Search Results

This report presents new findings on how an innovative post-employment program in Britain is affecting the employment, earnings and benefits receipt of long-term unemployed individuals. This initiative, called the Employment Retention and Advancement (ERA) demonstration program, is being carefully evaluated through a large-scale randomised control trial. ERA offered a unique combination of financial incentives and in-work support designed to help individuals sustain and advance in the labour market. The demonstration targeted three groups: unemployed lone parents, lone parents working part-time, and long-term unemployed individuals receiving government benefits. While a companion report [indexed at TD/TNC 94.119] presents effects for lone parents, this report focuses on the experiences of the long-term unemployed group, most of whom are men. An earlier evaluation report published in 2007 [indexed at TD/TNC 89.84], showed that, despite significant positive effects for lone parents, ERA's effects for the long-term unemployed group were mixed and uncertain after one year of follow-up. For this group, the program had shown no effects overall on employment or earnings but there were suggestions of positive effects in some districts. The new evidence presented here, covering two years of follow-up, continues to show that ERA's effects were limited. Although the program increased overall employment rates and reduced benefits receipt in year two, these effects were small. However, final assessment of ERA's effectiveness for this group must await longer-term follow-up.

Excerpt from published summary. Show less

This report presents new findings on the implementation and effectiveness of Britain's Employment Retention and Advancement (ERA) demonstration program, which is being evaluated though a large-scale randomised control trial. ERA's distinctive combination of post-employment advisory support and financial incentives was designed to help low-income individuals who entered work sustain employment and advance in the labour market. The analysis presented here focuses on the experiences of lone parents within the first two years following their entry onto the program.

Excerpt from published summary. Show less

With people living longer and the working age population in decline, older Australians are being asked to work longer. Yet increasing numbers are experiencing long-term unemployment and chronic insecurity in the labour market. The Brotherhood of St Laurence and University of Melbourne study, 'Understanding and preventing workforce vulnerabilities in mid-life and beyond', examines the relationship between people's age and their participation in paid work over the course of their lives, focusing in particular on people in their mid-40s, 50s, 60s, and 70s who do not have a job but would like to have one (including jobseekers and those not currently looking for paid work) or who are not working as much as they would like. The study sought to understand: the circumstances that lead to marginalisation from employment and how these differ between men and women and those of different ages; the impact this has on people's wellbeing, personal and financial, and future aspirations; and how existing employment services can better assist mature age people. Statistical analysis of [Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia Survey] HILDA and [Australian Bureau of Statistics] ABS data was carried out, along with qualitative interviews with 80 older men and women about their experiences of ageing, working, and looking for work.

This brief summary provides an overview of findings across three main areas: (1) ageism in employment; (2) people's orientations towards retirement, work-life balance, and attachment to work; and (3) the effectiveness of labour market intermediaries and job services. What emerges is the interconnection between work, age and identity and the critical importance of gender and class in shaping older workers' diverse experiences of ageing, work and discrimination.

Edited excerpts from publication and publisher's website. Show less

In the context of economic change and growing unemployment, there is increased interest in 'employer engagement' approaches to assisting disadvantaged jobseekers. There is also confusion about exactly what employer engagement means. This paper reports on an exploratory study of employer engagement and how it is understood from the perspectives of: employers; business and professional associations; and not-for-profit agencies that act as labour market intermediaries (LMIs) brokering the relationship between jobseekers and employers. The study considered employers' experience with 10 programs and examined five LMIs. Features that were shared by many of the programs include: small scale; short-term work placement, work experience or labour hire; mentoring, pre-employment and/or on the job; and targeted traineeships. This study provides some insight into the complexity of employer engagement approaches and raises the following questions: How can the successful experiences of employers and LMIs translate into positive, inclusive workplace approaches that can be implemented at a larger scale? How can training and employment pathways be made more relevant to employer and industry requirements? Would the wider adoption of special recruitment programs unintentionally reinforce discrimination by failing to challenge mainstream recruitment practices? To what extent do employers have a social obligation to provide employment opportunities for marginalised or excluded workers? How do these obligations differ across employer types, size, industries and labour conditions?

Excerpts from publication. Show less

Almost one-third of JobSeeker Payment recipients in Australia are people assessed as unable to work at least 30 hours a week. They face an uncertain future, with inadequate income support and little prospect of gaining employment in a competitive labour market. This growing group of people who are deemed to have 'partial capacity to work' reflects a decade of changes to tighten eligibility and assessment for social security payments, especially the Disability Support Pension. The impact on many people with disability and/or chronic health conditions has been severe. Enabling economic security for these vulnerable people requires reforms across intersecting areas including the social safety net and employment assistance.

The partial capacity to work category illustrates how the social security system fails many vulnerable individuals, due to design faults that create poverty traps. This report examines the development of this classification and its impact on the lives of individuals and their households. It considers the onerous processes involved in applying and for the Disability Support Pension, and the economic and social costs of having to live instead on the much lower JobSeeker Payment with extra obligations. It also points to structural barriers facing people with disability and/or chronic health conditions in seeking employment. It recommends urgent policy changes in intersecting systems - especially social security and employment assistance - to enable people who cannot work full-time due to disability or ill health to gain economic security and live with dignity.

Edited excerpts from publisher's website. Show less

This study provides valuable insights into the provision of employment services for highly disadvantaged people with complex needs. It built on the evidence-based Individual Placement and Support [IPS] approach for people with mental illness, which was developed and well-documented in the United States. The report includes a detailed fidelity review of the adaptation and implementation of the IPS model.

Published summary from BSL website. Show less

Existing policy responses to workforce age discrimination tend to focus on the role of employers in providing opportunities for jobseekers aged over 45. By contrast the 'Enhancing employment services for mature age jobseekers' study builds on previous research about mature age workforce participation to focus on employment services and how their staff might work more effectively with mature-age jobseekers. The latest iteration of Australia's outsourced public employment services is jobactive. However, jobactive is not working particularly well for mature age jobseekers, employment services staff or employers. Our research highlights several contradictions that undermine the effectiveness of assistance offered to mature age, and other, jobseekers. Older jobseekers may be seen as difficult to place and therefore be liable to 'parking' by employment services. As the frontline staff now tend to be younger and have fewer qualifications, our previous research suggested that their age mismatch with older jobseekers may give rise to unconscious bias.

This report focuses on employer perceptions of public employment services and mature age jobseekers. It draws on the analysis of 22 interviews with employers, employer groups, policy makers, diversity organisations and employment services peak bodies. Key findings are that: some employers are cautious about employing mature age workers; some employers have limited awareness of jobactive; employers are cautious about candidates referred by public employment services, especially mature age jobseekers; employers want well-matched candidates for vacancies; and there is a risk of over-promising and under-delivering, in that web and TV promotion of employment services risks being counterproductive - if employers do not find the kind of service they need they will be even less likely to use it in future. The implication of these findings are that: inclusive employment requires effort on many fronts; job-matching requires both time and knowledge; and to effectively tackle unemployment and discrimination, broader strategies are required.

Edited excerpts from publisher's website and publication. Show less

Existing policy responses to workforce age discrimination tend to focus on the role of employers in providing opportunities for jobseekers aged over 45. By contrast the 'Enhancing employment services for mature age jobseekers' study builds on previous research about mature age workforce participation to focus on employment services and how their staff might work more effectively with mature-age jobseekers. The latest iteration of Australia's outsourced public employment services is jobactive. However, jobactive is not working particularly well for mature age jobseekers, employment services staff or employers. Our research highlights several contradictions that undermine the effectiveness of assistance offered to mature age, and other, jobseekers. Older jobseekers may be seen as difficult to place and therefore be liable to 'parking' by employment services. As the frontline staff now tend to be younger and have fewer qualifications, our previous research suggested that their age mismatch with older jobseekers may give rise to unconscious bias.

This report focuses on the analysis of semi-structured interviews with 30 mature age jobseekers about their experiences of employment services. Our research shows that there is disjunction between what mature age jobseekers say they need from employment services and what they get. What is required according to the jobseekers we interviewed are: well thought-out pathways to sustainable employment; a skills assessment and recognition process; more effective employer engagement; and relevant, employment-related training and specific training for digital job search, as well as wider access to funding for targeted training to fill skills gaps. For example, jobseekers may have basic computer skills but need specific training in an accounting software package or advanced word processing. Jobseekers highlighted some of the contradictions inherent in the jobactive system that get in the way of what one jobseeker described as 'real help'. These contradictions include: emphasis on compliance undermines 'real' assistance; a short-sighted approach to long-term unemployment; focus on jobseekers rather than employers; mismatch between needs and support; insufficient job-specific training; mismatch of approved volunteer activities with jobseeker skills; and frontline staff are 'too young' to help.

Edited excerpts from publisher's website and publication. Show less

Existing policy responses to workforce age discrimination tend to focus on the role of employers in providing opportunities for jobseekers aged over 45. By contrast the 'Enhancing employment services for mature age jobseekers' study builds on previous research about mature age workforce participation to focus on employment services and how their staff might work more effectively with mature-age jobseekers. The latest iteration of Australia's outsourced public employment services is jobactive. However, jobactive is not working particularly well for mature age jobseekers, employment services staff or employers. Our research highlights several contradictions that undermine the effectiveness of assistance offered to mature age, and other, jobseekers. Older jobseekers may be seen as difficult to place and therefore be liable to 'parking' by employment services. As the frontline staff now tend to be younger and have fewer qualifications, our previous research suggested that their age mismatch with older jobseekers may give rise to unconscious bias.

This research summary provides an overview of the study and its findings, with more detail contained in three longer reports. The study entailed interviews with mature age jobseekers, jobactive staff and employers in four Victorian employment regions with high rates of mature age unemployment. The study deepens our understanding of the barriers and pathways that lead older Australians to be long-term unemployed. It documents the level and quality of current case management practices and evaluate the effectiveness of the current service model in supporting workforce access and participation for older men and women. The findings have informed a range of learning resources for employment services staff, aimed at enhancing intergenerational awareness and enabling them to support mature age jobseekers to find work. They will also inform policy advocacy to improve outcomes for mature-age and other disadvantaged jobseekers.

Edited excerpts from publisher's website and publication. Show less

Existing policy responses to workforce age discrimination tend to focus on the role of employers in providing opportunities for jobseekers aged over 45. By contrast the 'Enhancing employment services for mature age jobseekers' study builds on previous research about mature age workforce participation to focus on employment services and how their staff might work more effectively with mature-age jobseekers. The latest iteration of Australia's outsourced public employment services is jobactive. However, jobactive is not working particularly well for mature age jobseekers, employment services staff or employers. Our research highlights several contradictions that undermine the effectiveness of assistance offered to mature age, and other, jobseekers. Older jobseekers may be seen as difficult to place and therefore be liable to 'parking' by employment services. As the frontline staff now tend to be younger and have fewer qualifications, our previous research suggested that their age mismatch with older jobseekers may give rise to unconscious bias.

This report focuses on the perspectives of employment services staff. It draws on 32 semi-structured interviews conducted with jobactive staff in four employment regions in Melbourne with high mature age unemployment. Two complementary reports focus on the perspectives of mature age jobseekers and employers. From our interviews with employment services staff, we identified the following issues: prompt and flexible services are vital; assessment of needs could be improved; jobseeker skills assessment should be complemented by training linked to employment; understanding and collaborating in local labour markets is essential; recognising and fostering diversity and inclusive employment; and employer engagement presents challenges. To overcome these obstacles, employment services staff need more time to understand employers' needs and match suitable jobseekers with vacancies. They may also need training in strategies to promote mature age jobseekers, and related incentives such as Restart, to employers.

Edited excerpts from publisher's website and publication. Show less