-term unemployed cited
in the editorial overstate Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS)
unemployment estimates. ABS uses different criteria to that of the
Department of Family and Community Services (FaCS) to measure
long-term unemployed numbers and its LTU estimates for South
Australia are close to half those cited above. FaCS provides data
on individuals receiving unemployment benefits.
Nevertheless, as
was noted earlier by the Australian Financial Review, the
system of invitation to treat, tender and contract tends to make
the JN system secretive as providers may be loathe to criticise the
system or speak out, and it is also possible that more dissatisfied
clients may complain to the press or their MPs, while clients
satisfied with their treatment may be less likely to report this.
In early August 2003, there appeared to be some reluctance by DEWR
to update business activity of the JN members for fear that this
data would be reported unfavourably and show lower than expected
levels of compliance by clients, although the Minister for
Employment and Workplace Relations has sought to reinstate the
distribution of this data.
To the extent that
this system seeks to intervene early in a person s unemployment, it
addresses one mostly agreed fact of unemployment theory, that the
longer the period spent out of work, the more difficult it is for
the person to regain work. On the other hand the system appears to
automatically match clients to vacancies, possibly the same
vacancy, and thus gives rise to a potential of later penalising an
unemployed person for not responding to matched jobs (i.e. deny
them unemployment benefits), for example where a job may be
unsuitable to the client for reasons such as an occupational/skills
mismatch or location. The new system also appears to pay JN members
for processes rather than outcomes. However these are a few issues
which may become clearer or resolved as the new system beds
down.
On 9 September 2003, the Government advised JN members
that the payments for job search
support and intensive assistance for highly disadvantaged job
seekers will be paid at the beginning of each quarter and
will relate to the number of appointments that are
expected to be made, whether or not they
occur. Mr Brough stated in a media release
Job Network achieving record results (9 September 2003):
"Job Network is achieving record
job placements but can t help someone find work if they won t turn
up for their appointments.
"In response to these
difficulties with low attendance rates, the Department for
Employment and Workplace Relations has made administrative changes
to payment points for existing fees to ensure that Job Network
members get paid as intended for the work that they have done and
will continue to do.
"Each quarter Job Network members
will receive a payment for all the work associated with contacting
and registering job seekers and following-up those who miss
appointments, such as rescheduling appointments, making reminder
calls and recording change of circumstances details in the system.
Currently payments are only triggered after job seekers turn up for
their appointments, which doesn t reflect the actual work being
done.
JN providers were also advised that the mix
of clients had changed with 40 000 more clients now entitled to
Intensive Support customised assistance than DEWR estimated, thus
boosting the cash flow of JN providers job. (see
Cash advance to bail out Job Network )
Senator George Campbell asked a
question on notice to the Minister for Family and Community
Services, Senator Vanstone whether 60 000 benefit recipients would
be breached for missing interviews under JN3, as alleged by
Minister Brough. However from Senator Vanstone s response it appears that as at 18
September, 11 000 benefit recipients were likely to be penalised.
Opposition employment spokesperson, Anthony Albanese, claimed that
the revisions to the number of clients who might use or be required
to use JN services had fallen from the initial estimate of 780 000
to 500 000, thus affecting JN providers cash flows (see
Vanstone Exposes Brough ).
On the other hand, it also appears that JN
providers are reasonably satisfied with the recent changes to, and
broad direction of JN3. David Thompson, chair of National Employment Services
Association, representing JN providers is reported in
saying:
The new rules now mean there is more regular
contact and dialogue with job seekers . . . and because job seekers
must stay with one provider they are forced to take more notice of these people.
( Job Network in Log Jam , The Australian 12 September
2003)
In reaction to the
high number of jobseekers who have not responded to the JN
invitation letter to attend an interview, contact requirements
between JN providers and clients have been redefined and tightened.
It was reported in The Australian (26 September 2003) that benefit
recipients would be required to attend interviews with their JN
providers and if these attempts failed, Centrelink would make two
further attempts. If these attempts also fail to generate a
suitable response the benefit recipient faces a suspension of the
benefit and this will occur within 3 weeks or so of the initial
contact by the JN provider (Abbott’s
tough new dole rules). Where the jobseeker does make contact
with Centrelink and does not have a justifiable reason for not
responding to the contact attempts, they may face an administrative
or activity test breach and the subsequent breach penalty of 16% or
18% reduction in the payment rate for up to 6 months. It was
reported only 320 000 recipients had complied with interview
requests, while 1.6 million appointments had been made (in respect
of 720 000 benefit recipients) over the past few months.
Should there be other significant developments of the Job
Network, this E brief will be updated to reflect these.
For copyright reasons some linked items are only
available to Members of Parliament.
Back to top
|