Union dissent delays work for the dole
Members of the teachers' union, the Australian Education Union, in Canberra "simply weren't prepared to go ahead with work for the dole as it was designed", Clive Haggar, president of the AEU's ACT branch, told Green Left Weekly.
His comments followed an outburst by federal employment minister Tony Abbott on April 10 that the union had blocked the introduction of work for the dole schemes in ACT schools for more than four years.
Haggar explained that the ACT branch of the union has traditionally supported labour market programs which were properly resourced, were negotiated with local teachers and provided accredited training for participants.
In 1996 such schemes were scrubbed by the federal government, to be replaced with work for the dole.
"We were then approached by the [ACT education] department to consider a work for the dole program", Haggar says. The department wanted to place work for the dole participants in classrooms, as teachers' aides.
"We said we had significant concerns around support and training. Their response was to say they didn't care and would go ahead and do it anyway."
Unionists believed the new government's work for the dole scheme would put too much strain on school operations and that participants may have come out of it without any certified training they could use for future employment.
There wasn't just teacher opposition to the program, Haggar said. Parent didn't want people in the classroom who would be a distraction to teachers.
Haggar said that when the ACT Legislative Assembly's education and training committee questioned the department, "it became quite clear that the department had lied" about the level of consultation and the level of support.
For example, the department had claimed principals strongly supported the scheme. "In fact the primary principals' association had passed a motion saying they wouldn't have a bar of the scheme until the concerns that the AEU had about adequate support and training had been met."
"The scheme was reintroduced several months later", Haggar continued. Now participants would work alongside ancillary staff and janitors doing clerical and external "school beautification". The government hoped to bypass teachers' opposition.
The clerical staff and janitors, backed by their unions, opposed this scheme. They believed training would be inadequate and they would be doing additional supervisory work, for which many had never had training.
"The department then retreated from an overall attempt to impose the scheme", Haggar said. "Volunteers were called for. A number of schools put in indications of interest. Most hoped the AEU would be able to negotiate adequate support and training, but the department wasn't interested and wanted to push on with the scheme."
Haggar said that as the work pressures that would be put on to staff became more evident, schools began to drop out. Only about six of the more than 60 primary schools that were originally asked to consider the program are still involved.
"We have been subjected to quite sustained abuse from Abbott, but he hasn't addressed the facts. I can only assume, because Abbott has never addressed any of his concerns to this union, that it's just a political exercise on his part trying to slander unions and connect them with the ALP for political mileage", Haggar said.
Haggar said that if the scheme had provided adequate training, worthwhile responsibilities and proper support, his union would have "seriously considered" supporting it.
While Haggar recognises that the present work for the dole program is based on a notion of penalising and punishing the unemployed, "we've found the earlier forms of labour market programs worthwhile for the participants and the schools involved. But we couldn't give this the same imprimatur. Essentially the scheme was a cheap form of [the education department] accessing federal money for schools."
BY JONATHAN SINGER