My Blog

Category: Labour Standards & Workers’ Rights

  • Addressing the health workforce crisis in the Pacific

    Labour Standards & Workers’ Rights, International Relations, Unions & Collective Bargaining, Wages & Entitlements

    Addressing the health workforce crisis in the Pacific

    by Fiona Macdonald, Lisa Heap and Charlie Joyce

    Authors

    Fiona Macdonald

    Acting Director, Centre for Future Work

    Lisa Heap

    Senior Researcher

    Charlie Joyce

    Researcher

    Media release



    Australia dumps its care crisis on the Pacific – new report

    Labour mobility is a significant contributor to Pacific Islands’ economies.

    Australia and New Zealand’s temporary labour migration schemes for Pacific workers have expanded into more industries including personal care work in aged care.

    This has led to the loss of skilled health workers from Pacific Island countries, including registered nurses, to lower-skilled personal care jobs overseas.

    Workers who take up temporary migration in Australia and New Zealand are vulnerable to being underpaid and exploited, due to their visa status.

    This report examines the need for reform of labour migration systems and greater consultation with workers.



    Full report




    Factsheet
    Australia dumps its care crisis on the Pacific – new report

    Share

  • Too much work and too few paid hours?

    Labour Standards & Workers’ Rights, Wages & Entitlements

    Too much work and too few paid hours?

    Go Home On Time Day 2025
    by Fiona Macdonald

    Author

    Fiona Macdonald

    Acting Director, Centre for Future Work

    Widespread dissatisfaction with paid work hours, and employees working excessive unpaid overtime, are two of the key findings of the 2025 Go Home on Time Day (GHOTD) survey. The annual survey, undertaken by the Centre for Future Work at the Australia Institute in early September, asked 1,001 Australian workers about their paid working hours and preferences and about any unpaid overtime they worked.

    The findings of the 2025 survey, marking the seventeenth Go Home on Time Day, are not dissimilar to the 2024 survey findings. A large minority of Australian workers would prefer either more or fewer paid work hours. Mostly, workers who are dissatisfied with their hours want more paid work hours (44% of all workers), while a smaller group (14%) want less paid work time.  Alongside the desire for more work many employees are working several hours of unpaid overtime each week. This is the case for employees of all ages and for men and women across most industries and occupations. The 2025 GHOTD survey found, on average, employees work unpaid overtime of 3.6 hours a week, equivalent to 173 hours, or over 4.5 weeks, a year. Paid at the median wage rate this amounts to a financial cost to each worker of $7,930 per year; in total a loss of $95.78 billion.

    A positive finding from the 2025 survey is that unpaid overtime among full-time employees appears to be continuing a slow decline, noted in 2024. This suggests the “Right to Disconnect” legislation, introduced for employees in large organisations in August 2024, may be having its intended impact. The legislation was only extended to small businesses in August 2025, so we might expect to see further declines in unpaid overtime in 2026. A less positive finding is that unpaid overtime is high among part-time and casual employees, many of whom are younger workers. The costs of unpaid overtime to these workers are substantial–especially when considered as a proportion of their paid work time, given their shorter paid work hours and often lower pay rates.

    Read the full report



    Full report

    Share

  • Solving the crisis: Raising the living standards of Australian workers

    Employment & Unemployment, Future of Work, Inequality, Labour Standards & Workers’ Rights, Social Security & Welfare, Unions & Collective Bargaining, Wages & Entitlements

    Solving the crisis: Raising the living standards of Australian workers

    by Lisa Heap

    Author

    Lisa Heap

    Senior Researcher

    Media release



    Feeling hopeless? You’re not alone. The untold story behind Australia’s plummeting standard of living

    Productivity might be the word on everyone’s lips in the lead up to the Albanese Government’s Economic Reform Roundtable  however weak productivity isn’t the cause of many of the problems experience by workers in Australia today nor is increasing productivity the solution. Rapid inflation after the pandemic, combined with rising interest rates and slow wage growth, left many Australian households struggling to afford necessities. The Reserve Bank’s (RBA) blunt strategy of raising interest rates to slow the economy post the pandemic both misdiagnosed the drivers of inflation and harmed Australian workers who struggled to manage increased mortgage repayments and other debts. The root causes of Australia’s post pandemic crisis—rising corporate profits, unjustifiable price hikes, and deep wage stagnation were ignored by the RBA.

    Despite a reduction in inflation and interest rates, too many Australians are still experiencing lower living standards after the turbulent events of the past five years. Official inflation figures may capture broad economic trends however, they do not adequately describe the real pressures experienced by working people—particularly when it comes to the impact of the increasing costs of essentials like food, housing, and energy. Australian workers can ill afford another round of RBA driven unemployment, austerity, and uncertainty.

    What will it take to repair the damage to Australian workers’ living standards?

    In a new publication, Solving the Crisis: Raising the Living standards of Australian workers, some of Australia’s leading progressive economists and social policy analysts explain what is going on and how to fix it. The origins of the current crisis in living standards are documented. A progressive policy agenda for a second term Albanese Government is advanced.

    The multidimensional policy agenda in Solving the Crisis calls for

    • increases in real wages
    • achieving full employment
    • better quality jobs and greater assistance and respect for those seeking employment
    • strengthening public services (including health care, childcare, aged care and education)
    • making fair and affordable housing available
    • developing a well-planned and supported transition to renewable energy sources.

    The key to the success of this agenda is centering the experience of workers’ and their families.

    Australia should adopt a progressive multidimensional economic agenda that lifts living standards, reduces inequality, and strengthens democracy, rather than a narrow concentration on productivity. Uniting people behind this progressive economic agenda helps counter the trend towards increasing inequality, division and conflict, that has been present in other countries.

    How to solve the living standards crisis

    Four policy papers are the core of  Solving the Crisis. These papers examine the main drivers of inequality and deteriorating living standards in Australia

    • Greg Jericho examines how inflation is misunderstood when disconnected from wage growth. He proposes a shift in Reserve Bank policy and a renewed focus on promoting real wage increases.
    • Peter Davidson  argues that growing inequality is not inevitable. Through strengthening the four key policy pillars – income support, minimum wages, full employment, and employment services – minimum incomes can be raised and inequality reduced.
    • Thomas Greenwell highlights how decades of declining collective bargaining and high underemployment have undermined living standards. He calls for renewed support for unions, stronger collective bargaining systems, and a focus on full employment in macroeconomic policy.
    • Charlie Joyce revisits the concept of the social wage—and argues that rebuilding and expanding the social wage can raise living standards, promote inclusion, and restore trust in democratic institutions.

    Together these papers provide practical policy solutions forming a platform for economic reform.

    Solving the Crisis helps working people to help cut through economic misinformation and political spin, offering a clear lens on the structural factors that have driven inequality and declining living standards.

    Progress is happening

    In its first term the Albanese Government has made cautious progress on living standards. This progress includes labour market reforms that have contributed to stronger wage growth. These reforms include supporting increases in the minimum wage, facilitating collective bargaining in hard-to-organise industries, funding support for wage increase in early childhood education and aged care. Cost-of-living measures, like energy rebates and expanded renter assistance, also provide important support to hard-hit households. Meanwhile, the easing of interest rates by the RBA—better late than never, may support future growth and job-creation.

    However, while prices are growing more slowly, the levels of many prices remain too high—especially for necessities like food, housing, and energy. Wages growth may have commenced however at the current pace, it will take several years to repair real wages, and restore the same purchasing power for workers they enjoyed before the pandemic. The quality of public services (another critical determinant of living standards) has been damaged by underfunding and overreliance on privatised provision, the costs of which we are currently seeing in early childhood education and care. Minimum income payments such as Jobseeker remain woefully inadequate. The system designed to support and assist people from unemployment into decent jobs is broken beyond repair. Meanwhile, global economic and geopolitical uncertainty threatens to derail this modest recovery before it really gets going.

    More work to be done

    At the 2025 federal election the Australian people rejected political parties proposing cuts to public services, short-term fixes (like petrol tax cuts), and the politics of division. In its second term the Albanese Government has a unique opportunity to implement progressive policy changes such as those contained in Solving the Crisis.

    More details about Solving the Crisis and additional resources are available at https://www.carmichaelcentre.org.au/living_standards.



    Solving the Crisis: Raising the living standards of Australian workers

    Share

  • Working from Home, Not a Problem

    Gender at Work, Industry & Sector Policies, Labour Standards & Workers’ Rights, Public Sector, Procurement & Privatisation

    Working from Home, Not a Problem

    by Fiona Macdonald

    Author

    Fiona Macdonald

    Acting Director, Centre for Future Work

    More than one in three workers in Australia usually work from home at least some of the week. Working from home has become an established working arrangement for many employees in jobs where it is possible to work remotely. Yet, there is strong opposition from some employers to working from home and regular reports of pressure from organisations to wind back this work arrangement.

    During the lead up to the 2025 federal election we have heard a lot about working from home arrangements as the Coalition adopted a policy for all Commonwealth public servants to work from the office five days a week. The policy has been abandoned but it is not clear that the Coalition have changed their views on this flexible work option, having said it created inefficiencies, has harmed productivity and is much more common in the public than in the private sector. But is there any evidence supporting these views?

    In this briefing paper we review the evidence on working from home, addressing the questions: Who works from home and why? Who benefits from working from home arrangements? Why do some employers (and politicians) want workers back in the office? What is the future for work from home arrangements?

    We find working from home is a flexible work option that has benefits for workers and for organisations, and it contributes to more inclusive and gender-equal workforce participation and a more productive economy. Working from home arrangements may require some workplace adaptation including requiring managers to work differently. However these challenges should not get in the way of the many benefits that working from home and other flexible work arrangements offer.



    Full report

    Share

  • Briefing Paper: Restoring public sector capability through investment in public service employees

    Employment & Unemployment, Future of Work, Gender at Work, Governance & Government Agencies, Labour Standards & Workers’ Rights, Public Sector, Procurement & Privatisation

    Briefing Paper: Restoring public sector capability through investment in public service employees

    by Lisa Heap

    Author

    Lisa Heap

    Senior Researcher

    The Australian Public Service (APS) is responsible for delivering some of the most crucial social services to all Australians. The APS workforce includes employees who deliver frontline services like in Medicare and Centrelink, those who administer the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS), and those who assist service personnel and veterans via Veterans Affairs. These are just some of the functions that APS employees undertake. Behind front line service delivery staff are employees who support these staff, work to coordinate and integrate services and provide policy and regulatory advice to government.

    This briefing paper examines the make-up of the APS and considers recent efforts to improve APS service delivery. We conclude that recent investment in the employment of more APS employees has improved service delivery and that any reduction in APS employees will reduce service delivery or result in the engagement of more consultants and contractors.

    In this paper we debunk several of the myths promoted in the political debate around the size of Australia’s public service. One such myth is that Australia’s public service is “bloated” or “inefficient”. The research also found that despite claims to the contrary, most of the public service jobs created since 2022 were not based in Canberra.



    Restoring public sector capability through investment in public service employees

    Share

  • Life Savers Without Life Savings

    Labour Standards & Workers’ Rights, Retirement, Wages & Entitlements

    Life Savers Without Life Savings

    Early retirement and superannuation for firefighters and paramedics
    by Jack Thrower

    Author

    Jack Thrower

    Senior Economist

    Firefighters and paramedics save lives, protect us from the ravages of fire, and ensure the sick and injured receive the medical treatment they need. However, after a working life protecting others, these emergency workers face substantial risk of having inadequate retirement incomes.

    Firefighters and paramedics are regularly compelled to retire early due to particular barriers to working beyond the age of 60. Workers in these intense and challenging roles should have access to early retirement options. However, early retirement means fewer years for superannuation to grow and more years in retirement drawing on superannuation.

    The possibility of superannuation running out is significant even under relatively optimistic assumptions.

    This paper provides simulations of retirement income trajectories for firefighters and paramedics under a range of assumptions. For firefighters, these show, under relatively optimistic assumptions, an early-retiring single firefighter can expect their superannuation to run out six years before male life expectancy, nine years before female life expectancy, and 15 years earlier than for a regular retiree (retiring at 67). Under alternative scenarios, incorporating plausible risks, an early-retiring firefighter can expect their superannuation to run out 15 or more years before life expectancy.

    For paramedics, the challenges are similar and severe. Our simulations indicate that, even under optimistic assumptions, an early-retiring single paramedic can expect their superannuation to run out seven years before male life expectancy, ten years before female life expectancy, and 14 years earlier than for a regular retiree. Considering plausible risks, an early-retiring paramedic’s superannuation could run out 15 or more years before life expectancy.

    To extend superannuation longevity through to the age of their expected lifespan an early-retiring firefighter or paramedic would need to reduce their annual living expenses by 18.5%.

    Given the challenges of continuing their work in these intense roles past age 60, it is unacceptable that retired firefighters and paramedics should have either significantly reduced living standards or risk running out of superannuation in retirement.

    Among the range of potential policy responses considered in this paper, one response with promise is to increase employer superannuation contributions for emergency responders and supplement this with a one-time special superannuation contribution for workers already approaching retirement.



    Full report

    Share

  • Submission to Industrial Relations Victoria Inquiry on Restricting Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs) in Workplace Sexual Harassment Cases

    Employment & Unemployment, Gender at Work, Labour Standards & Workers’ Rights, Wages & Entitlements

    Submission to Industrial Relations Victoria Inquiry on Restricting Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs) in Workplace Sexual Harassment Cases

    by Lisa Heap and David Peetz

    Authors

    Lisa Heap

    Senior Researcher

    David Peetz

    Laurie Carmichael Distinguished Research Fellow

    It is generally reported that NDAs can benefit victim-survivors by providing anonymity and privacy where that is the victim-survivor’s choice. However, it is also reported that power imbalances between victim-survivors on the one hand and perpetrators and employers/organisation on the other have left workers feeling they had little choice but to sign NDAs.

    NDAs have had the impact of silencing victim-survivors, disguising the actions of perpetrators and covering up the prevalence of sexual harassment and other forms of gender-based violence and harassment within organisations. At times, this has enabled harassers to remain in the same workplace or move within industries and continue to engage in sexual harassment.

    The focus of this submission is on the issues of transparency associated with NDAs and the impact of these agreements on public interest concerns regarding the prevention of sexual harassment and other forms of gender-based violence and harassment at work. We believe that greater transparency regarding the practices associated with settling sexual harassment claims will lead to greater accountability. This accountability should be supported by legislative reforms that mandate minimum conditions such as those set out in this submission.



    Full report

    Share

  • No Blood – No Job

    Employment & Unemployment, Labour Standards & Workers’ Rights, Unions & Collective Bargaining

    No Blood – No Job

    Australia’s privacy laws and workers’ rights
    by Lisa Heap

    Author

    Lisa Heap

    Senior Researcher

    Organisations in Australia are using blood analysis as a means of screening future employees for ‘health risks’ that they allege may impact on their performance of work.

    Collecting sensitive information from blood analysis is restricted under Australia’s privacy laws. This is because the mishandling of this information can have a substantial detrimental impact on those who have provided the information. Requiring workers to submit to blood analysis is just one example of how organisations are now routinely collecting sensitive information from workers, sometimes without adhering to the requirements of privacy laws. Other examples include using fingerprint and facial recognition software and sensors that collect physiological and psychological data about workers.

    The protection from arbitrary interference with a person’s privacy is a fundamental human right. Interfering with this right, by collecting sensitive personal information, should occur in limited circumstances and only where necessary. However, this report shows that some organisations in Australia, are not treating the collection of sensitive information from workers as an exception. They are collecting sensitive information as a routine step in their employment processes.

    The findings of this report raise concerns about power, privacy, fairness, and the potential for discrimination in the practices being adopted by some organisations. These findings also show that Australia’s current privacy and workplace relations laws do not adequately address these concerns. Amendments to Australian privacy laws are currently being considered by the Australian Government with reforms likely to be put before the Australian Parliament before the end of 2024.

    This report examines the need for new provisions within either or both privacy or workplace relations laws that set out the rights of workers to protect their sensitive information. It argues that regulation should be geared towards, not only protecting workers’ rights to privacy, but to providing a disincentive to organisations hoarding and misuse of the personal and sensitive information of workers.

    The worker-centric approach called for in this report includes:

    • the development of one system of regulation to protect the privacy concerns of all workers regardless of employment status or work context
    • defining the collection of workers’ personal and sensitive information as high risk requiring both specific and detailed justification for the collection of this information and the genuine informed and affirmative consent of workers
    • the establishment of a tripartite mechanism to assist the regulator to develop and manage processes for dealing with the privacy and related human rights concerns of workers
    • the use of codes and frameworks, developed via a tripartite mechanism, to set out when and how workers’ information can be collected and used
    • the development of an easy to access, and timely, worker centered mechanism to address concerns about the collection and use of workers’ information.



    Full report

    Share

  • Submission to the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Employment, Education and Training Inquiry into the Digital Transformation of Workplaces

    Digital Technology & the Internet, Future of Work, Labour Standards & Workers’ Rights

    Submission to the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Employment, Education and Training Inquiry into the Digital Transformation of Workplaces

    by Fiona Macdonald and Lisa Heap

    Authors

    Fiona Macdonald

    Acting Director, Centre for Future Work

    Lisa Heap

    Senior Researcher

    Artificial Intelligence (AI) is transforming the way we work and the jobs we do. AI innovations in workplaces can have positive benefits, including through productivity gains. However, AI applications can also have significant risks for workers and for job quality.
    AI applications, including automated decision making, are not neutral processes. Software can be designed and used to assist workers by augmenting their capacity and freeing up time for more meaningful or creative work. Or it can be designed and used in ways that intensify work and displace workers.
    International evidence shows the use of AI in workplaces for managing workers and work processes is extending and intensifying long-standing efficiency-driven logics that result in reduced autonomy and control and intensify work, undermining job quality and worker wellbeing. Even when designed for benevolent purposes, unintended consequences can arise from the adoption of AI in workplaces. These include serious breaches of privacy, bias and discrimination in recruitment and hiring, and unfair decision-making in performance measurement and evaluation.
    In this submission we argue that the promotion of AI innovation must not overshadow objectives and principles for decent jobs and fairness at work. We set out principles for new laws to regulate the uses of AI in workplaces with a goal of protecting workers.



    Full report

    Share

  • The Irrelevance of Minimum Wages to Future Inflation

    Labour Standards & Workers’ Rights, Macroeconomics, Unions & Collective Bargaining

    The Irrelevance of Minimum Wages to Future Inflation

    Minimum and award wages should grow by 5 to 10 per cent this year
    by Jim Stanford and Greg Jericho

    Authors

    Jim Stanford

    Greg Jericho

    Chief Economist

    Media release



    Increasing minimum wage would not drive inflation up: new report

    A significant increase to the minimum wage, and accompanying increases to award rates, would not have a significant effect on inflation, according to new analysis by the Centre for Future Work at the Australia Institute.
    The analysis examines the correlation between minimum wage increases and inflation going back to 1997, and it finds no consistent link between minimum wage increases and inflation.

    The report, co-authored by Greg Jericho (Policy Director) and Jim Stanford (Director), finds that a minimum wage rise of between five and 10 per cent in the Fair Work’s Annual Wage Review, due in June, is needed to restore the real buying power of low-paid workers to pre-pandemic trends, but would not significantly affect headline inflation.

    Key findings of the report include:

    • Last year’s decision, which lifted the minimum wage by 8.65 per cent and other award wages by 5.75 per cent, offset some but not all of the effects of recent inflation on real earnings for low-wage workers.
    • At the same time, inflation fell by 3 full percentage points.
    • There has been no significant correlation between rises in the minimum wage and inflation since 1997.
    • Raising wages by 5 to 10 per cent this year would offset recent inflation and restore the pre-pandemic trend in real wages for award-covered workers.
    • Even if fully passed on by employers, higher award wages would have no significant impact on economy-wide prices.
    • A 10 per cent increase in award wages could be fully offset, with no impact on prices at all, by just a 2 per cent reduction in corporate profits – still leaving profits far above historical levels.

    “Australia’s lowest paid workers have been hardest hit by inflation since Covid. There is a moral imperative to restore quality of life for these Australians and this analysis shows that there is no credible economic reason to deny them,” Jericho said.

    “It’s vital the Fair Work Commission ensure that the minimum wage not only keeps up with inflation, but also grows gradually in real terms – as was the trend before the pandemic.



    Full report




    Factsheet
    Increasing minimum wage would not drive inflation up: new report

    Share