Submission 44 — Australian Services Union — NDIS Workforce | External submission

AUSTRALIAN

SERVICES

UNION

ASU Submission

Joint Standing Committee on the National Disability

Insurance Scheme

Submitter: Linda White, Assistant National Secretary

Organisation: Australian Services Union

Address: 116 Queensberry Street

Carlton South, Victoria, 3053

Phone:

Fax:

Email:

Date: 15 May 2020 [Extension granted]

The ASU ..................................................................................................................................... 3

Who we represent in disability services …………………………………………………………………………. 3

Our submission .......................................................................................................................... 3

Our recommendations ................................................................................................................ 4

The NDIS Workforce .................................................................................................................. 4

Wages that recognise the value and complexity of support work, and provide for workers and their families ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 4 The gender pay gap ……………………………………………………………………………………………………. 6 Secure jobs at the centre of service delivery ………………………………………………………………….. 6 Supervision and support………………………………………………………………………………………………. 8 Staffing levels, client load and unpaid work ……………………………………………………………………. 9 Training and development of the NDIS workforce …………………………………………………………… 9 Workplace bullying, harassment, violence or abuse ………………………………………………………. 12 COVID-19 ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 13

Conclusion ................................................................................................................................ 14

The ASU The Australian Services Union (ASU) is one of Australia’s largest unions, representing approximately 135,000 members.

The ASU was created in 1993. It brought together three large unions – the Federated Clerks Union, the Municipal Officers Association and the Municipal Employees Union, as well as a number of smaller organisations representing social welfare workers, information technology workers and transport employees.

Currently ASU members work in a wide variety of industries and occupations because the Union’s rules traditionally and primarily cover workers in the following industries and occupations:

 Disability support  Social and community services  Local government  State government  Transport, including passenger air and rail transport, road, rail and air freight transport  Clerical and administrative employees in commerce and industry generally  Call centres  Electricity generation, transmission and distribution  Water industry  Higher education (Queensland and South Australia)

The ASU has members in every State and Territory of Australia, as well as in most regional centres. Around 50% of ASU members are women, the exact percentage varies between industries, e.g. in social and community services around 70% of our members are women.

Who we represent in disability services The ASU is the largest union of workers in the social and community services sector, which includes workers in disability support services across the country. We are the major NDIS union in Queensland, New South Wales, ACT, and South Australia. We also represent public sector disability support workers in Queensland.

The ASU’s expertise in disability arises from representing the disability support workforce working in a range of different jobs roles including disability support work, care management and coordination, disability advocates, local area coordinators, team leaders, and managers in disability providers.

Our submission The ASU is pleased to provide this submission to the Joint Standing Committee on the National Disability Insurance Scheme and the inquiry into NDIS Workforce.

As the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) has progressively rolled out across the country, the ASU has seen a significant increase in precarious employment, alongside a reduction in training, supervision and other employment terms and conditions of employment.

In preparing this submission the ASU along with the Health Services Union (HSU) and United Workers Union (UWU) commissioned the UNSW Social Policy Research Centre (SPRC) to examine trends in the NDIS Workforce.

In March 2020 the UNSW SPRC surveyed 2341 disability workers. This is the largest ever study of the experience of frontline disability support workers in the NDIS. This submission will discuss broadly the findings of the research with the full report attached (Appendix 1) for consideration by the Committee.

Over the past three years the ASU has also made a range of recommendations to the Joint Standing Committee on the NDIS across 4 submissions to enable the development of evidence-based policy solutions. This submission builds on those earlier reports and recommendations.

Our recommendations The ASU makes the following recommendations to this inquiry.

NDIS pricing assumptions should be reviewed to:

(a) reflect the reality of disability support work (including appropriate classifications for the work performed, adequate time allocated for tasks, administration, supervision, training etc); and (b) support secure jobs in the sector.

The Government should establish a portable leave and training entitlement scheme for NDIS

workers so that there is a person-centred approach to training and career development in the sector, which will help with retention and recruitment.

There needs to be better support for disability support workers during the COVID-19

pandemic including:

a) provision of a COVID-19 Care Allowance; b) provision of appropriate protective equipment; c) no loss of pay where services are disrupted; d) workers are provided with appropriate and specialised disability infection control training; and

e) paid pandemic leave for all disability support workers. 5. The NDIS Workforce The NDIS is a major source of economic growth and jobs creation, with the Health Care and Social Assistance industry (including disability services) projected to have the strongest employment growth of any industry over the next five years.1 This sector is also predicted to end the year 2020 with increased demand and growth2.

For the NDIS to fulfil its promise to people with disability it must attract and retain a diverse workforce that supports choice and continuity for participants and one that is suitably skilled to provide meaningful person-centred supports.

However the current NDIS pricing and regulatory system is designed in a way that there are many impediments to reaching this promise. Below we outline in detail what some of the key issues are facing the NDIS workforce, the barriers that are in place to quality person-centred supports and decent jobs, and the solutions to make the NDIS the best it can be.

Wages that recognise the value and complexity of support work, and provide for workers and their families In order to attract sufficient workers, disability support jobs must be secure and well paid, with career paths to retain workers in the sector. We believe the current NDIS pricing regime does not provide for this. It is based on incorrect assumptions made about the nature of disability support work without sufficient consultation with frontline workers, people with disability or their representatives.

1 SBS News, Revealed: Australian industries that will see highest job growth in next five years [online] Accessed at: https://www.sbs.com.au/language/english/revealed-australian-industries-that-will-see-highest-job-growth-in-next-five-years 2 The Australian, Two-year coronavirus hangover as Frydenberg rules out ‘endless money tree’, 12 May 2020

We consider that a number of key assumptions underpinning the NDIS unit price are flawed, in particular:

 Prices wrongly assume that the total scope of disability support work is covered within Level 2 of the relevant Modern Award (the SCHADS Award). They do not set rates of pay at levels necessary to attract skilled staff or encourage upskilling or in recognition of the complexity of the work. Nor do prices reflect the growing independence and autonomy of disability support workers as providers scale back supervision due to budget constraints.  The price model does not recognise the time needed to deliver quality services to NDIS participants. Disability support workers have inadequate time to build relationships with participants, follow up on participant’s needs, coordinate and communicate with supervisors and other workers, complete paperwork, debrief and handover between shifts. This results in low quality of care. o The UNSW report found that on average front-line workers contributed 2.6hrs per week of unpaid work to compete essential functions of the work including: case notes, handovers, reports and communication with colleagues and other service providers regarding clients supports. o The UNSW report found 64% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed they felt under pressure to do more with less time.  Prices do not cover the cost of induction and training. o The UNSW report found that 26% of respondents received less than 1 day of training in the last 12 months o The UNSW report found many respondents did not receive enough training to do their job effectively.  Because the prices are set too low, they encourage the fragmentation of working time, unpaid work, casualisation, under-classification and underemployment. This undermines attempts to expand the workforce.

Our members have shared their experiences of the NDIS and have the following concerns about the unit price as a barrier in recognising and rewarding their work:

 This is the lowest paid job I have ever been paid. It is not much.

 The NDIS does not allow funding for staff development or team meetings. It seems all training and further skill development costs will be placed on the worker. This will reduce the high level of care that can be provided to our clients as our wages will not increase to cover these costs.

 Increase in non-billable administrative workload & employer pressure to meet billable KPIs have led to increased employee stress.

 It should include at least 15mins for administration, documentation and communication for each day that the participant receive support

A further issue experienced by our members is the use of ‘Host Agreements’, which are part of new Independent Living Options the NDIA is encouraging as an alternative to Supported Independent Living (formerly known as ‘group homes’). These ‘Host Agreements’ are:

 Usually in a group home situation.  Workers are paid no hourly wages, superannuation, award entitlements, worker’s comp etc. They are paid a flat rate of $250 for 24 hours of care or pro-rata on shorter stints as a reimbursement.  The Agreements have members defined as a “Volunteer”.  Payroll send them a Tax Exemption Explanation for Respite Payments.

We understand these Host Family Agreements have been pushed by the NDIS because it is a cheaper way of getting supports for clients who receive NDIS funding.

Whilst the ASU supports choice and control for people with disability and understand that may include wanting to live independently and in difference scenarios, we do not believe the only way to do this is via precarious employment or exploitation of workers.

People with disability do not want to be exploiting workers, this sentiment is supported by People with Disability Australia (PWDA) whose primary membership is people with disability and organisations primarily constituted by people with disability.

As part of the 4 yearly review of modern awards at the Fair Work Commission the PWDA observed that “people with disability want to employ staff who are paid appropriately for their work, and for working anti-social hours whether they be long, short, late, early, fall on public or religious holidays, or at other times when they may prefer to be spending time with family and friends….. By devaluing the work of disability support workers this in turn devalues the lives of the people with disability they support” 3.

We believe alternative accommodation models should be explored and designed collaboratively with disability stakeholders, including unions like the ASU who can work with people with disability and their advocates to design new systems that are not exploitative of workers and take into account the needs and interest of people with disability.

The gender pay gap The gendered undervaluation of disability support work has been a longstanding problem, with this type of work traditionally been seen as “women’s work” and wages have been restricted as a result. In the UNSW report 66% of respondents were female, with only 38% of workers believing they are paid fairly for the work they do whilst 39% are not satisfied and 24% neutral with their overall level of take home pay.

In the UNSW report 35% of survey respondents were aged 55 and over it is not surprising that 71% of those aged 55-64 are concerned they do not expect to have enough superannuation when they retire. In 2017 the ASU commissioned a report Not So Super, For Women: Superannuation and Women’s Retirement Outcomes which found Australia’s compulsory superannuation system is failing women.

By increasing the low hourly rate for supports funded by the NDIS and creating a fair income and in turn a higher superannuation balance in retirement will send a clear signal to the disability workforce that they are valued and will go some way in helping to close the gender pay gap that currently exists.

Secure jobs at the centre of service delivery Retaining and attracting workers to the sector is crucial for the NDIS to be a success. Quality, responsive supports for people with disability will not be available if the workforce is insecure and therefore unstable.

The traditional model of permanent employment with a single service provider is currently being eroded by alternative employment models, in particular:

 A rise in the casualisation of workforce as providers shift risks associated with flexible service delivery onto the workforce;  A rise in instances of employment across multiple disability service providers as workers try to maximise a stable income in the face of provider hesitancy to embrace permanent full-time work under the NDIS;  A rise in self-employment as a sole trader providing services directly to clients as workers seek to cut out the “middle man” of a controlling employer limiting their own hours and flexibility;  A rise in individual contracts between the client and the support worker. Workers are required to have their own ABN, and liability insurance etc.

3 Witness Statement of Matthew Bowden, Co-Chief Executive Officer for People with Disability Australia in the Fair Work Commission - 4 Yearly Review of Modern Awards for the Social, Community, Home Care and Disability Services Industry Award 2010

 A rise in “gig-economy” work as platform services (e.g. uber style services) enter the market; and  A rise in people with disability wanting to employ directly their own support workers to have greater control over the type of support they want and when they want it.

The ASU believes the NDIS pricing model needs to properly reflect the real cost of quality disability support, including:  Appropriate wages and conditions for the workforce and that reflects the complexity of the work they perform;  Secure jobs, not just short term casual work;  Career paths for disability workers;  Team approaches and good quality supervision, including clinical supervision;  Specific disability service provisions such as: case management, training, debriefing, documentation of care plans, etc;  Stability of the workforce to ensure consistency for people experiencing disability.

We believe a portable leave and training entitlement scheme for disability support workers would help to ensure the NDIS achieves its goal of delivering high-quality, individualised services to people with disabilities. This can be achieved by allowing workers to take their leave entitlements with them if they change jobs and investing in specialised skills and qualifications through a portable training scheme, rather than relying on short-term insecure work practices.

A Portable Training Entitlement Scheme:  Ensures a bases level of skill;  Builds career paths to both attract and retain workers;  Will broaden the services in the NDIS;  Will deepen the level of supports available;  Will overcome challenges of feeling valued;  Gives and acknowledges agency in workers ; and  Starts to address the concerns about insecure or disparate work organisation.

Information on how the Portable Training Entitlement Scheme would function is outlined later in our submission.

The high turnover of workers reported in the NDS Australian Disability Workforce Report (July 2018)4 reflects the experience of ASU members. ASU members report that the precarious working conditions of the NDIS with low pay and insecure hours are forcing them to seek more secure better paid jobs outside of the NDIS sector.

In the UNSW report only 30% of respondents will definitely be working in the disability sector in five years’ time, with 45% probably working, 19% uncertain and 6% definitely planning on leaving the sector.

The ASU is concerned about the loss of expertise and knowledge with the current and anticipated high staff turnover in the disability sector.

Our members have shared their experiences of the NDIS and have the following concerns about secure jobs:

 Get rid of 1 hour shift minimums -the NDIS should provide plans with numbers of hours versus dollar amounts to encourage the hiring of skilled support workers

 This is not a high point as NDIS has made my job redundant but I will look for work in sector.

4 National Disability Services, Australian Disability Workforce Report 2018. Accessed at: https://www.nds.org.au/policy/australian-disability-workforce-report-second-edition-highlights-workforce-risks1

 I’m a qualified youth worker who specialises in alcohol and other drugs and mental health which should pay 5.1. These types of jobs in Tasmania just don’t exist as they are being outsourced to disability organisations that pay their unqualified staff less money.

 Constantly asking for more rostered hours but not given the opportunity.

 The casual nature of the work and the pay/minimum hours is very unsustainable. It is also very difficult to come to work (often travelling 30 kilometres) for a 2 hour shift, then having to wait around for the next shift 4-5 hours later.

Insecurity and vulnerability is also prevalent amongst the NDIS workforce who are with disability themselves. Workers with disability are in particularly vulnerable positions for a myriad of reasons including: underemployment, are likely to be in jobs that are not that secure, and be victims of underpayments5.

For example, a worker with a disability has to serve for 12 months before they have a right to request a flexibility arrangement for their job under the Award. They can do it sooner, but the Award doesn’t allow for that or mandate that the employer must respond a certain way and thus a negative and unreasonable response could not be challenged.

Whilst the Disability Discrimination Act 1993 (Cth) (“the DDA”) provides for a general right of reasonable adjustments to not be discriminated against and thus that a worker with a disability is entitled to a reasonable adjustment immediately – the worker’s means of being able to challenge an employer being unreasonable and discriminatory is not easy.

They have to lodge a complaint under the DDA with the Australian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) and that can only be conciliated, it cannot be arbitrated. Whereas if the Award allowed for it, it could be arbitrated by the Commission even before the arbitrary 12 month threshold.

Supervision and support The UNSW report found workers across all service settings felt that support and supervision had eroded under the NDIS. The report found 37% of respondents do not get good introductions and information on new clients and 43% said they do not receive one-on-one support from a supervisor to discuss client needs and goals.

Only 36% of respondents said they get the time they need with supervisor, this was supported by those working in supervisory positions with 53% agreeing they were unable to provide proper supervision due to lack of time. Casual workers were the least likely to agree they got the time they needed with their supervisor.

Lack of support, funding pressures, poor senior management practices and workload pressures were the most common reasons workers gave along with team meetings being an issue in terms of being scheduled outside of workers hours or being postponed or cancelled.

The NDIA claims that management and supervision are built into the NDIS prices however this is not true with prices far too low to cover the worker’s wage as well as the overhead costs of supporting the worker. We believe NDIS prices should be increase to guarantee that workers will be appropriately supervised, managed, mentored and trained.

5 ABC News, Thousands of workers on the National Disability Insurance Scheme underpaid, new figures reveal [online] Accessed at: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-08-01/ndis-scheme-workers-underpaid-figures-reveal/11372252

Staffing levels, client load and unpaid work In 2019 the ASU conducted a survey of disability planners to assist the NDIS Joint Standing Committee with their inquiry into NDIS Planning. Many respondents felt they were working with an unrealistic client load with many respondents having client loads that exceeded 100 participants.

In the UNSW report 44% of respondents reported there was not enough staff in their service to get work done, with 64% saying they faced pressure to do more in less time. The report found that many were worried about client safety and wellbeing due to poor staff ratios.

The UNSW report also found respondents were working an average of 2.6 unpaid hours in the previous week. With the most common unpaid tasks including: completing case notes or other forms or reports, communicating with colleagues/service providers, handover and communicating with a supervisor.

A 2018 paper Wage theft, underpayment and unpaid work in marketised social care found disability support workers gave two main reasons for undertaking unpaid work. The first reason was their commitment to provide good quality, and usually essential, care. The second reason was most workers linked unpaid work to job insecurity as well as responding to client pressure to complete additional unpaid tasks in fear of losing shifts.

Furthermore the study found the NDIS, how it is funded and the regulatory environment helps facilitate the systemic non-payment of working time for disability workers.

Our members have shared their experiences of the NDIS and have the following concerns about client load:

 There’s no benchmark for a suitable load - it is expected that we just continue to support more and more people - and with loss of staff that means further cases are assigned to remaining staff, increasing our load exponentially

 Unrealistic client load - because staff were either no contract extended status or resigned, the remaining staff have had to pick up their case loads, take on new participants, and we have only replaced 4 of 13 former staff. Not enough!

 Client load too high. KPIs too high. Too many changes we can’t keep up. Pay does not equal our responsibility.

 Way too much work load. Unreasonable expectations. Burnout is real possibility for me and my workmates.

 Unrealistic client load. Not possible to monitor or deliver follow-up service within time allocations. This compromises quality of service delivery.

Training and development of the NDIS workforce The ongoing training and development of staff is critical to workforce quality recruitment and retention. Disability sector workers are highly skilled and passionate about what they do – but their capacity to have their skills recognised, to develop new skills and to attain relevant person-centred qualifications is severely limited.

In the UNSW report 26% of respondents reported they received less than one day of training in the last 12 months. This is disappointing for workers who choose to make disability services their long term career as they are not being provided with the opportunity to acquire advancement and upgrading of their qualifications.

The NDIS roll out has led to skills shortages across the sector, and without investment from the Government we believe these skills shortages may lead to importing labour from overseas or see a roll back of the NDIS in its current capacity.

For these reasons we need to invest in the training and development of disability workers in a strategic and planned way– purely for economic reasons, if not to ensure the vision of the NDIS.

There is a common misperception that those who work in disability services are unskilled and that workers in the industry do not need any special qualifications to work within it.

In the UNSW report 22% have worked in disability services between 5-10 years and a further 54% have worked for 10 years or more. Those in higher age brackets were also more likely to hold higher qualifications such as a diploma or degree, highlighting they are highly skilled and these qualifications support career longevity.

Lack of specified minimum skills requirements for entry to the sector and the lack of a clear career path means that barriers to entry are low, even for people who have few employment alternatives. It sends a signal to prospective employees that the work is undemanding, when in fact this is far from the truth.

Unrealistic expectations about what is required of workers in turn leads to poor outcomes from training and high turnover of staff, as well as inevitably a poor outcome for clients/participants. In addition, many potential employees are discouraged by poor wages and conditions in relation to work demands, lack of employment security and few opportunities for advancement.

The foundation for training in the disability support sector, even in the current pandemic must be rooted in national qualifications, accredited on the Australian Qualifications Framework, developed by the appropriate industry regulatory authority on the basis of Units of Competence taught by Registered Training Organisations that have been quality assured by ASQA.

In addition to a proper process of consultation with employers in the development and delivery of training to the sector, it is essential to properly consult with both the workers who deliver the services and with their clients/participants.

Any training must therefore be developed, implemented, delivered and monitored in consultation with recognised peak advocacy groups such as People with Disabilities Australia (PWDA), Inclusion Australia (National Council on Intellectual Disability (NCID) and Mental Health Australia (MHA).

There needs to be active involvement of the workplace in any successful implementation and delivery of training.

The NDIS pricing model has had significant consequences for training and development in the sector and for the capacity of providers to participate actively in providing a high standard of training, supervision etc. – or any training at all. There have been cut-backs in the time allocated for training; team meetings have all but disappeared; supervision has been severely curtailed; and large numbers of casual workers are being newly employed with almost no supervision at all.

Many workers and providers have told us that support staff are not paid to attend regular team meetings or attend training and development activities. This is not a reflection on those providers – who have often been as concerned about this situation as we are, but it is a very real problem when considering the effective implementation and delivery of training in this sector – which absolutely must include ongoing supervision, ongoing upskilling and active participation by the workplace in all of these aspects of learning and skills development.

It is currently very expensive to undertake accredited skills development. It involves potential and actual students paying upfront fees in many cases, and needing to take time away from shifts. In a sector in which the majority of workers are not well paid and employed on a casual or part time basis, relying upon shifts with often multiple employers, it is difficult to access training other than in-service training when this is available.

In-service training is more likely to be not accredited and delivered in a less than ideal manner. It has less value in terms of career development or portability between employers as it tends to be more enterprise-specific.

For these reasons the ASU commissioned the Australia Institute, Centre for Future Work to develop the Portable Training Entitlement Scheme. We acknowledge this Committee has already considered and saw merit6 in the proposal of such a scheme and we ask the Committee to again consider the introduction of a portable training entitlement system.

This scheme would involve funding three stages of training for the workforce:

Induction: This is a minimal induction training package provided to new workers starting with NDIS providers. It would involve 30 hours of on-line and face-to-face orientation to the goals and principles of the NDIS, and core features such as the code of conduct and basic safety practices; and 20 hours of supervised contact with people with disabilities. Importantly it would be an accredited VET competency that could build towards a formal qualification.

Foundation: This foundation entry-level course would be required for all new disability support workers within the first 18 months of their employment in NDIS-funded service delivery. It is accredited Cert III specialist NDIS training. The course would involve 90 hours of classroom training, and 120 hours of workplace training and assessment. This stage would also include assessment of RPL for existing workers with experience and previous training to attain a formal Cert III.

Accumulated training entitlement: The largest element of the comprehensive NDIS training program would be the establishment of a portable training entitlement system, through which NDIS providing workers would accumulate credits toward additional training. Training credits are earned as workers complete NDIS-funded work – whether with a provider-employer (as permanent or casual worker), or even directly for NDIS participants (working as sole traders). Workers would then be able to use these credits to enrol in accredited training of their choice, relevant to specialist disability support work. The training would be accredited units of competency that build further advanced qualifications over time. The credit would also cover the costs of release from work so they are able to undertake the study. It is estimated that the average disability support worker would accumulate credits for one three-day paid training course per year under the scheme.

All three parts would rely on reviewing the range of appropriate VET accredited courses so they respond better to the diverse needs and aspirations of people with disability and build career paths for the growing workforce. (E.g. creation of new Diploma, Advanced Diploma and specialist Cert IV disability courses – e.g. Mental Health, Nutrition etc). This review should occur nationally and be informed by experts including people with disability and their advocates.

The system would be administered by creating a federal authority such as a Disability Services Training Authority which could easily be housed within soon to be established NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission. The NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission is already tasked with overseeing the screening of all workers and registering providers etc.

The benefits of this scheme would be a win not only for the workforce, but also participants, employers and the TAFE Sector:

NDIS workforce: Fosters development of meaningful career paths and specialisation which will lead to greater retention and job satisfaction. It will also provide more attractive jobs for new workers to join the sector knowing they will be supported with induction and ongoing development. This is the fastest growing employment area in the country and investment in training is needed to assist workers transition from declining industries.

Participants: No impact on their individual package costs - it is a separately funded program. It will provide for better retention of good workers. Attracting new workers to the sector that want to stay and

6 Joint Standing Committee on the NDIS, Workforce Readiness. Accessed at: https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Joint/National_Disability_Insurance_Scheme/MarketReadiness/Report/c03

build careers but who are also sufficiently inducted into NDIS person centred care and the code of conduct. Person centred specialisation within the workforce so that NDIS supports can be responsive to their needs and aspirations.

Employers: Better support for the workforce means less pressure on employers to do stand-alone training of NDIS workers that is currently replicated provider to provider but not accredited nor of a meaningful or specialised nature. Greater savings from longer term retention of staff. Greater pool of employees to address this impending workforce crisis.

TAFE Sector: Support for public TAFE system via ongoing injection of students and an innovative model for TAFE to play longer term role in human services professional development.

In the UNSW report 40% of respondents believed they did not have good prospects for career advancement. This is disappointing that such eagerness to undertake training and development to improve services, practice and develop careers would be overlooked.

The UNSW report found the more time a worker spends in their role, the quicker their optimism disappears so that those with over 10 years of experience working in disability services have the lowest levels of optimism when it comes to career advancement. The Portable Training Entitlement Scheme would also promote career advancement and progression which is fundamental to attracting and recruiting worker to join the sector.

Workplace bullying, harassment, violence or abuse An important issue identified by survey respondents in the UNSW report was occupational health and safety, with 64% of respondents agreeing they were aware of a worker being subjected to workplace bullying, harassment, violence or abuse in the last 12 months.

Despite 48% of respondents being aware of harms to workers perpetrated by another worker many reported being hesitant to escalate matters further for fear of losing their job or if clients were the perpetrator they were worried they would be unable to work with that particular client again.

The UNSW report identified that job insecurity compounded issues surrounding the reporting of violence, harassment and abuse of both staff and clients. This represents a very serious failure of the current system.

Where support and supervision was lacking survey respondents felt more exposed with the chronic lack of training and supervision for workers clearly contributing to the increased frequency of dangerous situations.

Any workplace bullying, harassment, violence or abuse is not acceptable, whether it is perpetrated by another worker or by a client to a worker. The UNSW report found that 27% of respondents felt they do not receive adequate training to do their work safely, with the report linking workers confidence in reporting safety issues to measures of supervision.

The Quality and Safeguarding Framework and Code of Conduct are an important step in ensuring a quality and safe NDIS. However these are not underpinned with adequate funding and resources for training, workforce development, supervision, and administration for NDIS workers.

Both the Framework and Code require workers to continuously develop new skills and qualifications relevant to the diverse needs of individual clients. These skills are essential to ensure that the individual rights of participants are promoted. However, the capacity for NDIS workers to have their skills recognised, to develop new skills and to attain relevant person-centred qualifications is severely limited which is why the introduction of the Portable Training Entitlement Scheme is so important to the sector.

Our members have shared their experiences of the NDIS and have the following concerns about bullying, harassment, violence and abuse:

 Workers need individual training and support to ensure they have the skills and abilities to manage and prevent violence, exploitation, neglect and abuse.

 Need to ensure staff are trained on quality and safety standards and how to implement them and how to raise and act on their concerns.

COVID-19

Australian disability workers continue to provide support and assistance to people with disability and are on the front line of the coronavirus crisis. COVID-19 has impacted on how all disability support workers provide services. It has impacted on what programs are provided, how many clients participate, how workers comply with public health orders, how guidelines from the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission apply, how workers provide infection control, or provide safe and quality services. COVID-19 has impacted every service and every worker.

Disability support workers must be better supported in doing their job and facing this COVID crisis, to not only ensure their own safety but also the safety of the people they support.

The UNSW report provides analysis of workers’ experiences of delivering disability services and supports in the early stages of the outbreak of COVID-19 in Australia (Appendix 2).

This report highlights significant issues the disability workforce faced in context of COVID-19 including:

 There is an urgent lack of personal protective equipment (PPE) being supplied to staff and clients, and many workers feel their organisation’s safety protocols have been inadequate in the context of COVID-19.  There are widespread perceptions that the disability workforce is being dangerously overlooked in pandemic response, and many workers are worried about the ongoing impacts of lack of planning in their organisation and for the disability sector as a whole.  Workers have been particularly worried about day programs and community access activities remaining in operation; group homes remaining open to other workers delivering NDIS services and supports to residents, along with visitors; and disruption to clients’ routines and activities, which has created additional risks to client wellbeing and safety.  Staff are extremely anxious about the situation, and workforce issues and additional workloads have made it difficult to respond to heightened health and safety needs.  Some workers have lost jobs or shifts and are uncertain about the future of their work, and many expressed concerns about their inability to effectively self-isolate, and the financial impacts of doing so.

Respondents to the UNSW report reinforced some of the key challenges the NDIS market was already grappling with including: under-resourcing, lack of management support at the frontline, low pay, poor job security, multiple job holding, high workloads and unpaid work.

In addition the ASU, HSU and UWU have recently filed for a COVID-19 Care Allowance to be inserted to the Social, Community, Home Care and Disability Services Industry Award 2010 in an application to the Fair Work Commission.

The COVID-19 Care Allowance aims to reward disability support workers for their essential work and increased responsibilities associated with supporting a person with a disability who may have contracted the virus, including performing enhanced hygiene procedures and using personal protective equipment (PPE).

The unions are hopeful that the Commonwealth Government as the principal funder of the National Disability Insurance Scheme will agree to support this important initiative.

Furthermore the ASU along with other unions have filed for Paid Pandemic Leave and Special Leave where an employee contracts COVID-19 to be inserted to the Social, Community, Home Care and Disability Services Industry Award 2010 in an application to the Fair Work Commission. We see this as a crucial part of the Government’s COVID-19 response as well as ensuring the safety of people with disability.

Paid Pandemic Leave would ensure a worker receives two weeks paid leave each time they are required by the government, their employer or a doctor to self-isolate for the mandatory 14-day period due to exposure to COVID-19. Special leave where an employee contracts COVID-19 would allow for a worker to be absent from work without loss of pay, until the worker has medical clearance to return to work.

Disability support workers are frontline workers who are more likely to be exposed to COVID-19. The casualised and insecure nature of the workforce makes this paid leave all the more important.

In addition to the above the ASU urges the government to undertake the following:

 Provide funding - Provide funding to ensure all workers in the disability sector, regardless of employment status, do not go without pay when their ability to provide a service is disrupted due to COVID-19.  Provide additional safety equipment - Provide personal protective equipment (PPE) and additional cleaning services to keep workers and people with disability safe.  Provide ongoing training - Provide ongoing infection control training.  Deliver wage increases - Deliver wage increases to ensure workers are supported to continue delivering high-quality and safe services to people with a disability.  Prepare for the future - Work with the disability unions and the broader sector to prepare for a surge in workforce need so that new workers are appropriately trained, supported and safe.

Through this the Commonwealth Government can ensure continuity of support for people with disability during the COVID-19 crisis, whilst ensuring a sustainable and vibrant disability sector will exist once the pandemic is over.

Conclusion The pay and conditions of workers in the disability sector has a direct correlation with the quality, availability and diversity of the support offered to people with a disability.

A system of poorly paid, predominately female workers with no training opportunities cannot give each client the quality individualised plans they need, nor will it attract the workforce required to meet demand for person centred services.

Barriers to growing and maintaining the workforce include high turnover of staff due to the casual nature of work, lack of supervision, unpaid work and the lack of relevant qualification pathways and professional training opportunities, as well as the low paying conditions offered to disability workers.

We believe an overhaul of the NDIS pricing arrangements for such supports will go some way in overcoming these barriers.

The capacity of the disability workforce to have their skills recognised, to develop new skills and to attain relevant person-centred qualifications is severely limited. We consider that a portable training entitlement system is essential to ensuring we build meaningful careers and skills in the workforce.

Additionally in terms of the COVID-19 crisis we are calling on the Commonwealth Government, as the principal funder of disability services to urgently review the issues raised in this submission and provide all necessary funding to overcome these issues.

Finally, the ASU along with our frontline workers, wish to appear before the Senate Committee to give additional evidence and to represent our concerns more fully.