Brian Mitchell (Lyons, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

Far be it from me to wish anybody the sack—we will see how the member for Fisher will go in three years. Youth unemployment is a big issue in my electorate of Lyons. There are far too many young people not at school, not in training or not at work. In August, the Australian Bureau of Statistics stated Tasmania's youth unemployment rate was 18.7 per cent, and that compares to a national average of 12.7. Some parts of my mostly regional and outer suburban electorate suffer unemployment rates amongst 15- to 24-year-olds as high as 27 per cent. It is a crushing level of unemployment; a terrible waste of human potential.

All of us, in this place, agree that the scourge of youth unemployment needs to be addressed, but I think where we differ is how we get it done. On this side of the House, we believe a large part of the answer lies in addressing underlying issues that cause young people to be underemployed or unemployed in relation to other Australians. Better education, better training and more access to apprenticeships are the key. But these things require long-term government commitment and investment, and that does appear to be a stumbling block to those opposite.

One thing that we do not do on this side of the House is blame the unemployed for being unemployed. The vast majority of young people want to work. Some lack the skills for the jobs they want, some lack the ability or the resources to find work. Many others apply time and again and are simply unlucky, because the simple truth is, there are many more young people looking for work than there are jobs available. Sure, we all know someone, or at least a story or an urban myth of someone, who is capable of working but chooses not to. In my state of Tasmania, there are many fruit-picking jobs available. It is so difficult to source labour locally, despite high unemployment, that farmers rely overwhelmingly on backpackers. In 2013, those opposite did try to force young Tasmanians to pick fruit by seeking to remove unemployment entitlements for lengthy periods. That vicious plan was abandoned when it dawned on the government it was simply unworkable, because, of course, fruit picking is seasonal; it is not permanent; it is not secure. It is perfect work for young, fit people who seek a short-term job but it is far from a permanent, secure option. It is a job ideally suited for working holiday-makers—backpackers—and that is why Labor is keen to attract backpackers to this work and not price ourselves out of the international market. But that is a debate for another time and in another place, if the other place ever manages to bring on the debate.

If we want young people in permanent work, we must as a nation create more opportunities for permanent work. And we, in this parliament, have our role to play. For example, by offering support for Australian industry such as an Australian shipping industry, that will help keep and create jobs here. Australians, like Andrew, who was in the public gallery at question time today, can get a job in Australian shipping and plan for a secure future. Addressing what appears to be a proliferation of foreign workers in traditionally entry-level jobs at service stations, construction sites and aged-care homes is also part of the solution. Addressing this has to be part of the debate because these are exactly the sorts of entry-level jobs that give young Australians a start in life.

When it comes to jobs in Australia, we should look local first. Fast food outlets, pubs, supermarkets, restaurants, service stations, these are the sorts of jobs that are ideal for young people and which already employ thousands of them. Unfortunately PaTH could actually make things worse, not better, because it incentivises employers to put on free labour—temporary interns—over full-wage employees. Employers basically get a worker for free for 12 weeks, the wages are paid by the government plus the employer gets $1,000 for the burden of putting somebody on.

Under the coalition's rules, there is nothing stopping employers using cheap youth labour, so-called interns, to displace real jobs and churning through new interns every 12 weeks. Treating young people like they are disposable should not be part of any decent youth employment solution. But of course, it is my fear that the Youth Jobs PaTH program is not really about young people. PaTH is about providing employers, particularly big corporations, with easy access to a pool of free labour; it keeps wages down. If PaTH was really about making young people job-ready, it would include proper training and skills pathways. It would require more of employers, not less.

Instead, there is nothing in this program to stop an employer sticking a PaTH employer on a deep fryer and getting rid of them after 12 weeks and then starting again with somebody else and collecting another $1,000 for every new intern they put on. Worse, it appears these interns can be told to work weekends and nights—times when paid workers would receive penalty rates. 'Register now to host an intern' says the PaTH application form. Businesses will receive an up-front payment of $1,000 to help cover the costs of hosting an internship placement. All the form requires is a name, organisation, ABN and email—that is it. There is nothing about training, nothing about mentorship, nothing about the potential for ongoing work.

These young people are perversely called 'interns'. I have worked in private enterprise most of my working life. At the newspaper I worked at, we supported university intern programs. We would offer four- to six-week placements for senior journalism students and graduates. They received on-the-job training, mentorship and the chance to build a portfolio of published work. And we in turn received a warm body to give extra jobs and research to. Sometimes we would get an absolute ace of an intern and they would be given more complex stories to cover. It was in the main a win-win for both parties. Sometimes interns—desperate interns—would offer to stay on the job for free for months on end. But we always turned them down because there comes a time—and it is different for everyone—when it stops being an internship and it simply becomes sweatshop labour.

Most reasonable people would think of interns as students or graduates gathering on-the-job training in the profession of their choice such as journalism, law, politics or something similar. Few would consider a kitchen hand or a check out operator or a cleaner to be an intern. And of course every free or cheap person on-the-job is one less paid employee that you need—less superannuation, less workers compensation, and less annual leave to pay. Free youth labour might be nirvana for employer groups but it is a direct assault on the Australian culture of a fair go.

I hear the arguments of those opposite, who say a so-called internship will get young people job ready because it gives them experience, it gets out of the house and it gets them used to getting up early and dressing neatly. I do strongly believe that work develops character. I recommend it to every young person whether at school or not. My first job was at 14, at Hungry Jacks, and I stayed there for 14 years—and I have kept the kilos that I put on them. But if the entry-level job market is saturated with interns, what jobs are young people expected to get? What I can see happening is young people ending up on a never-ending treadmill of free internships and traineeships, never able to crack a real job because the jobs that used to be properly paid are filled by free interns.

I want young people in work, but I want them in decent jobs and not exploited. I want a job market where the disgraceful goings-on at employers like 7-Eleven are the exception not the norm. Our national character and identity are built on the notion of a fair go. There is nothing fair about treating young Australians like second-class citizens who are somehow unworthy of the pay and conditions that working men and women have fought for generations to create and protect. I have an obligation to the communities, families and young people in my electorate to ensure they are given decent opportunities to find meaningful ongoing employment.

There are many unanswered questions about PaTH. What happens if an intern sustains an injury at work? Are interns covered by workers compensation? The government has not addressed this important question. Will the base $200 a fortnight include the possibility of being made to work on public holidays and weekends? Does a penalty rates regime apply for these times? I suspect it does not. Will interns be expected to do the same work as someone earning a full-time wage? The government has not clarified this either.

For $200 a fortnight, on top of Centrelink entitlements, a young person can be expected to work up to 25 hours a week—eight bucks an hour. Is that our measure of what a young person is worth in Australia in 2016? What qualifications will an intern have earned after four to 12 weeks in a workplace working 15 to 25 hours a week? Will they have a recognised certificate or qualification to assist them with getting a proper paid job? I doubt it.

With PaTH scheduled to start in May, the government has many questions still to answer. It still cannot even tell us what and intern actually is. Labor intends to refer this bill to a Senate inquiry because the Australian people deserve these answers. Australians have fought for too long to win decent pay and conditions to see them undermine with reckless, lazy legislation. The bedrock of our society is 'a fair go for all'. We must never be a nation that applauds exploitation. Yes, we want young people in work. But we on this side of the House know the way to achieve this is through more support for education, training and apprenticeships, more support for Australian industry and more robust oversight of working visas to ensure that young Australians get the first crack at Australian jobs.

See this speech in context