FECCA s Submission to the LLNP Services Discussion Paper

Transcription

1 Director, Language, Literacy and Numeracy Transition to Training and Work Branch DEEWR 25/07/2008 FECCA s Submission to the LLNP Services Discussion Paper The Federation of Ethnic Communities Councils of Australia (FECCA) welcomes this opportunity to contribute to the Discussion Paper on the Language, Literacy and Numeracy Program. FECCA is the national peak body representing and advocating on behalf of culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) communities. FECCA develops policies and promotes issues on behalf of our national membership to government and the broader community. FECCA promotes Australian multiculturalism, community harmony, social justice, community participation and advocates against discrimination so as to build a productive and culturally rich Australian society. FECCA would like see greater acknowledgement of the particular needs of the CALD communities in discussion around the Language, Literacy and Numeracy Program. Migrants and refugees from non-english speaking backgrounds deserve particular consideration in the analysis of the program and this is important for the Government s social inclusion agenda to be truly socially inclusive. Greater attention and consideration of making our various language, literacy and numeracy programs more responsive to Australians from non-english speaking and CALD backgrounds could unlock the huge and often underutilised productive potential of Australia s migrant workforce. This could help address Australia s skills shortage and accompanying ageing demographic which is limiting economic growth. FECCA has drawn on recent consultations with CALD community members and service providers across Australia in addition to receiving input from its members to guide this submission.

2 Please find our comments attached. We would welcome the opportunity to discuss or clarify any of the issues raised in this submission. Please do not hesitate to contact FECCA on (02) should you wish to do so. Yours Sincerely Voula Messimeri, FECCA Chair

3 How effective is the LLNP in preparing clients for daily life and employment? FECCA acknowledges that where possible, learning English is a critical component of effective settlement for migrant communities. English language skills enable workforce and broader community participation which again are essential for building a new life particularly for refugees and other disadvantaged migrants. Migrants from non-english speaking backgrounds make up over 15% of the Australian workforce i. Therefore, well-resourced and flexible English language programs provide hugely important opportunities for new migrants and humanitarian entrants to fully participate in work, education, training and all aspects of community life. The Language Learning and Numeracy Program (LLNP) does have the capacity to help prepare individuals to be more productive members of Australian society. FECCA suggests the following improvements to the LLNP program: 1. The LLNP could work more effectively with the Job Network Members (JNM s). The unemployment rate in Australia is currently at its lowest level for decades, yet underemployment is prevalent across many ethnic minority groups and unemployment rates are disproportionately high within some, such as among many African refugee communities. The multicultural service sector could be better utilized to assist the LLNP program to better service people from CALD and NESB backgrounds. Flexibility in program delivery and on-the-job training are both important for people from CALD backgrounds who may have various immediate settlement challenges making time scarce. 2. CALD communities and migrants with low-level English language proficiency need to be considered as a specific target group within the LLNP review and strategies and policies need to be developed to ensure the program is responding to their particular needs, especially with regards to flexible and culturally sensitive and accessible program delivery. FECCA continues to advocate that the successful settlement of migrants and refugees is dependent on the quality and level of support they receive as they begin their new life as Australians and upon effective and adequately resourced early intervention measures ii. This is particularly important for humanitarian entrants who may have experienced long periods of displacement and dislocation from their homes due to civil war and ongoing conflict iii

4 In the context of the LLNP review the government should consider the successful return to work initiative being run by the Migrant Resource Centre South Australia (MRCSA) through their Job Ready model. The model enables individuals to increase their level of English language competency, and creates an environment which enables individuals to enhance their skills before entering or returning to work. How could LLNP learn from other programs? The utmost flexibility in the provision of English language programs is critical to making them relevant and accessible to migrant communities. Migrants often have significant and confronting settlement challenges, difficulties with transport and housing, and attending formal training at set times can be challenging. The more flexibility that can be provided with English language training through mechanisms such as distance learning, weekend and after hours classes, workplace training, and child-care support, the more likely it is that disadvantaged CALD communities will be able to participate in programs. The methodology used in delivering these programs must be made more appropriate to the needs of diverse learners such as refugees and humanitarian entrants. As such LLNP programs should avoid a one size fits all approach but should broaden to accommodate community needs and should be modeled around other good practice models that many community organizations engaged in providing English language training observe. As discussed previously the LLNP could also learn from the MRCSA s Job Ready model, which adopts a milestone and multifaceted-community development approach containing both formal and in-house (on the job) learning. This is a model that accommodates the diversity of needs of individuals and acknowledges that each individual is different. What structure for Program delivery would best meet clients needs and ensure successful outcomes, particularly for disadvantaged clients (e.g. Indigenous Australians) and clients with multiple barriers to learning? A federally funded, systematic approach to supporting CALD communities, new and emerging communities and refugees in their settlement transition to mainstream education, training and work is required. Previous experience has shown that there is a period of transition that occurs in the first several years of settlement. Programs should therefore take into consideration that learning can be significantly impaired by a number of factors in this process. Programs should include broader support elements to assist the effective acquisition and development of skills.

5 Adopting a Job Ready model would provide opportunities for individuals to learn English at their individual level, while at the same time incorporate other important training such as occupational health and safety, workplace relations and culture and industrial rights so as to better prepare individuals as they transit into work or other parts of the society. This model would also assist individuals with work placement opportunities to help them gain experience, and provide them with the option of continuing with their learning if they wish to increase their skills, or proceed into employment. Most importantly, this model acknowledges past learning and work experiences of individuals. FECCA has in the past highlighted that there is a great need to enhance work experience opportunities for newly arrived migrants and refugees iv. How could specialised services such as Advanced Vocationally Oriented Courses (AVOC) and Complementary Training (CT) be improved? Flexibility in the provision of these programs enhances their accessibility to and uptake by CALD communities. Some new arrivals are turned off by formal settings as opposed to community settings, which create a more welcoming, friendly and informal environment that for them is more conducive to learning. Other improvements should include the provision of inexpensive, culturally appropriate childcare to enable parents wishing to access English language courses or to acquire other vocational skills to do so. How can the linkages between LLNP providers and referring agencies [Centrelink and Employment Services Providers, including Job Network Members (JNMs)] be improved (noting that there has been a review of Employment Services Arrangements, as part of an open tender process occurring later this year)? Settlement challenges and culture shock may continue for several years and can lead to learning impairment. During this period there are cultural, psychological and language barriers which can be problematic and often impede access to effective training, language development, career planning and employment v. Migrants and especially refugees and humanitarian entrants need additional ongoing support beyond the initial six month settlement period. For English language and skills training to be more effective, there needs to develop a coordinated strategy between Centrelink, Job Network Members (JNM s), the Integrated Humanitarian Settlement Strategy (IHSS) and AMEP. Some people have alleged that the incentive scheme for JNM members has

6 seen some JNMs often put humanitarian entrants in the too-hard basket and send them to inappropriate courses to get them off their books and get some payment, rather than seriously address their skills and training needs and workforce potential. There is also a need to develop and improve links between Centrelink, LLNP and major community development organizations and also expand some other program delivery to settlement organizations and multicultural and ethnospecific service delivery agencies that are often closer to and better understand the needs of CALD communities. As highlighted, the LLNP needs to have the capacity to address individual needs. It should also not fall into the trap of defining language, literacy and numeracy as the only elements in a social inclusion plan. While they are integral, in isolation they cannot determine the ability of an individual to integrate into the wider society. Programs may need to take into account other variables like the take-up and drop-out rates, psychological issues (for torture and trauma victims), child care needs and so on. Is the LLNP the most cost-effective way of skilling people with low language, literacy and numeracy skills? How could it be made more effective? It can be said that the LLNP contributes to skilling people with low language, literacy and numeracy skills. However, it would add value to it if it equips individuals with industrial messages, which prepare them better as they enter into work. Equipping individuals with information such as OH&S, industrial and work place rights helps remove further disadvantage that an individual may be faced with in the workplace by placing them in a better position to understand and apply their rights at work. How could the current measurement of educational outcomes and client achievement be improved? There is a general consensus during the consultation process that the current duel model of measuring is too painstaking and has not been successful. Many felt that a quantitative model is not useful on its own in measuring the programs achievement. LLNP should move away from this model and embrace the Milestone model (as used by the Job Ready model), which constitutes a step-by-step along the way analysis of elements such as: 1. The progression of learning, that is, how much an individual has learnt from time of entry into program;

7 2. If the individual has leant enough English to go into work (including voluntary work); 3. The number of participants getting into work (including voluntary work) and holding their jobs; 4. If what the individual has learnt has helped in increasing performance in the work place; 5. The number of participants taking up further learning options to improve their skills. Embracing the milestone model of assessment and using a multifaceted approach to training, which acknowledges individual needs, presents assessors with the opportunity to work closely with individuals to determine the best way forward. It would also help if there was an audit of client skills i.e., the recognition of prior learning and work experience which the milestone model also takes into account. Do the current payment structures to LLNP service providers drive improved outcomes? If not what improvements could be made to gain improvements? During our consultation many felt that payment structures do not necessarily improve outcomes. Outcomes can be improved by the acknowledgment that each individual needs to be assessed differently as some require more comprehensive support than others. The program needs to accommodate the diversity of needs of individuals and ensure providers have incentive to work with harder and more challenging clients such as people from refugee and humanitarian backgrounds. The LLNP should also acknowledge that some individuals may have the potential to develop skills in vastly different areas. Therefore the program should create an environment where individual potential is identified and fostered. Should providers be financially rewarded if their clients gain employment? If so how would it be measured? As highlighted in our submission to the Future of Employment Services, financial remuneration is important but needs to avoid perverse outcomes such as where JNM s are sometimes remunerated for cases where they didn t actually find work for individuals. Currently if a non JNM organisation trains, supports and finds a jobs for an individual, they may not get acknowledged or remunerated. However if that individual was registered with a JNM they do get remuneration and acknowledgement.

8 There needs to be greater recognition that other organizations, such as multicultural and ethno-specific agencies are often finding work for the people they train yet not being properly supported by government. The system should acknowledge and remunerate these organisations to open up other often more effective pathways for getting disadvantaged people jobs. How can the reporting and administrative procedures be simplified or made more efficient so trainers can spend more time on training excellence? The current system should be re-evaluated. We have suggested that the LLNP should adopt a Milestone model of measurement. However, there are also simpler systems in existence at state level that are effective. i Department of Immigration and Citizenship. Diversity Australia: Diversity works! ii Ibid. iii Ibid. iv FECCA Submission Response to Employment Services Review 2008; discussion point 3 v FECCA (December 2006). "Access and Equity Report: Feedback from FECCA s consultation regarding access and equity issues for people from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds, conducted during November and December 2006."