CLW InFocus Magazine

                                                                  May 2008

Time for paid maternity leave to

become standard in all workplaces say unions

This is an excerpt of an article, "Maternity Scheme is Overdue" written by

Elizabeth Broderick, Sharan Burrow and Heather Ridout.It first appeared in the Age on April 8, 2008

"The Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission has long-advocated paid maternity leave, and in 2002 it undertook significant consultation, research and economic modelling on the issue. The commission proposed a basic minimum — a national scheme of 14 weeks paid at the federal minimum wage.

The ACTU has also been a strong advocate of paid maternity leave, and the Australian Industry Group supports an appropriate period of publicly funded paid maternity leave consistent with community and international standards and at the level of the federal minimum wage. We each have no doubt about the need for a national scheme and the benefits that it would bring to business, to employees and to the broader economy and society — and, perhaps most importantly, our children. It would also keep women linked to the workforce.

For business, there is a strong incentive. There is no doubt that paid maternity leave increases the likelihood of new mothers returning to work. Also, as figures from the Australian Bureau of Statistics last month showed, two-thirds of those not in the labour force who want to work are women, most of whom are mothers. As a nation our continuing economic prosperity can be assured only by retaining the productivity of this group. Paid maternity leave, as employers such as Westpac and General Motors Holden know, is an essential part of holding on to staff and avoiding the high costs of recruitment and replacement. Since introducing paid maternity leave schemes, these organisations have had return-to-work rates nudging 90%.

For workers, a national paid maternity leave scheme is a priority to compensate women workers for the income they lose when they give birth. At present, two-thirds of women have no access to this workplace entitlement, and it is low-paid women in industries such as retail and hospitality who are most likely to miss out, yet they are most likely to be in need of it.

Paid maternity leave is not about being nice to working women, it is about addressing the inequality experienced by women workers relative to men as a result of childbirth. Nor is it a question of the baby bonus versus paid maternity leave: Paid maternity leave is not a bonus, it is about a right to paid leave for working mothers recovering from childbirth to help establish breastfeeding and for all-important bonding to occur. Resolving this inequality should be the key objective of any paid maternity leave scheme.

We also know that for male workers paid maternity leave will ensure that they do not face becoming the sole breadwinner while dealing with the challenges that new fatherhood brings.

But, most importantly, we know that paid maternity leave will mean better care for our children. The health and welfare of mothers and their babies is absolutely paramount — women need time to recover from childbirth, adjust to motherhood and establish breastfeeding, which is one of the most important contributions to infant health and development. Our children's health, wellbeing and futures are at stake.

Employers are increasingly leading the way. Companies such as Myer and Aldi are now introducing their own schemes. However, while the business case for paid maternity leave is strong, employer-funded schemes are not viable options for every type and size of business. The beauty of a government-funded model is that it would allay the concerns of small and medium-sized businesses, which, understandably, fear the financial and regulatory burden of an employer-funded scheme. Additional benefit could be provided at the enterprise level. Ultimately a minimum government-funded scheme would also ensure that this basic human right is not denied to those workers who are unable to negotiate such a benefit with their employers.

Australia has been repeatedly criticised by international human and labour rights groups for not providing this benefit. A scheme of 14 weeks' paid maternity leave is the minimum international standard outlined by the International Labour Organisation's Maternity Leave Protection Convention, 2000 (No 183). Many countries now provide much more. Yet Australia remains one of only two Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries that do not provide any form of paid leave for mothers, the other being the US. Paid maternity leave has been on the public policy agenda for more than three decades and its realisation is well overdue. The struggle for a universal scheme can only be described as a protracted labour, and now is the right time to induce."

Elizabeth Broderick is federal Sex Discrimination Commissioner, Sharan Burrow is president of the ACTU and Heather Ridout is chief executive of the Australian Industry Group.

 

Download the Australia 2020 Summit – Initial Report

Social Policy Myths

Jennifer Buckingham and others / Centre for Independent Studies

Policy experts often think alike, even when the evidence contradicts them. Centre for Independent Studies (CIS) researchers Jennifer Buckingham, Andrew Norton, Phil Rennie, Jeremy Sammut, and Peter Saunders argue that this is how billions of dollars are spent on government programs that don't work.

Social Policy Myths

Dangerous and persuasive women: celebrating

a century of women's suffrage in Victoria

Speeches from Forum One: 'Rediscovering Women’s Political History', Melbourne, 6 March, 2008

Attracting a crowd of 300 people at BMW Edge Theatre at Federation Square, the first free forum the Victorian Women's Trust hosted in celebrating the centenary of women's suffrage in Victoria commemorated one hundred years of women’s activism (the Women's Trust will host three forums in total, over 2008).

The first event included speeches from leading historians Professor Patricia Grimshaw, Professor Marilyn Lake and literary historian Jennifer Strauss (who provided an analysis of the work of poet Dame Mary Gilmore).

To listen to the speeches or download them see: Victorian Women's Trust

The National Youth Commission (NYC) Inquiry into Youth Homelessness is only the second inquiry, specifically focused on homelessness, to be conducted independently of government. The first was the landmark Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Inquiry headed by Brian Burdekin in 1989. As a result of the Burdekin Report, youth homelessness became an identifiable community problem and impetus was given to some important new initiatives. However, twenty years on, ‘youth homelessness’ is still with us. This is despite our nation experiencing its highest level of economic prosperity since the 1970s and the lowest unemployment for several decades. Moreover, Australia is predicted to reap billions of dollars in strong tax revenues from its natural resources over the next twenty years and beyond.  

2007-2008 is arguably a watershed year, coming at a time when we have the first evidence that it is possible to reduce youth homelessness, and yet, the burgeoning rental crisis and the issue of housing affordability have begun to affect the everyday lives of many Australians, particularly young people. Youth homelessness is worse in 2008 than it was 20 years ago – the statistical evidence is that youth homelessness has doubled since Burdekin. The HREOC report in 1989, led to increased supported accommodation for young people and the IHSHY health initiative (approx $4.4 million annually) as well as employment and training support in the form of JPET ($19.9 million annually in 2005-6). However since the mid-nineties, there has been a stagnation of funding in real terms for areas such as supported accommodation (ie. SAAP) and over a long period of time, for public and community housing.

The National Youth Commission Inquiry into Youth Homelessness in 2007 was an independent community inquiry funded by The Caledonia Foundation. The NYC held 21 days of hearings in all states and territories, heard evidence from 319 individuals, received 91 written submissions including from seven government departments and held four policy forums to discuss policy issues and solutions.

Below are some excerpts from the report.

Homelessness is the most extreme form of poverty. In turn, living in poverty is one of the structural factors that leads to becoming homeless. While there has been a debate about how to measure poverty, the general consensus is that some 10 per cent of the population live in poverty relative to the rest of the community and the costs and living standards of Australia. In this category are Indigenous people, many single parents, and people who are long-term employed.

Young people who have been in state care and protection are over-represented in the homeless population. In the 2006 census of homeless school students, some 15 per cent of students had been in care and protection.

Mental health issues are more prevalent among homeless youth than the overall population of young people in Australia. In some cases, mental health is implicated in a young person becoming homeless, although it may be the case that the deterioration in the mental health of other family members tips young people into homelessness. However, becoming homeless is also an unhealthy lifestyle. There is evidence that psychological and psychiatric problems may result from homelessness.

Schools and the education system have become important sites for early intervention to assist homeless and at-risk students. Community agencies work more closely with schools than they ever did in the early nineties in the aftermath of the HREOC report. School welfare staff have become an important part of the early intervention response. However, school welfare resources and the school welfare staff available are unevenly distributed across Australia and the NYC seeks to establish appropriate national standards.

Over the past 20 years the affordability of housing has deteriorated – decreasing by 140 per cent between 1986 and 2006. In 1986, 3.6 years of average income was needed to purchase a home; by 2006 the purchase price required 7.0 years’ pay. The total stock of public housing has declined and rental vacancies have reached an all-time low.

Homeless young people are entirely dependent on Government income support. The Youth Allowance is designed to support full-time students and unemployed young people. The ‘unreasonable to live at home’ criteria provides additional support for homeless young people. The bureaucratic requirements of identification and evidence present barriers for homeless young people, demonstrated by the number of young people who enter  Supported Accommodation and Assistance Program  (SAAP) services with no income support in place.

The report includes recommendations from the National Youth Commission and can be viewed at: http://www.nyc.net.au/files/Australias_Homeless_Youth.pdf

Equity in Education

Deputy Prime Minister Julia Gillard spoke about equity in education at the 6TH Annual Higher Education Summit at Star City, Pyrmont SYDNEY. Here is an excerpt of what she said:

"Today I want to drill down on one of the important issues facing COAG and the Bradley Review – educational equity. Of course while the review is in progress we will be delivering our important election promises to higher education including the phasing out of full fee paying undergraduate places for Australian students."

"Equity is important to our education and training systems in so many ways.  It is of course an important moral issue for our country

A nation that thinks of itself as essentially egalitarian can’t sit by idly while those from disadvantaged backgrounds are denied the life opportunities that come from higher education – things like higher incomes, career progression, intellectual fulfilment and self-knowledge.

Studies show that education is one of the strongest guarantees of individual prosperity, social mobility and economic security.."

"But a frank assessment of our education system today would have to lead to the conclusion we have a major problem with equity.

While we have many high achievers, our ‘tail’ of lower performers is long. We suffer from weak literacy performance in the bottom layer of school students and high drop out rates.

The end result of our historical patterns of education coupled with years of neglect is a relatively high rate of 25 to 64 year olds with only lower secondary school qualifications.

When it comes to university education, while total numbers of students have grown spectacularly since the early 1980s, the socio-economic mix of students has hardly changed for the last 40 to 50 years.

The participation rate of disadvantaged groups, notably students from low socio-economic backgrounds, Indigenous Australians, and Australians from regional and remote areas, remains low.

In fact, the participation rate of students from lower socio-economic status background in higher education, fell from 15.1 per cent to 14.6 per cent between 2001 and 2006. By comparison, in 2006, about 25 per cent of the population was from low socio-economic status backgrounds. "

"It’s going to take action across a whole range of areas. Old ways haven’t necessarily worked, so we want new ideas.

We will be a Government that takes impartial expert opinion and evidence seriously before we make important policy decisions.

That’s why we want your input, ideas and energy as we set about making Australia’s education system better and more equitable."

See the Education, Skills and the Productivity Agenda for the 2020 Summit

Bar council recommends a charter of rights for NSW

In October 2007, the Tasmania Law Reform Institute completed its report on a Charter of Rights For Tasmania. The Institute concludes in its report that Tasmania should introduce a Charter of Human Rights. The recommendation is for a broad charter protecting economic, social, cultural, civil and political rights. For more information about the report and to download an electronic copy, go to: http://www.law.utas.edu.au/reform/

The NSW Bar Council has resolved to recommend the adoption of a Charter of Rights for NSW.  The council has approved a number of principles which are intended to form a basis for further public debate and discussion on human rights protections in this state.

For details see:  http://www.nswbar.asn.au/circulars/charter_rights_bc.php 

Australia's wealthiest slowest to give

Charitable giving by Australia's most affluent is not keeping pace with their increasing wealth delivered by a booming economy, according to a new report by QUT's Australian Centre for Philanthropy and Nonprofit Studies (CPNS).

The Report says the rising level of giving by the affluent overall has not kept pace with wealth trends -and the gap is widening - and that the percentage of the affluent who give to charitable causes has risen only modestly over the past 10 years despite a substantially higher level of personal wealth.

It says while the average household income in Australia grew by 34% in real terms from 1994-95 to 2005-06, it has been the wealthier household that has experienced the greatest gains with a 36% increase compared to around 31% for those on low and middle incomes (ABS, 2006a).

The research says that Australia's affluent are also on average giving at a lower level than their counterparts in comparable countries such as the UK, Canada and the US.

The report called "Good Times and Philanthropy: Giving by Australia's Affluent” was commissioned by the Petre Foundation, an organisation set up by Daniel Petre, a former vice president of Microsoft who has returned to Australia with his family..

Petre says he's not surprised by the results even though there are small pockets of wealthy individuals who do give.

He says the ultra-rich in Australia are incredibly resilient and entrenched in their position of not giving.

He says in the US if you are wealthy there is a sense of responsibility to give back to the community where you made your money, but in Australia it doesn't exist.

He says the Myer Foundation is still the biggest donor in Australia and that fund was set up by Sidney Myer decades ago.

Petre says what is needed is for one of the top ten wealthiest Australians to break ranks and agree to live on 10% less and set up a foundation with that 10%. This would instantly add more than $500 million into the charity pool.

Petre says one way of forcing change is to introduce death taxes for the ultra rich where anyone with over $30 million dollars is taxed 10%. Perhaps, he says the thought of giving $3million to the tax man would convince them to give it to charity instead.

The report says more tax-related strategies are called for, given the establishment of some 600 Prescribed Private Funds (PPFs) by individuals and companies since being introduced in 2001.

It makes recommendations on how to engage affluent Australians in philanthropy offering what it describes as standout opportunities for Not for Profits, corporates and government.

• Increase visibility of philanthropy amongst the affluent (including via the media);

• Increase awareness of different types of involvement to suit varying levels of wealth and personal circumstances;

• Create greater peer support for giving e.g. loose supportive networks and groups providing opportunities for discussion and potential group funding (e.g., giving circles);

• Offer more guidelines for giving, promote affluent giving norms and build the practice of 'planned' versus spontaneous giving;

• The highest echelons of government, business, the professions and the community need to be personally inviting Australia's wealthy opinion leaders to join in visionary philanthropic projects;

• Promote tax benefits attached to giving at higher levels, and alternatives;

• Train and support professional advisers about providing philanthropic advice to match clients' circumstances to most suitable giving vehicles or options;

• Improve awareness amongst Australia's affluent population of the benefits of involving their children in giving, the opportunities available, and who can assist them achieve their aims;

• Improve awareness of the Australian Not for Profit sector and the unique role of philanthropy in creating change in the community: the case for philanthropy needs to be stronger and clearer than it is currently;

• Increase transparency, efficiency and evaluation by Not for Profit organisations to help overcome expressed donor concerns. However, unrealistic expectations that a NFP organisation can exist without administration costs also need to be addressed.

• Improve understanding and responsiveness by the NFP sector of the needs and interests of the affluent;

• Improve volunteering opportunities for the affluent in Not for Profit organisations drawing upon their knowledge, connections, experience and interests.

The report can be downloaded at http://www.bus.qut.edu.au/research/cpns/publications/currentissue.jsp
(Probono Australia)

 

Lessons learnt about strengthening Indigenous families and communities

John Scougall / Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs

This report discusses what has been learned from the Stronger Families and Communities Strategy 2000–04 about how to strengthen Indigenous families and communities. The report provides insights into critical factors that explain the success of some projects and some of the frustrations experienced by others.

See REPORT