CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
Progress and referral of the bill
1.1 On 28 April 1999 the Senate referred the provisions of the Tradesmen's
Rights Regulation Repeal Bill 1999 to the Senate Employment, Workplace
Relations, Small Business and Education Legislation Committee. The bill
was introduced to the House of Representatives on 31 March 1999 and passed
the House without amendment on 12 May.
1.2 The bill was introduced to the Senate on 14 May 1999 and debate on
the second reading of the bill was adjourned until the first day of sitting
in the winter sitting. Debate did not resume, however, given the very
tight legislative schedule during the final weeks of this period of sittings.
Provisions and objectives of the bill
1.3 The purpose of this bill is to repeal the Tradesmen's Rights Regulation
Act 1946 (henceforth the TRR Act) and authorises the Governor-General
to make Regulations to enable the implementation of procedures to deal
with the remaining applications for skill assessments and to save and
protect rights obtained under the Principal Act, in particular the retention
of a register of certifications.
Background to the bill
1.4 The TRR Act had as its main purpose the task of resettling returning
servicemen into the civilian workforce and reconstructing Australia's
economy. The Act protected the position of enlistees who had been regarded
as tradespersons before the war, and enabled the recognition of those
civilian workers who had their skills upgraded during the war. It also
helped ex-service personnel, who received trade training during the war,
to gain civilian employment.
1.5 By 1951 the TRR Act was seen to have achieved its immediate post-war
objectives and in 1952 was amended to provide for the formal recognition
of trade skills of migrants in Australia. Since that time migrants have
accounted for an increasing proportion of trade certificates issued under
the Act.
1.6 The TRR Act has been the subject of a number of reviews in recent
years. Mr B. H. Tregillis reviewed the Act in 1989, with a follow up review
in 1991. The Tregillis reviews affirmed the importance of the Act in Australia's
post-war reconstruction effort, contributing to better industrial relations
and improvements in the Australian economy. In the 1991 review, it was
noted that the development of industry competency standards would have
implications for the Act but advised against changes to the assessment
procedures until such time as it could be demonstrated that a more effective
mechanism could be put in place. [1]
1.7 The TRR Act was subsequently identified for review under the Commonwealth
Legislation Review Schedule. [2] The Report
of the Legislation Review of the Tradesmen's Rights Regulation Act 1946,
published in November 1998, noted that developments in the domestic
training system, in particular the development of the Australian Recognition
Framework (ARF), had removed the underlying rationale for the continuation
of the Act and recommended that it be repealed. [3]
The Minister for Employment, Workplace Relations and Small Business, the
Hon. Peter Reith, MP, stated in the second reading debate on the bill
that, `the conditions for repealing the act identified in the Tregillis
review have been met by the development of training packages and the Australian
Recognition Framework.' [4]
Skill Assessments under the Tradesmen's Rights Regulation Act
1.8 The TRR Act provides a mechanism for assessing and formally recognising
the trade skills of eligible Australian residents, including migrants,
who developed their trade skills informally; that is, through means other
than the traditional apprenticeship system. Trades Recognition Australia
(TRA), which resides within the Department of Employment, Workplace Relations
and Small Business, has responsibility for administering the Act. TRA
conducts assessments in 49 prescribed metal and electrical trades (TRR
Act trades).
1.9 Given their experience in conducting trade skill assessments, TRA
was also made a relevant Australian authority for migration assessments
in 1993 under the regulations to the Migration Act 1958 to assist
the Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs (DIMA) in the
administration of the skilled stream of the migration program. [5]
For migration purposes, TRA conducts assessments in the 49 TRR Act trades
as well as a large number of other classifications (non-TRR Act trades).
Until recently TRA did not undertake trade skills assessments in a handful
of trades, such as the food and horticultural trades and hairdressing,
in which they did not have experienced assessors. These were done by DIMA
officials. Following changes to the Migration Regulations introduced on
1 July 1999, however, DIMA no longer has the power to undertake trade
assessments and consequently TRA has been conducting all trade assessments
since this time. [6]
1.10 Enabling TRA to conduct assessments for skilled migration purposes
created a logical link between the TRR Act and the Migration Act in the
area of trade assessments. It is important to note, however, that the
authority for TRA to undertake skill assessments for migration purposes
does not derive from the TRR Act. The legislative authority for TRA to
do these assessments is established under the Migration Regulations and
therefore the repeal of the TRR Act does not affect this role.
TRA assessment methods
1.11 For assessment purposes `all applicants must provide evidence that
they are capable of performing the full range of trade duties normally
undertaken by, and to the same level of skill as, a tradesperson in Australia.'
[7] The methods of assessment vary slightly
depending on whether the trade assessment is against a TRR Act trade and
also on the country of origin of the applicant.
1.12 In so called `criteria countries' [8],
training qualifications equivalent to Australian qualifications have been
identified for TRR Act trades. This means if an applicant holds a formal
qualification in his or her country of origin this will be recognised
as equivalent to an Australian qualification. For applicants who do not
meet the equivalence criteria or who are from countries whose accreditation
system is not recognised, a time-based approach to assessment is adopted.
Thus, an applicant must have a minimum of 6 years experience for metal
trades and 7 years for electrical trades performing the full range of
work, and to the level of skill ordinarily done by an Australian tradesperson.
Domestic applicants seeking recognition of trade skill developed informally
are also assessed against the `6/7 year rules'.
1.13 The basic assessment methodology for non-TRR Act trades is very
similar, utilising the formal training criteria where relevant and a time-based
approach otherwise. The minimum time in these trades is 6 years.
Developments in the domestic training system
1.14 The methods described above for assessing trade qualifications have
provided an effective and generally consistent process of trade recognition
in the absence of a comprehensive national system of training and recognition.
Progressive changes occurring in the domestic training system, in particular
the development of the National Training Framework (NTF) since late 1996,
have aimed at creating a more flexible and nationally consistent training
framework. These changes have involved a move away from the traditional
concepts of time-based learning to a competency-based system. The two
main components of the NTF are training packages and the Australian Recognition
Framework (ARF). Mr Glenn Newton from Australian Labour Market Services
told the Committee at its public hearing in Melbourne that:
Part of the rationale for the Tradesmen's Rights Regulation Act was
that, in the historical context of fragmented and different approaches
to the assessment through the state training arrangements, you had a
Commonwealth umbrella which provided a national, uniform approach. But
it only operated in the metals and electrical trades and not in the
others. We now have a situation where the Australian Recognition Framework
provides that national uniformity across all trades which basically,
to my mind, takes away the rationale for the continuation of the Tradesmen's
Rights Regulation Act. [9]
1.15 Training packages covering most industry sectors have been developed,
or are in the process of being developed. They have been developed with
input from industry to provide a consistent national system of vocational
education and training and are based on combinations of competencies that
have been aligned with the Australian Qualifications Framework. The national
recognition of qualifications based on competencies is achieved under
the ARF, which is delivered through Registered Training Organisations
(RTOs).
1.16 The aim of this bill is therefore to repeal the TRR Act, as it is
no longer consistent with the domestic training system. Not only is the
formal training criteria based on outdated industry classifications that
are not aligned with qualifications based on the training packages and
competency standards; qualification by time serving is no longer the relevant
benchmark by which to assess competency. It is proposed that with the
repeal of the TRR Act, RTOs would take over from TRA in the field of domestic
recognition and assessment services in accordance with the recommendation
of the Legislation Review Committee.
1.17 Although not directly affected by the repeal of this legislation,
it is similarly proposed, as was recommended by the Legislation Review
Committee, that RTOs subsume TRA's role in the assessment of overseas
skills for migration purposes. While this decision coincides with the
decision to repeal the TRR Act it is not a consequence of it. The legislative
authority to allow RTOs to do these assessments will be effected under
the Migration Regulations.
The Committee's inquiry
1.18 In considering this legislation the Committee sought clarification
on the following issues:
- the detail of pre-migration assessment, in particular whether paper
based assessments are sufficient in the case of nations with competency
systems and the difficulty of benchmarking those competencies against
Australian standards;
- whether an ethical problem might arise if the assessor is receiving
a direct fee-for-service payment and the impact on cost; and
- whether a RTO is equipped to complete an assessment which requires
an on-the-job or experience component, given that this is beyond the
scope of their existing recognition activities.
1.19 The Committee invited submissions from interested parties and initially
received 11 submissions. A public hearing was also held into the inquiry
at the Melbourne Town Hall on 20 July 1999. Supplementary submissions
were also received after the public hearing from some of the witnesses
who appeared. A list of submissions, and a list of witnesses who appeared
before the Committee appear in appendices to this report.
Footnotes
[1] As quoted in: Tradesmen's Rights Regulation
Repeal Bill 1999, Second Reading Speech, The Hon. Peter Reith MP,
House of Representatives, Hansard, 31 March 1999, p. 4896-4897
[2] The legislation review schedule has been
prepared in accordance with the requirements of the national competition
policy, agreed between the Commonwealth and all State and Territory governments.
The review schedule includes legislation which may be costly to business
as well as legislation that restricts competition. 98 separate reviews
are identified in the schedule.
[3] Report of the Legislation Review of the
Tradesmen's Rights Regulation Act 1946, November 1998, p. x
[4] ibid., p. 4897
[5] Submission No. 10, Department of Employment,
Workplace Relations and Small Business, vol.1, p. 102
[6] Submission No. 11, Department of Immigration
and Multicultural Affairs, vol. 1, p. 121
[7] Report of the Legislation Review of the
Tradesmen's Rights Regulation Act 1946, November 1998, p. 25
[8] Argentina, Austria, Belgium, Bolivia, Brazil,
Brunei, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Czechoslovakia, Denmark, Equador, Ireland,
Fiji, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hong-Kong, India, Italy, Japan,
Korea, Malaysia, Malta, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Paraguay, Peru,
Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Singapore, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sweden, Switzerland,
Turkey, United Kingdom, United States of America, Uruguay, Venezuela,
Yugoslavia
[9] Mr Glenn Newton, Hansard, 20 July
1999, p. 16