AUSTRALIA S SEASONAL WORKER PROGRAM DEMAND-SIDE CONSTRAINTS AND SUGGESTED REFORMS

Transcription

1 AUSTRALIA S SEASONAL WORKER PROGRAM DEMAND-SIDE CONSTRAINTS AND SUGGESTED REFORMS T h e W o r l d B a n k P a c i f i c D e p a r t m e n t w w w. w o r d b a n k. o r g / p i Pacific Update, the Australian National University June 17 th, 2014 Jesse Doyle Labour Migration Specialist Timor-Leste, Papua New Guinea and Pacific Islands The World Bank

2 ECONOMICS OF LOW-SKILLED LABOUR MOBILITY Large returns are possible if unskilled workers are able to move from poor countries where they are abundant to rich countries where they are relatively scarce. The migrants themselves gain from the much higher wages they receive, the sending countries benefit from the remittances the migrants send home, and the receiving countries benefit from the injection of low - skilled labour.

3 BRACERO PROGRAM- UNITED STATES 1942

4 SEASONAL AGRICULTURAL WORKER SCHEME UK 1950

5 GASTARBEITER PROGRAM GERMANY 1955

6 PACIFIC SEASONAL WORKER PILOT SCHEME (PSWPS)

7 Jul-08 Aug-08 Sep-08 Oct-08 Nov-08 Dec-08 Jan-09 Feb-09 Mar-09 Apr-09 May-09 Jun-09 Jul-09 Aug-09 Sep-09 Oct-09 Nov-09 Dec-09 Jan-10 Feb-10 Mar-10 Apr-10 May-10 Jun-10 Jul-10 Aug-10 Sep-10 Oct-10 Nov-10 Dec-10 Jan-11 Feb-11 Mar-11 Apr-11 May-11 Jun-11 Jul-11 Aug-11 Sep-11 Oct-11 Nov-11 Dec-11 Jan-12 Feb-12 Mar-12 Apr-12 May-12 Jun-12 PACIFIC SEASONAL WORKER PILOT SCHEME ( ) rd parameter change nd set of parameter changes 1 st set of parameter changes

8 Arrivals per FY PSWPS VS. RSE FY FY FY FY FY FY PSWPS RSE

9 HAY & HOWES (2012) The three major constraints: 1. The lack of an aggregate labour shortage 2. The lack of information about the scheme 3. The significant level of risk and cost

10 SEASONAL WORKER PROGRAM ( ) HORTICULTURE SECTOR Accommodation sector Trial Sectors Aquaculture sector Cotton sector Sugar cane sector

11 SEASONAL WORKER PROGRAM ( ) Cap on Seasonal Worker Program

12 LACK OF AN AGGREGATE LABOUR SHORTAGE Main reason for not participating (growers aware of the scheme) 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% No need Too costly Too risky Other 2011 (N=40) 60% 13% 20% 8% 2014 (N=64) 67% 14% 13% 6%

13 LACK OF AN AGGREGATE LABOUR SHORTAGE Main category of worker employed (primary sample) N=101 Backpackers Locals Students Grey Nomads Unspecified or unknown Contractors (Nonlocal Australians) % 13.4% 7.4% 3% 5% 5.4% % 31.2% 2.5% 0.5% 1% 10.9%

14 LACK OF AN AGGREGATE LABOUR SHORTAGE Prevalence of illegal workers in Australia Unlawful non-citizens located 10,722 11,428 14,169 13,831 15,477 15,077 Notices issued to employers of illegal workers Removals and assisted departures 8,404 6,818 8,825 10,175 10,785 13,486 Source: Department of Immigration and Border Protection ( )

15 ADDITIONAL COSTS Cost differential for growers hiring through a labour hire company Local / backpacker Pacific seasonal worker Horticulture award rate $16.37 $16.37 Casual loading (25%) $4.09 $4.09 Statutory costs* $4.09 $4.09 Additional premium $1 $3.50 Total $25.55 $28.05 *Statutory costs include superannuation, payroll tax and work cover

16 EXCESSIVE RISK Needing to guarantee Pacific seasonal workers a minimum of 14 weeks work Less control over the selection of workers Paying upfront costs for untested workers Risk of absconding

17 LACK OF AWARENESS Percentage of growers who have heard of the Seasonal Worker Program 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% NSW NT QLD SA TAS VIC WA TOTAL PS (N=101) 74% 71% 88% 56% 67% 70% 56% 68% SS (N=76) 56% 0% 67% 38% 50% 25% 17% 38% Total (N=177) 67% 56% 79% 47% 60% 49% 40% 55%

18 REPUTATION OF THE SCHEME Reputation of the SWP (all growers aware of the scheme) 45% 42% 40% 35% 33% 33% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% 6% 5% 19% 15% 10% 18% Poor Below Average Average Above Average Excellent Unsure Would rather not say Non-participating growers (N=95) 5% 7% 5% AEs and participating growers (N=40) 2% 0%

19 ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS Time take to become an Approved Employer 45% N=30 40% 40% 35% 30% 25% 27% 20% 20% 15% 10% 5% 3% 3% 7% 0% < 3 months 3-6 months 6-9 months 9-12 months >12 months Unsure

20 ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS Labour market testing Reporting to Government Process of applying to become an AE Recruitment plans On-arrival and pre-departure briefing Paperwork associated with superannuation

21 SUGGESTED REFORMS Key changes that growers thought would make the scheme more attractive N=40 80% 75% 70% 60% 50% 48% 40% 35% 40% 30% 28% 20% 20% 18% 15% 13% 10% 0% international travel costs Domestic transfer costs Organising accommodation Reporting to government Minimum 14 weeks work requirement Superannuation Labour market testing Pastoral care Other

22 SUGGESTED REFORMS Key reform that would transform the scheme: Removing the second-year visa extension for Working Holiday (subclass 417) visa holders or expanding the second-year visa extension to other sectors beyond agriculture, mining and construction Industry body survey suggests that this reform would not be politically feasible. Horticulture has become so dependent on backpackers that any reform restricting their supply would not pass.

23 SUGGESTED REFORMS Some of the key feasible reforms: 1. Reforming cost-sharing arrangements 2. Sharing the risk burden 3. Advertising the scheme more broadly 4. Improving the reputation amongst non-participating growers 5. Minimizing the administrative requirements

24 THANK YOU T h e W o r l d B a n k P a c i f i c D e p a r tm e n t w w w. w o r dbank.o r g / p i