Traditional Jobs Just Won't Work
Newcastle Herald
Tuesday November 26, 2002
A JOB supplies such social needs as purpose, self-esteem and identity; it facilitates social interaction and acceptability; and for most, it provides the only legitimate means of earning an income.
In view of the true unemployment situation in the Hunter, the Job Summit in Newcastle on December 9 is extremely important.
Yet, on precedent, the participants will focus on ways of attracting conventional industries involving traditional jobs, of the very kind which I have previously argued are in permanent decline.
There is no harm in attempting to lure steel mills and the like, provided it is realised that, even if they eventuate, they are unlikely to be very labour-intensive; and will probably provide little opportunity at skill levels less than trade/technician.
Take for example the Austeel proposal. This project does indeed look promising on paper: 3400 direct jobs during the three-year construction phase; about 1500 direct jobs during the operational period ? both having a significant multiplier or `ripple` effect on the local economy.
However, questions have already been asked (and no definitive answers received) concerning:
* The likelihood of this project materialising anyway.
* Of the 3400 construction jobs, how many would be filled by local labour?
* Of the 1500 ongoing jobs, how many would be of a skill level/type that matches the unemployed of the Hunter?
And because Austeel represents a multinational consortium, profits are unlikely to remain in Australia, let alone the Hunter.
Regardless of my criticisms, it is probably unavoidable in the short term to pursue such projects, purely in terms of immediate survival. Longer term, however, the Job Summit members must be prepared to think beyond the envelope.
It is vital that future industries be selected, and required to operate, to generate enduring, worthwhile jobs at a range of skill levels.
Let me offer an example. Newcastle City Council has commendably committed itself to an agenda of sustainability and environmental responsibility.
However, I would contend that it is restricted to piecemeal, fragmented projects, because it is attempting to implement new technology and ideas within an outmoded framework.
The alternative energy industry has the potential to create an enormous number of ongoing jobs, most importantly at a wide range of skill levels but not in the way it is currently exploited.
Sustainable energy and environmental systems shine, in terms of effectiveness, job creation, and eventual cost, when they are tailored for individual needs.
It is inappropriate to use them in large, centralised installations connected to distribution networks and grids.
Imagine if the Housing Department decided to equip all new public housing with solar hot water systems; and to progressively retrofit existing housing.
Better still ? add photovoltaic cells for solar electricity, and bio-organic systems for sewage treatment. Think of the number of jobs involved in constructing, installing and maintaining such stuff.
Australia consistently leads the world in photovoltaic (electricity-from-sunlight) research.
It has also produced a radically new, environmentally friendly storage battery that lasts indefinitely, and can be recharged at a service station in much the same way, and time, as refuelling a car.
Combine the energy source and the storage method, and the implications for, say, electric urban transit vehicles, is obvious.
Newcastle could be the first city in Australia, possibly the world, which had its own council fleet of electric cars for inner-city activities; cars that were non-polluting, quiet, almost free to run, and at no stage contributed to greenhouse gas emission.
Already possessing considerable industrial skills and infrastructure, and with commitment to local programs of retraining, Newcastle could position itself as the premier centre throughout Australasia for the manufacture, installation and maintenance of high-tech, custom built equipment.
But it would have to lead by example.
I realise the initial capital cost of such programs, and the need for unprecedented levels of subsidy and cooperation from all tiers of government; and I appreciate the comparative cheapness of the existing alternatives (grid electricity, petrol etc).
However, I am also aware of the enormous social cost of unemployment in terms of crime, health care, and alienation; and consider the huge cost of benefits and programs for the unemployed versus the spending power and taxation contribution of workers.
Approaches of the kind I am suggesting would be socially profitable even in the short term, and eventually economically as well.
The time has come for risk-taking. Newcastle will soon have little left to lose; and ultimately, the real risk lies in continuing to trust in the old solutions. Greg Cussan is a psychologist with experience in vocational and occupational psychology.
© 2002 Newcastle Herald