The Current Structure of the Seasonal Workers Program and the Pacific Labour Scheme
The Australian government currently has two programs to support labour mobility into Australia that supports its agriculture sector – the Seasonal Workers Program (SWP) and Pacific Labour Scheme. Both programs have similar selection, processing, monitoring and evaluation, welfare support and communication functions. They also deal with the same suite of foreign nations across the region, Australian industry sector and a similar workers selection pool.
In light of this similarity of focus and stakeholders, it seems strange there are two different programs run by two different federal government departments.
In light of this similarity of focus and stakeholders, it seems strange there are two different programs run by two different federal government departments.
It seems the Government may agree, as on 10 June 2021 they released a discussion paper and invited submissions on ways to improve, streamline and align Australia’s Pacific labour mobility programs to maximise benefits for employers, workers, and participating countries. Xseed Lead provided a submission to the review that covered six areas:
1. Aligning agencies and the SWP and PLS programs into one model
To align the two programs, a combined model of governance is needed that adopts the outsourced PLF model for delivery for budget allocation. This model should be complemented by a governance structure that has all involved government agencies. A representative, or three from regional nations would also be beneficial.
Does a streamlined approach come with risks?
2. The need for regional representation and involvement.
The lack of a regional focus in the management of both programs is a significant omission and likely why the processes are impersonal and cumbersome. Local governments and communities should be engaged to help integrate workers and support employers rather than using centralised organisations that have no representation in the regions. This would change the labour mobility programs to being done with communities rather than placed on them by the government.
3. and 4. Lack of cultural awareness and gender/social equality and inclusion in program implementation.
Currently within the implementation of both programs there appears to be no acknowledgement of the different cultural norms of the workers coming to Australia or support to gender equality and inclusion in these programs. While Australian programs are based on the management of individuals, impartial management and evaluation/accountability, for the incoming workers, community is extremely important.
Connecting workers through local providers, Pacific communities in the regions and constructing an online presence to enable connection once separated on different farms would make a significant difference.
These programs should also be cautious not to perpetuate the disparity between gender groups, especially as the Pacific nations are encouraged to have quotas for ensuring female representation. Specific support, networking and professional development should be provided to the women who participate.
5. The importance of using experienced employers and workers as mentors.
Past workers and employers who have engaged with SWP and PLS a number of times would make excellent mentors for new workers and sources of feedback to streamline the programs. This group could also assist in selecting, preparing, and training new workers coming from their home country prior to coming to Australia.
An online presence for both workers and employers that supported their ability to connect with others participating in their region would also be highly beneficial.
6. Education opportunities for workers and across nations.
Finally, a significant ‘perk’ of having one program governing the SWP and PLS would be the availability for Australia to provide subsidised education and training in core areas for workers through online measures. COVID has resulted in many schools placing courses online, which could be customised to support the ongoing education of workers. This increased capability would benefit their local communities and strengthen ties further with Australia.
The full submission can be found attached to this blog. If you are government, a provider, local community, or potential employer and agree with these recommendations, please contact us for a free discussion.
Author Bio
Deborah Knight is the founder of Xsead Lead with a background in organisational and individual leadership and executive coaching.
As a coach, Deborah aims to create an inclusive and respectful space where individuals and organisations can do the work necessary for growth and change. She is also passionate about helping women be valued for themselves while also contributing and being successful.
Apart from her company which she is deeply passionate about, Deborah also loves bushwalking, reading, travelling, and learning new things.
For any coaching or organisational support enquiries Deborah can be contacted via email: info@xseedlead.com.au or via her company website which is www.xseedlead.com.au.
