Workforce

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
But that revolution has long been thwarted by resistance – crucially from management concerned about productivity and performance.
It was <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2015/12/what-telecommuting-looked-like-in-1973/418473/?sf43013774=1">the case in 1974</a>, according to Jack Nilles, who led <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://dl.acm.org/doi/book/10.5555/540203">the first major study</a> to evaluate the benefits of “telecommuting” (by a team from the University of Southern California). It was still the case in 2019, according to researchers from San Jose State University, whose studies showed <a href="https://transweb.sjsu.edu/sites/default/files/1860-Prager-Flexible-Workplaces-South-Bay_0.pdf">managerial and executive resistance</a> were the major perceived obstacles to the expansion of flexible working practices.
Our own research with Australian public service managers in 2018 found extensive managerial resistance to employees working from home.
Wondering how the enforced experience of working from home might change such attitudes, we surveyed 6,000 Australian public servants (including 1,400 managers) in June and July, and found the seeds for a revolution.
Only 8.4% of managers rated their teams less productive when working from home, while 57% thought productivity the same, and 34.6% believed it higher.
These findings, along with others, suggest working from home, at least for part of the week, may become the norm.
Negative perceptions
It is difficult to estimate precisely how many people had the option of working from home prior to the pandemic. Australian Bureau of Statistics data <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/6333.0">published in September 2019 </a> indicated about a third of all employed people regularly worked from home. But it is likely this number also includes workers catching up on work after hours.
In the public sector, about one-third of executives worked away from the office, but <a href="https://www.apsc.gov.au/sites/default/files/apsc_state_of_the_service_report_2018-19.pdf">less than 15%</a> of non-executive employees did.
Our 2018 research, involving focus groups with nearly 300 managers across four state public services, found extensive managerial resistance to allowing work from home despite supportive policies permitting it.
Public sector managers shared with private sector managers concerns about performance and productivity, and the difficulty of remotely managing workers. They often framed their resistance around concerns about technology or work health and safety.
But on top of this, public service managers were sensitive about agreeing to any working arrangements that might feed community stereotypes about public servants having it easy.
Key findings
The COVID-19 pandemic rendered those objections irrelevant. By the end of May, <a href="https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/6764395/the-numbers-that-reveal-%20%20%20the-scale-of-the-public-services-response-to-covid-19/">57%</a> of Australian Public Service employees were reportedly working from home.
To compile our findings we worked with the Community and Public Sector Union, which distributed the survey on our behalf. The 6,000 respondents included about 20% non-union members and 22% managers, across a broad range of occupations and agencies.
As noted, three times as many managers thought team productivity and performance had increased as those who perceived a decrease, with the majority neutral.
<hr>
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/354017/original/file-20200821-14-awgoce.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=1000&amp;fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/354017/original/file-20200821-14-awgoce.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" alt="Manager perceptions of team performance working from home, by gender."></a> Manager perceptions of team performance working from home, by gender. The authors, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a>
<hr>
Female managers were slightly more likely to perceive greater productivity (36.7% compared to 31.1% of male managers), as were managers of teams larger than ten employees.
One manager noted “people are either productive or not, and it doesn’t matter where they work from”. Others said it had changed their management style for the better, forcing them to realise they did not need to micromanage to get results.
Nearly two-thirds said they intended to be more supportive of working from home in the future (though 2% said they planned to be less supportive). Male managers were the most swayed, with 68% saying they would be more supportive, compared with 63.6% of female managers.
One manager noted:
I had always accepted the department line that working from home is a privilege and not a real workplace. Also that working from home makes you unavailable and disconnects you from the workplace. Discovered that I couldn’t have been more wrong.“
Generally, our results show employees were mostly positive about working from home, with more than four out of five saying it gave them more time with their family, two-thirds saying they got more work done, and three in five enjoying having more autonomy over their work.
The downsides
There can be downsides to working from home, however. As one respondent put it: "I hate my house, it’s cold, and the kids are annoying, the dog stinks.”
The <a href="https://theconversation.com/its-not-just-the-isolation-working-from-home-has-surprising-downsides-107140">key issues identified by research</a> are social isolation, lack of feedback and loss of separation of work from home life.
<img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/354027/original/file-20200821-18-16za4ti.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" alt="Tired women using laptoop at night.">A quarter of workers reported working longer hours. Shutterstock
On the isolation and feedback front, our results were generally positive. Managers indicated communication technology enabled teams to stay in touch in multiple ways, from instant messaging to video conferencing. While just over 10% stuck to their usual meeting routine, the majority (about 60%) had increased their use of virtual meetings. This included scheduling social activities such as virtual coffee and drinks.
On the question of work-life balance, our results were more mixed.
Three-quarters reported they continued to work their usual work hours. But one in four reported working longer hours. Mostly this was due to increased workload, though almost 15% said they had been working more voluntarily because they were absorbed by their work. Many managers noted this increased motivation and mood.
Given the focus of the public service, this result is not necessarily one we can presume would apply across the entire workforce. That said, longer working hours do seem a feature of working from home during this pandemic. Based on data from more than 3 million in 16 cities, researchers found the average workday for those under lockdown <a href="https://theconversation.com/vital-signs-shorter-meetings-but-longer-days-how-covid-19-has-changed-the-way-we-work-143894">is about 48 minutes longer</a>.
These findings on longer hours potentially offset some of the positive perceptions of productivity improvements. The emergency conditions in which both managers and workers have been prepared to go the extra mile cannot become the baseline for expectations permanently.
Despite these caveats, and the need to point out that organisations still have much to do to embed flexibility in their cultures, our results add to the evidence that the great working-from-home experiment of 2020 has broken the back of decades of inherited managerial resistance. The revolution may have started.<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/144850/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important; text-shadow: none !important;">
<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/linda-colley-22201">Linda Colley</a>, Associate Professor HRM/IR, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/cquniversity-australia-2140">CQUniversity Australia</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/sue-williamson-104295">Sue Williamson</a>, Senior Lecturer, Human Resource Management, UNSW Canberra, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/unsw-1414">UNSW</a>
This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/with-management-resistance-overcome-working-from-home-may-be-here-to-stay-144850">original article</a>.
</body></html>

j.ballantyne1990-6AQqhLzZaK

With management resistance overcome, working from home may be here to stay

<html><body>
EXPERT OBSERVATION
The current climate has ushered in in a seismic shift in work culture, as many employees transitioning into a work from home set-up.
Australia’s largest privately held co-working space provider, working from home will welcome in a new era where a distributed working model becomes the new normal.
“At Hub Australia, we are already seeing an increased demand for space from companies who may have previously favoured a long-term commercial office model. As many workers, and more importantly their managers, adapt to working from home, the need for the same quantity of space at headquarters will reduce. The importance of having place for businesses and their teams to connect, learn and innovate will not go away. The culture of professional co-working spaces is well suited to meet this demand”.
Along with this, offices will have to shift their focus from real estate providers to a more experience-centric model in order to attract people to come to the office. Traditional working as we know it is being flipped on its head at a rapid pace.”
Here, Brad gives us his predictions for the key changes shaping the workforce:
Goodbye to the traditional office lease
“As we see it, the traditional office lease will be less relevant to companies post Covid-19. There was already a movement by corporates to have part of their office requirements met by flexible workspace operators, Covid-19 will serve to quicken the pace of this movement, but also to enlarge it. Organisations will need to offer work from home flexibility, as well as provide access to a ‘work base’, which could be suburban work hubs and CBD co-working spaces.”
A move to distributed working
“A single headquarters with high densities in an open plan environment no longer seems like the best idea post Covid-19. We’re predicting that employers will need to cater for a distributed workforce and provide multiple working environments, that could be a company HQ, home and third spaces.
Work-life balance, commute times and the rising cost of living means that working closer to home has long been a priority for many employees. But not everybody’s home is going to be an appropriate work environment, and many employees crave the social and community aspects of the workplace, so blending of the two will be essential.”
Set-up for virtual success
“Not only will flexible working become the new norm, but co-working providers will need to innovate their offering. At Hub Australia, we are launching a virtual offering at the start of May that offers members the ability to join the community virtually, with access to mailing packages, software discounts, video conferencing and the ability to work flexibly from Hub Australia locations when they need to. Setting members up for success virtually will become the norm.”
Brad Krauskopf is the CEO and Founder of Hub Australia
</body></html>

The future of the workforce is a distributed model: Hub Australia

<html><body>
The NSW government has launched a new mobile reporting system aimed at reducing dangerous work practices and risks to workers’ safety.
The system, known as ‘Speak Up. Save Lives’, is accessed via mobile devices and allows workers to send up to three photos to SafeWork NSW showing the unsafe practice or high-risk situation.
If the user provides their contact details, they will be sent a receipt of the concern lodged via email or text, however reports can be made anonymously. It also features a GPS locator.
Minister for Better Regulation and Innovation, Kevin Anderson, said the new mobile reporting tool will make it easy for workers who see workplace risks which could lead to injury or death to send photos of dangerous conditions they see straight to SafeWork NSW. 
“The new Speak Up reporting tool will give workers an easy, protected and fast way to report any work health and safety problems they may be facing, direct to SafeWork NSW from their mobile device,” Anderson said. 
“Safety is everyone’s responsibility, and everyone should feel confident they can report unsafe conditions. This new tool provides another way for workers to notify SafeWork NSW of a safety concern which may impact their own wellbeing and that of their work mates.” 
The scheme was backed by the family of construction apprentice Christopher Cassaniti, 18, who died at Macquarie Park in north-west Sydney on April 1 this year when a 15-metre tower of scaffolding fell on top of him at the site of the developer Greenland. 
Anderson added that the system does not replace the existing need for workers to report unsafe work practices to employers or to SafeWork NSW.
Businesses are still required to report all notifiable incidents, including death, serious injury or illness, or a dangerous incident, by calling 13-10-50 immediately. 
“Having seen the devastation workplace deaths and serious injury can have on the community, I would like to see workers play a more active role in making workplaces safer so everyone makes it home at the end of their shift,” Anderson said. 
SafeWork NSW have stated that they will review all complaints and take action based on the level of risk present. 
Speak Up. Save Lives’ has been developed as a progressive web app providing a quick and easy experience for customers, however it will also be available from app stores in the new year.
 
</body></html>

wdavis-8cCN98p7xp

New mobile reporting system launched to promote worker's safety

<html><body>
The unemployment rate is 4.9%, but the underemployment rate is 8.1%.
 
This is the third in a three-part mini-symposium on Wages, Unemployment and Underemployment presented by The Conversation and the Academy of the Social Sciences in Australia. Read the other pieces in the series <a href="https://theconversation.com/au/topics/assa-symposium-67964" target="_blank">here</a>.
For the moment, Australia’s unemployment rate has a “4” in front of it. The rate for February, released on Thursday, <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/6202.0" target="_blank">came in at 4.9%</a>. It’s the first time the rate has begun with a four since the Rudd/Gillard government when it dipped below 5% several times, and since the Howard and Rudd governments in the leadup the global financial crisis when it usually began with a four and at one point dipped to 3.9%.
It’d be good news were it not for another, almost as important, indicator - the underemployment rate.
Workers are underemployed when they are working fewer hours than they want to. They might be working part-time instead of full-time, or part-time for 10 hours a week instead of 20, or full-time at 35 hours instead of 40.
<hr>
<img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/265049/original/file-20190321-93051-e32m42.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" alt=""><a class="source" href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/6202.0" target="_blank">ABS Labour Force</a>
<hr>
Over the past five years the proportion of the workforce underemployed has climbed from 7.2% to 8.1% while the unemployment rate has climbed from 5.2%, then fallen, hitting 4.9%.
The underemployed are disproportionately women (60%), and are concentrated in the retail, health care and hospitality industries. Their jobs are more likely to be insecure, with inadequate hours often accompanied by unpredictable or uncertain hours.
They are in industries that have seen growth in temporary migrant workers and the systematic underpayment of workers, reflecting changes in the temporary visa system as well as <a href="https://doi.org/10.20851/wages-crisis-04" target="_blank">weaknesses in the enforcement of wage laws</a>.
Wages are the other side of the bad news. No one who has made a regular appearance at the plethora of parliamentary inquiries that have accompanied the rewriting of Australia’s industrial relations system over the past 23 years would be surprised that wage growth is bumping along at historic lows.
The reworked industrial relations system - and the social, cultural, economic and labour market context in which it sits - has reshaped power at work. Wave after wave of change has had the end result of shifting power to employers. And it is that change in power that, more than anything, explains the stalling of wages growth.
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/265055/original/file-20190321-93060-qtde5w.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=1000&amp;fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/265055/original/file-20190321-93060-qtde5w.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=237&amp;fit=clip" alt=""></a> Open letter in Tuesday’s Financial Review. <a class="source" href="http://ppesydney.net/open-letter-on-the-benefits-of-promoting-faster-wage-growth/" target="_blank">AFR</a>
As 124 labour market experts said in their <a href="http://ppesydney.net/open-letter-on-the-benefits-of-promoting-faster-wage-growth/" target="_blank">open letter in support of wages growth</a> published in the Australian Financial Review this week, we are witnessing the longest sustained rate of slow wage growth since the end of the Second World War.
It certainly isn’t the result of falling productivity, which has actually climbed 39% in the past two decades while real wages have climbed only 14%.
The feminisation of employment has also helped shift the power balance at work. Women’s share of the total workforce climbed from 43% to 47% between 1999 and 2019.
Research in many countries tells us that women are no less inclined to join a union and have no less an appetite to improve their working conditions than men. However, women’s caring responsibilities and the practical demands they face, along with the nature of the industries in which they work, often make it harder for them to bargain or to take industrial action.
<hr>
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/265052/original/file-20190321-93044-12f77y7.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=1000&amp;fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/265052/original/file-20190321-93044-12f77y7.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" alt=""></a> <a class="source" href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/6345.0" target="_blank">ABS wage price index</a>
<hr>
Analysts focus on the causes of this historic wages stall. Reserve Bank Governors caution about its consequences for the economy. But in thousands of households across Australia, a five-year stall in wages growth exacts a high human cost. It particularly affects those already on low pay, for whom a few dollars a week mean the difference between making rent, paying for school excursions or filling the fridge. ‘Frugal comfort’ of the kind promised by Justice Higgins in 1906 (to full-time men at least), is a long way from the anxiety that flatlining wages mean for many Australians.
The wage system shapes the fortunes of Australian households. Its reverberations have become more powerful with the growing number of two-earner households and a retirement incomes system that increasingly mirrors wage earnings.
The growing awareness of wage inequality and unevenly rewarded productivity, in combination with increasing job insecurity and weakening protections at work, is likely to feed into the election campaign.
Redressing the basic and widening power imbalance that underlies the employment and wage statistics has become a public necessity that has supporters in some surprising places. It is overdue.
<hr>
The <a href="https://www.assa.edu.au" target="_blank">Academy of the Social Sciences in Australia</a> is one of Australia’s four learned academies. The ASSA coordinates the promotion of research, teaching and advice in the social sciences, promotes scholarly cooperation across disciplines, comments on national needs and priorities in the social sciences, and provides advice to government on issues of national importance.<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/113360/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important; text-shadow: none !important;">
<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/barbara-pocock-7079" target="_blank">Barbara Pocock</a>, Emeritus Professor University of South Australia, <a href="http://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-south-australia-1180" target="_blank">University of South Australia</a>
This article is republished from <a href="http://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/jobs-but-not-enough-work-how-power-keeps-workers-anxious-and-wages-low-113360" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

Jobs but not enough work. How power keeps workers anxious and wages low

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
Whether it’s the use of Terminator imagery, visions of dystopia, or discussions of genomics, it’s common practice to use the metaphors and framing of speculative fiction to guide discussion into new and innovative areas.
A common theme is a world where humans do less work and machines do more. Why have we not yet reached that point?
I recently gave a talk on the implications of blockchain technologies for international trade. This technology can automate work that was manual and error-prone, bringing benefits with less human labour.
A colleague from another university reminded me afterwards that the promise of less work in the future was a mainstay of science fiction. Given my interests in smart city technologies, he asked, why did I think that we would finally see a real reduction in human work, as had been promised for so many years?
Trend towards shorter weeks reversed
To answer this question, we need to return to the mid-late 19th century, when the explosion of science-fiction writing began. Here are some Parisian illustrations of the year 2000. In these pictures, manual effort is reduced to button-pushing and supervision. Machines do the work and, hence, humans do less.
But what became of all this saved time? What happened to the leisure-oriented future?
A small amount of history is in order, as the 40-hour working week is a relatively new development. At the start of the 19th century, 100-hour weeks were not uncommon, and Australia has a long history of labour movements to develop a liveable working week.
The adoption of the 40-hour working week is often interpreted as a boon for workers but, as Henry Ford admitted, it is as much a benefit for employers. Ford observed that fatigued workers made more mistakes. Asking his workers to put in more than 40 hours a week usually cost him more money than he made.
John Maynard Keynes, writing in 1930, thought we’d be working 30 hours a week by 2030. Our problem would be too much free time.
We were on track to reducing working hours until 1980, when we went the other way. Working harder, for longer, somehow became desirable. And demandable.
Rutger Bregman has explored this at length in his book, Utopia for Realists. He champions a 15-hour work week to remove “bullshit jobs” and to give humans time to do useful and rewarding things. But this is at odds with how we often think about work. Work, and the amount of work we do, frequently defines our value.
Overwork is often interpreted as commitment, rather than inefficiency. The visions of reduced working weeks were, whether the authors knew it or not, visions of a more effective workforce. But to admit to doing less work is often interpreted as a proxy for caring less.
Given subsistence and thriving are generally related to the job we do, work is not just important in terms of perception, it is vital to survival.
So what’s different now?
Returning to my colleague’s question, have we actually reached a point where we could work less and get the same amount of work done? If so, why now?
In the developed world, home appliances have greatly reduced the need for physical labour. Fewer people need to be involved in tasks that once left them little time to do much else.
For example, the word processor and email have, to a great extent, replaced the dedicated secretarial staff that briefly flourished with the rise of the typewriter. At one time all copies were made with manual scribes, carefully duplicating what they read. Then we had carbon paper. Then photocopiers. Then printers. Then the requirement for physical copy reduced.
An entire stream of labour appeared and disappeared as technology advanced. We freed ourselves of one kind of work; we just replaced it with another.
The rise of robotics has heralded a new model for labour: one where humans can be removed from the entirety of a task, beyond supervision or programming. But we know that we may not always want to do this. In India, Nitin Gadkari, the minister for road transport, highways and shipping, said: "We won’t allow driverless cars in India. … I am very clear on this. We won’t allow any technology that takes away jobs."
India has 400 million workers, 12.5 million of them identified in transport, storage and communication industries. Putting millions of people out of work is at odds with India’s plans to increase the numbers in the workforce.
So we have two reasons emerging for why we haven’t seen the promised labour reductions. The first is our perceptions of working hours as proxy value of an employee. The second is that few governments want to cause widespread unemployment as this is then linked to social and economic issues.
But this is at odds with what we know about work: too much of it is bad for us and the job itself.
Working out the post-work economy
Until now, these answers have been enough because we didn’t really have machines that could replace us. But that has changed in many areas. Planes can land themselves. Cars can drive themselves. Computer-controlled trains run in many subways and airports of the world.
In terms of transport, then, humans are rapidly becoming superfluous, except as passengers. And transport is only one example. We can now say “let someone else do it” and have that someone not be human.
We finally have the means to sensibly replace human labour, without forcing that work on to someone else. But this does not mean we can simply do that. We need to work out how to support people in a post-work economy.
We need to accurately identify which jobs machines can’t do. We need to identify how we will be social without the accidental socialisation caused by the necessity of work.
We now live in the age predicted by science fiction. It’s up to us whether we choose to give ourselves the leisure, or not.
Nick Falkner is associate professor and director of the Australian Smart Cities Consortium at University of Adelaide.
This article was originally published on <a href="https://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-happened-to-our-promised-leisure-time-and-will-we-find-it-in-the-smart-city-83570" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

Will smart cities lead us to our promised leisure time?: Nick Falkner

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/63263/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
By 2034/35, almost 20 percent of Australians (6.2 million) are projected to be aged 65 or over.
One sector already feeling the impact of the ageing population is construction. In Queensland, the number of construction workers aged 55 and over increased from 8 percent of full-time workers in 1992 to 14.2 percent in 2014.
An ageing workforce is likely to increase the need for less physically demanding jobs or maybe technology might address this issue. Task automation and the industry’s innovation culture are two of the greatest areas of uncertainty for the construction industry.
A new study that developed evidence based scenarios for 2036, depicts how automation and manufacturing could grow in the construction sector, creating more knowledge intensive jobs as a result.
The study explores future technology that eliminates dangerous and difficult tasks, particularly in light of the ageing workforce.
Experts in the industry were asked the extent to which technology would progress and how many or which tasks could be automated. There was no consensus on this and the other point of contention between the interviewees was how bold the industry would be in its pursuit of new solutions.
The research did suggest the construction workforce will need a broad understanding of digital applications, in addition to traditional project management and communication skills.
<h2>Construction jobs of the future</h2>
The trends analysis and scenario development in the report produced some examples of possible construction industry jobs in the year 2036, including:
Building assembly technician
Someone who oversees robotic systems and examines data feeds throughout the life of a project. This worker would optimise workflows and make adjustments on real time feedback from clients about design or changes to materials.
Virtual/augmented reality trainers
Breakthroughs in virtual and augmented reality technology could provide low-cost immersive environments where apprentices and trainers can meet virtually in any training situation, such as worksite, factory, design studio – the possibilities are endless.
Building drone operators
These professionals would control and program drones to carry out complex tasks such as site inspections, deliveries and maintenance.
Robot resource manager
Robots in the workplace will need someone to take care of commissioning, software programming, maintenance and re-purposing or recycling of robotic parts. Keeping track of this exploding field of technology will be a key challenge for the role.
<h2>Other opportunities</h2>
The Australian construction industry is changing with the introduction of digital collaboration platforms, like Building Information Modelling (BIM), robot machine prototypes such as the Fastbrick robot and rapid progress in 3D printing capabilities. These innovations will need more people skilled in the use of software programs and less people for labour-intensive jobs such as bricklaying or paving.
BIM is software that creates a 3D visualisation of a building. However, it extends beyond 3D imaging to show scheduling, cost control, facility management and energy performance monitoring. The UK government has mandated that all centrally funded work is to be undertaken using BIM by April 2016 and the Queensland government has stated that it will progressively implement the use of BIM into all major state infrastructure projects by 2023. As workers' skills in BIM increase in Australia, the improved cost and time saving will drive customers to demand that projects are managed in this way.
Already, in the Netherlands, the company MX3D is using 6-axis industrial robots to print a fully functional steel bridge. Contour Crafting technology, a process invented at the University of Southern California, has great potential for automating the construction of whole structures as well as sub-components and a company in China is using 3D printing to build houses.
The manufacturing part of the construction industry is expected to grow at 5% per annum out to 2023, compared to a growth rate of 2.3% for the industry as a whole. While the current prefabricated building market in Australia is still comparatively small, with only A$4.5 billion of the total A$150 billion construction industry, it is expected to contribute to more affordable housing stock and to take a much greater share of creating multi-storey buildings.
The nature of construction work is set for a step change over the next 20 years and careful strategic thinking is needed to navigate the changes.
The changes will require humans to exercise judgement and decision-making that reflects human values and aspirations; a task that is well beyond the most advanced artificial intelligence systems.
George Quezada is research scientist, Data61, and author for The Conversation. He can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/george-quezada-286991" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

jchancellor-FAypfDUnLy

What construction jobs will look like when robots can build things

<html><body>
 Six months ago we noted that there were more people in jobs or looking for jobs than ever before across a raft of age categories. And at that time we suggested there were signs that participation rates seemed to be topping out – starting to trend sideways. 
But interestingly over the past six months workforce participation rates for those older than 55 years have lifted and to fresh record highs (using 12-month rolling averages).
<a href="/images/2016/04/26/Screen%20Shot%202016-04-26%20at%209.07.39%20AM.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="/images/2016/04/26/Screen%20Shot%202016-04-26%20at%209.07.39%20AM.png" alt="">
But while seniors are more active in the labour force, the participation rate for the 15-19 years grouping continues to trend lower. And the participation rate of 20-24 year Aussies has been largely stable and still well below the record highs set 25 years ago.
In rolling average terms, the overall labour force participation rate has been rising since May 2015 and now stands at a 2ó-year high of 65.0 percent, but still below the high of 65.5 per cent set in 2011. However a key reason why overall workforce participation is still below record levels is the lower participation rate of young people, with more choosing to do further studies before joining the workforce.
The latest job numbers also show that there are 3.66 million people over the age of 65 compared with 3.53 million Australians aged between 25-34 years. The number of people over the age of 65 is growing at a 3.4 percent annual rate. In contrast the number of people aged 25-34 is growing at a 1.58 percent annual rate (8-year low) and the number aged 35-44 is growing at a 0.21 percent annual rate – slowest rate recorded.
Australians are living longer and are opting to stay in the workforce longer – even if on a more casual or part-time basis.
But the trends are incredibly positive for Government finances and the economy as a whole. The risk had been that the ageing population would lead to lower tax revenues and rising health and social security spending. But a healthier aged population and greater workforce participation by seniors can buy the politicians more time in coming up with a new tax structure that will take the economy forward.
What do the figures show?
 Detailed employment data
A raft of detailed job data for March was released yesterday. Data on employment by industry is released quarterly and the most recent data was published last month. 
This month we focus on participation rates (proportion of people in jobs or looking for work) across age brackets and have assessed rolling annual averages.
In the year to March, the participation in the job market of those 25-34 years was 83.2 per cent, just off the record high of 83.3 percent set in the year to February.
The participation in the job market of those 35-44 years was 83.8 percent,  a record high.
The participation in the job market of those 60-64 years was a  record high of 56.0 percent.
The participation in the job market of those 65 years plus was 12.3 percent,  a record high
The participation in the job market of those 55-59 years was 73.6 percent,  a record high.
The participation in the job market of those 45-54 years was 83.4 per cent, just below the record high of 83.6 percent set in April 2011.
The participation in the job market of those 20-24 years was 79.2 per cent, up from the record low of 78.0 per cent set in November 2014.
The participation in the job market of those 15-19 years was 53.8 per cent, up from the record low of 53.2 percent set in July 2014.
The number of people in the civilian population aged 65 plus is 3.66 million, up 3.43 percent on a year ago.
Those aged 25-34 years total 3.53 million people (up 1.58 per cent) and those aged 35-44 years total 3.22 million people (up 0.21 per cent).
There are 3.61 million Aussies not in the labour force and the number is currently falling at a 1.51 per cent annual rate – just off the fastest annual decline seen in the past nine years.
Average hours worked in the year to March was 32.3 hours. The average measure has been largely unchanged over the past year but down on recent highs of 32.9 hours set in early 2012.
<a href="/images/2016/04/26/Screen%20Shot%202016-04-26%20at%209.09.25%20AM.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="/images/2016/04/26/Screen%20Shot%202016-04-26%20at%209.09.25%20AM.png" alt="">
What is the importance of the economic data?
The Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) provides  detailed labour market figures one week after releasing ‘top level’ statistics of employment &amp; unemployment levels across states and territories. The detailed data is useful in identifying broader underlying trends and instructive about the health of the economy.
<a href="/images/2016/04/26/Screen%20Shot%202016-04-26%20at%209.11.31%20AM.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="/images/2016/04/26/Screen%20Shot%202016-04-26%20at%209.11.31%20AM.png" alt="">
Craig James is the chief economist at <a href="https://www.comsec.com.au/default.aspx" target="_blank">CommSec</a>.
</body></html>

Record share of seniors in workforce: CommSec's Craig James

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
In the current review of Modern Awards before the Fair Work Commission, employers are challenging the level of penalty rates.
At the same time, the Productivity Commission says excessive penalty rates for Sundays reduce hours worked, mean unemployment is higher than it needs to be, and reduce options for businesses and consumers. It wants Sunday penalty rates in some sectors to be set at the Saturday rate.
A penalty rate for Sunday work was first implemented in Australia for working “unsocial” hours in 1919. The 1947 “Weekend Penalty Rates Case” expanded penalty rates to Saturdays, while Sundays were set at a rate of double time. Later decisions specified that workers would need to be compensated for the loss of opportunity for family life and social time resulting from weekend work.
More than 60 years on, employers argue the world has changed. It has, but many of the arguments employers make are not supported by the evidence.
Myth 1: Given extended trading hours, it’s no longer abnormal for people to work weekends. 
Most employees still do not work unsocial hours. According to the Australian Work and Life Index, 38% of workers work unsocial hours; only 32.2% of workers work weekends and 18.9% of workers work evenings after 9pm regularly. These figures include the 13.1% of workers who work both evenings and weekends regularly.
<a href="/images/2015/11/16/Screen%20Shot%202015-11-16%20at%208.06.14%20AM.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="/images/2015/11/16/Screen%20Shot%202015-11-16%20at%208.06.14%20AM.png" alt="" width="705" height="570">
 
Click to enlarge
Myth 2: It’s only young single people that work weekends.
While being single with no children is more common than other family types among these workers, they are not a majority: there are also many couples both with and without children, and sole parents.
<a href="/images/2015/11/16/Screen%20Shot%202015-11-16%20at%208.10.04%20AM.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="/images/2015/11/16/Screen%20Shot%202015-11-16%20at%208.10.04%20AM.png" alt="" width="705" height="414">
 
Women are also more likely than men to work weekends. HILDA data indicates that only 22% of male and 21% of female weekend workers were dependent students; in other words, 78% of all weekend workers were not dependent and pay their own bills.
<a href="/images/2015/11/16/Screen%20Shot%202015-11-16%20at%208.11.22%20AM.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="/images/2015/11/16/Screen%20Shot%202015-11-16%20at%208.11.22%20AM.png" alt="" width="779" height="663">
 
Myth 3: The disadvantages of working weekends are only bad for those who work very long hours.
Employers argue that the adverse effects associated with working weekends are only relevant to those who work very long hours, and that the days and times themselves are no longer relevant, either because people no longer engage in the activities which previous decisions attempted to protect, or because these activities can be made up on other days and at other times.
But those who work on weekends do so at the sacrifice of time with friends and family, time which cannot be simply made up through time spent at other times during the week. This is particularly acute on Sundays, which remain a time for spending time with family. In spite of claims to the contrary, the differentiation between Saturdays and Sundays remains relevant in modern Australian society.
In general, the recompense of penalty rates is the key reason for willingly working weekends; with far fewer doing so to meet their own flexibility needs. However, the experience of the Work Choices era, and the importance and power of employer expectation, does suggest that many employees would not, in the absence of penalty rates, be able to avoid weekend work due to fear of losing their jobs, and indeed employees being forced to work weekends for no extra pay seems the most likely consequence of removing penalty rates.
Myth 4: Those who work in industries that pay penalty rates are not low paid.
Many workers on penalty rates are among the low paid. According to the Australian Work and Life Index, 37.8% of workers who work weekends only and receive penalty rates rely on these to meet household expenses. This increases to 48.8% for those working both evenings and weekends, and 52.2% for Sundays only.
<a href="/images/2015/11/16/Screen%20Shot%202015-11-16%20at%208.13.12%20AM.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="/images/2015/11/16/Screen%20Shot%202015-11-16%20at%208.13.12%20AM.png" alt="" width="779" height="640">
Myth 5: Reducing or eliminating penalty rates would increase employment.
The empirical evidence for increased employment as a result of reducing penalty rates is non-existent. <a href="https://press.anu.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/Paying-the-Penalty-The-High-Price-of-Penalty-Rates-in-Australian-Restaurants.pdf">Employer arguments</a> have been based essentially on economic theory, which is merely hypothesis in the absence of empirical confirmation. What may be relevant in terms of the impact of wages on employment is that none of the available empirical evidence suggests minimum wages have a significant effect on net employment, a point reiterated by the Productivity Commission.
While some studies do suggest a substitution effect, this would be a matter of balancing one set of employed workers against another – older workers versus youth. In the absence of minima the wages of those who are employed would be lower. However, a number of studies suggest no effect at all, and some suggest a positive effect.
Given the evidence, it is difficult to see any benefits likely to accrue from the abolition or reduction of penalty rates for employees, employment levels or greater availability of services to the public.
 
Ray Markey is director of the Centre for Workforce Futures, Macquarie University and author for The Conversation. He can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/ray-markey-16292" target="_blank">here</a>.
 
</body></html>

Workforce

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

Workforce

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News