Western District Employment Access – Response to Employment Services 2015 – 2020 Exposure Draft

Training

Comments:

  • Employment Services 2015 – 2020 has a strong focus on job seeker work preparation to meet employers demands yet training appears to be restricted in terms of Employer Fund expenditure, What does ‘training that is not directly related to a specific job’ mean in the Employer Fund non funded items?
  • Recommend: Loosen the rules regarding training in the Employment Fund eligibility to give Employment Providers the scope to make this decision.
  • Training can play a major role in jobseeker engagement, particularly for those that are highly disadvantaged.Having a jobseeker attend training every day can assist in job preparation just by attending and engaging with other training participants.
  • Recommend: Allocate an overall percentage of expenditure in the Employment Fund for training itemsto engage jobseekers

Financials

Comments:

  • With the change from service fees to administration fees, and the reduction in income that this produces, areas of poor job opportunities will challenge the financial viability for an Employment Provider.
  • Recommend: Education outcomes (other than for those 15 to 17) be considered.
  • Administration fees do not reflect the extra servicing required for mutual obligation management
  • Experience in the delivery of Job Services Australia (and even the Job Network) has shown a clear correlation between wage subsidy expenditure and sustained outcomes. The prescribed levels of wage subsidy options for employers under the Employment Services contract will be greatly reduced and employers will have to wait longer to be subsidised. This will impact employer’s willingness to place highly disadvantaged jobseekers.
  • Recommend: Consider a 12 week wage subsidy allocation from the Employment Fund at the Providers discretion.
  • Providers are being given the opportunity to be innovative in service delivery, yet very restricted in how the Employment Fund can be used.
  • Recommend: Roll the Employer Fund allocation into the Administration Fees and let the providers make decisions on how expenditure works for their particular area.

Work for the Dole

Comments:

  • There appears to be too much duplication between the services of the WfD Coordinator and Providers, particularly with providers still able to deliver their own WfD options. Hosts will be confused with the level of contact from the Coordinator and each of the Providers. Participant management will be inconsistent and clumsy.
  • Recommend: Reconsider the need for a Work for the Dole Coordinator. Funding could be allocated to the service providers to continue current work for the dole arrangements, with an emphasis on collaboration between providers.