Category: Media Release

  • Budget’s Illusory Hope for Business-Led Recovery

    Budget’s Illusory Hope for Business-Led Recovery

    by Jim Stanford

    Share

    The Commonwealth government tabled its 2020-21 budget on 6 October, six months later than the usual timing because of the dramatic events associated with the COVID-19 pandemic and resulting recession. There is no doubt it is a budget unlike any other in Australia’s postwar history. While the budget certainly unleashes unprecedented fiscal power, its underlying logic and specific policy design are unsatisfactory in many ways. We present here analysis and commentary on several aspects of the budget, drawing on input from all of the Centre’s research staff: Economist and Director Dr. Jim Stanford, Senior Economist Alison Pennington, and Economist Dan Nahum.

    Key conclusions of our analysis include:

    • This budget says explicitly that Australia’s economic reconstruction after COVID-19 is to be trusted almost entirely to private business – helped along with generous tax cuts and business subsidies.
    • The need to strengthen public services (like health care, child care, and higher and vocational education) is largely ignored, as is the need to preserve and strengthen income security programs (with the phase-out of JobKeeper and cuts to JobSeeker going ahead).
    • Tax cuts, whether targeted at businesses or high-income households, will have little impact on actual spending and job-creation.
    • The government needs a more forceful, hands-on, and sustained reconstruction plan to ensure that the economy does not get ‘stuck’ in its current state of partial recovery. That needs much more public sector leadership, vision, and funding.
    • The government admits that wage growth is going to get weaker before it gets stronger – but is doing nothing about that critical problem (which will undermine consumer spending far more than tax cuts will stimulate it).

    Download our full review of the 2020-21 budget below.


    Related documents



    2020-21 Budget Analysis

    You might also like

    Commonwealth Budget 2025-2026: Our analysis

    by Fiona Macdonald

    The Centre for Future Work’s research team has analysed the Commonwealth Government’s budget, focusing on key areas for workers, working lives, and labour markets. As expected with a Federal election looming, the budget is not a horror one of austerity. However, the 2025-2026 budget is characterised by the absence of any significant initiatives. There is

    Centre For Future Work to evolve into standalone entity

    The Centre for Future Work was established by the Australia Institute in 2016 to conduct and publish progressive economic research on work, employment, and labour markets. Supported by the Australian Union movement, the centre produced cutting edge research and led the national conversation on economic issues facing working people: including the future of jobs, wages

  • 480,000 Jobs Rely on QLD Public Service, Cuts Would Deepen the State’s Recession

    480,000 Jobs Rely on QLD Public Service, Cuts Would Deepen the State’s Recession

    Share

    With state budget deficits a potential issue in the coming Queensland election, new research from the Centre for Future Work shows that cutting public sector jobs and wages would directly undermine the delivery of essential public services at a challenging time in Queensland’s history. Moreover, misplaced fiscal austerity would also hurt the state’s economic recovery by reducing spending, employment and production in the private sector. These effects would be especially severe in regional and remote QLD, which is most reliant on public service jobs.

    The report, by the Centre for Future Work, finds that for every 10 direct jobs in state-funded public services, another 4.5 jobs are supported in the QLD private sector. This means that these public services support a total of some 480,000 public and private sector jobs across Queensland. Cuts to public services and staffing would impact private sector jobs and incomes, deepening the recession.

    Key Findings:

    • Some 480,000 positions are supported, directly and indirectly, by the provision of state-funded public services in Queensland.
    • This includes 331,000 direct public sector jobs, as well as over 150,000 more positions in the private sector that depend on the economic stimulus provided by public sector work.
    • For every 10 direct jobs in the state-funded public service, another 4.5 jobs are supported in the private sector.
    • Regional and remote Queensland is the most reliant on state public sector workers – both for the services they provide, and as a source of high-quality employment for local residents. State public sector workers account for almost 12% of total employment in remote and very remote regions of QLD.
    • The report simulates two potential scenarios of fiscal austerity in Queensland. It finds that fiscal austerity (imposed via cuts to public service staffing and wages) would cause substantial harm to Queensland’s economy: including cumulative losses (over three years) of $9-$16 billion in state GSP, and the loss of 20-35,000 person-years of employment in the private sector.

    “In this unprecedented time, the maintenance of public services is surely a more urgent priority than cutting government spending in pursuit of some illusory fiscal target,” said Dan Nahum, Economist at the Centre for Future Work and author of the report.

    “By cutting employment and incomes for public sector workers (and the private sector industries which depend on public services for their own markets), misplaced austerity would undermine economic recovery and reduce GDP.

    “A more constructive and effective response to the COVID crisis is to expand the economic and social footprint of government, including state governments – not shrink it.

    “Attacking public sector employment and compensation, just at the time Queenslanders need more public services, not less, would be a major policy mistake.”


    Related research

  • New Analysis: 12,000 Community Service Jobs at Risk Due to Funding Uncertainty

    New Analysis: 12,000 Community Service Jobs at Risk Due to Funding Uncertainty

    Share

    New economic research shows up to 12,000 community service jobs are at risk due to the Federal Government’s failure to confirm whether federal funding for community service organisations will be maintained.

    The new report released today by the Australia Institute’s Centre for Future Work demonstrates the economic importance of Commonwealth pay-equity funding at a time when these community services are critical to Australia’s pandemic-damaged economy.

    Key Findings:

    • The Federal Government is yet to confirm whether it will continue $576.5 million in supplemental funding for federally-supported community services, currently set to expire in the current (2020-21) financial year.
    • This special funding was part of the Commonwealth government’s legislated 9-year timetable to phase in pay equity wage adjustments in community services.
    • If this funding is not renewed (either by incorporation into a higher level of core funding for affected organisations, or through the extension of explicit pay equity supplements), the resulting funding shortfall will undermine and reverse the progress that has been made toward pay equity since the 2012 pay equity order.
    • The loss of federal pay equity supplements would inevitably produce some combination of staffing cuts and wage cuts, as organisations respond to such a significant loss of funding.

    “If experienced fully through staff cuts, the end of federal supplements would result in the loss of close to 12,000 jobs in federally-supported community organisations,” said Dr. Jim Stanford, director of the Australia Institute’s Centre for Future Work.

    “Alternatively, if the brunt of the funding cut is experienced through effective wage reductions it would reduce annual incomes for federally-funded community service workers by as much as $15,000 for full-time staff.

    “To put up to 12,000 community service jobs at risk, or force community service workers to take a $15,000 a year pay cut in the middle of global pandemic and an economic recession is both heartless and economically self-destructive,” Dr. Stanford said.

    The Centre for Future Work report also found that the broad health and social services sector (which includes most of these community service organisations) has reduced the gender pay gap by more than any other industry in the years since the pay equity reform was announced.

    Those past gains will be undermined and reversed unless federal funding consistent with new pay equity norms is quickly confirmed.


    Related research

  • Webinar: How TAFE Can Drive Australia’s Skills and Jobs Recovery

    Webinar: How TAFE Can Drive Australia’s Skills and Jobs Recovery

    by Alison Pennington

    Share

    With millions facing unemployment and crisis-accelerated job transitions, public investment in the skills and earning capabilities of Australians will be critical to our post-pandemic recovery.

    To mark National TAFE Day and the release of new research by the Centre for Future Work on the economic and social benefits of the TAFE system, The Australia Institute hosted a timely discussion on how the TAFE system can drive a COVID-era skills and jobs recovery with ACTU President Michele O’Neil, Correna Haythorpe, federal president of the Australian Education Union, and Alison Pennington, Senior Economist at the Centre for Future Work.

    The webinar was presented as part of the Australia Institute’s widely acclaimed Economics of a Pandemic webinar series and explored why the TAFE system has been in turmoil, the historic role it has played generating a more skilled workforce and productive economy, and how we can fix it.


    Related documents



    Presentation slides

    Related research

    You might also like

  • Failure to Invest in New Tech Damaging Economy, Incomes & Jobs

    Failure to Invest in New Tech Damaging Economy, Incomes & Jobs

    Share

    Startling new research from the Centre for Future Work shows that Australia’s economy is now regressing in its use of new technology, with negative implications for productivity, incomes, and job quality.

    The report findings contrast sharply with the common concern that robots and other forms of automation will threaten future job security for Australian workers.

    Major findings include:

    • Business investment in new machinery (including robots) is weaker than at any point in Australia’s post-war history.
    • Business spending on new research and technology has also been falling in Australia, and now ranks well behind the average of other industrial countries (and even some emerging economies, like China).
    • The average amount of machinery and equipment used by the typical Australian worker has been declining since 2014, and has since fallen by 6%.
    • Because of less automation and innovation, average productivity in Australia’s economy has also been declining for three straight years – also the weakest performance in Australia’s post-war history.

    “Australian businesses are not investing nearly enough in new technology,” said Dr Jim Stanford, Economist and Director of the Centre for Future Work.

    “This lack of business investment in new technology does not mean that Australian jobs are somehow safer. To the contrary, the failure of business investment means that even more jobs will be located in low-productivity, low-tech, low-wage industries – with terrible implications for wages and job quality.

    “Business leaders love to complain that Australia’s productivity problems are due to red tape, taxes, and unions. The evidence is clear that their own failure to invest in new capital and new technology explains the stagnation in productivity. Instead of blaming others for this outcome, business leaders need to look in the mirror.”


    Related research

  • TAFE system supports $92.5 billion in annual economic benefits

    TAFE system supports $92.5 billion in annual economic benefits

    Share

    New research from the Australia Institute’s Centre for Future Work shows the TAFE system supports $92.5 billion in annual economic benefits through the direct operation of TAFE institutes, higher incomes and productivity generated by the TAFE-credentialed workforce, and reduced social benefits costs.

    The report adopts a multidimensional approach to measuring the wide economic and social benefits of the TAFE system resulting from Australia’s historic investments in public vocational education. Over $6 billion in economic activity and 48,000 jobs are supported by the direct operation of TAFE institutes and the TAFE supply-chain. Through its accumulated contribution to the employability and skills of Australians, the TAFE system generates another flow of benefits worth $84.9 billion per year in higher incomes and productivity. Those benefits are shared by workers in higher incomes, firms in higher profits, and federal and state governments – which receive $25 billion per year in extra tax revenues. Finally, another $1.5 billion in fiscal savings are enjoyed by governments through reduced costs for health and welfare benefits for TAFE graduates. Altogether, the TAFE system drives $92.5 billion in benefits per year – equal to almost 5% of Australia’s GDP.

    The report finds despite chronic underfunding, Australia’s historic investment in the TAFE system continues to generate an enormous and ongoing dividend to the Australian economy. Increased public investment in the skills and earning capabilities of Australians will be critical to our post-pandemic recovery.

    Key Findings:

    • Australia’s historic investments in quality TAFE education supports a combined and ongoing flow of total economic benefits worth $92.5 billion to the Australian economy in 2019 — 16 times greater than the annual ‘maintenance’ costs Australia currently reinvests in the TAFE system.
    • The presence and activity of TAFE institutes ‘anchors’ over $6 billion per year in economic activity and 48,000 jobs from the direct operation of the TAFE system and its supply chain, and ‘downstream’ consumer spending impacts.
    • The TAFE-trained workforce generates $84.9 billion per year in higher incomes and business productivity. $49.3 billion is paid in additional earnings to TAFE-credentialed workers (relative to earnings of workers without post-school training); businesses receive $35.6 billion in increased profits from a more productive TAFE-trained workforce.
    • The costs of delivering TAFE are modest – only $5.7 billion per year, or 0.3% GDP. Extra tax revenues received by governments thanks to the superior productivity and incomes of TAFE-trained workers alone are worth $25 billion per year: 4.4 times more than the total costs of running the TAFE system.
    • The TAFE system increases employability and lowers unemployment. TAFE graduates enter the labour force with better employment prospects and skills. The increased labour force participation and employability of TAFE graduates corresponds to additional employment of 486,000.
    • The TAFE system promotes wider social benefits critical to addressing inequality. TAFE helps ‘bridge’ access to further education and jobs pathways in regional areas and for special and at-risk youth groups. TAFE students are more likely to come from low-income households and identify as Aboriginal compared with private VET providers.

    “Australia will squander the demonstrated economic benefits generated by our investments in the TAFE system, and unnecessarily limit our post-COVID recovery if we don’t act quickly to reinstate the critical role that TAFE plays in the VET system,” said Alison Pennington, senior economist at the Australia Institute’s Centre for Future Work.  

    “The Australian economy is reaping an enormous flow of economic benefits from a VET ‘house’ built by the TAFE system. But the ‘house’ that TAFE institutes built is crumbling. If Australia wants to secure the benefits of a superior, productive TAFE-trained workforce as we prepare for post-COVID reconstruction, the damage must be repaired quickly.

    “Major public skills investments will be best coordinated by TAFE institutes as the longest-standing and most reliable ‘anchors’ of vocational training and must be at the centre of an economic reconstruction process.

    “By providing bridges to further education and jobs for regional, low-income and at-risk youth groups, the TAFE system is critically important to addressing systemic inequality in Australia’s economy and society.”


    Related research

  • Post-COVID Manufacturing Renewal Represents Potential $50 Billion Boost to Economy

    Post-COVID Manufacturing Renewal Represents Potential $50 Billion Boost to Economy

    Share

    New research from the Australia Institute’s Centre for Future Work reveals that Australia ranks last among all OECD countries for manufacturing self-sufficiency. While this indicator confirms the dramatic decline of domestic manufacturing in recent years, it also reveals the enormous potential benefits that would be generated by rebuilding manufacturing back to a size proportional to our national needs: including $180 billion in new sales, $50 billion in additional GDP, and over 400,000 new jobs.

    Key Findings:

    • Australia ranks last in manufacturing self-sufficiency among all OECD countries. Australians use $565 billion worth of manufactures each year, however, we only produce $380 billion. Therefore, Australia produces only 68% (just over two-thirds) of what we use: less than any other OECD economy.
    • The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the strategic importance of domestic manufacturing capacity. Disruptions in global supply chains and protectionist trade policies by foreign governments have increased risks we might not be able to access essential products (like health equipment and supplies) when we need it.
    • Manufacturing is not just ‘another’ sector of the economy. For several concrete reasons, manufacturing carries strategic importance to broader national prosperity and security.
      • Australians purchase and use more manufactured goods over time; and manufacturing output is growing around the world. Allowing domestic manufacturing to decline, while our use of manufactured products grows, undermines national economic performance.
      • Manufacturing is the most innovation-intensive sector in the whole economy. No country can be an innovation leader without a strong manufacturing base.
      • Manufactured goods account for over two-thirds of world merchandise trade. A country that cannot successfully export manufactures will be shut out of most trade.
      • Manufacturing anchors hundreds of thousands of other jobs throughout the economy, thanks to its long and complex supply chain. Billions of dollars’ worth of supplies and inputs are purchased by manufacturing facilities, supporting many other sectors of the economy.
      • Manufacturing offers high-quality jobs, full-time hours and above-average incomes. And thanks to strong productivity growth and the capacity to apply modern technology, manufacturing offers the prospect of rising incomes in the future.

    “As Australian governments and business leaders realise the importance of manufacturing in rebuilding the national economy after COVID, this research shows that Australia now has the smallest manufacturing industry relative to domestic purchases of any OECD country,” said Dr. Jim Stanford, Director of the Australia Institute’s Centre for Future Work and author of the report.

    “These findings confirm the enormous task ahead of the country in rebuilding our domestic manufacturing capacity. However, it also highlights the enormous economic benefits that would be generated by getting manufacturing back to a proportional size: including $180 billion in new sales, $50 billion in new GDP, and over 400,000 new direct jobs.

    “While two-way international trade in manufactured products will always be essential, as a nation we should be manufacturing in aggregate as much as we are using. If we rebuilt a manufacturing sector that was broadly proportionate to our needs, our manufacturing industry would grow by almost 50% – generating enormous benefits in jobs, incomes, innovation and exports.”


    Related research

  • Victorian Inquiry Offers Novel Routes to Regulating Gig Work

    Victorian Inquiry Offers Novel Routes to Regulating Gig Work

    by Alison Pennington

    Findings from a landmark inquiry commissioned by the Andrews Victorian government into the work conditions in the “on demand” (gig) economy have been released. The report’s findings are timely with COVID-era unemployment surging and an expanding pool of vulnerable workers relying on “gig” work to meet living costs.

    This commentary outlines the key findings of the On-Demand Inquiry.

    Victorian Inquiry Offers Novel Routes to Regulating Gig Work

    Findings from a landmark inquiry commissioned by the Victorian government into the work conditions in the “on demand” (gig) economy have been released. The Inquiry confirms workplace laws have failed to keep pace with economic change.

    Release of the report’s findings are timely with COVID-era unemployment surging and an expanding pool of vulnerable workers relying on “gig” work to meet living costs. How do platform “digital sweatshops” work?

    Platform business models recruit workers without access to secure and better compensated jobs (especially migrant and young workers). Jobs performed are often menial and without adequate safety protections. Gig workers lack stable work schedules or incomes, and receive wages that often fall well-below social norms and legal minimums.

    The major recommendations by the Inquiry chaired by former Fair Work Ombudsman Natalie James include:

    • A more systematic application of the “work test” currently used to classify workers as employees or independent contractors by codifying the test in the Fair Work Act (rather than common law). This would create a nationally coherent framework for extending protections including minimum pay and conditions to gig workers genuinely working for another’s business.
    • Alter competition laws and establish a new industry Award to enable gig workers to bargain collectively with platforms.
    • Strengthen the gig work regulatory regime through industry codes of conduct between platforms, governments and unions for non-employee gig workers, overseen by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, and allow an independent tribunal to oversee work status determinations.

    We commend the Inquiry on the ambitious scale of the investigation, and the innovative pathway proposed for gig work regulation.

    Three Centre for Future Work reports on gig work in Australia were cited in the final report. Research by Director Jim Stanford (with Andrew Stewart from University of Adelaide) featured in the report’s major recommendation that collective bargaining rights be extended to gig workers to lift pay and conditions of gig work.

    Read our full submission to the Inquiry — Turning Gigs Into Decent Jobs — by Jim Stanford and Alison Pennington.


    You might also like

    Centre For Future Work to evolve into standalone entity

    The Centre for Future Work was established by the Australia Institute in 2016 to conduct and publish progressive economic research on work, employment, and labour markets. Supported by the Australian Union movement, the centre produced cutting edge research and led the national conversation on economic issues facing working people: including the future of jobs, wages

  • Austerity Threatens Women’s Access to Paid Work

    Originally published in The New Daily on June 25, 2020

    Women have suffered the worst labour market impacts since the shutdowns. Gender-unequal impacts have been due to women’s greater exposure to customer-facing industries shut down first by public health orders, higher employment intensity in insecure and part-time positions, and an increased caring burden unmet by the state. But instead of providing countervailing support, the federal government is accelerating women’s work crisis.

    In this commentary, originally published in the New Daily, Senior Economist at the Centre for Future Work Alison Pennington outlines how government’s austerity agenda has intensified the unequal jobs fallout and threatens to “turn back the clock” for women’s economic security.

    How the government is turning back the clock for women

    The increase in women’s workforce participation is the most significant labour market trend of the past 40 years.

    However, in the COVID-19 health and economic crisis, the gender boundaries of paid work are being redrawn.

    Worse still, the government is the one holding the pen.

    Women have suffered the worst labour market impacts since the shutdowns.

    Total employment fell by 7.3 per cent for women compared with 5.7 per cent for men between February and May.

    About 450,000 women have lost their jobs and 350,000 left the labour market all together.

    Women saw a 12 per cent decline in hours worked, compared to 9 per cent for men.

    This gender inequity stems from three main channels:

    This combination has created a ‘perfect storm’ for women in the workplace.

    However, instead of stepping up to provide countervailing support, the federal government is only exacerbating the crisis.

    This started back when JobKeeper was announced and excluded short-term casuals by design, which affects more women than men.

    And then, most recently the government targeted early JobKeeper cuts to childcare workers in what is a cruel double blow.

    Not only do more women work in child care, but more women benefit from access to affordable child care.

    The cumulative impact of Australia’s effective gender pay gap of 32 per cent (in average weekly earnings for all workers) and inadequate parental leave supports for cash-strapped families makes their work-care decisions clear cut.

    Without affordable child care, mum’s got to stay home.

    There’s more bad news on the industrial relations front.

    Last week the Fair Work Commission decided to freeze minimum wages for up to seven months, in the sectors with the lowest wages and most precarious jobs – which are, surprise, mostly women’s jobs.

    While women have been bearing the brunt of the economic impacts of COVID19, state and federal governments have targeted stimulus spending on the most bloke-heavy industry in the economy – construction.

    For every $1 million invested in construction only 0.2 direct jobs are generated for women.

    Yet $1 million invested in education generates almost 11 jobs for women.

    In fact, education investment creates more jobs for just women than construction creates for anybody: Man or woman.

    Job-generating spending for women is best directed to the public sector.

    Women make up 61 per cent of all public sector workers, with the sector supporting fuller female participation – women hold 54 per cent of full-time roles but only 35 per cent of full-time roles in the private sector.

    Not only would public sector pay cuts risk driving this recession into a depression, they disproportionately hurt women’s incomes.

    Even temporary wage freezes (of one or two years) compound into tens of thousands of dollars in lost wages compounding over her working life.

    And austerity pain radiates far beyond income losses for affected workers, reducing consumer spending (right when the economy needs more), tax revenues and enhancing deflation risk.

    When the largest employer in the economy cuts wages, it has a powerful effect for other employers.

    It’s not just a hunch, this is exactly what happened after the GFC.

    The unnecessary 2011-12 federal public sector wages caps cut the legs out from everyone’s wages.

    But the pain induced from pay cuts doesn’t end there. Because lower-wage environments breed insecure work.

    People accept lower-quality jobs or juggle multiple jobs to earn the same income. Women are much more likely to work these precarious jobs.

    Prime Minister Scott Morrison has acknowledged that COVID-19’s fallout has been harshest on women.

    Yet his government is pushing an agenda that will ensure there will be less jobs for women, and they’ll be worse paid.

    Economic inclusion of women must be targeted in a long-term, sustained public investment plan that mops up the private sector carnage and lets us build back better.


    You might also like

    Commonwealth Budget 2025-2026: Our analysis

    by Fiona Macdonald

    The Centre for Future Work’s research team has analysed the Commonwealth Government’s budget, focusing on key areas for workers, working lives, and labour markets. As expected with a Federal election looming, the budget is not a horror one of austerity. However, the 2025-2026 budget is characterised by the absence of any significant initiatives. There is

  • Repairing Universities & Skills Key to Meeting COVID-Era Challenges

    Repairing Universities & Skills Key to Meeting COVID-Era Challenges

    by Alison Pennington

    Share

    Training must play a vital role in reorienting the economy after the pandemic, supporting workers training for new jobs including millions of young people entering a depressed labour market without concrete pathways to work. But what kind of jobs will we be doing in 2040? And how prepared is Australia’s skills system (and universities specifically) to play this important role now?

    Our Senior Economist Alison Pennington was interviewed by UTS The Social Contract podcast on how COVID-19 is reshaping relations between universities, government and industry. 

    Alison explains how the pandemic economic crisis presents significant challenges to Australia’s fragmented, underfunded and unplanned skills system wounded from decades of failed marketisation policies, and why sustained public investments in skills and jobs pathways will be essential to solving our economic and social challenges. 

    Listen to the episode on Whooshkaa. She is joined by Megan Lilly, head of Workforce Development at the Australian Industry Group.


    You might also like

    Centre For Future Work to evolve into standalone entity

    The Centre for Future Work was established by the Australia Institute in 2016 to conduct and publish progressive economic research on work, employment, and labour markets. Supported by the Australian Union movement, the centre produced cutting edge research and led the national conversation on economic issues facing working people: including the future of jobs, wages