Linda Kirk (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise this afternoon to support Senator Ludwig’s motion to refer the matter of 457 visas to the Senate Legal and Constitutional References Committee. This week, over the last two or three days, we have heard so much about the 457 visas—about the way that they are being used, or perhaps I should say misused, by employers to the detriment of those persons who are coming into this country wishing to work. They are really just being abused. The concerns that we have expressed this week in relation to 457 visas include the facts that they are being used to displace Australians from jobs, they are being used as an excuse to cut training opportunities and they are being used in a way that is simply driving Australian wages down.

What has been the response of the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs to what we have raised this week in the Senate? As Senator Fierravanti-Wells has just referred to, the minister has used as her ‘defence’, shall we put it, the report Temporary skilled migrants’ employment and residence outcomes (2006). Senator Fierravanti-Wells quoted extensively from that and the minister’s media release. I will not attempt to deal with each and every item that she referred to but, rather, make the point that has been made by Labor in relation to this report. Our argument about this is pretty simple—that is, the report that Senator Vanstone and Senator Fierravanti-Wells have referred to was prepared and the research done prior to the Work Choices legislation coming into place. As we all know, the new industrial relations laws have now been in effect since March, for the last three months or so. But all the research for this report was done prior to the new industrial relations laws coming into effect.

It is pretty obvious, I would have thought, that the impact of the industrial relations laws makes for a new capacity for these temporary worker visas, the 457 visas, to be used in a way that simply drives wages down. The reason why that has happened is quite simple. It is because the new industrial relations laws have opened up a huge gap between what the market rate was and what the new legal minimum rate could be. So what does the minister do in order to refute this? She puts out this academic study dated August 2006 but does not mention the fact that all of the research that was done to prepare this report was conducted under the old industrial relations system.

So all of what Senator Fierravanti-Wells referred to, the various myths that she pointed out and the various percentages that she referred to—like 93 per cent of those surveyed in the report were in managerial, professional, associate professional or skilled trade occupations—have to be taken with a grain of salt because this does not represent the current law, given that Work Choices is now in place and the scenario has changed considerably. As Labor has said, there is not one sentence in the document that the minister released that actually undermines what Labor has been claiming during the course of this week. The only way that the minister appears to be able to defend the temporary worker visas, the 457 visas, is to go to this data that predates the current industrial relations regime.

What I do want to point to this evening is research that has been conducted under the existing industrial relations laws. There was an article published quite recently in the journal People and Place by an academic, Mr Bob Kinnaird, who is an immigration analyst. The work that he has done actually was conducted during the operation of the Work Choices legislation, which is the current law. I want to draw the attention of the Senate to a number of his findings, because I think that they are a lot more relevant than the report that Senator Fierravanti-Wells referred to and the one that the minister is using as her defence for the operation of these visas.

One statistic is that the growth in these 457 visas has been so rapid in the last year that for the first time there will probably be more temporary skilled 457 visas granted than skilled permanent residence visas. I think that is a pretty alarming statistic. Why is it that we are bringing in these temporary skilled 457 visa holders? Why are we not bringing in skilled permanent residents and granting them appropriate visas? In fact, it is the case that in the year 2005-06 the number of 457 visas that were granted was 40,000—a very large number, especially when you compare it with the number in the previous year. As I understand it, in that year some 28,000 visas were issued, so the number rose from 28,000 to 40,000 in the course of just one year—an increase of 43 per cent.

In his research Mr Bob Kinnaird also referred to the fact that some 457 visa holders are being paid below market rates. This is something that is emerging and becoming really quite apparent, but it is very difficult for us to get exact figures because the government does not even collect data on the actual salaries that are paid to these workers. Another trend that is emerging, and this is something that Senator Lundy referred to in the chamber a couple of days ago, is that 457 visas are adversely affecting jobs and training for young Australians, particularly in the IT industry.

In the time that I have remaining I want to focus on one of the most concerning aspects of the way this visa is operating and highlight to the chamber just why it is so essential that we do have a Senate inquiry into the operation of the 457 visas and the government’s mismanagement of them. Firstly, I refer to the data that indicates the actual incomes that are being received by persons on the 457 visas. It is shown than 25 per cent of 457 visa holders in the trades reported average incomes of less than $35,000. One third of 457 professionals reported incomes under $50,000, including three per cent below $35,000. You would have to compare this with what is being received out there in the marketplace. The median starting salary for new graduates with a bachelor degree was $38,000 in 2004, so it is clear that a huge number of these people are being paid considerably below the market rate. As I said, it is very difficult to compare because the government does not collect any data on the actual salaries paid to these workers.

Another thing that is emerging is the number of hours that these people on 457 visas are being required to work. Some are being required to work in excess of 40, 45 and even 50 hours a week to receive this minimum salary. The point that I wish to emphasise is the way that the 457 visa minimum salary is actually setting a benchmark for low wages for all Australians. It is setting a low, low benchmark against which salaries for all other Australians are eventually going to be measured.

I will briefly touch on the way that 457 visas are now essentially attracting semi- or even unskilled workers into Australia, with very low English requirements. Given that there is no labour market testing, there has been, as I said, this move towards semi- or even unskilled workers. For example, in Western Australia McDonald’s has confirmed that a Filipino 457 visa holder was transferred to Karratha and that his duties included doing shiftwork as an assistant manager and serving food. We really have to wonder why it is that the minister can say, and actually verify, that there is a shortage of McDonald’s staff in Australia. Why is it that we need to be using people coming in on these 457 visas to take up employment in McDonald’s?

There have also been a number of references to the fact that the program does not appear to be used for the purpose for which it is meant to be used—namely, to target critical skills shortages in Australia, particularly in the building trades. The Australian Trucking Association has also reported that it is close to having the government approve 100 truck drivers under the 457 visa. This week we have also referred to investigations in South Australia where meatworkers have not been working in jobs relating to the skill that was stated on their visa application. We have to wonder whether or not the government is aware of these breaches. Something that has also come to light during the course of this week is that, because of the compliance measures—or, rather, lack of compliance measures—that the government has in place, the department currently visits only 25 per cent annually of employers who employ 457 workers. It is very difficult to know whether or not the conditions of the visa are actually being complied with.

I think what emerges out of this is that the government is expanding the 457 visa system to include semiskilled and unskilled labour. This obviously has nothing whatsoever to do with the skills shortage that we clearly do have in Australia and everything to do with driving down wages and conditions not just for the people on 457 visas but, essentially, for all Australians who are looking for work.

In conclusion, I would like to mention something that Labor senators have said numerous times in this chamber this week—that is, Labor of course supports the 457 visa. It is a very good concept and, if it were to be used properly—that is, to bring in people to work in areas where there really is a skills shortage—then clearly it is a very good program and naturally Labor would support that. But there are many concerns that have been raised during the course of this week that make it quite clear that there is an urgent need for an inquiry into this. It is pretty clear that employers are not required to show that there is a skills shortage in a particular area before taking on an individual. It allows employers to import semiskilled or even unskilled workers onto wages and conditions that bear no resemblance whatsoever to accepted Australian minimum standards. Most concerning is the fact that this visa is having the effect of reducing job and training opportunities for Australians. It is for this reason that I support Senator Ludwig’s motion that this matter be referred to the Senate Legal and Constitutional References Committee, and I urge all senators to support the motion.