@bankwest Curtin University
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMICS CENTRE
EMPLOYMENT
AND DISABILITY
IN AUSTRALIA
Improving employment outcomes for people with disability
Alex Buckland, Mike Dockery, Alan Duncan, Valentina Sanchez Arenas,
Panagiotis Sotirakopoulos, Chris Twomey, Lili Loan Vu
Focus on the States Series, No. 10/24 March 2024
About the Centre
The Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre is an independent economic and social research organisation located within the Curtin Business School at Curtin University. The Centre was established in 2012 through the generous support of Bankwest, a division of the Commonwealth Bank of Australia. The Centre’s core mission to deliver high quality, accessible research that enhances our understanding of key economic and social issues that contribute to the wellbeing of West Australian families, businesses and communities.
The Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre is the first research organisation of its kind in WA and draws great strength and credibility from its partnership with Bankwest, Curtin University and the Western Australian government. The Centre brings a unique philosophy to research on the major economic issues facing the State.
By bringing together experts from the research, policy, and business communities at all stages of the process – from framing and conceptualising research questions, through the conduct of research, to the communication and implementation of research findings – we ensure that our research is relevant, fit for purpose, and makes a genuine difference to the lives of Australians, both in WA and nationally.
The Centre is able to capitalise on Curtin University’s reputation for excellence in economic modelling, forecasting, public policy research, trade and industrial economics and spatial sciences. Centre researchers have specific expertise in economic forecasting, quantitative modelling, micro-data analysis and economic and social policy evaluation. The Centre also derives great value from its close association with experts from the corporate, business, public and not-for-profit sectors.
BCEC REPORT SERIES
BCEC REPORT SERIES
Focus on Western Australia
This series explores economic and social issues from a Western Australian perspective, including data specific to WA or benchmarking WA against other states and territories.
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMICS CENTRE
HOUSING AFFORDABILITY First release 2014
IN WESTERN AUSTRALIA
2023 Building for the future
Ryan Brierty, Alex Buckland, Adam Crowe, Alan Duncan and Steven Rowley
Focus on Western Australia Report Series, No.17
May 2023
Focus on the States
This series examines topical economic and social issues of relevance to contemporary public policy discourse in Australia.
First release 2014
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMICS CENTRE
BEHIND
THE LINE
Poverty and disadvantage in Australia 2022
Alan Duncan
Focus on the States Series, No. 9/22 March 2022
Focus on Industry
This series looks at historical trends, current issues and future directions in important industry sectors within the context of the Western Australian economy.
First release 2016
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMICS CENTRE
TRADING UP
International trade futures and the Western Australian economy
AlexDanielBuckland,Kiely, ValentinaAlan Duncan,SanchezMohammadArenas andFarhad,PanosAbebeSotirakopoulosHailemariam,
Focus on Industry Report Series, No. 8
July 2023
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES 1
SERIES1
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
This page has been intentionally left blank.
2 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
2
CONTENTS
CONTENTS
LIST OF FIGURES 5
LIST OF TABLES 7
FOREWORD BCEC 8
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 9
Key findings 12 Recommendations 14
EMPLOY MY ABILITY: POLICY FRAMEWORKS AND APPROACHES 17
Introduction 18 Framing the challenge 19 Human rights, dignity and labour market inclusion 20 Improving employment outcomes in Australia 22
Employ My Ability – Please? 23
Education to employment transitions 24 The international context 25
PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA: PREVALENCE AND TRENDS 27
Introduction 28 Defining and measuring disability 29 Prevalence and nature of disability in Australia 32
EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH A DISABILITY 41
Introduction 42 Trends in labour force participation and employment for people with a disability 43 Which occupations and industries are most accessible to people with disabilities? 46 The labour market penalty for people with a disability 49 Journeys through work and time: labour market progressions for people with a 55 disability Has the National Disability Insurance Scheme improved labour market outcomes? 58
IS THE AUSTRALIAN WORKPLACE INCLUSIVE FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES? 61
Introduction 62 A precarious world: job insecurity for people with a disability 63 Job satisfaction for people with a disability 66 Matching up? Underemployment and work preferences 67 Breaking down the barriers 70 Labour market discrimination 73
DISABILITY, WELLBEING AND EMPLOYMENT 75
Effect of employment on wellbeing for people with a disability 80
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES 3
SERIES3
CONTENTS
CONTENTS (continued)
EMPLOYMENT AND LABOUR MARKET INCLUSION FOR CARERS 81
Introduction 82 Caring for a person with a disability 83 Is the Australian labour market inclusive for carers? 87 Working life for carers 89 Barriers to employment 91 Caring, wellbeing and employment 93
SHIFTING THE DIAL: RESHAPING POLICY TO BROADEN ACCESS TO EMPLOYMENT 97
FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES
Introduction 98 The economic contribution and cost of people with a disability 99 A work first approach 101 Public sector employers as leaders 105 Community sector providers as employers of choice 106 Education to work transitions that support life-long outcomes 107
SUMMARY AND POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS 109
Recommendations 113
ABBREVIATIONS 115
REFERENCES 117
APPENDIX 119
4 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
4
LIST OF FIGURES
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE 1 People with disability: conceptual framework 30
FIGURE 2 Disability rates by age and gender, 1998 and 2018 SDAC, persons aged 32
0-69
FIGURE 3 Prevalence of disability by extent of limitation, SDAC, working-age 34
population, 1998 to 2018
FIGURE 4 Nature of impairment for people with a disability aged 15-69: by gender, 35
2003 and 2018
FIGURE 5 Age of disability onset for people with a disability aged 15-69: by gender, 36
1998 and 2018
FIGURE 6 Proportion with a disability, and work limiting disability, population aged 37
15-69, 2001-2022
FIGURE 7 Disability prevalence by gender, age, and cohort: 2001 to 2022 39
FIGURE 8 Labour force status for people with and without a disability: 2001 to 2022 43
FIGURE 9 Employment rates for people with and without a disability: by gender, 2001 44
to 2022 FIGURE 10 Employment rates by level of disability: 2003 to 2018 45 FIGURE 11 Workforce share by occupation for people with disability and non-disabled: 46 2020 to 2022 FIGURE 12 Workforce share by industry for people with disability and non-disabled: 47 2020 to 2022 FIGURE 13 Estimated employment penalty for people with disability: 2003 to 2022 50 FIGURE 14 Employment penalty by level of limitation for people with disability: 1998 51 to 2018
FIGURE 15 Educational attainment for people with and without a disability: 2001 to 53
2022 FIGURE 16 Employment penalty by education level for people with disability: 1998 to 54 2018 FIGURE 17 Labour market trajectories for people with and without disability: 2015 to 57 2022
FIGURE 18 Precarity index by disability status and gender: 2002 to 2022 63
FIGURE 19 Precarity by occupation for people with disability: 2002 to 2022 64
FIGURE 20 Mean job satisfaction by disability status 66 FIGURE 21 Underemployment ratios by disability status: 2001 to 2022 67 FIGURE 22 Reasons for working part-time by disability status: 2001 to 2022 68
FIGURE 23 Preference for working more or fewer hours: employees with a work-limiting 69
disability
FIGURE 24 Stated reasons for difficulties getting a job: jobseekers with and without 70
disability FIGURE 25 Reasons for not looking for a job: marginally attached people with and 71 without disability FIGURE 26 Mean life satisfaction by disability status 76
FIGURE 27 Overall life satisfaction rating (0-10 scale): by disability status 77
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES 5
SERIES5
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
LIST OF FIGURES (continued)
FIGURE 28 Mean life satisfaction by level of disability: HILDA 2001 to 2022 79 FIGURE 29 Share of working age Australians providing care: 2006 to 2021 83 FIGURE 30 Age composition of primary carers and other carers: 1998 and 2018 84
FIGURE 31 Educational attainment by carer status: 1998 and 2018 85
FIGURE 32 Labour force status for carers and non-carers: ABS Census, 2006 to 2021 87 FIGURE 33 Mean job satisfaction by carer status: 2005 to 2022 89
FIGURE 34 Preference of carers for working more or fewer hours: 2005 to 2022 90
FIGURE 35 Perceived reasons for difficulties getting a job: jobseekers: by carer status, 91
2005 to 2022 FIGURE 36 Reasons for not looking for a job: marginally attached by carer status, 2005 92 to 2022 FIGURE 37 Mean life satisfaction by carer status: persons aged 15-69 years, HILDA 93 Waves 5-22
FIGURE 38 Life satisfaction: Effects of caring roles, and main carers' labour force 94
status: HILDA Waves 2005 to 2022
6 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
6
LIST OF TABLES
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE 1 Disability rates by gender and age, SDAC 1998 to 2018 33
TABLE 2 Distribution of people with disability across industry sector: 2020 to 2022 48
TABLE 3 Labour market transitions between 2021 and 2022: by disability status 55
TABLE 4 Probability of employment: multivariate regression models, HILDA and 120
SDAC data
TABLE 5 Employment probability by level of limitation: pooled SDAC data 1998- 121
2018
TABLE 6 Employment probability by education level and disability status 121
TABLE 7 Estimated association between NDIS support package and labour market 122
outcomes: people with disability, 2017 to 2022
TABLE 8 Transition to employment among people with disability who would like a 123
job: 2017 to 2022
TABLE 9 Drivers of ‘happiness' among people aged 15-69: 2001 to 2022 124
TABLE 10 Estimated relationship between disability status and wellbeing: by degree 125
of limitation, 2001 to 2022
TABLE 11 Labour force status and life satisfaction by degree of work limitation: 2001 126
to 2022
TABLE 12 Employment probability for carers: panel regression models, HILDA data 127
2005 to 2022
TABLE 13 Effect of carer status on life satisfaction: panel regression models, HILDA 127
data 2005 to 2022
TABLE 14 Labour force status and life satisfaction for carers: HILDA data 2005 to 128
2022
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES 7
SERIES7
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
FOREWORD
Despite growing demand for workers and skills in Australia, there remain significant barriers to employment for many of the one in six Australians – around 4.4 million people – with a disability. The situation is especially acute for up to 3 million Australians living with a disability classified as work-limiting to some degree.
Aside from this obvious underutilisation of the talents of people with disability, the opportunity to work is fundamental to living a complete and fulfilling life and to achieving autonomy and independence.
This new Focus on the States report contains a comprehensive assessment of the trends, drivers and consequences of labour market disadvantage faced by people with disability in Australia, with a view to highlighting the potential for policy and actions to promote greater inclusion and support, reduce barriers to employment and address the discrimination and unconscious bias that still endures in our society.
The report casts new light on the different labour market journeys and work progressions experienced by people with work-limiting disabilities compared to those with conditions that do not limit their labour market contribution, and to people without disability, as well as for carers of people with disability.
We reflect on the extent to which the support packages available through the National Disability Insurance Scheme have improved access to employment for people with disability and offer some recommendations for action to make Australian workplaces more inclusive for all. These recommendations are founded on the guiding principle of an entitlement to meaningful work for all that seek it.
We would like to thank the many stakeholders we’ve met with for their invaluable insights and contributions to shaping this report, particularly those with lived experiences of the issues examined.
We hope you find the report to be illuminating, and as always, we would love to hear your views on our research.
Professor Alan Duncan
Director, Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre
Faculty of Business and Law, Curtin University
8 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
8
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Commencing from the early 1990’s, Australia’s policy relating to people with disability has been fundamentally reshaped into what has been described as the ‘rights based’ era. Key developments on this pathway included the Disability Services Act (1986), the Disability Discrimination Act (1992), Australia’s signing of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, two 10-year National Disability Strategies, the introduction of the National Disability Insurance Scheme and the 2019 Royal Commission into the treatment of people with disability.
At the heart of these reforms is the goal for an inclusive society in which people with disability can lead lives to the fullest of their potential and as equal citizens.
Access to meaningful employment is a critical element in achieving inclusivity and leading a full life, and this report focuses on Australia’s track record in terms of labour market inclusion for people with disability and their carers.
Labour market inclusion for people with disabilities Despite the extensive policy efforts, reforms to supports and service delivery for people with a disability and greatly increased funding, we find that things are not improving for Australians with a disability. Relative to Australians without disability, the likelihood of a person with a disability gaining employment has not increased at all over the past 20 years.
This finding applies across the spectrum of levels of limitation. Employment prospects have not improved for people with disabilities who face mild limitations, through to those with profound limitations in undertaking core activities.
This key finding is confirmed using detailed statistical modelling and conducted separately using two key national datasets.
The wellbeing of people with disability Australia’s lack of progress in labour market inclusion appears symptomatic of a wider failure of policy reforms to alleviate the barriers people with disability experience in participating fully in society.
Australians with disability do, on average, lead happy and fulfilling lives. However, our modelling identifies reductions in life satisfaction associated with having a disability, and with disabilities of varying levels of limitation. These ‘wellbeing’ penalties have also not reduced at all over the past 20 years.
There is widespread acceptance that opportunity for meaningful employment with fair pay for people with disabilities is integral to full participation in society. Key domains in which people with disability are less satisfied with their lives relate to labour market inclusion: their employment opportunities and financial circumstances.
Accordingly, our modelling provides strong evidence that securing employment enhances wellbeing for people with disabilities.
Are workplaces inclusive? When in employment, workers with disability typically report a high level of satisfaction with their jobs. Relative to other workers, however, they are notably less satisfied with their pay, and job security. On average they are actually more satisfied with the work that they do than workers without disabilities.
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES 9
SERIES9
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
The jobs of workers with disability are highly precarious, particularly for workers in lower skilled occupations. Job insecurity and inferior working conditions contribute in roughly equal part to this precarity. It is in the occupation of technicians and trades workers that people with disability face the highest gap in precarity relative to their counterparts without disabilities.
Job insecurity is one element of a much higher rate of churn between labour market states for people with disability. This includes moving in and out of the labour force altogether, as well as between jobs and unemployment. For example, 90 per cent of full-time workers without a disability in one year are found to be in full-time work the following year, compared to just 75 per cent of full-time workers with a disability.
Carers
Being the primary carer of a person with a disability or an elderly person is associated with a lower employment probability of 5 to 10 per cent. The demands of that role are associated with a small but significant reduction in self-assessed life satisfaction.
As with people with disabilities, there appears to have been no improvement in work outcomes and life satisfaction for carers over the past two decades of policy and funding reform.
The availability of free time, finances, employment opportunity, and health are life domains in which primary carers of working age tend to be less satisfied.
There is also a large overlap between the population of carers and people with disability. Based on the HILDA data, 46 per cent of working age people who are a main carer also have a disability.
Primary carers looking for work nominate their own ill health as their main barrier to getting a job.
Shifting the dial We fully support the rights-based approach to policy relating to people with disabilities, but existing policy settings that merely point to rights without meaningful initiatives and compliance are not generating sufficient momentum for change to improve the lives of Australians with disabilities.
More needs to be done. Evidence presented in this report makes it clear that enhancing labour market inclusion must be part of that push.
We advocate a work first approach embedded into the supports provided for people with disabilities, in which the default assumption is that people with disabilities can access meaningful work whenever they and their families believe this is appropriate.
To implement this approach, we recommend the creation of an agency to coordinate disability employment policy that ensures it is aligned with positive outcomes for people with disability. Roles would include the collection and collation of data, rigorous evaluations, and providing evidence-based advice to employers, service providers and policy-makers on what works best.
An initial priority must be to address adverse incentives embedded in the existing system. These include the greater rewards to Disability Employment Service providers to achieve repeated short-term placements rather than longer term employment outcomes, restrictions on hours worked in placements, and how support payments or NDIS eligibility can be placed at risk or withdrawn over time as a result of successful employment outcomes.
10 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
1010
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Our modelling suggests that, other things being equal, being in receipt of NDIS support reduces the likelihood a person with disability will secure a job. Currently only around one-third of NDIS support plans for working age clients include employment-related goals.
Leveraging the efforts, good will and leadership of corporate Australia is essential to the success of a work first approach. This should start with offering strong incentives, such as wage subsidies, financial and technical assistance with workplace accommodations, backed up by research and evaluation to identify and promote best practice. The agency would provide a central contact point for employers to address the uncertainties many feel around creating inclusive workplaces.
All organisations should be seen as potential Australian Disability Enterprises. Rather than differentiating by the degree of ‘openness’ versus supported employment, all organisations should be supported on the basis of their effectiveness in generating positive outcomes for people with disabilities and their families against clearly defined objectives.
Governments should be prepared to enact compliance measures, such as mandatory reporting, targets and quotas if there is no evidence of progress accelerating. Government procurement conditions and practices is a key place to start.
The government sector also needs to lead the way by improving the inclusiveness in the public sector.
Education to work pathways There is a case for a greater focus on increasing education retention and attainment for young Australians with disabilities. While employment rates increase with educational attainment for all Australians, our modelling shows there is large, additional positive effect for people with disability.
This means there is a large social opportunity cost arising from the exclusion of people with a disability who are currently at the margins of finishing school, or of going on to complete a certificate or university qualification.
The evidence also shows that better education outcomes for people with a disability provides an additional boost to their job prospects, with a bachelor’s degree increasing their chances of being employed by an additional 34.4 per cent (an additional 16.2 per cent boost above the 18.2 per cent improvement seen for people without a disability with a degree).
Best practice models provide both meaningful jobs skills and work experience programs along with supported post-school transition that engages with employers, support and follow up with students to ensure success.
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES 11
111111
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
Key Findings that they have been consistently 25 30 percentage points less likely to be employed than those without a disabilityThe BCEC Employment and Disability report over the past two decades. There is evidencedraws on the different strengths of three of a recent decline in that penalty frommain datasets to maximise insights into around 32 percentage points in 2018 totrends for people living with a disability 27 percentage points in 2022.in Australia: the ABS Survey of Disability, Aging and Carers (SDAC), the ABS Census Penalties in the probability of being inand 22 waves of the longitudinal Household, employment associated with each level ofIncome and Labour Dynamics in Australia restriction – from a disability that poses noSurvey (HILDA). Each data set has different restrictions on core activities through to oneways to identify people with disability, but that imposes profound limitations on coreall three draw on the concept of requiring activities – have remained stable over time.assistance for everyday functioning.
The need for inclusive educationDue to the focus on labour market inclusion, Having a university degree is associatedmost statistics and analyses presented in with an 18.2 per cent increase in the chancethis report relate to people of working age, of being in work compared to a person whodefined as between 15 and 69 years of age. did not complete school. For people with disability, having a university degree isThe prevalence of disability in Australia associated with an additional 16.2 per centEstimates of the prevalence of disability higher probability of being in work.vary across different sources of data. According to the ABS Survey of Disability, Labour market churn and discouragedAgeing and Carers, there are around 4.4 jobseekersmillion people with disability in Australia. People with disability experience a highThe total incidence of disability among degree of churn between labour marketworking age people (15-69 years) declined states. For full-time workers with afrom 18.0 per cent in 1998 to 14.4 per cent disability, typically 25 per cent will havein 2018. left full-time employment one year later, compared to just 10 per cent for full-timeThe decline in prevalence can be attributed workers without a disability.to a fall in the prevalence of disability among older working-age Australians, and Among unemployed people, 42 per cent ofparticularly in disabilities associated with people with a disability have left the labourphysical restrictions. force one year later, compared to just 13.7 per cent for people without a disability.Labour market inclusion Based on HILDA data, 53.1 per cent of Job qualitypeople with a work-limiting disability were When in employment, workers with ain a job in 2022, compared to 81.8 per cent disability are, on average, quite contentof people without a disability or long-term with their jobs and with most aspects ofhealth condition, a gap of 28.6 percentage their jobs. Relative to workers without apoints. That gap has widened from 27.8 disability, the aspects of their jobs they arepercentage points in 2001. least satisfied with are pay, job security and hours worked.People with disability experience a significant labour market ‘penalty’, such
12 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
1212
KEY FINDINGS
Labour market segregation account of cost savings in welfare By industry, the health care and payments and the mitigation of other social assistance sector employs the supports. largest proportion of its workforce with people with a disability (21.7 per cent). Disability and wellbeing Agriculture, forestry and fishing has the Australians with a disability lead happy highest over-representation of workers and rewarding lives, reporting average with a disability, at 6.3 percentage life satisfaction of over 7 on a scale points above their overall share in the from 0 to 10 and on which 10 is the workforce. Mining has by far the highest highest possible score. However, having under-representation (-6.4 percentage a disability is associated with lower points) wellbeing. The reduction in reported subjective wellbeing associated with When in employment, people with having a disability is as large today as it disability are under-represented in was in 2001. higher skilled occupations. They are around twice as likely to be employed For people with a disability, there is as labourers than people without a evidence that gaining employment has a disability. positive and causal effect on their sense of wellbeing. A work first approach Over 630,000 people now receive support People with disabilities care through the NDIS. Currently only one- There were an estimated 1.42 million third of NDIS clients of working age have carers of working age in Australia in employment goals as part of their NDIS 2022 of whom 840,000 were the main support plans. Modelling suggests being carer of people requiring assistance due a NDIS client reduces a person’s chance to a disability or old age. Around 63 per of being in employment and reduces cent of carers are female, and this rises their chance of transitioning into work to 70 per cent for main carers. by around 7 percentage points. Controlling for other factors, a person Accessible transport is a barrier to who is a main carer is around 8.5 securing employment. Twenty-six per percentage points less likely to be cent of people with disability report working than a similar person who is a transport issues as a barrier to finding non-carer. work, compared to 16 per cent of jobseekers without a disability. Many carers are, themselves, people with disabilities and vice versa. Among people The economic return to inclusion of who are the main carer of someone who people with disability in Australia is elderly or has a disability, 35 per Analysis in this report suggests that cent have a work-limiting disability increasing the number of people with themselves, compared to 15 per cent of disability who are employed by 10 per people without caring roles. cent would raise national economic output by $16 billion per year.
This is a conservative measure based on additional wages but does not take
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES 13
131313
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
Recommendations the participation and inclusion of people living with a disability.
A work first approach • Regular national, state and territory
-
Implement a work first model based on a Disability Employment Excellence universal entitlement to meaningful work Awards. for all who seek it, with pay at or above
award wages. • Trial and evaluate disability employment
subsidy programs and specialist
• Create a National Disability Employment support for people with higher work
Agency (NDEA) that coordinates and limitations and support needs, as well aligns activities across existing welfare as one-off disability placement and and disability support agencies (including workplace adaptation schemes to support Disability Employment Services as well as recruitment and transition. access to the disability support pension and NDIS). Public Sector employment
- Federal, state and territory governments • Ensure active representation of people commit to provide leadership in disability
with disabilities and carers in policy employment processes and outcomes. formulation and evaluation as well as the
governance and oversight of the NDEA. • Include clear and consistent public sector
employment targets and reporting
• Ensure regular and consistent reporting requirements in the national partnership
and analysis of disability employment agreement and the Australian Disability and wellbeing outcomes, including Strategy. social inclusion, self-determination and
meaningful work. • State and territory public sector
commissions should regularly share best
• Set and report against clear targets practice models and case studies.
for disability employment outcomes, including public sector employment, Community Sector employment
industry and enterprise level reporting, • Federal, state and territory governments
procurement targets and resources in provide additional funding into existing public service contracts, and inclusion in and new public service contracts NDIS support plans. to support and deliver disability employment outcomes.
- Require the NDEA to develop and implement a progressive policy • Develop and resource specialist disability
framework to share best practice in recruitment and transition support promoting greater workplace inclusion for services to assist and advise community people with disability. service providers and to provide ongoing support to people with a disability and
• Establish a national program to fund employers.
specialist disability recruitment and support services to provide targeted Employer leadership
support, and disseminate best practice at • Leading employers should embrace
an industry and enterprise level. disability employment outcomes as a means of advancing and promoting the
-
A broadscale national awareness culture and values of their businesses. campaign to change community, employer and workplace attitudes to
14 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
1414
RECOMMENDATIONS
-
Employers who have actively engaged with and promoted the WGEA model are well-placed to transfer their learnings from gender equity to disability inclusion outcomes.
-
Boards of Management should oversee disability recruitment and employment outcomes and look to include representation of lived experience at Board level.
-
Industry bodies should actively engage with disability inclusion initiatives, developing, supporting and promoting industry-level initiatives, share and award stories of success.
Education to work transitions
-
A national partnership agreement committing state and territory education systems to develop, deliver and report a coordinated national response.
-
A quality post-school transition process that includes: person-centred transition planning, beginning early (by year 9); work experience opportunities and the facilitation of part-time work; a focus on foundational skills; and career development planning.
-
A national clearing house to curate and coordinate information and resources, overseen by the National Disability Employment Agency.
-
National data collection on post-school outcomes.
-
A system for reporting breaches of the disability standards for education with an independent complaints mechanism.
-
Specialised career advisory and transitional support roles within schools and educational institutions.
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES 15
151515
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
“IT IS ESTIMATED THAT
ONE IN EVERY SIX
AUSTRALIANS OR
AROUND 4.4 MILLION
PEOPLE IS LIVING
WITH A DISABILITY
(AIHW 2022).“
16 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
1616
EMPLOY MY ABILITY: POLICY FRAMEWORKS AND APPROACHES
EMPLOY MY ABILITY:
POLICY FRAMEWORKS
AND APPROACHES
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES 17
171717
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
INTRODUCTION
It is estimated that one in every six We look at the impact of disability on Australians or around 4.4 million people is wellbeing and participation in our economy living with a disability (AIHW 2022). Many and community. of these Australians live full, rewarding, and happy lives, make significant contributions Our focus is primarily on labour market to our economy and society, and enrich the inclusion for people living with a lives of those round them. Far too many, disability and carers. We are conscious of however, are still excluded from making a intersectionality with other groups who also meaningful contribution to our community experience discrimination, including First and are not living their lives to their full Nations Australians, LGBTQ+ and those potential … for completely avoidable from non-English speaking backgrounds. reasons. We acknowledge there are many issues beyond labour markets that can intersect Exclusion from the labour market is a and interact to compound disadvantage, major contributing factor to lower levels just as other issues facing Australians with of life satisfaction for people living with a disability also impact on their participation disability. Consecutive policies have set and wellbeing. Labour market inclusion targets to improve this situation over the is by no means a magic bullet, however last two decades but failed to shift the meaningful work, financial independence dial in any meaningful way. This report and the respect shown by colleagues and draws on insights provided by a range of the community can have a profound impact stakeholders, and data from the Census, on life satisfaction, social inclusion and Surveys of Disability, Ageing and Carers, wellbeing. and the Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia survey (HILDA).
2 Rebecca Cassells, Michael Dockery and Alan Duncan (2014), Falling Through The Cracks: poverty and disadvantage in Australia, BCEC Focus on the States Report Series, Issue #1. October 2014.
18 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
1818
FRAMING THE CHALLENGE
FRAMING THE CHALLENGE
People all differ in their physical and social- The transformative approach to emotional characteristics and in their conceptualising disability within the rights functional capacities across the gamut of based era is to reframe capability in relation human activities. Ideally, we seek a society to the barriers that prevent or interfere with that maximises people’s wellbeing through a person’s ability to feel part of our society the attainment of their own aspirations that and participate within community activities, also maximises their social contribution including employment. Everyone has a to help achieve others’ wants and goals. right to participate and make a meaningful These are not inconsistent but mutually contribution to our community, based on reinforcing goals, since it is an innate their strengths, proclivities, and passions. human trait to derive wellbeing from a sense Hence, we seek as a community to empower of relatedness and mastery (Deci and Ryan them by addressing those barriers to their 2000). participation. In practice, however many of the barriers that remain are attitudinal Disability is a relative concept defined either rather than physical, and we still have a with respect to identifiable physiological long way to go. conditions, or in terms of limits to functioning, relative to some norm. In times past, Australia’s approach to people living with a disability failed to adequately promote wellbeing or to facilitate their contribution to and involvement in society. Limits to functioning were often exacerbated by discrimination and ill-informed attitudes, compounding disadvantage and exclusion.
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES 19
191919
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
HUMAN RIGHTS, DIGNITY AND LABOUR MARKET INCLUSION
In Australia, people living with a disability Starting from the 1980s, the third period are subject to policies of both the saw a reorientation of the underpinning Commonwealth and State governments, philosophy, as questions of needs and with the balance of responsibility shifting qualification for support were replaced with over time. Post colonisation, Stubbs, Webster a rights-based approach, recognising the and Williams (2020) identify three broad right of people living with a disability to chronological periods of changing ‘social dignity and the fullest possible participation conceptions’ towards people with disability. in society. Significant steps in this direction Firstly, a role for the Commonwealth included the Disability Services Act (1986), was established in Section 51(xxiii) of Disability Discrimination Act 1992, the the Constitution, which provided for the signing of the United Nations Convention Commonwealth to make laws with respect on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities to ‘invalid and old-age pensions.’ In this first (UN CRPD) (2007), and the establishment period the Commonwealth’s obligation was of the National Disability Insurance Scheme seen as limited to support of the ‘deserving (2011). and aged poor’ with the result that many people with a disability were either neglected An early indication of this paradigm shift or consigned to hospital, jails or asylums was the Disability Services Act (1986). (Mays 2015, Kewley 1980, Stubbs et al. It provided a framework for the funding 2020). and provision of disability services, and a stated objective of the legislation was to In the second period, expectations for the ‘assist people with disabilities to receive Commonwealth to provide welfare schemes services necessary to enable them to work for social and economic reconstruction in towards full participation as members of the the aftermath of World War 2 provided the community.’ Next Australia introduced the impetus for an expanded Commonwealth role Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (DDA) with in policies affecting people with disability. the objective to eliminate ‘as far as possible’ This was facilitated by an amendment to the discrimination against people on the ground Constitution to insert s51(xxiiiA) to enable of disability, including in the areas of work the Commonwealth to make laws relating and education, and to ensure people with to ‘pharmaceutical, sickness and hospital disability have the same fundamental rights benefits, medical and dental services.’ as the rest of the community. Initially focussed on assisting people with prospects of ‘gainful employment,’ the scope A key step in the evolution of international of Commonwealth rehabilitation services policy was the United Nations Convention expanded in the 1970s to cover all people on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities with disability, and assistance was provided (UN CRPD) in 2006. It included the principles to charitable organisations to support of non-discrimination; full and effective disabled people’s homes and ‘sheltered participation and inclusion in society; respect employment’ (Kewley 1980, Stubbs et al. for difference and acceptance of people with 2020). disabilities as part of human diversity and humanity; and equality of opportunity. Australia was one of the original signatories to the Convention in 2007 which was ratified in July 2008.
20 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
2020
HUMAN RIGHTS, DIGNITY AND LABOUR MARKET INCLUSION
The first National Disability Agreement Looking back over this period of significant (NDA) was signed by all states in 2008 and change in attitude toward disability in the first National Disability Strategy 2010- Australia, we see significant evolution in 2020 developed and endorsed by COAG in national policy, programs and funding.
- It set out six priority areas for action: Yet, when we look at the evidence on inclusive and accessible communities; rights employment participation outcomes in the protection; economic security; personal and reports listed above and in the following community support; learning and skills; and pages of this report, one single fact stands health and wellbeing. out. Over the last two decades we have seen no meaningful improvement in disability employment rates and outcomes.
Disability Discrimination Act 1992. Commonwealth of Australia.
Section 3 of the DDA outlines the objects of the Act, which are:
- to eliminate, as far as possible, discrimination against persons on the ground of disability in the areas of:
i. work, accommodation, education, access to premises, clubs and sport; and ii. the provision of goods, facilities, services and land; and
iii. existing laws; and
iv. the administration of Commonwealth laws and programs; and
-
to ensure, as far as practicable, that persons with disabilities have the same rights to equality before the law as the rest of the community; and
-
to promote recognition and acceptance within the community of the principle that persons with disabilities have the same fundamental rights as the rest of the community.
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES 21
212121
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES IN AUSTRALIA
This section brings together learnings from Australia’s Disability Strategy 2021–2031 disability employment policy and programs (the ADS) was released in December 2021 within Australia and internationally to better and is intended to be “… an aspirational road understand what influences outcomes, map pointing the way ahead and represents and to consider what strategies and the national commitment to enabling every initiatives can make a practical difference to Australian to meet their potential, to achieve, employment outcomes. to have a fair go and to have real choices.” (page 318).
The Royal Commission into Violence, Abuse,
Neglect and Exploitation of People with The strategy is supported by a range of Disability was established in April 2019 other documents, including a Roadmap, and in response to community concern about Outcomes Framework, data improvement widespread reports of violence, neglect, and engagement plans, and a series abuse and exploitation. It delivered an of targeted action plans that include interim report in October 2020 and its final employment, community attitudes, early report in September 2023. Focusing on the childhood, and safety. The ADS Outcomes lived experience and voices of people with Framework consists of 85 measures across a disability and their carers, the report the 7 outcome areas. Forty-one are systems also foregrounds issues of participation measures, 40 are population measures and and wellbeing, devoting Volume 7 of its 12 4 are community attitudes measures. The volumes to Inclusive Education, Employment reporting framework includes annual reports & Housing. delivered by AIHW as well as regular reports against the action plans. The report pointed to a number of areas of employer action, including: specialised and The ADS has a strong policy focus on targeted recruitment programs; mentorships employment. The aim of the Employment and traineeships; training for employees and Financial Security outcome area is and recruiters; the development of policies that people with disability have economic relating to reasonable adjustments; security, enabling them to plan for the membership of networks to share and future and exercise choice and control over develop resources; and enhancements to their lives. Its three policy priorities are: employee platforms to make them more user to increase employment of people with friendly and accessible. disability; to improve the transition of young people with disability from education to The findings of the Royal Commission employment; and to strengthen financial highlighted recruitment policies and independence of people with disability. practices, pointing to employers’ risk aversion, biases and misconceptions. One Since its introduction in 2021, reporting on major barrier is what are considered the employment outcomes highlighted in the ADS ‘inherent requirements’ of a role and what has been comparatively limited. The first ADS count as ‘reasonable adjustments’ within the Annual Report (AIHW 2023) reported that: workplace under the DDA. This meant that, while under law employers were obliged not “… there was no real change in the to discriminate in recruitment and to make unemployment rate gap between reasonable changes to workplaces to include people with disability and people workers, in practice there was uncertainty, without disability between 2012 and little support or advice for employers, and 2018 (4.0 and 4.7 percentage points, little meaningful compliance. respectively, for people aged 15 and over).”
22 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
2222
EMPLOY MY ABILITY – PLEASE?
EMPLOY MY ABILITY – PLEASE?
The release of the ADS also coincided Any employer convinced to put it into with the launch of Employ My Ability: The practice would then need to seek additional National Disability Employment Strategy free advice, support and tools from one or in December 2021. The two strategies are more of the sources provided.1 explicitly linked, with the ADS Employment Targeted Action Plan directly referencing Employers are encouraged to develop a
Employ My Ability. Disability Action Plan using templates and
resources provided by JobAccess or the The strategy points to six key barriers Australian Human Rights Commission. reported when looking for or staying in work: This includes reconsidering recruitment processes to ensure that they are
-
Discriminatory attitudes and behaviours inclusive and satisfactorily address the during recruitment. issue of workplace adjustments. They are also advised to reach out to similar
-
Bullying, experiences of discrimination organisations for advice. However, the list of and lack of support in the workplace. endorsing organisations on the DSS website is currently short and not very diverse.3. A lack of assistance in finding, securing and maintaining employment. Given the diverse needs, activities and
-
Difficulty in accessing skills training and workplace environments found across education. different employment sectors, there is a risk that a choice of five support agencies could
-
Difficulty negotiating reasonable result in varying and patchy approaches adjustments/accommodations in the to workplace advice and support. We workplace. recommend over time that there is a degree of specialisation by industry across
-
Negative attitudes in the community, disability employment support agencies, including that people with disability can’t that this is promoted via industry networks work, or don’t want to work, and that and peak bodies, and that industry employing people with disability would be specific resources, guides and templates costly or risky. are developed and made available. This would ensure employers know where to go,The strategy seeks to lift employer tailored resources are more quickly andengagement and capability as a means easily adapted, there is greater consistencyof increasing employment demand by in their application, and it becomes easierproviding employers with the tools and to measure and report implementationabilities needed to confidently hire, outcomes to drive improvements in ratessupport, develop and retain people with of employment, retention, productivity anda disability. Employ My Ability is more wellbeing.of a high-level introduction to help get employers started (and provide their Boards with a useful overview) than a practical and implementable guide to recruitment, workplace adjustments, employee support and retention or HR policy development.
1 Resources are provided online via JobAccess and IncludeAbility, while the Australian Disability Network (ADN), Diversity Council of Australia and Get Skilled Access provide employer education, networks and support.
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES 23
232323
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
EDUCATION TO EMPLOYMENT TRANSITIONS
Employ My Ability also identifies building It concluded that were was a critical and the employment skills, experience and urgent need for education reform. Its confidence of young people with a disability key messages were the need to change as a priority action area. While surveys of attitudes and address misconceptions, young people with a disability show positive create opportunities and improve access, attitudes to future employment and the importance of planning and ongoing 90 per cent actively want to work, in resources, and streamlining coordination, practice 18 per cent of school leavers with partnerships and accountability. a disability have not entered the workforce seven years after leaving school (compared The CYDA report recommended a quality to 5 per cent of all school leavers).2 post school transition process that includes person-centred transition planning, The 2015 report Post School Transition: The beginning early (by year 9), with high experiences of students with disability by expectations embedded throughout the Children and Young People with Disability process. Work experience opportunities Australia (CYDA) is acknowledged as an and part-time work should be facilitated excellent and detailed report into the via connections with local businesses and challenges faced by school leavers. The employers, with a focus on foundational report found that … skills and career development planning with the young person, including a follow up with “… many young people with disability them post school. have extremely poor post school transition experiences. This is impacting negatively on life outcomes where there is low participation in employment and tertiary study and social exclusion remains high. While there are pockets of good post school transition practice, generally programs and preparation for this transition are fragmented with minimal coordination and guidance regarding what should occur during this time.
2 Year 13 (2021) Disability and Career Advice Survey. The South Australian Centre for Economic Studies (2021) Disability Employment Landscape Research Report.
24 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
2424
THE INTERNATIONAL CONTEXT
THE INTERNATIONAL CONTEXT
The last two decades since the signing of the The European Union has implemented various UN CRPD have also seen significant change strategies to promote disability inclusion and progress internationally. Successful in the workforce: notably, the ‘Disability international social and workplace inclusion Employment Package’ under the 2021-2030 initiatives overseas can provide best practice Strategy for the Rights of Persons with examples we can learn from and build on. Disabilities. Additional measures encompass the European disability card (for mutual Inclusion is the guiding principle of the 2030 recognition of disability status and equal Agenda for Sustainable Development, which access to benefits across eight Member pledges to create a “just, equitable, tolerant, States), the Erasmus+ program (supporting open and socially inclusive world in which mobility for disabled students), and the the needs of the most vulnerable are met” 2019 European Accessibility Act (mandating (UNDESA, 2019). International discussions accessibility for goods, services, and assistive on sustainability and inclusion recognise devices) (Lecerf, 2022). the significant barriers that prevent people with disabilities from having equal chances The US Office of Disability Employment Policy in the workforce, including higher rates employs a ‘work first’ model. It has the explicit of unemployment and inadequate social objective of increasing the number of people protection (ILO, 2016). Globally, roughly one with disability in employment, undertaking billion individuals (15 per cent of the world’s evaluation to provide evidence-based advice population), are people with disabilities, on best practice approaches to assisting from which approximately 80 per cent are of people with disability into work, and advising working age (World Bank, 2022). on how these policies and practices can be coordinated between employers and all levels The World Bank (2022) identifies inaccessible of government. physical environments and transportation, the unavailability of assistive devices In the Asia and the Pacific region, the and technologies, non-adapted means of majority of countries have also passed anti communication, gaps in service delivery, discrimination and employment equity laws. and discriminatory prejudice and stigma Governments have implemented initiatives in society as key barriers to full social and to encourage the employment of people with economic inclusion of people with disabilities. disabilities, including efforts to lower the The policy focus and associated strategies for expenses of employment for both companies encouraging the employment of people with and individuals with disabilities (UNESCAP, disabilities have been impacted by the shift in 2021). They also include employment quota understanding of disability from the medical systems, preferred contracting, job retention, model to the social and human rights models and return-to-work arrangements for people (UNESCAP, 2021). who acquire a disability (UNESCAP, 2021).
One of the policy tools most commonly The OECD (2022) argues that a key reason for used internationally to support employment the limited employment effect of disability possibilities for people with disabilities is reforms is that employment-oriented efforts employment quotas. Currently, the laws of often come too long after a person is first slightly more than 100 nations worldwide marginalised from the labour force. It stresses include employment quotas (ILO, 2019). the importance of early intervention to Countries such as France, Japan, and support the transition to employment for Germany have instituted a 2-6 per cent quota young people with a disability, given the high for businesses with 20 or more employees, share that find themselves not participating in leading to positive impacts on employment employment, education or training. outcomes (ILO, 2019).
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES 25
252525
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
“PEOPLE WITH
DISABILITIES ARE
HIGHLY DIVERSE
Quote IN TERMS OF
THE NATURE OF
THEIR DISABILITY
AND RELATED
EXPERIENCES.“
26 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
2626
PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA: PREVALENCE AND TRENDS
PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
IN AUSTRALIA:
PREVALENCE AND TRENDS
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES 27
272727
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
INTRODUCTION
Perhaps the most widely cited figure on the The SDAC survey is the most rigorous prevalence of disability is the Australian in the way disability is defined and the Institute of Health and Welfare’s estimate most detailed in capturing the nature of that one in every six Australians – or around disability and caring activities. It offers 4.4. million people – have a disability (AIHW regular cross-sectional snapshots based on 2022, based on SDAC 2018). However, a large sample that includes people living in people with disabilities are highly diverse cared accommodation and uses consistent in terms of the nature of their disability measures over time. The SDAC is also and related experiences. There is no one identified as the key source of population definitive measure of disability status or of data in the Australian Disability Strategy the number of Australians with disability. 2021-31 outcomes framework to evaluate outcomes across its seven priority areas. This report draws on three main sources of data on people with disability, each For these reasons this section focuses on with its own strengths and weaknesses: SDAC data to provide insights into trends the Australian Bureau of Statistics’ (ABS) relating to the population of people with Census of Population and Housing, the disability in Australia by type, severity ABS Survey of Disability, Ageing, and and other key dimensions. Data from six Carers (SDAC) and the Household, Income waves of the SDAC are available for this and Labour Dynamics in Australia Survey purpose: 1998, 2003, 2009, 2012, 2015 (HILDA). Within each of those datasets, a and 2018, with data from the 2022 SDAC person’s disability status is conceptualised survey scheduled for release in June 2024. with reference to restrictions or the need To assess more recent developments, this is for assistance in undertaking everyday supplemented with the HILDA data. HILDA activities. Although the measurement has a much smaller sample size than the constructs used are relatively consistent SDAC, but also contains quite detailed data across datasets and over time, estimates on limitations resulting from disability and of the prevalence of people with disability on caring activities, and data are available can vary significantly for reasons unrelated for 22 annual waves from 2001 to 2022. to underlying changes in the population of people with disability. These include Due to the focus of this report on labour changes in rates of awareness, diagnoses, market inclusion, there is particular focus and identification, and who the respondent on people of working age, which is 15 to 69 is that makes the assessment (for example, years of age. self-report or by parents or other family/ household members).
28 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
2828
DEFINING AND MEASURING DISABILITY
DEFINING AND MEASURING DISABILITY
This chapter provides an overview of how The vast majority of people classified disability and caring status are measured as having a disability do have specific in our key national data sources, then limitations or restrictions, and in turn explores some of the key trends relating to the majority of those have a core activity the population of people with disability in limitation. Australia, with a particular focus on people of working age. Classification of the extent of limitation is:
As a starting point, we itemise the definitions • mild - the person needs no help and has used for the measurement of disability, as no difficulty with any of the core activity well as the extent of limitation, in the main tasks, but uses aids or equipment for core data sources used in this report. tasks, or has one or more of the following limitations
ABS Survey of Disability, Ageing, and – cannot easily walk 200 metres
Carers (SDAC) – cannot walk up and down stairs
without a handrail The SDAC identifies people with a disability
if they report they “… have a limitation, – cannot easily bend to pick up an object
restriction or impairment, which has lasted, from the floor or is likely to last, for at least six months
and restricts everyday activities.” People – cannot use public transport
with disability are then classified based – can use public transport, but needson whether they have a specific limitation help or supervisionor restriction, which may be a limitation with one of the three core activities (self- – needs no help or supervision, but has care, movement, and communication) or a difficulty using public transport restriction in schooling or employment. Those with core activity limitations are further • moderate - the person needs no help, but assessed as having mild, moderate, severe, or has difficulty with a core activity task profound limitations.
-
severe - the person: Under this framework, a person may have a – sometimes needs help with a core disability but not have specific limitations activity task, and/or or restrictions, such as requiring minor assistance or using aids for self-care or – has difficulty understanding or being household chores but not to the extent of understood by family or friends, or core limitations or substantially curtailing schooling or employment. Need for – can communicate more easily using assistance may include older people who sign language or other non-spoken require assistance due to their age, but forms of communication the definition excludes young children who
-
profound - the person is unable to do, or simply have a similar need for assistance as always needs help with, a core activity other children of their age. task.
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES 29
292929
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
Household, Income and Labour Dynamics and cannot be corrected by medication or in Australia Survey (HILDA) medical aids. Information is further collected on the degree to which a person’s disability More recent insights into trends in the limits their capacity to work. population of Australians with a disability can be gained from the HILDA data, with the data Although not as rigorous and detailed in available for the 2022 wave of the survey. its measurement and classification of the nature, type and severity of disability as The main variables identifying people with SDAC, it is available on a continuous annual disability in HILDA are also based on whether basis from 2001 right up until 2022, and the individual has a long-term health its panel nature also allows us to track condition, disability or impairment that lasts individuals’ journeys and life transitions. 6 months or more, restricts everyday activity,
FIGURE 1
People with disability: conceptual framework
Persons aged 15-69:
17,908,092 (HJO/b) ’“1iiiiiiiiiiii1 SDACHILDA
17,705,1>2 (100%)
With a dl,ablllty: Without a dlsablllty:
4,742.590(26 5%) 13,165,502 (73 5%)
I
, 616,016 (3.S%) 17,089,151 (96 S%)
Without specific limitation, With specific limltatlons or or restrictions: restrict.ions:
1,660,764(9 3%1 3,081,826 (17 2%1
With :u;hoolinJ or With core activity employment resbictions only: limitations:
Prnfound limltatlons: Severe llmitaticn.s: Moderate limltaticns: Mild li mitations:
. ’
Source: Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre | Adapted from ABS Disability, Ageing and Carers survey. Appendix - conceptual
framework: disability (2018) using data from HILDA Wave 22 and ABS 2021 Census.
30 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
3030
INTRODUCTION
There is no single definitive measure of the 69. Another shift appears to be a falling incidence of people with disabilities, and gender gap in disability rates for working estimates can vary across data sources age Australians. More recent HILDA data for a variety of reasons. The analysis in indicate a general increase in prevalence this report draws heavily on the detailed, since the latest SDAC survey in 2018. individual level data from multiple waves of the SDAC up to 2018 and from the 22 waves Interestingly, ABS Census data show very of the HILDA survey spanning 2001-2022. rapid growth in the incidence of younger These give a similar general estimate of the people with disability between 2006 and proportion of Australians with a disability, 2021, which is not reflected in the SDAC and particularly with a work limiting but is supported to a degree by the cohort disability of around 15 per cent. analysis from HILDA. The causes of what looks to be a rising disability prevalence Given its rigor and consistency in identifying among younger cohorts certainly warrants people with disability, the SDAC is our further investigation. The release later this preferred source for looking at disability year of data from the SDAC undertaken in prevalence and the degree of limitation. 2022 will provide an important and timely The SDAC shows a modest decline in the opportunity to take stock of the changing prevalence of disability for working age characteristics of Australia’s population of people since 1998, largely due to a falling people with disabilities. incidence for people aged between 30 and
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES 31
313131
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
PREVALENCE AND NATURE OF DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA
The SDAC’s detailed, consistent in the incidence of disability for people aged measurement and classification provide the between 30 and 69 years, most notably for best source of data for an in-depth analysis men. For people aged 55 to 69 years, the of the prevalence and nature of disability proportion of males with a disability fell 10 across the Australian population, and how percentage points (from 39 per cent to 29 that has been changing over time. per cent), and the proportion of females with a disability fell by eight percentage points Around 17.7 per cent of all Australians (from 35 per cent to 27 per cent). So, while were identified in the SDAC as people with a substantial age gradient is evident, with disability in 2018. This is marginally lower rates increasing rapidly from age 30-44 than the 19.3 per cent recorded in the 1998 years, that gradient has become less steep SDAC. The SDAC shows a substantial decline over time.
FIGURE 2
Disability rates by age and gender, 1998 and 2018 SDAC, persons aged 0-69
45%
40%
35%
30%
25% cent Per 20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
Males Females Males Females
1998 2018
■ 0-5 years ■ 6-10 years ■ 11-19 years ■ 20-29 years ■ 30-44 years ■ 45-54 years ■ 55-69 years
Notes: Sampling weights were used when computing these descriptive statistics.
Source: Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre | Authors’ calculations based on ABS Survey of Disability, Ageing and Carers,
1998 and 2018.
32 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
3232
PREVALENCE AND NATURE OF DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA
TABLE 1
Disability rates by gender and age, SDAC 1998 to 2018
1998 2003 2009 2012 2015 2018 Difference
1998 to 2018
Persons % % % % % % %
Age
0-5 years 4 4 4 4 4 4 0
6-10 years 10 9 9 8 10 9 -1
11-19 years 9 10 7 9 8 10 1
20-29 years 9 10 7 8 8 8 -1
30-44 years 14 13 11 10 11 9 -5
45-54 years 23 22 18 18 16 16 -7
55-69 years 37 36 33 32 30 28 -9
Males
Age
0-5 years 5 5 5 4 6 5 0
6-10 years 12 12 12 11 12 12 0
11-19 years 11 11 9 10 10 10 -1
20-29 years 10 10 7 8 9 8 -2
30-44 years 15 13 11 10 10 8 -7
45-54 years 22 21 17 17 16 15 -7
55-69 years 39 36 33 32 31 29 -10
Females
Age
0-5 years 3 4 3 3 3 3 0
6-10 years 7 6 7 6 8 7 0
11-19 years 7 9 6 7 7 10 3
20-29 years 9 9 7 9 8 8 -1
30-44 years 13 13 12 11 11 9 -4
45-54 years 23 22 19 19 17 16 -7
55-69 years 35 35 34 32 30 27 -8
Source: Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre | Authors’ calculations based on ABS Survey of Disability Ageing and Carers,
1998 to 2018.
The data in Table 1 reveal that for the little difference by gender for people aged cohorts aged 0-5 years and 6-10 years, between 11 and 69. the rate of disability had been consistently much higher for male than for female Given the focus of this report on labour children – sometimes twice as high. In the force inclusion, we look more specifically at most recent 2018 survey, that incidence changes for people aged 69 and under. The remained much higher for males in those proportion of Australians with a disability cohorts, at around 70 per cent higher. has remained relatively constant over time across all levels of restriction (Figure 3). In contrast for young people aged 11 19, an initial substantial gender gap has For people aged 15 to 69, the total incidence diminished over time as the incidence of of disability declined from 18.0 per cent in disability among females has increased 1998 to 14.4 per cent in 2018. While the to be on par with that of males (at 10 per incidence in those older age groups declined cent) by 2018. The 2018 survey indicates substantially (Figure 2), they also now
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES 33
333333
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
make up a larger share of the working age over the past two decades. Figure 3 shows population. Had there been no change in the changes in the prevalence of disability by incidence of disability within age groups, the extent of restriction or limitation. Over then the effect of the changing age structure time, there has been a reduction in the of the working-age population alone would proportion of the working age population have added around 1.5 percentage points with a moderate core limitation, severe to the rate of disability. However, this was core limitation, and with a schooling or more than offset by declining incidence employment restriction but without a core within age groups, reducing the overall limitation. However, the proportion of people incidence by around 4.8 percentage points. with a mild core limitation and profound core limitation has remained constant since There have been some significant 1998, at around 5 per cent and 3 per cent of developments in the nature of disability the working-age population, respectively.
FIGURE 3
Prevalence of disability by extent of limitation, SDAC, working-age population, 1998 to 2018
6%
5%
4%
cent 3%
Per
2%
1%
0%
Profound core Severe core Moderate core Mild core limitation Restriction but no No core limitation
limitation limitation limitation core limitation or restriction
■ 1998 ■ 2003 ■ 2009 ■ 2012 ■ 2015 ■ 2018
Notes: Sampling weights were used when computing these descriptive statistics.
Source: Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre | Authors’ calculations based on ABS Survey of Disability, Ageing and Carers,
1998 to 2018.
34 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
3434
PREVALENCE AND NATURE OF DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA
We have grouped the types of disability The figures reveal a substantial drop in the reported in the SDAC into four broad prevalence of physical restrictions in the categories: sensory and speech, physical 15 years between 2003 and 2018 for both restrictions, intellectual restrictions and men and women (both down by around 3 ‘other’, and compared rates across the percentage points). Men have also seen a 2003 and 2018 surveys. Figure 4 shows fall in the prevalence of sensory and speech that physical restrictions are by far the related impairments of around one-half most common form of disability, and of a percentage point, while this remained the incidence of physical restrictions is relatively unchanged for women. Over the higher for women. In contrast, men have same period, the incidence of limitations higher prevalences of limitations caused associated with intellectual disabilities has by sensory and speech conditions and remained relatively unchanged for both men intellectual disabilities. and women.
FIGURE 4
Nature of impairment for people with a disability aged 15-69: by gender, 2003 and 2018
12%
10%
8%
cent 6%
Per
4%
2%
0%
Females Males Females Males
2003 2018
■ Sensory and speech ■ Physical restriction ■ Intellectual ■ Other
Notes: Sampling weights were used when computing these descriptive statistics.
Source: Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre | Authors’ calculations based on ABS Survey of Disability, Ageing and Carers,
2003 and 2018.
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES 35
353535
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
Other important changes have been the commenced when they were aged 15-29 delay in the onset of disability (Figure years and 30-44 years has fallen sharply,
- and the reduction in the incidence of notably for men. This appears to be due to disability attributed to accidents and work. a decrease in the rates of acquired disability Figure 5 shows that the proportion of the attributed to accidents and work, evidence population that has a disability that first of the impacts of improved safety measures occurred when they were aged 0-4 years or and OHS policies. The proportion with later 5-14 years has remained constant between onset of disability – when they were aged 1998 and 2018. However, the proportion of 45-69 years – has fallen marginally. working-age people with a disability that
FIGURE 5
Age of disability onset for people with a disability aged 15-69: by gender, 1998 and 2018
6%
5%
4%
cent 3%
Per
2%
1%
0%
Females Males Females Males
1998 2018
■ 0-4 years ■ 5-14 years ■ 15-29 years ■ 30-44 years ■ 45-69 years
Notes: Sampling weights were used when computing these descriptive statistics.
Source: Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre | Authors’ calculations based on ABS Survey of Disability, Ageing and Carers,
1998 and 2018.
36 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
3636
PREVALENCE AND NATURE OF DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA
Trends to 2022: the Household, Income everyday activity, and cannot be corrected and Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) by medication or medical aids. This survey corresponds to the broad ‘person with a disability’ classification in the SDAC.3 More recent insights into trends in the population of Australians with a disability Figure 6 shows the proportion of people can be gained from the HILDA data, with reporting they have a disability, and a the data available for the 2022 wave of the work-limiting disability from 2001 to 2022. survey. We see that on average 23.4 per cent of the working age population reported having a Although not as rigorous and detailed in disability, and 15.8 per cent a work limiting its measurement and classification of the disability. This aligns with the 2018 SDAC nature, type and severity of disability as estimate of people with disability ‘with SDAC, HILDA is available on a continuous specific limitations or restrictions’ of annual basis from 2001 until 2022, and 15.6 per cent. its panel nature also allows us to track individuals’ journeys and life transitions. The proportion of working age people reporting a disability in HILDA increased by The main variables identifying people around 6 per cent over the 22 years, while with disability in HILDA are also based on those reporting a work limiting disability whether the individual has a long-term rose by just 2.6 per cent. The HILDA data health condition, disability or impairment show a slight upturn in both measures since that lasts 6 months or more, restricts the SDAC was last taken in 2018.
FIGURE 6
Proportion with a disability, and work limiting disability, population aged 15-69, 2001-2022
30
25
20 cent 15
Per
10
5
0
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
Has disability Disability limits work
Notes: Based on HILDA Household Form; weighted by responding person weights.
Source: Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre | Authors’ calculations based on HILDA survey, 2001 to 2022.
3 In HILDA, this question is asked of all responding persons in the individual ‘Person Questionnaire’. Data on disability status is also recorded on the Household Questionnaire, which is completed by one member of the household on behalf of all household residents. There is a substantial degree of mismatch between the two measures.
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES 37
373737
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
A cohort analysis upon men, including industrial activity and labour market conditions associated with The HILDA data make it possible to compare post-war reconstruction. This may be due how the evolution of the incidence of to higher rates of accident and work-related disability evolved over the life cycle for disability, which have improved over time different cohorts. Specifically, we compare with stronger health and safety measures. the ‘Builders’ generation, born between 1928 and 1945, with the ‘Boomers’ (born A concerning increase in the prevalence from 1946-1964), ‘Gen X’ (1965-1980), ‘Gen of disability is evident for Gen Z, with Y’ (1981-1996) and ‘Gen Z’ (1997-2012). markedly higher rates of disability in their teens and early twenties. The increase is The age-specific rates of disability for each most pronounced for women, with rates cohort and by gender are overlayed in around 10 per cent higher than observed for Figure 7. All cohorts display the pronounced, Gen X at comparable ages. Moreover, this positive age gradient in the incidence of phenomenon of elevated rates of disability disability evident in other data. For the most for younger women appears to have part, the profiles are quite similar for the commenced with Gen Y. For that cohort, Boomer, Gen X and Gen Y cohorts. rates then converge to be similar to the Gen X cohort by around 30 years of age. For the older Builder generation, for whom we can observe disability rates in their later While some of the increased prevalence for years of working age, there is a noticeably Gen Z may be associated with the COVID-19 higher incidence of disability among men, pandemic, that would not explain the shift and noticeably lower incidence among appearing to have commenced with Gen women, compared to the younger cohorts. Y or the greater change for young women While it is tempting to attribute this to relative to young men. Only time will tell World War II, note the oldest of that cohort if this higher rate of disability remains were aged 17 when the war ended, so very a persistent feature for the Gen Z, and few in this sample would have seen active particularly for women from Gen Z as they service. However, the social and economic age, or whether rates will converge to the legacy of World War II may well have had age-profiles of earlier cohorts, as appears to an impact that disproportionately impacted have happened with Gen Y.
38 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
3838
PREVALENCE AND NATURE OF DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA
FIGURE 7
Disability prevalence by gender, age, and cohort: 2001 to 2022
(a) females (b) males
55% 55% 50% 50%
(%) 45% (%) 45%
40% 40%
35% 35% condition condition
LTH 30% LTH 30%
or 25% or 25%
disability 20%15% disability 20%15%
5% 5% reporting 10% 10% reporting
Share 0% 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 Share 0% 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65
age age
Builders Boomers Gen X Gen Y Gen Z Builders Boomers Gen X Gen Y Gen Z
Notes: Respondents are grouped into five age cohorts according to date of birth, ranging from Builders (born 1928-1945), Boomers (1946-1964), Gen X (1965-1980), Gen Y (1981-1996) and Gen Z (1997-2012).
Source: Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre | Authors’ calculations based on HILDA survey, 2001 to 2022.
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES 39
393939
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
“THERE IS A STARK
CONTRAST IN
LABOUR FORCE
Quote STATUS BETWEEN
AUSTRALIANS
WITH A DISABILITY
AND THOSE
WITHOUT A
DISABILITY,
AND THE DEGREE
OF EXCLUSION
INCREASES WITH
THE SEVERITY OF
LIMITATION.“
40 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
4040
EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH A DISABILITY
Quote
EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES
FOR PEOPLE WITH
A DISABILITY
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES 41
414141
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
INTRODUCTION
There is a stark contrast in labour force of the population of people with disabilities status between Australians with a disability in terms of extent of limitations, age and and those with none, and the degree of educational attainment. exclusion increases with the severity of limitation. That should come as no This section provides a detailed overview surprise. Previous reports have highlighted of the changing labour market experiences that the raw gaps in outcomes between of people with disabilities. We also people with disabilities and those without report results of modelling to show how disabilities, such as in rates of labour force labour market opportunity for people participation and employment, have not with disabilities has changed by level of changed substantially over recent decades. restriction and after allowing for a wide However, many factors may be shaping range of other factors to determine, more relative labour market outcomes for people definitely, the extent of progress and with disabilities, including the composition whether we could be doing better.
42 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
4242
TRENDS IN LABOUR FORCE PARTICIPATION AND EMPLOYMENT FOR PEOPLE WITH A DISABILITY
TRENDS IN LABOUR FORCE PARTICIPATION AND EMPLOYMENT FOR
PEOPLE WITH A DISABILITY
Based on people classified as having the onset of the pandemic, employment a disability under HILDA’s very broad rates increased by only 4 percentage points definition of a long-term condition that for people with a work-limiting disability. restricts everyday activities, Figure 8 shows Employment rates remained at or around there has been at best incremental change 70 per cent over the same period among in employment opportunity for people with people with a non-work limiting disability disability for most of the past two decades. but have risen 6.9 per cent for people Between 2001 and 2019, the year before without a disability.
FIGURE 8
Between 2001 andLabour force status for people with and without a disability: 2001 to 2022 2019, the year before the onset
(a) employment rate (b) unemployment rate of the pandemic,
employment rates 100 8 increased by only 4 90 7 percentage points for 80
(%) 6 people with a work- (%) 70
rate 5 limiting disability. rate 60
50 4
40 3 Employment 30 Unemployment 2
20 1 10 0 0 2001200220032004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016201720182019202020212022 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
non-disabled non-disabled non work-limiting disability non work-limiting disability disability limits work or can’t work disability limits work or can’t work
Source: Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre | Authors’ calculations based on HILDA survey, 2001 to 2022.
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES 43
434343
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
Moreover, it is difficult to see the increase in Figure 9. The steady convergence in from 2001 to 2022 as an improving trend employment rates for men and women since, even with increases in the two without disabilities over this century most recent years, current rates are only is apparent. Estimates for people with marginally above those for 2009, when disability are noisier given they are based both rates peaked for people with disability. on smaller sample sizes, but a similar That also marked the year in which the convergence by gender seems to have been participation and employment gaps occurring. Encouragingly, the employment narrowed to their lowest point, and they rates for men and women with work have since widened again. limiting disabilities reached parity in 2018, and has since fluctuated at around that Trends in employment rates by gender for mark. Employment rate parity has yet to persons with a work-limiting disability and be observed for men and women without for those without a disability are shown disabilities.
FIGURE 9
Employment rates for people with and without a disability: by gender, 2001 to 2022
100 +20
90 +18
80 ........ , , +16 --- ------------------------------- --- (ppt) 70 ______ , ,- --------- +14 (%) -------------------~-- 60 +12 gap
rate 50 +10
40 +8 30 +6 employment Employment
20 +4 Gender
10 +2
0 +0
-10 -2 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
gender gap for people with disabilities (RHS scale) female - non-disabled female - disability limits work male - non-disabled male - disability limits work
Source: Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre | Authors’ calculations based on HILDA survey, 2001 to 2022.
44 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
4444
INTRODUCTION
Figure 10 reveals trends in employment between the groups over time. Critically, rates using the SDAC’s more nuanced Figure 10 shows there has been little classification of disability by degree of improvement in labour market inclusion limitation. Employment rates display for people with disabilities over the last 15 a consistent decrease with degree of years and certainly no improvement relative limitation with persistent differentials to people without a disability.
FIGURE 10
Employment rates by level of disability: 2003 to 2018
90
80
70 78.278.078.079.3 76.0
(%) 60
61.9 rate 59.3 50 58.6 56.5 55.2
40 45.445.044.846.6 42.1 39.540.3 30 37.838.136.6 Employment 32.0 30.2 29.3 28.5 20 24.7
10 11.113.614.49.711.4 0 11111
No disability Restriction Mild core Moderate core Severe core Profound core II
only, no core limitation limitation limitation limitation
limitation
■ 2003 ■ 2009 ■ 2012 ■ 2015 ■ 2018
Source: Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre | Authors’ calculations based on ABS Survey of Disability, Ageing and Carers, 2003
to 2018.
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES 45
454545
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
WHICH OCCUPATIONS AND INDUSTRIES ARE MOST ACCESSIBLE TO
PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES?
The relative profile of employment by the relative workforce shares for people occupation shows some strong clusters with disability compared to workers without of over-representation of people with disabilities across occupational classes, disability in certain occupations and under- using HILDA data from 2020 to 2022. representation in others. Figure 11 shows
FIGURE 11
Workforce share by occupation for people with disability and non-disabled: 2020 to 2022
Specialist Managers
Hospitality, Retail and Service Managers
Farmers and Farm Managers
Chief Executives & General Managers
Business, HR and Marketing Professionals
Health Professionals
Education Professionals
Design, Engineering, Science and Transport Professionals
Legal, Social and Welfare Professionals
ICT Professionals
Arts and Media Professionals
Construction Trades Workers
Engineering, ICT and Science Technicians
Automotive and Engineering Trades Workers
Electrotechnology and Telecoms Trades Workers
Other Technicians and Trades Workers
Skilled Animal and Horticultural Workers
Food Trades Workers
Carers and Aides
Hospitality Workers
Health and Welfare Support Workers
Sports and Personal Service Workers
Protective Service Workers
Numerical Clerks
Other Clerical and Administrative Workers
Inquiry Clerks and Receptionists
General Clerical Workers
Office Managers
Clerical and Office Support Workers
Personal Assistants and Secretaries
Sales Assistants
Sales Support Workers
Sales Representatives and Agents
Road and Rail Drivers
Machine and Stationary Plant Operators
Mobile Plant Operators
Storepersons
Other Labourers
Cleaners and Laundry Workers
Food Preparation Assistants
Factory Process Workers
Construction and Mining Labourers
Farm, Forestry and Garden Workers
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Share of workforce (%)
[J people with disability ■ non-disabled
Source: Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre | Authors’ calculations based on HILDA survey, 2020 to 2022.
46 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
4646
WHICH OCCUPATIONS AND INDUSTRIES ARE MOST ACCESSIBLE TO PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES?
The comparisons in Figure 11 show that among hospitality, retail and service people with disabilities are strongly over- managers (5.0 per cent). represented in most labourer categories (accounting for around 11 per cent of all Figure 12 shows the percentage of the people with disability in work), especially workforce of people with and without factory process workers (representing 2.6 disability by broad industry sector per cent), cleaners and laundry workers (2.6 according to HILDA data from 2020 to 2022, per cent), and food preparation assistants while Table 2 provides a breakdown by (1.7 per cent). We also find a significantly industry of the employment of people with a higher share of people with disability who disability as a share of sector workforce. work as carers and aides (7.8 per cent), and People with a
in health and welfare support services We can see in Figure 12 that the health disability are
(2.7 per cent). care and social assistance sector employs under-represented
the largest proportion of workers with in specialist
Of those in employment, people with a disability (17 per cent) and without manager occupations
a disability are under-represented in a disability (21.7 per cent), followed by (5.2 per cent
specialist manager occupations (5.2 per education and training (10.9 per cent and compared to
cent compared to 9.4 per cent of all workers 10.0 per cent) and retail trade (9 per cent 9.4 per cent of all
without a disability) but over-represented and 9 per cent). non-disabled workers)
but over-represented among hospitality,
FIGURE 12
retail and service Workforce share by industry for people with disability and non-disabled: 2020 to 2022 managers (5.0 per cent).
Health Care & Social Assistance 21.7 ·----------------------------------------------------------.------..·---------------------------------------------------------~------ Education & Training ----------------------------------· 10.9 ' Retail Trade ·-----------------------------, 9.0
Professional, Scientific, Technical Svcs ., ___________________________------------------- -------·6.0 _, '
Construction ––––l______6.0 J
Manufacturing ., _______________________ ------------------- ---16.2_ '
Public Admin & Safety 5.7
Accommodation, Food Svcs 7.2
Transport, Postal, Warehousing ––––––––‘’ 4.7 Financial & Insurance Svcs 3.0
Other Services 3.9
Wholesale Trade 3.5
Administrative & Support Svcs 4.0
Mining --------,0.6 ...... ., I '
Arts & Recreation Svcs ’1.5
Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing _____ J 3.2
Information Media & Telecomm. 1.5
Electricity, Gas, Water, Waste Svcs ·–·—.Ji0.8
Rental, Hiring, Real Estate Svcs -__-,J0.7
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24
Distribution of employed people across industry sectors (%)
non-disabled people ■ people with a disability
Source: Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre | Authors’ calculations based on HILDA survey, 2020 to 2022.
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES 47
474747
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
Looking at the proportion of people representation outcomes are ranked in with a disability as a share of sector Table 2, which also provides a breakdown of workforce highlights that agriculture, the percentage change over the last three forestry and fishing has the highest over- years, showing greatest improvements representation rate (+6.3 per cent) followed in the representation of workers with a by administrative and support services disability in wholesale trade (+3.8 per (+4.4 per cent), while mining has by far the cent), and in accommodation and food highest under-representation rate at (-6.4 services (+3.0 per cent) – while the arts and per cent) followed by electricity, gas and recreational services sector (-1.1 per cent) water services, and rental, hiring and real and the mining sector (-0.8 per cent) went estate services (both -3.3 per cent). Industry backwards.
TABLE 2
Distribution of people with disability across industry sector: 2020 to 2022
non- people with over/under ppt change in share
disabled a disability representation - three years
people
% % ppt ppt
Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing 84.6 15.4 +6.3 +0.1 I
Administrative & Support Services 86.6 13.4 +4.4 +2.0
Wholesale Trade 88.3 11.7 +2.7 +3.8
Health Care & Social Assistance 88.9 11.1 +2.1 +0.6 I
Accommodation, Food Services 89.1 10.9 +1.9 +3.0
Other Services 90.0 10.0 +1.0 +1.8 --
Information Media & Telecomm. 90.1 9.9 +0.9 +1.9
Education & Training 90.5 9.5 +0.5 +1.6
Transport, Postal, Warehousing 91.0 9.0 +0.0 ■ +0.9 Retail Trade 91.0 9.0 -0.0 ---• +0.5 I
Public Admin & Safety 91.6 8.4 -0.6 +0.8 I
Manufacturing 92.2 7.8 -1.2 -0.1 I
Arts & Recreation Services 92.5 7.5 -1.5 ■ -1.1
Construction 93.3 6.7 -2.4 -0.2 I
Professional, Scientific, Technical Services 93.5 6.5 -2.5 -0.2 I
Financial & Insurance Services 93.6 6.4 -2.6 ■ +1.0
Rental, Hiring, Real Estate Services 94.2 5.8 -3.3 +0.7 I
Electricity, Gas, Water, Waste Services 94.2 5.8 -3.3 -0.5 I
Mining 97.4 2.6 -6.4 ■ -0.8
All industries 91.0 9.0 +0.8 I
Notes: The percentage point changes in workforce composition compare the workforce shares for people with disability in the three-year period 2020 to 2022 with the three-year interval 2017 to 2019.
Source: Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre | Authors’ calculations based on HILDA survey, 2020 to 2022.
48 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
4848
THE LABOUR MARKET PENALTY FOR PEOPLE WITH A DISABILITY
THE LABOUR MARKET PENALTY FOR PEOPLE WITH A DISABILITY
The trend in participation rates and Employment penalties by disability status employment rates documented above Statistical modelling (or regression analysis) suggest that over at least the past 20 was undertaken based on both the SDAC years Australia has made no progress in and HILDA data to isolate the association promoting labour market inclusion for between a person having a disability and people with disability. However, changes their prospects of participating in the in some of the characteristics of the labour force and of being in employment, population with a disability may be clouding relative to people without a disability. that picture, such as the age profile, severity These estimates control for a range of other of limitations, and migrant status. factors known to influence labour market outcomes, including age, gender, level of People with disability
To gain an idea of the independent effect of education, migrant status, and whether experience a penalty
limitations on labour markets prospects, people live in major capital cities or in more such that they are
models were estimated of the probability of regional and remote areas. consistently 25-30
a person participating in the labour market percentage points less
and of being in employment, conditional Regression analysis of HILDA data between likely to be employed
upon their disability status. This allows 2005 and 2022 (maroon line) and SDAC than those without a
estimation of how labour market outcomes data between 2003 and 2018 (teal line) disability.
differ for people with disability after indicates that people with disability have
controlling for other factors that shape a consistently lower likelihood of being Recent data from
labour market outcomes. It also allows us to employed, that is, they face a ‘penalty’ HILDA shows a
assess the impact of those other factors on in terms of their employment prospects promising trend,
the job prospects of people with disability, (Figure 13). The modelling approach allows with the employment
whether such factors have differential us to estimate the size of this penalty for penalty declining by
effects for people with and without a each year of survey data with detailed around 5 percentage
disability, and how these effects have been results reported in Table 4 of the Appendix. points to 27 per cent
changing over time. between 2018 to Analysis across both data sources shows 2022. To leverage the different strengths each clearly that people with disability experience dataset has to offer, modelling is undertaken a penalty such that they are consistently using both the repeated SDAC cross-section 25-30 percentage points less likely to be data and with the HILDA panel data which employed than those without a disability. tracks the same individual over time. This is the case even when we control for We adopt a consistent methodology for differences in age, education, region and estimating the effects of disability status other factors. Both HILDA and SDAC show a and one which makes it relatively easy to consistent trend between 2008 and 2018 of interpret the findings. We then cross-check this penalty rising to plateau around 2016. the estimates of key importance using Recent data from HILDA shows a promising alternative methodologies to confirm the trend, with the employment penalty results. declining by around 5 percentage points to 27 per cent between 2018 to 2022. This decline coincides with a tightening labour market and the lowest unemployment rates in many decades.
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES 49
494949
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
FIGURE 13
Estimated employment penalty for people with disability: 2003 to 2022
-33
-31 (ppt) -29 disability a -27 with people -25 for
-23 penalty
-21
Employment
-19
-17
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
HILDA SDAC
Notes: Employment penalties are estimated by regression methods using HILDA and SDAC data. Full details of each regression are presented in Table 4 of the Appendix to this report.
Source: Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre | Authors’ calculations based on HILDA survey, 2003 to 2022 and ABS Survey of
Disability Ageing and Carers, 1998 to 2018.
To examine the degree to which the Specifically, we compare employment rates employment penalty for people with for people with disabilities classified into six disabilities varies according to the level of levels of restriction, ranging from profound work limitation, we make use of detailed core limitations through to a disability that information collected in the ABS SDAC on imposes no core limitation or restriction on the nature and degree of core limitation. schooling or employment.
50 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
5050
THE LABOUR MARKET PENALTY FOR PEOPLE WITH A DISABILITY
Two sets of employment penalties are employment penalties of 33.1 percentage presented in Figure 14. The first set of points even among people with a mild employment penalties (in orange bars) core limitation, relative to people without are based on simple average employment disabilities. rates for the six categories of limitation, relative to the average employment rate of These differences in average employment 77.9 per cent for people without a disability. rates could potentially be driven by differences in common characteristics People with a profound core limitation face between people according to their level the largest penalties, with only 12.1 per of work limitation – perhaps differences cent engaging in some form of employment. in ages, levels of education, demographic Employment rates improve as the degree of characteristics, or work experience. limitation reduces, but we still see average
FIGURE 14
Employment penalty by level of limitation for people with disability: 1998 to 2018
-80
-70 (ppt) -60 -65.8
-50 penalty -54.7 disability -40 -49.0
no
to -30 -40.7 -39.3
-33.1 Employment -20 -30.6 relative -25.5 -9.6 -10 -19.5 -17.0 -6.7 -4.4 -2.6
0
Profound core Severe core Moderate Mild core Restriction but No restriction LT health
limitation limitation core limitation limitation no core or core condition
limitation limitation
■ no controls ■ with controls
Notes: Employment penalties are based on regression analysis using SDAC data. Full details are presented in Table 5 of the Appendix to this report.
Source: Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre | Authors’ calculations based on ABS Survey of Disability Ageing and Carers, 1998
to 2018.
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES 51
515151
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
To assess whether compositional experienced across our economy. Hence differences have a part to play, a second employers desperate to find more workers set of employment penalties are presented have become more prepared to consider (in maroon) in Figure 14 that control for employing people living with a disability. differences in characteristics. Relative to people without a disability, the employment The period since 2021 also coincides with the penalty varies from around a 6.7 per cent implementation of the latest more detailed reduction in the likelihood of being in work Australian Disability Strategy (2021-2031) for people without any core limitation including Employ My Ability, the national or restriction, through to a 54.7 per cent disability employment strategy. It may be reduction for someone with a profound core that the activities and initiatives under this
There has been no limitation. plan are also beginning to contribute to
improvement in improved outcomes. Data reported under
labour market The important point is that little of the the ADS employment targeted action plan is
inclusion for people observed penalty can be explained by currently insufficient to attribute causality.
with disability in differences in other characteristics between
Australia for most of people with and without a disability, Going forward it is important that reporting
particularly for those with more limiting against programs and initiatives is detailed this century.
restrictions. For example, of the ‘raw’ enough for us to be able to see which policies penalty observed for people with a profound and initiatives are making a real difference. core limitation equating to a 65.8 per cent reduction in the chance of being The role of education in employment, only 11.1 per cent can A related question to the effects of the be accounted for by other differences in employment penalty is whether the returns characteristics, leaving the 54.7 percentage to education are the same for people with point adjusted penalty. disability. The strong association between a person’s level of educational attainment and Further analyses across the various years of their employment prospects are well known, the SDAC confirm that the magnitude of the but less is known about how this applies to penalty associated with each of the different people with disability in Australia. levels of limitation remained stable between 1998 and 2018. The persistence of penalties Census data show that the share of working associated with different levels of restriction age people with a core limitation holding was also confirmed using the measure in a bachelor’s degree or higher qualification HILDA in which people with disability rated grew from 5.9 per cent in 2006 to 10.5 the extent to which their disability limits the per cent in 2021. While this represents a amount of work they can do. substantive increase, the proportion among people without a disability grew much faster, The critical message from the analysis from 19.3 per cent in 2006 to 31.6 per cent in this Focus on the States report is that in 2021. Hence the relative gap grew from there has been no improvement in labour nearly 14 to 21 percentage points, and market inclusion for people with disability people without a disability are still around for most of this century, and this finding is three times as likely to hold university level robust across disability types and levels of qualifications. limitation. The evolution of the profile of educational One exception to this trend is the lower attainment for people with and without a employment penalty and improved disability over this century can be seen in employment outcomes over the period more detail using the HILDA data (Figure 15). between 2019 and 2022. During this period The key take-home from these comparisons we have experienced the lowest rates of is the overall growth in university level unemployment recorded in the last 50 qualifications, and the growing gap in the years, with severe skills shortages being shares who have completed a bachelor’s
52 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
5252
THE LABOUR MARKET PENALTY FOR PEOPLE WITH A DISABILITY
degree or higher. The shares of people having disability in Australia. This is because completed Diploma level qualifications are estimates of the association between quite similar between the two populations, disability status on employment outcomes with a slightly higher proportion of people control for level of education, and thereby with disability holding Certificate III/IV level take into account the fact that people with qualifications. This may reflect a greater disability, on average, complete fewer years proportion of people with a disability who are of education. seeking vocational or trades qualifications as an alternative route to employment or career If we remove the education controls from pathway. the modelling, the estimated coefficient associated with having a disability then According to regression analysis prepared for represents the combined impact of exclusion this report, the probability of being employed in both educational opportunities and in is around 21 per cent higher for those who the labour market. This total effect is in have completed a bachelor’s degree or above fact only marginally higher. Modelling compared to someone who did not complete reveals that once controls for educational Year 12 (see Appendix Table 4). attainment are omitted, the penalty observed for people with disability increases Estimates of reduced employment may from a 26.5 per cent lower probability of not reveal the full extent of labour market being in a job, to 28.3 per cent. exclusion experienced by people with
FIGURE 15
Educational attainment for people with and without a disability: 2001 to 2022
(a) Year 12 or Certificate I/II (b) Certificate III or IV
40 +40 40 +40
(%) 30 +30 (ppt) (%) 30 +30 (ppt)
20 +20 20 +20 people shares people shares
of 10 +10 in of 10 +10 in
0 - 0 - Share Share
-10 -10 -10 -10 difference difference
2001200220032004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016201720182019202020212022 2001200220032004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016201720182019202020212022
Differences - non-disabled vs people with disability Differences - non-disabled vs people with disability People with disability People with disability
non-disabled people non-disabled people - -
(c) Diploma (d) Bachelor’s degree and higher
40 +40 40 +40
(%) 30 +30 (ppt) (%) 30 +30 (ppt)
~
20 +20 20 +20 people shares people shares of 10 +10 in of 10 ----- +10 in
0 - 0 - Share Share
-10 -10 -10 -10 difference difference
2001200220032004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016201720182019202020212022 2001200220032004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016201720182019202020212022
Differences - non-disabled vs people with disability Differences - non-disabled vs people with disability People with disability People with disability
non-disabled people non-disabled people - -
Source: Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre | Authors’ calculations based on HILDA survey, 2001 to 2022.
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES 53
535353
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
One reason for this limited sensitivity to chance of being in work compared to a the inclusion or exclusion of controls for person who did not complete school. For education is that the estimates overlook people with disability, having a university the association of higher qualifications degree is associated with an additional with a higher likelihood of being in a job. 16.2 per cent higher probability of being in Our modelling reveals that people with work (that is, 34.4 per cent overall). a disability experience an employment premium for higher qualifications. For This higher qualification ‘premium’ results all people without a disability having a in a much smaller employment ‘penalty’ for university degree is associated with, on people with disability with higher levels of average, an 18.2 per cent increase in the education, as shown in Figure 16.
FIGURE 16
Employment penalty by education level for people with disability: 1998 to 2018
-35
-30 -32.0 -30.6 (ppt) -25 -20 penalty
-15 -19.0 disability -17.8 -15.9 no -10
to
-5 -8.7 Employment -0.5 relative 0
3.8 - -
5
10
Year 11 Cert I/II to Year 12 Diploma Cert III/IV Bachelors and above
■ HILDA ■ SDAC
Notes: Employment penalties are based on regression analysis using HILDA and SDAC data. Full details are presented in Table 6 of the Appendix to this report.
Source: Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre | Authors’ calculations based on the HILDA survey, 2001 to 2022 and the ABS
Survey of Disability Ageing and Carers, 1998 to 2018.
54 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
5454
JOURNEYS THROUGH WORK AND TIME: LABOUR MARKET PROGRESSIONS FOR PEOPLE WITH A DISABILITY
JOURNEYS THROUGH WORK AND TIME: LABOUR MARKET
PROGRESSIONS FOR PEOPLE WITH A DISABILITY
Exploiting the panel nature of the HILDA disability in 2021 moving into part-time survey allows us to track the labour market work (22.8 per cent, compared to 33.6 per transitions of individual workers over time cent without a disability). to analyse trends and patterns. Table 3 compares transitions for workers with and The largest and most concerning change in without disabilities by comparing their labour labour force status can be seen with the 42 market status between 2021 and 2022. We per cent of people with a disability who were can see that 90.4 per cent of workers without unemployed in 2021 and decided to leave a disability who were employed full-time in the labour force in 2022. This compares to 2021 remained employed full-time in 2022, only 13.7 per cent among people without a while only 74.6 per cent of workers with disability in similar circumstances – a gap disabilities retained their position (a difference of 28.7 per cent. At the same time, we see of 15.9 percentage points). Conversely, 35.5 that 86.2 per cent of people with a disability per cent of people without a disability who who are not in the labour force in 2021 were unemployed in 2021 become employed also stayed out of the labour force in 2022, full-time in 2022, compared to only 11.3 per compared to 69 per cent for those without a cent of people with disabilities - a gap of 24.3 disability). percentage points. Across all labour market categories, we see While we see similar rates of part-time that there are much higher rates of churn for workers with and without disabilities in 2021 people with a disability, while they are more still working part-time in 2022, we also see likely overall to be excluded and to become lower rates of unemployed people with a discouraged.
TABLE 3
Labour market transitions between 2021 and 2022: by disability status
(a) People with disability
Share by 2022 employment status 2021 labour
market Employed Employed Unemployed Not in the Total
status full-time part-time labour force
% % % %
Employed full-time 23.9 74.6 14.1 1.5 9.9 100
2021 status UnemployedEmployed part-time 22.35.5 17.711.3 64.322.8 23.42.3 15.642.5 100100 employment Not in the labour force 48.3 2.8 7.9 3.1 86.2 100
Total 100.0 23.7 22.7 3.7 49.9 100
(b) Non-disabled people
Share by 2022 employment status 2021 labour
market Employed Employed Unemployed Not in the Total
status full-time part-time labour force
% % % %
Employed full-time 53.5 90.4 6.3 0.7 2.6 100
2021 status UnemployedEmployed part-time 24.43.3 24.435.6 65.933.6 17.01.4 13.78.2 100100 employment Not in the labour force 18.9 8.7 17.6 4.8 69.0 100
Total 100.0 57.1 23.8 2.2 16.9 100
Notes: Labour market transition calculated for people who remained HILDA survey respondents in 2021 and 2022.
Source: Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre | Authors’ calculations based on HILDA survey, 2021 to 2022.
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES 55
555555
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
The level of labour market churn for people from full-time to part-time (40 per cent), with disability can be seen most clearly or bounce between part-time and full-time when we list and compare different labour work a couple of times. In contrast people market pathways across eight successive living with a disability were most likely waves of HILDA from 2015 to 2022 to transition from part-time work to not inclusive. Figure 17 provides a frequency in the labour force (43 per cent), or from breakdown of labour market pathways unemployment to not in the labour force comparing people with a disability (maroon (21 per cent), with substantial groups dotted lines) against those without a bouncing between not in the labour disability (solid orange lines). At the top force and part-time work (17 per cent) or we see clearly those who do not transition remaining unemployed (13 per cent). across the successive waves – 40 per cent of people without a disability remained in full- Mapping the number of labour market time employment, compared to less than transitions in Figure 17 shows there is a 10 per cent of people with a disability. At the higher number of people with a disability same time nearly 60 per cent of people with who did not transition over the eight years a disability remained out of the labour force - accounting for 79 per cent of respondents for all eight years, compared to less than who remained in the survey over the period 10 per cent of non-disabled people. 2015 to 2022, of whom the largest single group are the 59 per cent who remained not Looking further down we see very different in the labour force. In contrast 58.2 per cent patterns for each cohort. People without of people without a disability also stayed a disability were most likely to go from put over this period, dominated by the part-time to full-time work (59 per cent) or 40 per cent remaining in full-time work.
56 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
5656
JOURNEYS THROUGH WORK AND TIME: LABOUR MARKET PROGRESSIONS FOR PEOPLE WITH A DISABILITY
FIGURE 17
Labour market trajectories for people with and without disability: 2015 to 2022
FT
NILF
PT
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Share of people (%)
PT->FT
FT->PT
FT->PT->FT
FT->NILF
PT->NILF
PT->FT->PT
NILF->PT
PT->FT->PT->FT
FT->UE->FT
FT->NILF->FT
PT->NILF->PT
NILF->FT
FT->PT->NILF
FT->PT->FT->PT
UE->FT
FT->NILF->PT
NILF->PT->FT
UE
FT->PT->FT->PT->FT
PT->NILF->FT
NILF->PT->NILF
FT->UE
PT->NILF->PT->NILF
NILF->PT->NILF->PT
PT->UE
UE->NILF
PT->FT->PT->NILF r-,
NILF->UE->NILF [.–---]
NILF->FT->PT
FT->NILF->PT->FT • NILF->UE->PT • FT->UE->PT
FT->PT->NILF->FT
NILF-UE
NILF->PT->FT->PT
NILF->FT->NILF
UE->NILF->UE
UE->NILF->PT
NILF->PT->UE->PT
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Share of people (%)
people with a disability non-disabled •
Notes: Labour market transition calculated for HILDA survey respondents who remained in the survey between 2015 and 2022.
Source: Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre | Authors’ calculations based on HILDA survey, 2015 to 2022.
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES 57
575757
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
HAS THE NATIONAL DISABILITY INSURANCE SCHEME IMPROVED
LABOUR MARKET OUTCOMES?
The introduction of the National Disability is aged 65 and under, the representative is Insurance Scheme (NDIS) marked a major also asked: policy shift in terms of both the approach to supporting Australians with a disability and “Has [name] received an agreed the level of that support in financial terms. package of support through the Targeted towards people with significant National Disability Insurance Scheme and ongoing disability, the NDIS provides at any time during the last 12 individual tailored support packages within months?”. a self-directed funding model. One of the stated objectives of the NDIS in the NDIS This makes it possible to identify people in Act is supporting the independence and the HILDA survey who are reported to have social and economic participation of people received assistance through the NDIS from with disability. Assistance with transport, 2017 onwards.4 To explore the relationship workplace supports or education and between receipt of a NDIS support training to help people find and remain in package and labour market inclusion, we employment can be included in support expanded on the modelling to estimate the packages, and NDIS providers may also association between being in receipt of NDIS help people with disabilities to access support and participation or employment. mainstream employment services. To do this, we looked specifically at people with disability by the broad HILDA Over 630,000 people now receive support definition using data from 2017 onwards. through the NDIS. A recent review of the The modelling controls for other factors as scheme (Department of Prime Minister reported in Table 4 (see Appendix). and Cabinet 2023) did not have a strong focus on employment outcomes. Our own The initial results suggest having a analyses of NDIS performance data for the NDIS package is associated with a lower September quarter of 2023, reveal that probability of the individual participating in only 35.1 per cent of the support plans for the labour market by around 10 percentage working age clients included employment points, and of being in employment by targets, with little variation across types of around 9 percentage points (results for key disability. variables of interest are reported in Table 7 see Appendix). A question relating to the NDIS was added to the HILDA survey from 2017 onwards. The However, the reduced labour market household representative completing the inclusion associated with NDIS support may survey questionnaire is asked to indicate be due to the fact that people qualifying whether each household member has a for NDIS support are likely to have more disability. From Wave 17, if the household challenging barriers. To control for this, member is reported to have a disability and we further took account of the individual’s
4 We stress ‘who are reported’ since a significant share of HILDA respondents who report themselves as having a disability or long-term health condition are not recognised as such on the HILDA household form (27 per cent of cases). The implications of that inconsistency for the accuracy with which people are identified as NDIS clients are unclear. It would be expected that receipt of a support package from the NDIS would more unambiguously identify persons as having a disability, and therefore reduce the potential for those people to be misclassified.
58 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
5858
HAS THE NATIONAL DISABILITY INSURANCE SCHEME IMPROVED LABOUR MARKET OUTCOMES?
assessment of the extent of their limitation. The richness of the HILDA data allows us to This was based on whether the person further test these competing explanations indicated that they had a disability that for the observed effects of the NDIS. Broadly limits the type or amount of work they can speaking, people who are not employed do, and on an 11-point scale reflecting the are classified as unemployed if they are extent of limitation. actively seeking work, and not in the labour force if they are not actively seeking Allowing for the extent of work limitation work. For people outside the labour force, results in a smaller estimated coefficient HILDA further asks “Even though you are on NDIS support, the result continues to not looking for work now, would you like suggest that people on a NDIS package are a job? (Assume that suitable childcare 8 percentage points less likely to participate arrangements could be found.)”. Using this in the labour market and 7 percentage question, a sample of people who would points less likely to be in a job (Table 7 potentially like to be working was identified. models 3 and 6, respectively). We then modelled the probability that they were in a job the following year, conditional We found this result to hold when tested upon whether or not they had a NDIS using other alternative potential modelling support package. approaches, including when the estimated association between NDIS participation and Again, the analysis is restricted to Waves employment is based only on people who 17 (2017) and onwards and to people with are observed to move in and out of NDIS disability. The key results are reported support. This more rigorously controls for in Table 8 (see Appendix). As would be potential individual effects that we may be anticipated within this group, active unable to observe in the modelling, and the jobseekers were the most likely to have results suggest reduced participation and transitioned into employment the following employment for those with NDIS support by year. Those who definitely wanted to four percentage points. work but were not actively seeking work in one year were less likely to be in a job To the extent that the NDIS aims to enhance the following year, and those who only inclusion for its clients, the evidence here ‘maybe’ wanted a job less likely still. After suggests that it is at best ineffective and controlling for those characteristics, and possibly even counterproductive. It is the different specifications of the extent of possible that some people with a disability work limitations, the estimated effect of faced financial hardship and, prior to NDIS having a NDIS support package is to reduce support, needed to seek and maintain the probability of transitioning into work work simply to get by. Additional support by 7 per cent. Hence when we take into through the NDIS may be allowing some account all possible factors that may result to be more selective in their choices. in NDIS recipients being less able to secure However, the finding is also reminiscent employment our analysis suggests they of consultations reported in the ‘Shut are still less likely to be working or in the Out’ report over a decade ago: “More than labour force than other people living with a half of the submissions received during disability with similar levels of limitation by the consultation process (56 per cent) around 7 per cent. said that services and programs act as a barrier to, rather than a facilitator of, their participation.” (National People with Disabilities and Carer Council 2009, p.4).
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES 59
595959
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
“WORKPLACE
INCLUSION
REQUIRES MUCH
Quote MORE THAN SIMPLY
BEING CLASSIFIED
AS EMPLOYED.“
60 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
6060
IS THE AUSTRALIAN WORKPLACE INCLUSIVE FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES?
IS THE AUSTRALIAN
WORKPLACE
INCLUSIVE FOR PEOPLE
WITH DISABILITIES?
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES 61
616161
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
INTRODUCTION
Workplace inclusion requires much more For the first domain, we use data from the than simply being classified as employed. HILDA survey includes measures related As emphasised in many of our stakeholder to job insecurity like workers’ own views consultations, there can be a large gap of their future employment prospects, the between a person with a disability being chance of losing their jobs, and their overall on the payroll and that person enjoying sense of job security. To capture the degree full participation and opportunity. Physical of control over working hours, we looked at accessibility of a workplace does not irregular hours, working fewer or more hours guarantee full inclusion, and workplace than desired, and a loss of work-life balance. culture can have a significant impact on And to capture the quality of an employee’s feelings of inclusion, workplace productivity working conditions, the index uses measures and wellbeing. In this section we look at related to leave entitlements including sick, aspects of the experiences of people with family and compassionate leave. disability who are employed. Inferior job attributes are often more Workers can also experience job insecurity pronounced for women than men, but how and an overall sense of lack of control or do these various dimensions of job precarity autonomy in the demands of their roles, as compare for people with disability and well as being confronted with poorer working people without disability? This is the aspect conditions. of workplace inclusion we turn to first in this chapter.
In the Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre’s
Future of Work report (Cassells, Duncan et al, 2018)5, report, we developed a composite index of precarious employment over these three domains, using data from the
Household Income and Labour Dynamics in
Australia (HILDA) survey.
5 Rebecca Cassells, Alan Duncan, Astghik Mavisakalyan, John Phillimore, Richard Seymour and Yashar Tarverdi (2018), Future of Work in Australia: Preparing for tomorrow’s world, BCEC Focus on the States Report Series, Issue #6. April 2018.
62 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
6262
A PRECARIOUS WORLD: JOB INSECURITY FOR PEOPLE WITH A DISABILITY
A PRECARIOUS WORLD: JOB INSECURITY FOR PEOPLE WITH A
DISABILITY
Precarious work refers to uncertain and precarity than either their counterparts insecure employment conditions. This can without disabilities, or those whose include short-term contracts, uncertain disability is not work limiting. The gap in working hours and income, often with rates of precarity has remained consistent little or no control of hours worked. It also over the last two decades across economic increasingly includes ‘gig economy’ work, cycles. Workers without disabilities and where work may be assigned on a task- those whose disability is not work limiting by-task basis via a digital app. Precarious show very similar rates of precarity, with work has an impact on both financial slightly greater variation attributable to and personal security, impacting on smaller numbers among the latter. All
workers' ability to plan for the future and three groups show a consistent pattern Those workers with a
undermining wellbeing. of rising and falling work precarity across disability that limits
recent economic cycles, peaking in 2015 their capacity for
There have been some major changes and dropping in 2008 and 2022. The work experience much
in the degree of work precarity between trend of reduced precarity in recent times higher rates of work
2001 and 2022 by disability and work clearly coincides with falling rates of precarity than either
limitation (Figure 18). Those workers with unemployment and growing skills shortages their counterparts
a disability that limits their capacity for across our economy. without disabilities, or
work experience much higher rates of work those whose disability is not work limiting.
FIGURE 18
Precarity index by disability status and gender: 2002 to 2022
(a) by level of disability (b) by gender and disability status
1.4 1.4 1.2 1.2 1.0 1.0 index 0.80.6 0.80.6
0.4 index 0.4
0.2 0.2 Precarity 0.0 0.0 Precarity -0.2 -0.2
-0.4 -0.4 -0.6 -0.6 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
non-disabled male non-disabled male disabled
disabled, work-limiting
disabled, non work-limiting female non-disabled female disabled
Notes: Precarity is modelled as a composite index using multiple indicators to capture job insecurity, a lack of control, or inferior work conditions. See Cassells et. al. (2018).
Source: Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre | Authors’ calculations based on HILDA survey, 2001 to 2022.
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES 63
636363
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
FIGURE 19
Precarity by occupation for people with disability: 2002 to 2022
(a) precarity by domain
All occupations
Labourers
Machinery Operators and Drivers
Sales Workers
Clerical and Administrative Workers
Community and Personal Service Workers
Technicians and Trades Workers
Professionals
Managers
-1.2 -0.8 -0.4 0.0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2.0
precarity index ■ lack of control ■ inferior work conditions ■ job insecurity
(a) difference in precarity
All occupations I Managers
I Professionals ■-
Technicians and Trades Workers ’ I
Community and Personal Service Workers ■
I -- Clerical and Administrative Workers
Sales Workers
Machinery Operators and Drivers
I
Labourers
’
-0.2 +0.0 +0.2 +0.4 +0.6 +0.8 +1.0 +1.2 difference- in precarity: disabled vs non-disabled
■ lack of control ■ inferior work conditions ■ job insecurity
Notes: Precarity is modelled as a composite index using multiple indicators to capture job insecurity, a lack of control, or inferior work conditions. See Cassells et. al. (2018).
Source: Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre | Authors’ calculations based on HILDA survey, 2002 to 2022.
64 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
6464
INTRODUCTION
For workers with a disability, Figure inferior work conditions that contribute 19 (Panel a) clearly demonstrates that most to the overall gap, followed by job the level of precarity increases for less insecurity. On average, there is in fact only a skilled occupations, with mangers and marginal difference between the two groups professionals experiencing the least in terms of a sense of control over their jobs. precarity, and labourers the major occupational group with the highest value The differences are most apparent among on the index. The outlier in this relationship technicians and trades workers, with is clerical and administrative workers, who inferior work conditions and job insecurity experience lower than average precarity contributing in roughly equal parts to a when compared to other workers with very large gap for workers with disabilities disability, and significantly lower than their in this occupation. The second largest gap ’neighbouring’ occupational categories in in precarity between workers with and terms of skill level: community and personal without disability is within the occupation service workers and sales workers. of machinery operators and drivers, with lack of control also making a sizeable Panel (b) of Figure 19 breaks down the contribution to the gap for these workers. difference in the precarity index between workers with and without disability by the In four of the major occupational categories contribution of the different components of workers with disability actually score the index. Across all occupations, workers more favourably in terms of control: with disabilities score markedly higher on professionals, managers, labourers, and the index, and this holds within each of the community and personal service workers. eight major occupational categories. It is
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES 65
656565
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
JOB SATISFACTION FOR PEOPLE WITH A DISABILITY
HILDA collects data on people’s overall job with most aspects of their jobs, as are other satisfaction and with a number of aspects workers. of their employment: pay, job security, flexibility, hours worked and the work itself. On each domain, however, people with Figure 20 shows mean satisfaction with disability report lower satisfaction with each of these elements for people without a their jobs. There is a substantial gap in disability, for all those with a disability, and satisfaction with pay, job security and for the subset of people with disability who hours worked, and in each of these domains indicate their condition limits the type or the gap is more marked for those with amount of work they can do. The data are employment limitations. Satisfaction with
There is a substantial for people aged 15 to 69 years and pooled flexibility to balance work and non-work
gap in satisfaction over all 22 waves. In the HILDA questions on commitments is very similar for people with
with pay, job job satisfaction, respondents are instructed a work-limiting disability and those with a
security and hours to answer by selecting a number between 0 non-work limiting disability.
worked for people and 10, “where 0 means you are completely
with employment dissatisfied, and 10 means you are totally These differentials in average satisfaction
limitations. satisfied.” Overall, it can be seen that by disability status have been highly
workers with a disability are, on average, persistent over the 22 Waves of HILDA for quite highly content with their jobs and each of the domains of job satisfaction.
FIGURE 20
Mean job satisfaction by disability status
Total pay satisfaction 8.0 7.5
7.0 Overall job satisfaction Job security satisfaction
6.5 6.0 5.5
Flexibility to balance work Satisfaction with the work and non-work itself commitments
Satisfaction with hours worked
Non-disabled people All people with disability Work limiting disability
Source: Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre | Authors’ calculations based on HILDA survey, 2001 to 2022.
66 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
6666
MATCHING UP? UNDEREMPLOYMENT AND WORK PREFERENCES
MATCHING UP? UNDEREMPLOYMENT AND WORK PREFERENCES
People with disability are much more likely cent compared to their counterparts with to report working part-time. Based on 2021 no disability (in orange) and those whose Census data, for example, 52 per cent of disability is not work-limiting (in teal) employed people aged 15 to 69 years and both of whom experience similar trends in who needed assistance with a core activity underemployment rates over time. worked part-time, compared to 32 per cent of employed people without disability. While there is greater variation in underemployment rates for those with Panel (a) of Figure 21 tracks the a work-limiting disability, there is also a underemployment ratio for workers with clear trend of this gap opening up across
and without disabilities over the last two the economic cycle to peak at around 10 Workers with a work-
decades, showing similar differences and percentage points in 2019, before starting limiting condition
trends to those seen with precarity. Workers to drop back as the employment market show a clear penalty
with a work-limiting condition (in maroon) tightens to 2022. of between 5 to 10 per
show a clear penalty of between 5 to 10 per cent compared to their counterparts with no disability or non
FIGURE 21
limiting disability. Underemployment ratios by disability status: 2001 to 2022
(a) by level of disability (b) by gender and disability status
24 24 22 22
20 20(%) 18 (%) 18
ratio 16 ratio 16 14 14 12 12 10 10 8 8
6 6 Underemployment 4 Underemployment 4
2 2 0 0 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
non-disabled disabled, work-limiting male non-disabled male disabled
disabled, non work-limiting female non-disabled female disabled
Notes: Underemployment is calculated to meet the three criteria of the ILO definition, being those who are willing and able to work more hours during the survey period and are below the 35 hour threshold for full-time work.
Source: Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre | Authors’ calculations based on HILDA survey, 2001 to 2022.
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES 67
676767
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
Disaggregating this result by gender in with the reasons given by people without Figure 21 (b) also demonstrates a clear and disability: specifically, that they: prefer consistent additional underemployment part-time work, they have childcare penalty by gender for women with a responsibilities, it is a requirement of their disability (maroon line) compared to men chosen job, they have study commitments with disability (orange line) of between and are unable to find full-time work. 3 to 6 per cent. In fact, we see that underemployment rates for men with a Much higher proportions of part-time disability compare very closely with those workers without a disability cite study for women without a disability, both of commitments and caring for children as
There is a clear and whom are consistently 5 to 6 percentage their reasons for working part-time, but this
consistent additional points higher in their underemployment rate is likely to reflect the older age of people
underemployment than men without a disability. with a disability.
penalty of between
3 to 6 per cent The HILDA survey collects more nuanced If we restrict the sample to people aged
for women with data on working hour preferences. This 40 and over and putting aside ‘own illness
disability compared includes asking part-time workers their or disability’ the most common reasons
to men with main reason for working part-time rather cited for working part-time are common to
disability. than full-time, and asking all workers if they people with and without a disability. The
would like to work more hours or less hours main one is simply that people prefer to
The main reason than they currently do. work part-time. Very few people reported
people with a work- choosing to work part-time because their
limiting disability Not surprisingly, the main reason people welfare payments or pension may be
give for working part- with a work-limiting disability give for affected if they worked full-time (just 1.2
time is their own working part-time is their own illness or per cent of part-timers with a work-limiting
illness or disability. disability (Figure 22). The other reasons disability, and 0.4 per cent of those without
cited by people with disability for working a disability). part-time are in relatively close alignment
FIGURE 22
Reasons for working part-time by disability status: 2001 to 2022
45
40
35 workers 30 part-time 2520 of cent 15 Per 10
5
0
Prefer part-time Own illness or Prefer job & PT Caring for children Could not find full- Other personal or
work disability hours required time work family
responsibilities
■ Persons with no disability ■ Persons with work-limiting disability
Notes: Data are restricted to those currently working part-time.
Source: Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre | Authors’ calculations based on HILDA survey, 2001 to 2022.
68 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
6868
MATCHING UP? UNDEREMPLOYMENT AND WORK PREFERENCES
The pattern of mismatch in hours worked is The remaining workers indicate they would quite similar for workers with and without a like to maintain the number of their working disability. In the data pooled over 22 waves, hours. For people with a disability that roughly one quarter of workers indicate limits the amount or type of work they can they would prefer to work fewer hours; do, Figure 23 shows that since 2001 there while slightly more workers with a work- has been a slight rise in the proportion of limiting disability would prefer more hours workers who are happy with the hours they (21 per cent) compared to people without a work, and a decline in the proportion who disability (15 per cent). would prefer fewer hours.
FIGURE 23 The pattern of Preference for working more or fewer hours: employees with a work-limiting disability mismatch in hours worked is quite similar for workers with and 70 without a disability.
60 Roughly one quarter of workers indicate they (%) 50 would prefer to work fewer hours; while
40 slightly more workers employed with a work-limiting
of 30 disability would
Share 20 prefer more hours (21 per cent) compared
to people without 10 a disability (15 per cent). 0
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
Fewer hours About the same More hours
Source: Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre | Authors’ calculations based on HILDA survey, 2001 to 2022.
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES 69
696969
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
BREAKING DOWN THE BARRIERS
The HILDA survey collects information about in getting a job, or the main reason they had people’s perceived barriers to employment. not been looking for a job. Prior to Wave 5 People who are unemployed – those who there were also some minor changes to the are not employed and have been looking responses categories for these questions, for work - are asked to indicate the reasons hence this section reports results for the they have had trouble getting a job. People HILDA data pooled from Waves 5 to 22. who are marginally attached to the labour force – who are out of work and have not To highlight the barriers facing jobseekers been looking for work, but who would with a disability, perceived difficulties in potentially like to work - are asked to finding work are reported for two groups: nominate the reasons they have not been people with a work-limiting disability and looking for work. Commencing from Wave 5 people with no disability or long-term health (2005), respondents were further asked to condition. The most common responses are nominate the main difficulty they have had reported in Figure 24.
FIGURE 24
Stated reasons for difficulties getting a job: jobseekers with and without disability
None of the above 7.3 21.6
Hours were unsuitable 13.2 17.0 Just no jobs at all 17.619.0
Employers thought respondent too young or to old 11.0 21.0
No jobs in your line of work 18.6 22.9
Transport problems / too far to travel 16.1 25.7
Too many applicants for the available jobs 24.727.2 Did not have enough work experience 27.528.9
Did not have the required education, training or skills 21.5 27.8
Own ill health or disability 4.1 57.8
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Per cent
■ Persons with work-limiting disability ■ Person with no disability
Notes: Multiple responses allowed.
Source: Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre | Authors’ calculations based on HILDA survey, 2005 to 2022.
70 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
7070
BREAKING DOWN THE BARRIERS
As anticipated, a high proportion of people to 11 per cent). The latter difference will with disability (58 per cent) report their reflect that jobseekers with a disability own ill-health or disability as a reason will typically be older, given the increasing for having trouble finding work. This prevalence of disability with age. compares to just 4 per cent of people with no disability. A number of other barriers Figure 24 also shows that jobseekers are reported by a significant proportion without a disability were far more likely of people with disability, including lack of to report none of the listed difficulties as skills and experience and limited availability barriers to finding a job. When asked to of jobs. Mostly these barriers are reported nominate which of the items is the main by similar proportions of those with and source of difficulty in finding work, 42 per without disability, however, a notably higher cent of people with disability nominated proportion of people with disability report their own ill-health or disability, followed by transport issues as a barrier (26 per cent of transport problems (8.2 per cent), too many those compared to 16 per cent of jobseekers applicants for available jobs (7.7 per cent), without a disability), and a similar gap in and being seen as too young or too old the proportion who feel employers see them (7.0 per cent). as too old or young (21 per cent compared
FIGURE 25
Reasons for not looking for a job: marginally attached people with and without disability
Own illness, injury or disability 63.8 3.9
Studying/returning to studies 7.5 36.9
Ill health of someone else/other family reasons 6.9 5.4
Prefers to look after children 5.3 16.0
Does not need to work 2.1 5.0
Too young/too old 1.5 1.6
Moved house/Holidays 1.3 4.3
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0
Per cent
■ People with work-limiting disability ■ People with no disability
Notes: Multiple responses allowed.
Source: Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre | Authors’ calculations based on HILDA survey, 2001 to 2022.
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES 71
717171
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
For people who are marginally attached to the labour force, Figure 25 reports the main reasons given for not looking for work. Again, for people with disability, their own ill-health, injury or disability is the most commonly cited reason for not seeking work, reported by 68 per cent of respondents. It is also given as the main reason by a similar proportion (64 per cent) of those respondents. The main other reasons for not looking for work for people with disability include caring roles or family issues (10.2 per cent), study plans (9.2 per cent), and preferring to look after children (8.6 per cent). For the marginally attached without a disability the most common reasons given for not seeking work were study plans (40.2 per cent) and looking after children (20.2 per cent). In contrast to perceived barriers to finding a job, lack of transport was not seen as a major reason for not looking for work for people with a disability, cited by just 1.8 per cent.
72 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
7272
LABOUR MARKET DISCRIMINATION
LABOUR MARKET DISCRIMINATION
In the 2018 and 2022 waves of the As may be expected, there is a big difference HILDA survey, respondents were asked in reports of discrimination on the grounds whether they felt they had experienced of disability, but also of discrimination discrimination in the labour market on the because of age. For people who report basis of having a long-term health condition having a work-limiting disability, 9.0 per or disability. Specifically, people who cent felt they had been discriminated indicated they had applied for a job with against in a job application because of their a new employer at some time in the past long-term health condition or disability. two years were asked if they felt they were This compares to 0.3 per cent for those ever unsuccessful because the employer without a disability.6 However, a slightly discriminated against them. People who had higher proportion – 9.3 per cent – felt they been an employee any time in the past two had been discriminated against on the years were asked if they felt they had been grounds of their age, compared to just 4.0 discriminated against by their employer per cent of the population of applicants during that time. without a disability. This will be due, at least in part, to the older age profile of people While these questions had been asked in with disability, given that the prevalence earlier waves of the survey, in 2018 and of disability rises rapidly with age. There 2022 the range of response options for the is a clear pattern in which the proportion grounds of discrimination were expanded of people who feel they were discriminated to include discrimination on the basis of against in a job application due to their a person’s long-term health condition disability increases with the extent of or disability. This was in addition to the limitation associated with that disability. options of gender, age, ethnicity, religion and parenting responsibilities presented in A similar picture arises for feelings of earlier surveys. Here we focus on the pooled discrimination among employees. Among data from those two waves (2018 and 2022) people without a disability, 7.5 per cent which separately identified perceptions of felt they had been discriminated against discrimination on the grounds of a person’s by their employer in the past two years, disability. increasing to 15.2 per cent for all people with disability, and 19.2 per cent for Among people of working age who had people with a work-limiting disability. For applied for jobs, 18.2 per cent of people with employees with a work-limiting disability, disability felt they had missed out on a job discrimination because of their disability due to discrimination, a rate that is twice is the most common grounds cited (9.8 that for the population of applicants without per cent), followed by age discrimination a disability (9.1 per cent). The proportion is (7.0 per cent). Although the incidence is higher still for people with a work-limiting considerably lower, people with a work disability, at 21.3 per cent. Applicants with limiting disability are also around twice as a disability were more likely to report all likely to feel discriminated against because forms of discrimination, but the incidence of their gender: 5.2 per cent compared to is small, and the differences between people 2.7 per cent for employees without a with and without disabilities is very minor, disability. when it comes to reports of discrimination based on gender, race, religion or parenting responsibilities.
6 Note, someone who currently did not report having a disability at the time of the survey may have had a long-term health condition or disability at other times during the previous two years, and so may still report that as a grounds for discrimination.
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES 73
737373
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
In summary, these survey data suggest incidences. Given that less than 40 per cent discrimination is a significant factor in of people with a work limiting disability the labour market exclusion felt by people were in employment in those survey years, with disability. Among people with a work the fact that 20 per cent of people with limiting disability, close to one-in-five who such a disability who had applied for jobs had applied for jobs felt they had missed out felt they missed out due to discrimination, due to discrimination in the past two years, including 9 per cent on the grounds of their and a similar proportion of those who were disability, indicates that discrimination is a employees felt they had been discriminated major contributor to reduced employment against by their employer in some aspect opportunity for people with disabilities. The of their jobs. For both applicants and number of applicants with a work limiting employees, perceptions of discrimination disability who felt they missed out on a job on the grounds of their disability and on the because of discrimination on the grounds of basis of age contribute roughly equally to their disability amounts to 5 per cent of the their reported incidences of discrimination. stock of people with a such a disability who are in work. Moreover, repeated experiences It is difficult to say how accurately such of discrimination will discourage people perceptions reflect actual incidences of from looking for work, such that the full discrimination: the case could be made contribution of discrimination as a barrier to that perceptions either under-estimate or labour market inclusion will extend beyond over-estimate actual occurrences. Further, the experiences of those who have actively the reports relate to any experience of applied for work. disability during the past two years, and do not take account of the number of such
74 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
7474
DISABILITY, WELLBEING AND EMPLOYMENT
DISABILITY, WELLBEING
AND EMPLOYMENT
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES 75
757575
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
DISABILITY, WELLBEING AND EMPLOYMENT
HILDA provides a number of measures of disability, people with a long-term health people’s wellbeing and, importantly, the condition or disability, and the subset of ability to track changes in people’s reported that group who report that their condition wellbeing over time as their circumstances limits the type or amount of work they do. change. In each wave, the HILDA survey Predictably, it is in the domain of health asks people how satisfied they are with a that the biggest gap in satisfaction emerges range of aspect of their lives, and then “All for people with a disability, followed by things considered, how satisfied are you employment opportunities and financial with your life?”. Responses are recorded on situation. Working-age Australians with a a scale ranging from 0 (totally dissatisfied) disability actually report higher satisfaction to 10 (totally satisfied). Differences in the with the amount of free time they have than mean responses for three groups are shown those with no disability. in Figure 26. These are people without a
FIGURE 26
Mean life satisfaction by disability status
The home in which you live 9
How satisfied are you with your life 8 Your employment opportunities
7
6
The amount of free time you have 5 Your financial situation
4
The neighbourhood in which you How safe you feel live
Feeling part of your local Your health community
Non-disabled people All people with disability People with work-limiting disability
Source: Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre | Authors’ calculations based on HILDA survey, 2001 to 2022.
76 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
7676
DISABILITY, WELLBEING AND EMPLOYMENT
When it comes to overall life satisfaction, people without a disability. As is typical of people with disability report lower subjective assessments on such a scale, satisfaction than people without a disability. responses are clustered around 8, with Among those with a disability there is almost 80 per cent of the pooled responses only a very marginal difference in mean of people without a disability in the interval satisfaction for those with and without a of 7, 8, and 9. The profile of responses for work limiting condition. As this section people with disability is much flatter, with focuses on this rating of life satisfaction as fewer selecting points on the scale at the a measure of quality of life, it is important highly satisfied end, and more opting for to appreciate its properties. Figure 27 points in the middle and lower ‘dissatisfied’ shows the distribution of responses for range, as shown in Figure 27 for those with people with a work-limiting disability and an employment restriction.
FIGURE 27
Overall life satisfaction rating (0-10 scale): by disability status
40
35
30
25
cent 20
Per
15
10
5
0
dissatisfied) 1 2 3 4dissatisfied) 6 7 8 9 satisfied) nor (Totally (Totally 100 satisfied
(Neither 5 ■ Person with no disability ■ Persons with work-limiting disability
Source: Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre | Authors’ calculations based on HILDA survey, 2001 to 2022.
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES 77
777777
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
A consequence of this tightly clustered married and unmarried people to be one distribution is that relatively minor of the largest effects observed. In these differences in the numerical averages models the marital wellbeing ‘premium’ between groups correspond to quite is around +0.30 relative to those who substantial differences in happiness levels. have never been married. The reduction We are able to use these data to estimate in wellbeing association with a person so-called ‘happiness models’, which having a work limiting disability is larger in provide statistical estimates of differences magnitude (-0.48 in Model 2). It also larger in subjective wellbeing for people with than the estimated gap in satisfaction disabilities of varying level of limitation between those in work and those who are after controlling for other factors, as well unemployed, with the latter well known to as estimates of how those other factors be associated with substantially reduced affect people’s wellbeing. The results of such wellbeing. models using different measures of the extent of a person’s disability are reported It must be stressed that Australians with a in Appendix Table 9. disability lead happy and rewarding lives: reporting a average life satisfaction of over For all people with disability or long-term 7 on a scale from 0 to 10 and on which 10 health condition, the estimated coefficient is the highest possible score. However, it is suggests the condition is associated the case that Australians with a disability with lower life satisfaction of 0.32, about experience a lower sense of wellbeing than one-third of a unit on the 11-point scale. those without a disability. Satisfaction There is a larger association when we with life deteriorates with the severity of differentiate between people with a work disability, and the magnitude of that loss of limiting disability (-0.48 points) and those wellbeing is considerable in the context of with a disability that does not limit work the variation typically associated with other (-0.13 points). We also test the association key life outcomes that shape wellbeing. using the continuous scale of the extent of The important question is whether more individuals’ work limitations, which ranges could be done to promote inclusion and to from 0 (no limitation) to 11 (can’t work at mitigate factors that contribute to people all). This confirms wellbeing falling with with disability experiencing lower subjective severity of the limitation (See Table 9). wellbeing. On the basis of the raw means between people with no disability or long These estimates are substantial in term health condition and people with a magnitude. An almost universal finding work-limiting disability, Figure 28 suggests from happiness models in the empirical this gap in wellbeing has not narrowed at all literature is for the differences between over the 22 years of the HILDA data.
78 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
7878
DISABILITY, WELLBEING AND EMPLOYMENT
FIGURE 28
Mean life satisfaction by level of disability: HILDA 2001 to 2022
8.2
8.0 – 7.8
7.6
7.4 satisfaction life 7.2 Mean 7.0~
6.8
6.6
6.4
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
People with no disability People with work-limiting disability
Notes: Responding Person weights used.
Source: Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre | Authors’ calculations based on HILDA survey, 2001 to 2022.
The raw means presented in Figure 28 will The findings show no lessening of the be by affected compositional changes in effect of having a disability on people’s the samples, including the age structure sense of wellbeing over these periods, and and incidence of disability by severity. To this applies for the effect of different levels assess changes more rigorously over time of severity or limitation. Unfortunately in the relative wellbeing of Australians with changes in policy or in community attitudes a disability, we partitioned the timeframe over this time do not appear to have of the HILDA survey into three sub periods significantly lessened the way experiences (2001-08, 2009-15, 2016-22) and analysed of people with disabilities can impact upon the association between disability status their assessments of their wellbeing. and life satisfaction for each period. The results are reported in Appendix Table 10.
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES 79
797979
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
EFFECT OF EMPLOYMENT ON WELLBEING FOR PEOPLE WITH A
DISABILITY
The results of models of people’s associated with a person’s disability, assessment of their life satisfaction for both being in a job and being in full-time the full working-age population show that, education, as opposed to being outside the relative to people who are not participating labour force, is associated with around a in the labour market, employed people 0.25 point movement up the life satisfaction have modestly higher life satisfaction, and scale, again a relatively sizeable shift in the those who are unemployed are on average context of other factors known to impact less happy than non-participants (Table 9). upon wellbeing. The association with being People in full-time education also report in part-time employment is also positive relatively high life satisfaction. Those but smaller, while being unemployed has a effects represent the association between detrimental effect. labour force status and subjective wellbeing, after controlling for disability status and The results are suggestive that labour other factors, and averaged across the full market and education inclusion enhance working-age population including people the wellbeing of people with disability. with and without disability. For a number of reasons, caution must be exercised in interpreting these results as We are particularly interested in how proof of a casual effect. For example, there labour force status, and particularly may be other factors that influence both being in employment, shapes feelings of labour market engagement and wellbeing; wellbeing for people with disability. To or ‘reverse causation’ in which naturally obtain those estimates, similar modelling happier people are more likely to secure jobs was undertaken with the HILDA data using or enrol in education. To control for such only the sample of people with disability. factors more rigorously, we use estimates Specifically, we looked at those people who based only on how reported wellbeing reported they had a disability that limits the changes for people with disabilities as they amount or type of work they can do. move between labour market states (so called ‘fixed effects’ models, see Panel B of We find large and positive effects of labour Table 11). Those models lead to very similar market engagement for people with a estimates of the association between being disability, be that engagement in the form in employment or full-time study on the life of employment or full-time education satisfaction of people with a disability. This (results for key variables of interest are provides strong supporting evidence of a reported in Appendix Table 11). After casual effect of labour market engagement controlling for the level of work limitation on wellbeing, but not definitive proof.
80 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
808080
EMPLOYMENT AND LABOUR MARKET INCLUSION FOR CARERS
Quote
EMPLOYMENT AND
LABOUR MARKET
INCLUSION FOR CARERS
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES 81
818181
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
INTRODUCTION
The Census, SDAC and HILDA also provide 6 months; while HILDA refers to ongoing, information on Australians who care for regular care. Each relate to assistance due people with disabilities. Again, there are to limitations associated with a disability, differences in the way carers are identified. long-term health condition or old age, and All three refer to care that is undertaken on not assistance provided to children simply an informal or unpaid basis, and not care as due to their young age. part of a person’s employment, although a carer may be in receipt of Carer Allowance or Given the focus of this report on labour Carer Payment through the social security market inclusion, the analysis in this section system. The Census asks if people spent is restricted to people of working age, which time providing care during the prior two we define as 15 to 69 (although the people weeks; SDAC specifies that the caring must they care for can be of any age). be ongoing and expected to last at least
82 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
82828
CARING FOR A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY
CARING FOR A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY
The ABS Census of Population and Housing This incidence of caring has increased from includes the question: “In the last two weeks 11.3 per cent recorded in 2006. That +1.5 did the person spend time providing unpaid percentage point increase in the prevalence care, help or assistance to family members of carers over those 15 years equates to a or others because of a disability, a long-term quite substantial growth of 13.6 per cent. health condition or problems related to old The incidence of caring as recorded in the age?”. It further specifies that anyone in Census has steadily risen for both men and receipt of Carer Allowance or Carer Payment women. While it has increased more rapidly should indicate that they do provide care. for men, this has made only minor inroads into the disproportionate share of carer
The 2021 Census counted 2.13 million roles undertaken by working-aged women. The 2021 Census
working-age Australians who reported In 2006 the gap between the proportion of counted 2.13
providing such care, of whom 61 per cent women and men reporting caring activities million working-age
were women. Excluding non-responses to was 5.27 percentage points; fifteen years Australians who
the question, this equates to 12.9 per cent of later in 2021 it was 5.20 percentage points. reported providing
the working age population - 15.4 per cent of care, 61 per cent of women and 10.2 per cent of men (Figure 29). whom were women.
This incidence ofFIGURE 29 caring has increasedShare of working age Australians providing care: 2006 to 2021 from 11.3 per cent recorded in 2006 18 to 12.9 per cent in 2021. 16 (%)
14 15.4 14.7 15.0
12 13.9 12.9 population 12.5 12.0 10 11.3
9.8 10.2 8 9.3 8.6 working-age 6
of Share 4 2
0
2006 2011 2016 2021
■ Male ■ Female ■ Persons
Source: Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre | Authors’ calculations from ABS Census of Population and Housing, 2006 to 2021.
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES 83
838383
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
The SDAC provides a more detailed The SDAC data show some significant classification of carers who give ongoing, changes in the composition of people unpaid assistance or supervision to a undertaking caring roles. First, the caring person (or persons) with a disability or to population has aged substantially. In 1998, older persons. It further classifies them as a 29 per cent of primary carers were aged 55 primary carer if they provide the most help 69 years. By 2018 this had increased to 41 and supervision to the person being cared per cent. There was a similar though slightly for. smaller increase in the share of other (non-primary) carers in this age group, The share of people aged over 55 who from 25 per cent to 35 per cent. There were undertake caring roles has increased associated declines in the proportion of substantially over the past decade, both as primary carers aged 30-44 years, and for primary carers and in other caregiving roles other carers in the proportion of carers aged (Figure 30). from 15 to 44.
FIGURE 30
Age composition of primary carers and other carers: 1998 and 2018
45
40 41.0 35
35.0 34.0 30
30.0 29.0 29.0 25 28.0
cent 25.0 25.0 24.0 Per 20 23.0 22.0
15 16.0 10 12.0
5 8.0 7.0 6.0
1.0 1.0 5.0
0
Primary Other Primary Other
1998 2018
■ 15-19 years ■ 20-29 years ■ 30-44 years ■ 45-54 years ■ 55-69 years
Source: Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre | Authors’ calculations based on ABS Survey of Disability, Ageing and Carers, 1998
and 2018.
84 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
84848
CARING FOR A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY
The carer cohort of 2018 was also rising share of carers with university level substantially more educated than the carer qualifications. In 2018 around 25 per cent cohort of 1998 (see Figure 31). The major of both primary and other carers held a compositional change has been a falling bachelor’s degree or higher qualification, proportion of carers who have not completed and this proportion had more than doubled the equivalent of Year 12 schooling and since 1998.
FIGURE 31
Educational attainment by carer status: 1998 and 2018
7.5 per cent of 60 working-age Australians reported caring for someone. 50 49 Around 63 per cent
40 43 of carers are female,
and this rises to
70 per cent for cent 34 33 30 main carers. Per 29 30 28 27 25 26
20
16
14 13 10 12 11 10
0
Primary Other Primary Other
1998 2018
■ Year 11 and below ■ Certificate I/II - Year 12 ■ Advanced Diploma - Certificate III/IV ■ Bachelor Degree and above
Source: Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre | Authors’ calculations based on ABS Survey of Disability, Ageing and Carers, 1998
and 2018.
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES 85
858585
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
Household, Income and Labour Dynamics be attributed to HILDA’s criterion that the in Australia (HILDA) survey caring should be an ‘ongoing’ role, whereas Commencing from Wave 5, the HILDA the Census definition relates to any caring survey asked people whether they care for undertaken in the prior two weeks. someone with a long-term health condition, who is elderly or who has a disability. Around 63 per cent of carers are female, Caring is defined as providing assistance and this rises to 70 per cent for main carers. with self-care, mobility or communication, When the carer is the main carer, they are and does not include caring which is much more likely to be caring for someone undertaken as part of paid employment. who lives in their own household (around For carers identified 80 per cent of cases). For those who are
in the pooled HILDA For those who are carers, HILDA also not the main carer, the person they are
data, 41 per cent determines whether the person (or people) caring for is more often someone who lives
also reported having being cared for live in the same household elsewhere (around 62 per cent).
a disability, and as the respondent or elsewhere, and whether
30 per cent a work- they are the ‘main carer’ of a person being It is notable that a very high proportion of
limiting disability. cared for. carers are also people with disability. For
carers identified in the pooled HILDA data,
The incidence of Over the years the data have been collected 41 per cent also reported having a disability,
disability among (2005 to 2022), 7.5 per cent of working-age and 30 per cent a work-limiting disability.
people who are a Australians reported caring for someone, These figures compare to 21 per cent and
main carer is even with the majority of those (4.3 per cent 14 per cent, respectively, for working-
higher: 46 per cent of working-age adults) doing so as the age Australians who are not carers. The
report having a main carer. Using survey population incidence of disability among people who
disability and weights, this equates to an estimated 1.42 are a main carer is even higher: 46 per cent
35 per cent report million carers of working age in Australia report having a disability and 35 per cent
having a disability in 2022 and 840,000 main carers. The report having a disability that limits the
that limits the work lower frequency of caring roles among the work they can do. This compares to
they can do. working-age population as measured in 15 per cent of non-carers who report a
HILDA when compared to the Census (7.5 work-limiting disability. per cent compared to 12.9 per cent) can
86 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
86868
IS THE AUSTRALIAN LABOUR MARKET INCLUSIVE FOR CARERS?
IS THE AUSTRALIAN LABOUR MARKET INCLUSIVE FOR CARERS?
The Census provides the most comprehensive the 2021 Census, 69.1 per cent of carers were coverage of the population of people who participating in the labour force. This is up care for a person with a disability but does from 65.0 per cent in 2006, but lower than not further identify whether or not they are for people who are not carers (75.6 per cent). the main carer. Carers are more likely to work part-time, but the shares of carers and non-carers in full Census data show a modest increase in time work has converged since 2006, with labour force participation rates for carers a gap of around 8 percentage points in the between 2006 and 2021 (Figure 32). As at 2021 Census.
FIGURE 32
Labour force status for carers and non-carers: ABS Census, 2006 to 2021
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2006 2011 2016 2021 2006 2011 2016 2021
Carers Non-carers
■ Employed FT ■ Employed PT ■ Unemployed ■ NILF
Source: Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre | Authors’ calculations from ABS Census of Population and Housing, 2006 to 2021.
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES 87
878787
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
The HILDA survey includes information The results indicate that someone who is a from 2005 onwards on respondents’ roles main carer is around 8.5 percentage points as a main carer or secondary caregiver. less likely to be working than a similar This provides an important opportunity person who is a non-carer (Appendix Table to explore the extent to which caring 12), but with a much smaller reduction of responsibilities affect employment around 1 percentage point for other carers. outcomes, and whether such impacts have changed over time. When we analysed this association between caring and employment opportunity for Using statistical regression methods, the earlier half (2005-13) and latter half of
Someone who is a we are able to compare the employment this period (2014-2022), the results show
main carer is around probabilities of carers and non-carers the ‘penalty’ in employment opportunity
8.5 percentage over the period from 2005 to 2022. This associated with caring roles has remained
points less likely to approach controls for other characteristics very stable. A comparable analyses using
be working than a of carers that may affect their labour market the SDAC data confirm a reduced likelihood
similar person who is outcomes to try to ascertain, as close as of employment for people undertaking
a non-carer. possible, the effect that undertaking a caring roles, albeit with slightly smaller
caring role has on employment opportunity. estimated penalty (5 percentage points).
88 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
888888
WORKING LIFE FOR CARERS
WORKING LIFE FOR CARERS
Carers who are in employment report much carers are relatively less satisfied with is the same overall job satisfaction as workers their job security (see Figure 33). Primary who are not undertaking caring roles, and carers also report lower satisfaction with this applies to both main carers and other their pay, but carers tend to have higher carers. Based on the pooled HILDA data from satisfaction with the actual work they do 2005 to 2022, the main aspect of work that than other employed people.
FIGURE 33
Mean job satisfaction by carer status: 2005 to 2022
Carers who are in Total pay satisfaction employment report 8.0 much the same overall 7.8 job satisfaction as 7.6 workers who are not
7.4 Overall job satisfaction Job security satisfaction undertaking caring
7.2 roles. 7.0 6.8 6.6
Flexibility to balance work and Satisfaction with the work itself non-work commitments
Satisfaction with hours worked
Non-carers Main carers Other carers
Source: Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre | Authors’ calculations based on HILDA survey, 2005 to 2022.
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES 89
898989
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
In terms of preferences for working fewer or carers who are content with their hours of more hours, the HILDA data suggest that work has trended upwards. In terms of hours carers have quite similar profiles to other mismatch, there has been a decline in the workers, with around 60 per cent satisfied proportion who would prefer to work fewer with the number of hours they worked. hours, and an increase in the incidence of underemployment. Focussing on main carers, Figure 34 shows that since 2005, the proportion of working
FIGURE 34
Preference of carers for working more or fewer hours: 2005 to 2022
70
60
50 (%)
40 employed of 30 Share 20
10
0
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
Fewer hours About the same More hours
Source: Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre | Authors’ calculations based on HILDA survey, 2005 to 2022.
90 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
909090
BARRIERS TO EMPLOYMENT
BARRIERS TO EMPLOYMENT
As discussed above with reference to people of non-carers. ‘Own ill health or disability’ with disability, the HILDA survey asks and ‘unsuitable hours’ were also difficulties people who are looking for work about their that carers were more likely to perceive as perceived barriers to gaining a job and, for barriers to finding work compared to non those who are potentially interested in work carers. but not looking for work, the reasons why they have not actively sought employment. When asked to nominate what they perceive Among people who had been looking for as their main barrier to finding work (as work, those with caring roles were more opposed to indicating all difficulties that likely to nominate most of the barriers apply), the most commonly nominated listed in the survey when compared to factor for main carers was actually their jobseekers who did not care for a person own ill health or disability (14.6 per cent), with a disability or an elderly person (Figure followed by employers thinking they were 35). Main carers were much more likely to too old or too young (13.2 per cent). ‘Other nominate ‘Other family responsibilities’ family responsibilities’ ranked fourth, as a difficulty, selected by 12.8 per cent of attracting a similar share of responses main carers. At 4.3 per cent, surprisingly as unsuitable hours, and not having the few jobseekers with other (non-primary) required education, training or skills, caring roles acknowledged this item as a each with between 9 and 10 per cent of barrier, and this compared to 1.4 per cent responses.
FIGURE 35
Perceived reasons for difficulties getting a job: jobseekers: by carer status, 2005 to 2022
22.7 Did not have the required education, training or skills 29.1 28.9 29.2 Did not have enough work experience 27.5 26.3 13.4 Employers thought respondent too young or to old 15.8 24.5 15.6 Own ill health or disability 19.9 20.8 19.3 No jobs in your line of work 26.0 20.4 18.0 Just no jobs at all 20.9 19.4 25.6 Too many applicants for the available jobs 29.6 17.7 13.5 Hours were unsuitable 17.8 17.1 18.7 Transport problems / too far to travel 19.0 15.4 1.4 Other family responsibilities 4.3 12.8 18.5 None of the above 13.5 9.8
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Per cent (%)
Non-carers Other carers Main carers • • •
Notes: Multiple responses permitted.
Source: Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre | Authors’ calculations based on HILDA survey, 2005 to 2022.
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES 91
919191
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
For people who would potentially like to study. This applied to just 6.3 per cent of to work if a suitable job was available, main carers, compared to 22.4 per cent of but had not actively looked for work, the other carers and 31.5 per cent of people who predominant reason given by those who are are not in caring roles. main carers was the ill health of someone else or other family reasons (Figure 36). As with people with disability, very few Nominated by 54.0 per cent of main carers, of the marginally attached reported the this far exceeds the 16.4 per cent of people potential effect on their welfare or pension in other caring roles who gave this reason, as a reason for not looking for work: around highlighting the much greater constraints 2 per cent for main carers, and close to 1
The predominant upon labour market engagement for main per cent of respondents for other carers and
reason given by carers. Another indication of this is the for non-carers. For all three groups, fewer
those who are low proportion of main carers who are not than 1 per cent nominated this as the main
main carers for not seeking work because they intend to return reason for not looking for work.
actively seeking work was the ill health of someone else or FIGURE 36 other family reasons. Reasons for not looking for a job: marginally attached by carer status, 2005 to 2022
3.4 Ill health of someone other than self/other family reasons 16.4 54.0 26.8 Own illness, injury or disability 27.6 24.5 15.6 Prefers to look after children 16.7 18.1 31.5 Studying/returning to studies 22.4 6.3 2.5 Other child care reason 2.7 5.9 1.7 Difficulties in finding child care 1.7 3.3 5.7 Does not need to work 5.0 2.6 4.0 No time 6.3 1.4
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0
Per cent (%)
■ Non-carers ■ Other carers ■ Main carers
Notes: Multiple responses permitted.
Source: Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre | Authors’ calculations based on HILDA survey, 2005 to 2022.
92 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
92929
CARING, WELLBEING AND EMPLOYMENT
CARING, WELLBEING AND EMPLOYMENT
In terms of overall life satisfaction, people The differences between non-carers and who are a main carer report lower mean carers who are not main carers are generally satisfaction than other carers, who in turn very minor. The lower satisfaction for people report lower mean life satisfaction than who are main carers is most apparent in the people with no ongoing caring role (Figure realms of employment opportunity, health, 37). The same ordering holds for each of the finances, and with the amount of free time life domains recorded in the HILDA survey. available.
FIGURE 37
Mean life satisfaction by carer status: persons aged 15-69 years, HILDA Waves 5-22 People who are a main carer report lower mean satisfaction The home in which you live than other carers, who 8.5 in turn report lower
8.0 How satisfied are you with your life Your employment opportunities mean life satisfaction
7.5 than people with no 7.0 ongoing caring role. 6.5 6.0
The amount of free time you have Your financial situation 5.5
5.0
The neighbourhood in which you live How safe you feel
Your health Feeling part of your local community
Non-carers Main carers Other carers
Source: Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre | Authors’ calculations based on HILDA survey, 2005 to 2022.
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES 93
939393
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
In raw terms, the differences in overall life is small in magnitude (a fall of just 0.075 satisfaction are small, and may be a result on the 11-point scale) relative to, say, the of other factors, such as differences in age, higher life satisfaction associated with being level of education, marital status and so married instead of single (+0.3) or, indeed, on. The blue bars in the left panel of Figure with having a disability. However, given the 38 show the estimated change in people’s tight distribution of responses on the life reported life satisfaction associated with satisfaction scale, we can be confident in the caring status from statistical models of life findings of a negative association. The lower satisfaction reported above (See Table 13, wellbeing associated with being a carer full results not reported). After controlling who is not a main carer is smaller still and
Being in work for other factors, the results are consistent only marginally significant. The association
is associated with lower life satisfaction for carers who between carer status and self-assessed
with greater are the main carer of a person with a wellbeing appears to have been stable for
wellbeing among disability or an elderly person – the estimate main carers since 2005.
main carers, and this applies to
FIGURE 38
both full-time and Life satisfaction: Effects of caring roles, and main carers’ labour force status: HILDA Waves 2005 to 2022 part-time work.
0.200
0.182*** 0.173 0.150 0.162***
0.100 coefficients 0.0500.000 Estimated -0.050 -0.027*
-0.075*** -0.100 -
-0.150 -0.169*
-0.200
Main carer Other carer FT Employment PT Employment FT Student Unemployed
Carer status Main carer - labour force status
Notes: Coefficients are estimated using a linear regression model. Starred coefficients are statistically significant at either the 1 per cent (), 5 per cent () or 10 per cent () level. Estimates for carer status are relative to persons without caring roles, and for labour force status relative to main carers who are not in the labour force.
Source: Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre | Authors’ calculations based on HILDA survey, 2005 to 2022.
94 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
94949
CARING, WELLBEING AND EMPLOYMENT
The effect of employment on wellbeing for evidence of positive effects is more limited carers for carers. Being in work is associated with For carers, engaging in the labour force is greater wellbeing among main carers, and likely to offer positive psychological and this applies to both full-time and part-time financial rewards as well as presenting work. There is a similar estimated effect for challenges in balancing work and caring being engaged in full-time study, however, duties. To investigate the net effects of we cannot be confident in this result in labour force status for carers, multivariate a statistical sense. We can see from the models of life satisfaction are estimated relative magnitude of the effects, being able separately for the two groups of carers to maintain engagement with the labour (main carers and other carers). force more than offsets the lower wellbeing associated with a primary carer role. The estimates of the effect of labour force Caring obligations which preclude labour status for people who are main carers are market engagement have a much larger also shown in Figure 38. Results for the key negative impact on people’s subjective variables relating to labour force status for wellbeing. There is little evidence of positive both main carers and other caring roles associations with being in employment are presented in Table 14. In contrast to or with being a full-time student for other people with disability, among whom we carers (See Table 14, effects not shown in find labour market engagement provides the figure). a positive boost to life satisfaction, the
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES 95
959595
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
“THE LAST TWO
DECADES HAVE
SEEN SIGNIFICANT
Quote CHANGES ACROSS
AUSTRALIA, IN THE
UNDERSTANDING
OF AND ATTITUDES
TOWARD PEOPLE
LIVING WITH A
DISABILITY ACROSS
OUR COMMUNITY.“
96 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
96969
SHIFTING THE DIAL:
RESHAPING POLICY TO BROADEN ACCESS TO EMPLOYMENT FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES
SHIFTING THE DIAL:
RESHAPING POLICY TO
BROADEN ACCESS TO
EMPLOYMENT FOR PEOPLE
WITH DISABILITIES
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES 97
979797
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
INTRODUCTION
The last two decades have seen significant changes across Australia, in the understanding of and attitudes toward people living with a disability across our community, and in the nature and scale of public policies and programs that support them. However, as the evidence evaluated within this report clearly shows, these policies and strategies have yet to have a meaningful impact on employment outcomes for people living with a disability.
98 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
989898
THE ECONOMIC CONTRIBUTION AND COST OF PEOPLE WITH A DISABILITY
THE ECONOMIC CONTRIBUTION AND COST OF PEOPLE WITH A
DISABILITY
In recent years the public dialogue living with a disability when they are given concerning the lives and wellbeing of people a chance and, along with employers and living with a disability has been dominated workplaces, given the support they need to by a focus on costs rather than benefits. succeed, it is important to consider what is The NDIS cost $35 billion last financial the most effective pathway to success. In year to support around 610,000 people doing so it is important that we thoughtfully living with profound or severe limitations, balance both economic and social outcomes. is expected to exceed $50 billion in the A narrow focus on economic outcomes next federal budget and grow to $90 billion alone would prioritise investment in those per annum within a decade.7 In December experiencing few workplace limitations
National Cabinet announced a new national as a means of delivering the quickest and Our analysis suggests
partnership agreement with the states simplest return on investment. However, that an increase of
and territories to commit an additional doing so risks overlooking the positive 10 per cent in the
approximately $3.5 billion per year to impacts and long-term benefits on the number of people
disability services outside of the NDIS, health, wellbeing and life satisfaction with disability who
representing its 50 per cent share of these of meaningful employment and greater are employed would
“foundational supports” delivered by the social inclusion on those facing greater life increase national
states, with their growth rate capped at challenges. economic output by
8 per cent per annum. $16 billion per year. Conversely, an approach that leverages A strength-based approach to workplace the current structures and eligibility inclusion that focuses on the wellbeing of requirements of the NDIS to build greater people with a disability and of the broader workplace support into existing personal community would foreground the benefits plans, would see more resources dedicated of strengthening participation and put a to that cohort facing the greatest barriers value on the additional contribution people and work limitations, who might also expect with a disability can and will make when we to only be able to work limited hours, and truly Employ their Ability. It is telling that may experience some deterioration in in reviewing all of these policies, strategies, their health and work capacity over time inquiries and reviews from the past two or if over-stretched. What the data has decades, we could not find anywhere shown us about workplace outcomes for that such a value had been estimated or NDIS participants to date suggests that measured. this has not been happening for a number of reasons, including existing workplace Our analysis suggests that an increase of barriers such as employer bias and risk 10 per cent in the number of people with aversion, but also risk aversion on the disability who are employed would increase part of people with a disability who may national economic output by $16 billion erroneously fear losing their entitlement to per year. This is a conservative measure lifelong support. Addressing these barriers based on additional wages but does not take (as discussed earlier) requires more account of cost savings in welfare payments specialised employer and workplace and the mitigation of other supports. recruitment and transition packages that provide individualised support. In considering the future economic contribution that can be made by people
7 Statement from National Cabinet, Prime Minister Hon. Anthony Albanese, 6 December 2023.
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES 99
999999
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
The significant underemployment of people Furthermore, this is occurring at a point with a disability (particularly those with in time where skills shortages are holding comparatively little limitation or restriction back our economic potential, while changes to their ability to participate in work, where in community attitudes, technological these challenges are easily overcome or enablers and the ‘working from home circumvented) found in this report over the revolution’ are all opening up opportunities last decades is both a disappointment and for greater workforce participation. a major opportunity. It is a disappointment because it exposes the manner in which We suggest there are four different domains successive government policies and within which to consider successful policies initiatives have, despite the best of and initiatives: intentions, failed to shift the dial. It is also a major opportunity because it highlights 1. National policies, targets and that with better coordination and support, regulations we should be able to significantly transform
-
Employer initiatives, supports anddisability employment outcomes over the resourcesnext decade.
-
Public-sector employment strategies While it is early days yet in the rollout of and targets the 2021-2031 ADS and the development of foundational supports, this shift in focus 4. Community sector programs and and promise of increased investment has initiatives significant potential to improve broader outcomes and boost workforce participation These are discussed further on the following if implemented thoughtfully and effectively. pages. Our analysis within this report clearly shows that there is significant unrealised potential among people with a disability to contribute to the Australian workforce.
100 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
10010000
A WORK FIRST APPROACH
A WORK FIRST APPROACH
In light of the extent of policy reforms, Enterprises and the NDIS. Critically, it would growth in government funding, the have extensive representation of people with conducive labour market conditions, and disabilities in its management and policy the evident dedication and good will of formulation. Analysis of NDIS-reported the many disability organisations across performance data for the September quarter the sector, the lack of evidence of an 2023 show that only 35.1 per cent of improvement in labour market inclusion for the support plans for working age clients Australians with disability over two decades included employment goals, with little seems almost irreconcilable. Somehow, variation across types of disability. for some reason, the current system is not working. We can and, by now, should have The agency would coordinate assistance created a more inclusive labour market for provided to people with disability (the Australians with a disability. supply-side) and work to improve employer practices and incentives to hire, train and A critical step is to harness the good will retain people with disability in customised and potential of Australian businesses, in employment places (the demand side). much the same way that many workplaces The agency would also have a key role in are proactively addressing gender inequality curating access to resources to assist and and promoting Indigenous employment. support inclusive recruitment, transitions, Numerous other issues have been raised in workplace adjustment and support, and the various consultation reports supporting hence in linking employers and prospective the strategies, in the reviews of the NDIS, employees to specialist support services of the Disability Employment Strategy and that reflect the needs and requirements of in the Royal Commission, and these have their industry, circumstances and enterprise been echoed in consultations undertaken type. for this report with key stakeholders and researchers. Some workplaces are more amenable to employing people with a disability including To begin to address these issues, we through the potential for job redesign recommend a wholesale restructuring and this will apply to different forms of and reorientation of the existing supports disability. Economies of scale are likely for people with disability to a proactive to be very significant because of fixed ‘work first’ model. Income support and costs of physical adjustments, training of other assistance provided to people with other staff and their accumulated skills disability, their families, and carers needs by experience, potential reorganisation of to be integrated into a simplified and workflow, appropriate technologies and so streamlined program with an expectation on. This means that once one person with of appropriate and meaningful work, a disability is employed in an organisation, and with pay at or above applicable the cost of employing additional people minimum or award wages. This could be with disability will be lower, and particularly achieved through an overarching policy one with similar requirements for inclusion. and administrative body focusing on It is logical that some organisations, as employment for people with disabilities, well as occupations and industries, will similar to the Office of Disability employ more people with disability and Employment Policy in the US, that would with different types of disability and indeed coordinate existing elements of the system we have seen there is significant variation relating to employment inclusion, including across industry sectors. This also means Disability Support Pension, Disability that the learnings for organisational policy Employment Services, Australian Disability and practice, workplace adjustments and
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES 101
101101101
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
cultural change are also transferable – we While workplaces with higher numbers of can document and evaluate what works, workers with disability and with particular compile resources and case studies by types of disability are likely to emerge, this industry and build a model for best practice. specialisation would be very different to segregated employment. In an outcomes We recommend a system in which driven model, all Australian enterprises are employers receive a negotiated subsidy potentially Australian Disability Enterprises, and support package for customised without need to differentiate between open employment placements, with the level of and segregated employment other than in financial subsidy to the employer based on respect to the enterprises’ performance. the number of people with disability they Emerging research indicates that creating employ, the extent of their limitations, customised and integrated employment can and key personal wellbeing indicators with have high initial or up-front costs, but those incentives structured to reward longer term costs diminish over time to be lower than employment outcomes. The customised the costs of positions provided in segregated support packages would be negotiated employment (Taylor et al. 2021). Hence, between disability employment specialists over time we would expect the traditional and employers, or groups of employers, forms of ADE to disappear simply because with support available to cover workplace they would not be competitive with other adjustments and other required on-the-job businesses in providing better outcomes for support and regular follow-up visits by an people with disability. The role of Australian employment specialist depending upon the Disability Enterprises has been controversial employee’s needs. and the Royal Commission and others have called for the end of segregated The workers should be paid at least award employment. If the incentives are well wages, with any shortfall between the designed, ADEs would only survive in the worker’s productivity and their wages longer term if they are providing superior being paid to the employer as part of the outcomes than could be achieved elsewhere negotiated subsidy package. It is worth for a substantial number of people with noting this potential subsidy is more to disability. address employer misperceptions of the productivity and capability of people with Evidence suggests that key barriers to a disability, and care should be taken to employers hiring people with disability monitor output against industry standards include uncertainty about how to go about to avoid misuse. The support package would it, complexity of needing to deal with be monitored and adjusted over time in multiple agencies, concerns about costs line with employment outcomes, workers’ and a tendency to over-estimate them, changing needs and productivity levels. and limited awareness of the wide range of Importantly, this would include monitoring supports available. Proactive and strategic of other personal outcome measures targeting of customised employment for the people with disability and, where packages to employers would address relevant, their families and carers, such as these concerns, with larger organisations feelings of social inclusion, security and targeted first. It makes sense for support self-determination as proposed by Smith providers to specialise by industry so they and Parmenter (2023), to align incentives can tailor advice, policies and packages to with the provision of meaningful work meet industry needs. While packages may and appropriate jobs rather than simply be relatively generous initially to encourage compliance. leading employers to participate, research
102 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
1021020
A WORK FIRST APPROACH
suggests support needs will decline as We believe such a work first scheme should inclusive practices become embedded initially be promoted through positive and accepted. If the subsidies offered incentives offered to employers, including systematically exceed the actual costs to the financial value of the subsidy and expert the employer, such that they make excess support for implementation and assistance profits or returns from participating then, with accommodations. However, there in theory, competition between employers are a number of potential ‘sticks’ as well should drive the offered subsidies down as ‘carrots’ that can be used to increase towards the true marginal costs to employment outcomes, at least for large employers – which for many employees with organisations, such as increased monitoring disability would be zero! and reporting against targets in line with
the Women’s Gender Equity Agency model,
The fact that support packages would and potentially the adoption over time of potentially draw on other supports available quotas, procurement restrictions, or other to the employee, such as through the NDIS penalties for failure to commit to developing or DES, and the earnings would impact on an inclusive disability employment plan. income support, highlights the need for such a work first approach to be delivered through It is important to note that the rights and a coordinated disability employment needs of people living with a disability are structure that integrates existing programs currently elevated in the public discourse into individualised, customised employment about inclusion. For leading employers, packages. It is important however, that embracing strong and innovative policies workers must be full and equal employees and targets for employing people living with of the business, not of the placement a disability can become emblematic. It can agency. The wages paid to the employee be a way of expressing their heart, boosting may result in an appropriate withdrawal the value of their brand, reinforcing their of income support over time, but never in social licence to operate. With the National a way that leaves them financially worse Disability Strategy committing to raise off during their transition into employment the profile and change public attitudes and or should they need to leave that job. This understanding towards inclusion of people includes ensuring that if or when their with a disability over the coming decade, health or capacity to work deteriorates industry leaders can expect that the issue over time there is no barrier to accessing will be on the agenda for some time and that support and no loss of DSP entitlement. change is inevitable – hence it pays to get Ideally, this should be guaranteed by a ahead of the curve. legislated minimum living wage. From a government budget perspective, withdrawal One of the best examples of a linked policy, of income support would substantially practice and outcomes measurement offset the component of the subsidy framework for delivering improved package associated with any difference workplace outcomes is the learnings between worker productivity and wages. from gender pay equity practice over However, we believe participation in any the last decade undertaken by WGEA, such scheme by people with disability and BCEC and industry leaders. While the their family should be seen in the spirit of a focus of those efforts has been around right to meaningful work and full women’s employment, gender pay equity, participation in society, and not as a mutual leadership pathways and policies supporting obligation or work test for receipt of other representation in management and at board benefits.
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES 103
103103103
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
level, the underlying framework remains equally relevant. The approach is to begin working with progressive businesses and agencies, put in place a framework that allows you to compare different policy and practice initiatives against meaningful and measurable outcomes, then bring key stakeholders together to discuss what makes a difference, compare notes and share learnings. Then progressively refining and extending voluntary reporting frameworks, linking them to recognition and rewards, with a view to build in mandatory reporting and targets over time. Such a model also builds independent knowledge and expertise as you go, putting in place initiatives that offer advice and support to smaller or newer players who are keen to come onboard but lack the capacity. This is supported by the National Disability Employment Agency or supporting services providing template policies and insightful case studies matched to industry and enterprise need that make implementation easier.
104 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
1041040
PUBLIC SECTOR EMPLOYERS AS LEADERS
PUBLIC SECTOR EMPLOYERS AS LEADERS
Successive public sector employment Victoria has the clearest, most detailed policies and commitments over the last two and advanced public sector framework decades have emphasised the potential for within the Employment TAP, which is government agencies to provide leadership arguably the best practice model for others in disability employment. This makes to adapt and adopt. In contrast, Western sense as agencies delivering public services Australia has a much lower public sector and implementing government policies disability employment rate and the WA and priorities should also be well placed Public Sector Commission (2020) People to deliver disability employment services, with Disability: Action Plan to Improve WA policies and outcomes. In practice however Public Sector Outcomes 2020-2025 is very progress has been surprisingly slow, high level, lacking detail for implementation outcomes have been patchy and there are and accountability. The plan reported an many examples where high level policies employment rate of only 1.5 per cent in and aspirations have failed to translate 2020, down from 2.4 per cent in 2014. This into practical actions and outcomes. The has risen marginally to 1.6 per cent in June national APSDS target of 7 per cent of 2023.9 It is clear that, without a concerted employees with a disability in the Australian effort including introduction of a targeted Public Sector by 2024 does not look likely to and resourced policy to which agencies be achieved under current policy settings, and Director-Generals are held directly as APS employment had risen marginally accountable, WA has no credible path to from 4.9 per cent at baseline in December reach a 5 per cent target by 2025. 2021 to 5.1 per cent in June 2023.8 State and territory outcomes and commitments Governments need to set agency-level are even more patchy, with the Employment targets for disability employment rates and Targeted Action Plan only listing targets put in place measures that require public for Victoria (6 per cent), NSW (6.5 per cent) reporting on policy implementation and and WA (an ’aspirational’ 5 per cent). There workforce outcomes. Better outcomes will is not yet any consistent planning, policy, be achieved if knowledge and expertise is targets or reporting across jurisdictions, more effectively sourced and shared across and it is not easy to find current or recent agencies and portfolios, with centralised figures at a state or territory level. It is oversight and shared initiatives to assist, not immediately apparent what level of advise, and to support recruitment and commitment or obligation there is for employment transitions. Public sector states and territories to comply with and commissions should work closely with the implement the data improvement plan and National Disability Employment Agency, to what extent inter-jurisdictional data will and learnings and case studies from public be consistent and commensurable in the sector employment initiatives can be future. shared and adapted across the private and community sectors.
8 AIHW 2023 https://www.aihw.gov.au/australias-disability-strategy/outcomes/employment-and-financial-security/ public-sector-employment.
9 WA Public Sector Commission (2023) State of the WA Government Sector Workforce 2022-23 https://www.wa.gov.au/ government/document-collections/state-of-the-wa-government-sector-workforce.
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES 105
105105105
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
COMMUNITY SECTOR PROVIDERS AS EMPLOYERS OF CHOICE
One place where much higher rates of over-committed and lack the time and disability employment could be achieved resources needed to develop new policies quickly and effectively is in not-for-profit and practices, undertake the recruitment, community service providers delivering provide transition-support, or invest in public service contracts. Here the challenges improving workplace accessibility or and support needs are different, and policies assistive technologies. Currently many are and initiatives need to reflect this difference also facing workforce and financial viability to be effective. On the one hand, non- problems, as public sector funding contracts government social service organisations have not kept pace with award wage rises are well aligned in their mission, values and and inflation. The best way to overcome workplace culture to accept and embrace these challenges is to provide resources people living with a disability within their and targeted support upfront, outsource workforce. Give them the opportunity the recruitment and transition support to a and resources and many will jump at the specialist not-for-profit service, and make chance. There is also likely to be relevant additional funding available within existing knowledge and practical experience across service contracts or via a grants program to their workforce that makes collegial achieve additional employment outcomes. support easier, more sincere and effective. Over time inclusion policies can be However, on the other hand, not-for-profit introduced into procurement arrangements organisations reliant on government and targets set for organisations securing funding are often starved of resources, contracts over a certain size.
106 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
1061060
EDUCATION TO WORK TRANSITIONS THAT SUPPORT LIFELONG OUTCOMES
EDUCATION TO WORK TRANSITIONS THAT SUPPORT LIFELONG
OUTCOMES
The transition from education to work is them into practice, more clearly needs to one of the most profound and influential be done to actively support all students life changes for all young adults. How with a disability to ensure a successful well or poorly we move from school, TAFE work transition. DSS can do more to curate or University into a real, meaningful and and provide guidance to their resources, ongoing job can set our path through life, providing direct support and system impacting on our confidence, career options , navigation services through their funded future earnings and our sense of purpose, agencies to assist young people and parents belonging and social value. The evidence to find the right resources for their interests from a range of studies and inquiries and hook into the right agencies and job over the last decade, and our analysis of opportunities in their local area, industry of pathways and transitions across successive specialisation, and addressing their specific waves of the HILDA survey shows clearly disability support needs. that young people with a disability face a tougher transition. They are more likely to There is a need for educational institutions spend longer seeking work, be insecurely and state and territory education employed, under-employed, or in work that departments to play a much greater role in feels less meaningful in a workplace where transition support. We still need to change they do not feel truly included. While 90 per attitudes and address misconceptions; to cent of young people with a disability show create opportunities and access; recognise positive attitudes to future employment the the importance of planning and ongoing reality is that 18 per cent of school leavers resources; and streamline coordination, have not entered the workforce and are still partnerships and accountability.11 Effective seeking work 7 years later.10 Conversely, outcomes are unlikely to be achieved by personal stories of great placement simply loading more responsibility onto programs and well-supported transitions teachers and lecturers, who are unlikely to show how a little bit of the right help at have the experience and industry linkages the right time can be transformational. – or the time – to provide effective support. When our young people shine, irrespective We clearly need specialised roles and of whether they do or do not face activity additional resources to make this work. This limitations, the contribution they make needs to be backed by targets and reporting to those around them and ultimately the requirements, with a degree of analysis economy and broader community is greatly and oversight to allow us to build on what magnified. A little bit can make such a huge works and intervene where the outcomes difference – and we need to do more. are insufficient. Incorporating changes into a national partnership agreement may be Employ My Ability, the national disability the best way to drive a coordinated national employment strategy for 2021-2031, response, backed by a national clearing provides links to a range of resources and house curating information and resources, advice for students, parents, teachers as well as a system for reporting breaches and career advisors. While some of these of disability education standards and an resources can be helpful to those who independent complaints mechanism. have the capacity to engage with them and the connections and resources to put
10 Year 13 (2021) Disability and Career Advice Survey. The South Australian Centre for Economic Studies (2021) Disability Employment Landscape Research Report.
11 CYDA (2015) Post School Transition: The experiences of students with disability.
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES 107
107107107
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
“IN THIS REPORT WE
HAVE SCRUTINISED
POPULATION
Quote REPRESENTATIVE
DATASETS COVERING
25 YEARS TO
ASSESS PROGRESS
TOWARDS LABOUR
MARKET INCLUSION
FOR PEOPLE
WITH DISABILITY,
COMMENCING
FROM 1998.“
108 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
10810808
SUMMARY AND POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
SUMMARY AND POLICY
RECOMMENDATIONS
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES 109
109109109
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
SUMMARY AND POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
In this report we have scrutinised population In 2022 Australia’s unemployment rate representative datasets covering 25 averaged 3.7 per cent, the lowest in the years to assess progress towards labour almost 50 years since the current labour market inclusion for people with disability, force series began in 1978. Throughout the commencing from 1998. At the start of year, there were typically around 450,000 this period, one could reasonably expect vacancies available to be filled in Australian momentum to have already been building businesses, with many employers facing in terms of the impact of reforms and acute skills shortages and calls for increased innovations on the employment prospects, migration and streamlined visa processing working lives and broader social inclusion of to meet the need for workers and skills. Australians with disability. Our detailed modelling of participation The sobering finding is that there is no and employment outcomes for people with real evidence of any overall improvement disability takes account of the severity in labour market inclusion for people with of limitations. We find no evidence of an disability over the one-quarter of a century improvement in labour market participation since 1998. or relative employment opportunity for people with disabilities, irrespective of their Based on the most recent wave of HILDA level of disability. This is true for the years data, the labour force participation rate between 1998 to 2018 covered by the SDAC, for people aged 15-69 with a disability or and for the 22 annual waves of HILDA data long-term health condition in 2022 was from 2001 to 2022. only 57 per cent compared to 84 per cent for people without a disability, a gap of Not only have the decades of reform failed 27.0 percentage points. The corresponding to enhance labour market inclusion for figures for the percentage in employment people with disabilities, they are failing are 53.2 per cent and 81.8 per cent, a gap at a time of severe skills shortages when of 28.6 percentage points. The latter is the labour market conditions could hardly bemore important indicator of labour market more conducive to measures to increaseinclusion, as our results have indicated that workforce participation.it is employment opportunity that drives participation for people with disability. We appreciate that many of the reforms under the social model of disability overEstimates from HILDA also show there the last two decades have broader socialwere 184,000 people with disability who and community objectives for people withwere unemployed in 2022. This grossly disability that extend beyond the labourunderstates the level of underutilisation market. Is it the case that progress towardsince, as noted, a lack of employment labour market inclusion has stagnatedopportunity keeps many people with because the focus has been on makingdisabilities out of the labour force figures altogether. There were a further 483,000 ground in other domains? Unfortunately, people with disability who would definitely for a number of reasons, we do not like to be working, and 137,000 who would believe so. potentially like to work if a suitable job was available to them. In all, this represents over First, drawing on the existing literature and 800,000 potential workers without a job, extensive discussions with stakeholders, and we can confidently say that there are we concur that there is strong merit in a many more people with disability for whom ‘work first’ approach, one that assumes meaningful work should be an option, but meaningful work should be the default who do not see it as such. expectation for all, with exceptions made
110 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
110110
SUMMARY AND POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
only where there are clear grounds to out of work more frequently, to be under think otherwise. The UN CRPD emphasises employed, and to spend periods out of the the importance of a right to work and of labour force due to discouragement. access to an open, inclusive and accessible work environment, and this sentiment is Labour market transitional analysis of reiterated throughout recent Australian HILDA data shows approximately two out of policy documents. three people with a disability will transition between labour market categories in any Second, we have also modelled changes given year, compared to less than one in the subjective wellbeing for people with in three for people without a disability. disability from 2001 to 2022. As with People living with a disability who are not indicators of labour market outcomes, in the labour force in a given year are more we find no evidence that their subject likely to stay out the following year (86 assessments of the quality of their lives, per cent), while those with a disability who relative to Australians without a disability, are unemployed are most likely to become have improved at all over this period. And, discouraged (42 per cent) and exit the finally, the modelling of subjective wellbeing labour force. demonstrates that gaining employment, when it occurs, does have a substantial and Worryingly, we also find evidence that positive effect on subjective wellbeing for people with disability are less likely to people with disability. transition into employment when they are a NDIS client, other things being equal. This Hence, we believe the lack of improvement result controls for the person’s self-assessed in labour market inclusion for people with level of work limitation and holds true even disability is symptomatic of a wider failure when we focus on the sample of jobseekers to improve social inclusion and the quality with a disability who indicate that wanted to of life for people with disability generally, work. The findings relating to the NDIS are and not simply a lack of progress limited based on data collected in the HILDA survey to the one domain. Progress in achieving over a relatively short timeframe (2017 to greater labour market inclusion would 2022) with a limited sample. For this and enhance the lives of Australians with other technical reasons, we cannot claim disability. with confidence that the results imply that being a NDIS client has a detrimental effect For people with disability who are in on employment, but it does provide strong employment, levels of job satisfaction evidence that the NDIS is not contributing have remained quite stable over the past positively to improved employment two decades, as have the small gaps in outcomes for its clients. satisfaction between workers with and without disability. Job quality and relative Considering the personal importance job quality for people with disability people with a disability put on achieving appears to have remained quite stable. a meaningful and secure work placement However, a critical difference in labour as a means to life satisfaction, and the market experience of workers with disability manner in which NDIS planning is intended is the rate at which people with disability to be person-centred and aspirational, transition between labour force states. Our this suggests that other factors are at analysis of the labour market journeys play. While one clear factor is employer of people with a disability clearly show a bias and misunderstanding of the risks much higher level of precarity and churn. and support needs of employing a person They are much more likely to bounce in and living with a disability, another critical
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES 111
111111111
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
barrier could be the risk to maintaining DSP are 34 per cent more likely to secure work entitlement. While in theory a person with a after completing a degree). This premium disability can work for two years without associated with additional education losing their DSP entitlement, in practice the is observed for people with all levels of combination of the challenging and limitation, with the exception of those with bureaucratic process of securing an profound core limitations. entitlement plus the adversarial recent history of social security policy within The persistence of the barriers to labour Australia may well make them risk adverse. market inclusion for people with disability Anyone with a level of limitation severe also has flow on effects to their carers. enough to qualify for NDIS is also likely Around 10 per cent or working age to face some challenges or concerns in Australians have unpaid caring roles, and maintaining their level of health and activity the number has increased modestly over the over time. Hence, if there is a real prospect past 20 years. There has been a significant of their work capacity deteriorating in the ageing of the carer population over this medium to long term with increasing pain time, with the proportion of carers who are or exhaustion, then the risk of losing DSP aged 55-69 years increasing by around could seem an existential threat. 10 percentage points so they now account for over one-third of working-age carers. This report has concentrated on labour We also find that there is a substantial market status for people of working age. An intersection between the population of important contributor to those outcomes is people with disability and the population of educational attainment and training, and carers. Around one-third of carers of working there is an equally wide range of issues age are themselves people with disability, relating to inclusion of people with disability twice the prevalence for the remaining (non in education and how that relates to the carer) population. transition from education to work. As is well known, employment outcomes improve with Many people undertaking these unpaid individuals’ level of educational attainment, caring roles do so at the expense of their and that holds true for people with and own careers. People who are the main or without disability. However, our analyses of primary carer of people with disability are the SDAC data shows the boost to the typically around 10 per cent less likely to be probability of being in employment from in employment, other things being equal. higher levels of education is substantially This effect has been quite consistent over greater for people with disability. On time, and a much smaller penalty of around average, for example, people of working age 1 or 2 per cent is experienced by carers with a university degree are around who are not a primary carer. Challenges 18 per cent more likely to be employed than associated with caring do have a negative someone who did not complete Year 12 of effect on subjective wellbeing of primary high school. Among people with a disability, carers and this does not appear to have having a degree is associated with an been alleviated to any significant degree by additional 16 per cent increase the disability policy reforms or increased in employment propensity (that is, they funding over the past two decades.
112 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
112112
RECOMMENDATIONS
RECOMMENDATIONS
A work first approach • Trial and evaluate disability employment
-
Implement a work first model based on a subsidy programs and specialist universal entitlement to meaningful work support for people with higher work for all who seek it, with pay at or above limitations and support needs, as well award wages. as one-off disability placement and workplace adaptation schemes to support
• Create a National Disability Employment recruitment and transition.
Agency (NDEA) that coordinates and aligns activities across existing welfare Public Sector employment
and disability support agencies (including • Federal, state and territory governments
Disability Employment Services as well as commit to provide leadership in disability access to the disability support pension employment processes and outcomes. and NDIS).
- Include clear and consistent public sector • Ensure active representation of people employment targets and reporting
with disabilities and carers in policy requirements in the national partnership formulation and evaluation as well as the agreement and the Australian Disability governance and oversight of the NDEA. Strategy.
• Ensure regular and consistent reporting • State and territory public sector
and analysis of disability employment commissions should regularly share best and wellbeing outcomes, including practice models and case studies. social inclusion, self-determination and Community Sector employment meaningful work.
- Federal, state and territory governments • Set and report against clear targets provide additional funding into existing
for disability employment outcomes, and new public service contracts to including public sector employment, support and deliver disability employment industry and enterprise level reporting, outcomes. procurement targets and resources in
• Develop and resource specialist disability public service contracts, and inclusion in
recruitment and transition support NDIS support plans. services to assist and advise community
-
The NDEA develop and implement a service providers and to provide ongoing progressive policy framework to share support to people with a disability and best practice in promoting greater employers. workplace inclusion for people with Employer leadership disability.
-
Leading employers should embrace • Establish a national program to fund disability employment outcomes as a
specialist disability recruitment and means of advancing and promoting the support services to provide targeted culture and values of their businesses. support, and disseminate best practice at
• Employers who have actively engaged an industry and enterprise level.
with and promoted the WGEA model are
-
A broadscale national awareness well-placed to transfer their learnings campaign to change community, from gender equity to disability inclusion employer and workplace attitudes to the outcomes. participation and inclusion of people living with a disability.
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES 113
113113113
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
-
Boards of Management should oversee disability recruitment and employment outcomes and look to include representation of lived experience at Board level.
-
Industry bodies should actively engage with disability inclusion initiatives, developing, supporting and promoting industry-level initiatives, share and award stories of success.
Education to work transitions
-
A national partnership agreement committing state and territory education systems to develop, deliver and report a coordinated national response.
-
A quality post-school transition process that includes: person-centred transition planning, beginning early (by year 9); work experience opportunities and the facilitation of part-time work; a focus on foundational skills; and career development planning.
-
A national clearing house to curate and coordinate information and resources, overseen by the National Disability Employment Agency.
-
National data collection on post-school outcomes.
-
A system for reporting breaches of the disability standards for education with an independent complaints mechanism.
-
Specialised career advisory and transitional support roles within schools and educational institutions.
114 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
114114
ABBREVIATIONS
ABBREVIATIONS
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES 115
115115115
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
ABS Australian Bureau of Statistics
ADE Australian Disability Enterprises
ADS Australia’s Disability Strategy
AIHW Australian Institute of Health and Welfare
BCEC Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre
COAG Council of Australian Governments
CYDA Children and Young People with Disability Australia
DDA Disability Discrimination Act
DES Disability Employment Services
DSS Department of Social Services (Commonwealth)
GST Goods and services tax
HILDA Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia (survey)
ILO International Labour Organisation
NDA National Disability Agreement
NDCA National Disability and Care Alliance
NDEA National Disability Employment Agency (proposed)
NDIS National Disability Insurance Scheme
OECD Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development
PC Productivity Commission
SDAC Survey of Disability, Ageing and Carers (Australian Bureau of Statistics)
UN CRPD United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities
UNDESA United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs
UNESCAP United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific
WGEA Workplace Gender Equality Agency
116 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
116116
REFERENCES
REFERENCES
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES 117
117117117
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
REFERENCES
Australian Institute of Health and Welfare 1978, Syndey University Press: Sydney. (2022), People with disability in Australia 2022, Lecerf, M. (2022). Understanding EU policiesCatalogue number DIS 72, AIHW, Australian for people with disabilities. In EuropeanGovernment.
Parliament. European Parliament. https://
Australian Institute of Health and Welfare www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/ (2023) Australia’s Disability Strategy 2021– etudes/BRIE/2021/698811/EPRS_ 2031 Outcomes Framework: First annual BRI(2021)698811_EN.pdf. report, Catalogue number ADS 1, AIHW, Mays, J. (2015), ‘Australia’s disabling incomeAustralian Government. support system: tracing the history of the Australian Law Reform Commission, Making disability pension from 1908 to today’, Rights Count: Services for people with a Australian Journal of Social Issues, 50(3), disability (Report No 79, 1996) 253-276. Cain, P. (2014), All the way to the moon Smith, P. (2023), ‘The influence of the and back. Ending discrimination for people National Disability Insurance Scheme on with intellectual disability in employment. customised employment practice in Australia’, Precedent, 125, 46-51. Journal of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, 2(2). DOI: https://doi.org/10.33700/ Cassells, R., Dockery, M., and Duncan, A jhrs.2.2.81. (2014), ‘Falling through the cracks: Poverty and Disadvantage in Australia’, Bankwest Curtin Stubbs, M., Webster, A. and Williams, J. Economics Centre, Focus on the States, Issue (2020), People with disability and the
No.1, October 2014. Australian Constitution, Research Report,
Royal Commission into Violence, Abuse,
Cassells R, Duncan A, Mavisakalyan A, Neglect and Exploitation of People with Phillimore J, Seymour R and Tarverdi Y (2018), disability, October. ‘Future of Work in Australia: Preparing for tomorrow’s world’, Bankwest Curtin Economics Taylor, T., Avellone, L., Cimera, R., Brooke, Centre, Focus on the States Series, Issue 6, April V., Lambert, A., & Iwanaga, K. (2021).
-
Cost-benefit analyses of employment
services for individuals with intellectual and Deci, E. and Ryan, R. (2000)., Self- developmental disabilities: A scoping review. determination theory and the facilitation of Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 54(2), intrinsic motivation, social development, and 193-206. wellbeing. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68-78.
United Nations Department of Economic
Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet and Social Affairs (UNDESA) (2019). (2023), Working together to deliver the Sustainable Development Goal 10 Reduced NDIS - Independent Review into the National Inequalities: Progress and Prospects. https://
Disability Insurance Scheme: Final Report. sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/
Commonwealth of Australia. documents/21453SDG_10_EGM_2019_ Hallahan, L. 2016, Disability policy in Australia: concept_note_30Jan_consolidated.pdf. a triumph of the scriptio inferior on impotence United Nations Economic and Social and neediness?, Australian Journal of Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific Issues, 50(2): 191-208. (UNESCAP) (2021). Disability at a glance
International Labour Organisation (ILO) 2021: The Shaping of Disability-Inclusive
(2016). Disability and work. ILO. https://www. Employment in Asia and the Pacific. In United
ilo.org/global/topics/disability-and-work/ Nations. United Nations Economic and Social
WCMS_475650/lang–en/index.htm. Commission for Asia and the Pacific. https:// www.unescap.org/sites/default/d8files/ International Labour Organisation (ILO) (2019). knowledge-products/DAG2021-Final.pdf.
Promoting Employment Opportunities for
People with Disabilities. In International Labour World Bank. (2022, April 14). Disability
Organisation. ILO. Inclusion Overview. World Bank. https://www. worldbank.org/en/topic/disability.
Kewley, T. (1980), Australian Social Security
Today: Major developments from 1900 to
118 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
118118
APPENDIX
APPENDIX
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES 119
119119119
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
TABLE 4
Probability of employment: multivariate regression models, HILDA and SDAC data
HILDA SDAC
2005 to 2022 2003 to 2018
Year x disability
2003 x (disability) - -0.2594 ***
2005 x (disability) -0.3073 *** -
2006 x (disability) -0.3065 *** -
2007 x (disability) -0.2965 *** -
2008 x (disability) -0.3136 *** -
2009 x (disability) -0.2759 *** -0.2500 ***
2010 x (disability) -0.2776 *** -
2011 x (disability) -0.2905 *** -
2012 x (disability) -0.2939 *** -0.2668 ***
2013 x (disability) -0.2844 *** -
2014 x (disability) -0.3018 *** -
2015 x (disability) -0.3138 *** -0.2797 ***
2016 x (disability) -0.3018 *** -
2017 x (disability) -0.2889 *** -
2018 x (disability) -0.3186 *** -0.2805 ***
2019 x (disability) -0.2971 *** -
2020 x (disability) -0.2951 *** -
2021 x (disability) -0.2772 *** -
2022 x (disability) -0.2725 *** -
long-term health condition -0.1307 *** -0.0242 ***
Education
year12 0.1352 *** -
certificate 0.1530 *** 0.1181 ***
diploma 0.1691 *** 0.1748 ***
university 0.2107 *** 0.2074 ***
Age band
20-29 0.1449 *** 0.2183 ***
30-44 0.1948 *** 0.2795 ***
45-54 0.2107 *** 0.2860 ***
55-69 -0.0475 *** 0.0372 ***
Australian born 0.0541 *** 0.0836 ***
married 0.0579 *** 0.0470 ***
main carer -0.1714 *** -0.0554 ***
Remoteness
inner regional -0.0091 *** 0.0053 **
outer regional -0.0095 *** 0.0218 ***
remote or very remote 0.0008 0.0000 ***
female-identifying -0.0456 *** -0.0507 ***
Age of youngest child
youngest child 14 and under -0.0033 0.0411 ***
youngest child over 14 -0.0104 *** 0.0231 ***
female x youngest child 14 and under -0.1351 *** -0.1202 ***
female x youngest child over 14 0.0518 *** -0.1935 ***
Constant 0.5191 0.3918
State fixed effects Yes Yes
Survey year fixed effects Yes Yes
Observations 250,480 195,653
R-squared 0.222 0.215
Notes: All models are estimated using a linear probability models approach using pooled regressions for both HILDA and SDAC datasets. Starred coefficients are statistically significant at either the 1 per cent (), 5 per cent () or 10 per cent () level.
Source: Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre | Authors’ estimates using HILDA survey, 2005 to 2022 and ABS Survey of Disability
Ageing and Carers, 2003 to 2018.
120 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
120120
APPENDIX
TABLE 5
Employment probability by level of limitation: pooled SDAC data 1998-2018
SDAC SDAC
no controls with controls
Year x disability Baseline (no disability) 77.9 ***
Disability level
Profound core limitation -65.8 *** -54.7 ***
Severe core limitation -49.0 *** -40.7 ***
Moderate core limitation -39.3 *** -30.6 ***
Mild core limitation -33.1 *** -25.5 ***
Restriction but no core limitation -19.5 *** -17.0 ***
No restriction or core limitation -9.6 *** -6.7 ***
LT health condition -4.4 *** -2.6 ***
Other controls Yes Yes
State fixed effects Yes Yes
Survey year fixed effects Yes Yes
Observations 195,653 195,653
R-squared 0.090 0.229
Notes: All models are estimated using a linear probability models approach using pooled regressions for SDAC datasets. Starred coefficients are statistically significant at either the 1 per cent (), 5 per cent () or 10 per cent () level. Full regression estimates are available from the authors on request.
Source: Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre | Authors’ estimates using the ABS Survey of Disability Ageing and Carers, 1998 to 2018.
TABLE 6
Employment probability by education level and disability status
HILDA SDAC
2005 to 2022 2003 to 2018
Disability -0.3196 *** -0.3060 ***
Education level
Cert I/II to Year 12 0.1326 *** 0.1092 ***
Diploma Cert III/IV 0.1543 *** 0.1589 ***
Bachelors and above 0.1946 *** 0.1821 ***
Disability x education level
disability x Cert I/II Year 12 -0.0033 0.0189 **
disability x Diploma Cert III/IV 0.0066 0.0599 ***
disability x Bachelors and above 0.1204 *** 0.1622 ***
Other controls Yes Yes
State fixed effects Yes Yes
Survey year fixed effects Yes Yes
Observations 250,480 195,653
R-squared 0.222 0.223
Notes: All models are estimated using a linear probability models approach using pooled regressions for SDAC datasets. Starred coefficients are statistically significant at either the 1 per cent (), 5 per cent () or 10 per cent () level. Full regression estimates are available from the authors on request.
Source: Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre | Authors’ estimates using HILDA survey, 2005 to 2022 and ABS Survey of Disability
Ageing and Carers, 1998 to 2018.
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES 121
121121121
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
TABLE 7
Estimated association between NDIS support package and labour market outcomes: people with disability, 2017 to 2022
Participation Employment
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
A. Random effects Disability limits work [0,1] -0.14 *** -0.14 ***
(0.000) (0.000)
Disability limits work [0-11] -0.03 *** -0.03 ***
(0.000) (0.000)
Has NDIS support package [0,1] -0.10 *** -0.10 *** -0.08 *** -0.09 *** -0.08 *** -0.07 ***
(0.000) (0.000) (0.000) (0.000) (0.000) (0.000)
Other controls Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
R-squared 0.18 0.23 0.30 0.17 0.22 0.28
Observations 22,259 22,196 22,169 22,259 22,196 22,169
No. individuals 8,145 8,131 8,127 8,145 8,131 8,127
B. Fixed effects Disability limits work [0,1] -0.07 *** -0.07 ***
(0.000) (0.000)
Disability limits work [0-11] -0.02 *** -0.02 ***
(0.000) (0.000)
Has NDIS support package [0,1] -0.04 *** -0.04 *** -0.04 ** -0.04 ** -0.04 ** -0.04 **
(0.006) (0.007) (0.012) (0.012) (0.011) (0.015)
Other controls Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
R-squared 0.10 0.13 0.19 0.08 0.11 0.16
Observations 22,259 22,196 22,169 22,259 22,196 22,169
No. individuals 8,145 8,131 8,127 8,145 8,131 8,127
Notes: All models are estimated using a linear probability model. Starred coefficients are statistically significant at either the 1 per cent (), 5 per cent () or 10 per cent () level. Full regression estimates are available from the authors on request.
Source: Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre | Authors’ estimates using HILDA survey, 2017 to 2022.
122 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
122122
APPENDIX
TABLE 8
Transition to employment among people with disability who would like a job: 2017 to 2022
P (Transition to employemnt)
(1) (2) (3)
Disability limits work [0,1] -0.05 *** (0.009) Disability limits work [0-11] -0.01 *** (0.000)
Unemployed — — —
Not in labour force and:
Definitely want to work -0.15 *** -0.15 *** -0.14 ***
(0.000) (0.000) (0.000)
Maybe wants to work -0.21 *** -0.20 *** -0.19 ***
(0.000) (0.000) (0.000)
Has NDIS support package [0,1] -0.07 *** -0.07 *** -0.06 ***
(0.003) (0.004) (0.007)
Other controls (see Table 5) Yes Yes Yes
R-aquared 12% 13% 14%
Observations 3,224 3,210 3,203
No. individuals 1,816 1,812 1,810
Other controls Yes Yes Yes
R-squared 0.10 0.13 0.19
Observations 22,259 22,196 22,169
No. individuals 8,145 8,131 8,127
Notes: All models are estimated using a linear probability model. Starred coefficients are statistically significant at either the 1 per cent (), 5 per cent () or 10 per cent () level. Full regression estimates are available from the authors on request.
Source: Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre | Authors’ estimates using HILDA survey, 2017 to 2022.
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES 123
123123123
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
TABLE 9
Drivers of ‘happiness’ among people aged 15-69: 2001 to 2022
Dep. Variable: life satisfaction (0-10)
(1) (2) (3)
No disability — —
Has disability/LT health condition -0.317 *** (0.000) Disability, no work limitation -0.133 *** (0.000) Disability limits work or can’t work -0.478 *** (0.000) Disability limits work (0-11) -0.082 *** (0.000) Labour force status
Not in labour force — — —
Employed FT 0.06 *** 0.03 *** -0.02 *
(0.000) (0.002) (0.056)
Employed PT 0.08 *** 0.06 *** 0.02 **
(0.000) (0.000) (0.015)
Unemployed -0.23 *** -0.25 *** -0.29 ***
(0.000) (0.000) (0.000)
Student FT 0.17 *** 0.14 *** 0.11 ***
(0.000) (0.000) (0.000)
Age: 15-19 years — — —
20-29 years -0.27 *** -0.27 *** -0.26 ***
(0.000) (0.000) (0.000)
30-44 years -0.37 *** -0.36 *** -0.35 ***
(0.000) (0.000) (0.000)
45-54 years -0.32 *** -0.30 *** -0.29 ***
(0.000) (0.000) (0.000)
55-69 years -0.14 *** -0.12 *** -0.10 ***
(0.000) (0.000) (0.000)
Female 0.05 *** 0.05 *** 0.04 ***
(0.000) (0.000) (0.002)
Has dependent children aged 0-4 -0.00 -0.01 -0.02 **
(0.835) (0.297) (0.045)
Has dependent children aged 5-14 -0.08 *** -0.09 *** -0.09 ***
(0.000) (0.000) (0.000)
Has dependent children aged 15-24 -0.07 *** -0.07 *** -0.07 ***
(0.000) (0.000) (0.000)
Marital status: Married/de dacto — — —
Separated/ Divorced/ Widowed -0.51 *** -0.51 *** -0.50 ***
(0.000) (0.000) (0.000)
Never married -0.31 *** -0.31 *** -0.30 ***
(0.000) (0.000) (0.000)
Indigenous 0.13 *** 0.13 *** 0.14 ***
(0.000) (0.000) (0.000)
Born in: Australia — — —
Main English spkg country 0.02 0.02 0.02
(0.337) (0.394) (0.468)
Non-English speaking country -0.20 *** -0.20 *** -0.19 ***
(0.000) (0.000) (0.000)
Educational attainment: Did not complete Year 12 — — —
Year12 -0.09 *** -0.09 *** -0.10 ***
(0.000) (0.000) (0.000)
Certificate -0.10 *** -0.10 *** -0.10 ***
(0.000) (0.000) (0.000)
Diploma -0.06 *** -0.06 *** -0.07 ***
(0.002) (0.001) (0.000)
University degreee -0.06 *** -0.06 *** -0.07 ***
(0.000) (0.000) (0.000)
SEIFA decile - relative socio-economic advantage/disadvantage 0.01 *** 0.01 *** 0.01 ***
(0.000) (0.000) (0.000)
Lives in: Major city — — —
Inner regional Australia 0.11 *** 0.11 *** 0.11 ***
(0.000) (0.000) (0.000)
Outer regional Australia 0.15 *** 0.15 *** 0.15 ***
(0.000) (0.000) (0.000)
Remote Australia 0.15 *** 0.15 *** 0.14 ***
(0.000) (0.000) (0.000)
Very remote Australia 0.18 *** 0.18 *** 0.18 ***
(0.001) (0.001) (0.001)
Constant 8.31 *** 8.31 *** 8.30 ***
(0.000) (0.000) (0.000)
R-squared 0.081 0.090 0.097
Observations 283,074 283,074 282,876
Number of individuals 31,832 31,832 31,822
Notes: All models are estimated using linear regression. Starred coefficients are statistically significant at either the 1 per cent (), 5 per cent () or 10 per cent () level.
Source: Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre | Authors’ estimates using HILDA survey, 2001 to 2022.
124 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
124124
APPENDIX
TABLE 10
Estimated relationship between disability status and wellbeing: by degree of limitation, 2001 to 2022
Sub periods
All waves 2001 to 2009 to 2016 to
2001 to 2022 2008 2015 2022
(1) (2) (3) (3)
Panel A
No disability — — — —
Disability -0.318 *** -0.311 *** -0.324 *** -0.330 ***
(0.000) (0.000) (0.000) (0.000)
Observations 296,472 92,232 101,194 103,046
Panel B
No disability — — — —
Disability limits work or can't work -0.478 *** -0.472 *** -0.499 *** -0.483 ***
(0.000) (0.000) (0.000) (0.000)
Disability does not limit work -0.134 *** -0.126 *** -0.134 *** -0.142 ***
(0.000) (0.000) (0.000) (0.000)
Observations 296,348 80,898 97,028 118,422
Panel C
Disability limits work (0-11) -0.082 *** -0.080 *** -0.082 *** -0.082 ***
(0.000) (0.000) (0.000) (0.000)
Observations 296,260 80,890 96,985 118,385
Notes: All models are estimated using linear regression. Starred coefficients are statistically significant at either the 1 per cent (), 5 per cent () or 10 per cent () level. Full regression estimates are available from the authors on request.
Source: Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre | Authors’ estimates using HILDA survey, 2001 to 2022.
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES 125
125125125
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
TABLE 11
Labour force status and life satisfaction by degree of work limitation: 2001 to 2022
Model 1 Model 2
(1) (2)
A. Random Effects Disability limits work (2-11) -0.072 *** (0.000) Labour force status:
Not in labour force — —
Employed FT 0.368 *** 0.237 ***
(0.000) (0.000)
Employed PT 0.277 *** 0.196 ***
(0.000) (0.000)
Unemployed -0.080 * -0.161 ***
(0.080) (0.000)
Student FT 0.361 *** 0.274 ***
(0.000) (0.000)
Observations 47,251 47,163
No. Individuals 10,880 10,868
R-squared 0.06 0.08
B. Fixed Effects Disability limits work (2-11) -0.055*** (0.000) Labour force status:
Not in labour force — —
Employed FT 0.357 *** 0.272 ***
(0.000) (0.000)
Employed PT 0.248 *** 0.196 ***
(0.000) (0.000)
Unemployed 0.001 -0.058
(0.989) (0.244)
Student FT 0.294 *** 0.238 ***
(0.000) (0.000)
Observations 47,251 47,163
No. Individuals 10,880 10,868
R-squared 0.015 0.01
Notes: All models are estimated using linear regression. Starred coefficients are statistically significant at either the 1 per cent (), 5 per cent () or 10 per cent () level. Full regression estimates are available from the authors on request.
Source: Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre | Authors’ estimates using HILDA survey, 2001 to 2022.
126 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
126126
APPENDIX
TABLE 12
Employment probability for carers: panel regression models, HILDA data 2005 to 2022
All waves Nine-year sub periods
2005 to 2022 2005 to 2013 2014 to 2022
(1) (2) (3)
Not a carer — — —
Carers:
Carer, but not main carer -0.009 ** -0.011 ** -0.014 ***
(0.030) (0.044) (0.008)
Main carer -0.085 *** -0.080 *** -0.081 ***
(0.000) (0.000) (0.000)
Observations 250,152 116,012 134,140
Notes: All models are estimated using a linear probability model. Starred coefficients are statistically significant at either the 1 per cent (), 5 per cent () or 10 per cent () level. Full regression estimates are available from the authors on request.
Source: Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre | Authors’ estimates using HILDA survey, 2005 to 2022.
TABLE 13
Effect of carer status on life satisfaction: panel regression models, HILDA data 2005 to 2022
All waves Nine-year sub periods
2005 to 2022 2005 to 2013 2014 to 2022
(1) (2) (3)
Not a carer — — —
Carers:
Carer, but not main carer -0.027 * -0.026 -0.024
(0.072) (0.226) (0.241)
Main carer -0.075 *** -0.085 *** -0.081 ***
(0.000) (0.001) (0.000)
Observations 249,736 115,837 133,899
Notes: All models are estimated using linear regression. Starred coefficients are statistically significant at either the 1 per cent (), 5 per cent () or 10 per cent () level. Full regression estimates are available from the authors on request.
Source: Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre | Authors’ estimates using HILDA survey, 2005 to 2022.
BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES 127
127127127
EMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY IN AUSTRALIA:
IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY
TABLE 14
Labour force status and life satisfaction for carers: HILDA data 2005 to 2022
Main Other
carers carers
A. Random Effects Labour force status:
Not in labour force — —
Employed FT 0.162 *** 0.136
(0.004) (0.111)
Employed PT 0.182 *** 0.028
(0.000) (0.729)
Unemployed -0.169 * -0.102
(0.052) (0.512)
Student FT 0.173 0.045
(0.133) (0.756)
Observations 10,004 7,586
No. Individuals 3,324 4,025
R-squared 0.09 0.09
B. Fixed Effects Labour force status:
Not in labour force — —
Employed FT 0.151 * 0.136
(0.071) (0.111)
Employed PT 0.146 ** 0.028
(0.027) (0.729)
Unemployed -0.062 -0.102
(0.506) (0.512)
Student FT 0.227 * 0.045
(0.096) (0.756)
Observations 10,004 7,586
No. Individuals 3,324 4,025
R-squared 0.03 0.03
Notes: All models are estimated using linear regression. Starred coefficients are statistically significant at either the 1 per cent (), 5 per cent () or 10 per cent () level. Full regression estimates are available from the authors on request.
Source: Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre | Authors’ estimates using HILDA survey, 2005 to 2022.
128 BANKWEST CURTIN ECONOMIC CENTRE | FOCUS ON THE STATES SERIES
128128
Disclaimer
While every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of this document, the uncertain nature of economic data, forecasting and analysis means that the centre, Curtin University and/or Bankwest are unable to make any warranties in relation to the information contained herein. Any person who relies on the information contained in this document does so at their own risk. The centre, Curtin University, Bankwest, and/or their employees and agents disclaim liability for any loss or damage, which may arise as a consequence of any person relying on the information contained in this document. Except where liability under any statute cannot be excluded, the centre, Curtin University, Bankwest and/or their advisors, employees and officers do not accept any liability (whether under contract, tort or otherwise) for any resulting loss or damage suffered by the reader or by any other person.
The views in this publication are those of the authors and do not represent the views of Curtin University and/or Bankwest or any of their affiliates. This publication is provided as general information only and does not consider anyone’s specific objectives, situation or needs. Neither the authors nor the centre accept any duty of care or liability to anyone regarding this publication or any loss suffered in connection with the use of this publication or any of its content.
Authorised Use
© Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre, March 2024
Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre Focus on the States Series #10
ISBN: 978-1-925757-29-3
This report was written by: Alex Buckland, Mike Dockery, Alan Duncan, Valentina Sanchez
Arenas, Panagiotis Sotirakopoulos, Chris Twomey and Lili Loan Vu, all from the Bankwest
Curtin Economics Centre.
This report may be cited as: Buckland, A., Dockery, M., Duncan, A., Sanchez Arenas, V., Sotirakopoulos, P., Twomey, C., and Vu, L., (2024), Employment and disability in Australia: Improving employment outcomes for people with a disability, Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre, Focus on the States, No. 10, March 2024.
This publication contains confidential and proprietary information of the Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre. All of the material in this publication is for your exclusive use and may not be otherwise used or modified for, or by, any other person or sold to or otherwise provided in whole or in part to any other person or entity without the prior written consent of the Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre. A standard hard copy of, or electronic subscription to, this publication entitles employees of the same organisation and same physical location as the subscriber to the use of its contents for internal reporting purposes only. Multiple user licenses are available for organisations with more than one location.
Acknowledgement: This report uses unit record data from the Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) Survey. The HILDA project was initiated and is funded by the Australian Government Department of Social Services (DSS) and is managed by the
Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research (Melbourne Institute). The
findings and views reported in this paper, however, are those of the authors and should not be attributed to either DSS or the Melbourne Institute.
Contact
Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre
Tel: +61 8 9266 2873 Email: bcec@curtin.edu.au
bcec.edu.au
© Curtin University 2024