JSA, DES and IEP providers

8.71 Once a job seeker is placed in a particular stream, the role of JSA and DES providers is to assist individual job seekers to gain sustainable employment including connecting job seekers to skills development and training opportunities. Depending on the stream into which the job seeker is placed, providers may also be required to provide other services. This is particularly so in the case of DES providers.

8.72 In March 2010, a system of specialist providers—referred to collectively as DES—replaced the former Disability Employment Network and Vocational Rehabilitation Services to provide employment services for job seekers with disability.

8.73 Integrated Indigenous employment services are also available through the JSA network, in conjunction with the IEP and, in areas with poor labour markets, Community Development Employment Projects.

Employment Services Deeds and the tender process

8.74 JSA and DES delivery is provided by employment service providers who are contracted by DEEWR under Employment Services Deeds due to expire on 30 June 2012. ‘Different versions of the Deed were prepared to reflect the different combination of services’.^[72]

8.75 The current Deeds for JSA expire on 30 June 2012, however, the Deed provides the Government with the ability to extend them. As part of the 2011–2012 Budget, and then in June 2011, the Government announced that:

The procurement methodology for Job Services Australia 2012–2015 [and Disability Employment Services 2012–2015] will be a mix of contract extensions, business reallocation, and open tender processes available to existing providers and prospective new providers. This mix is designed to maintain the stability of the current model, while ensuring the highest quality employment services for job seekers.^[73]

8.76 These tender processes may provide avenues through which the Government could require providers to consider and address family violence-related issues in this area.

8.77 Concerns have been raised about the structure and operation of the JSA system—in particular about the way in which DEEWR monitors provider performance and outcomes as well as the fee structure, to the extent that it provides financial incentives to place certain job seekers. These issues extend beyond the scope of the Terms of Reference for this Inquiry.

8.78 WEAVE suggested that providers should be required to have policies which commit them to the safety of people attending the service and annual training in best practice in identifying and responding to family violence.^[74]

8.79 However, DEEWR considered that the current Deed is very clear on tailoring services to job specific needs—including those who face multiple non-vocational barriers (such as family violence) to employment. However, family violence is not expressly referred to. The ALRC therefore considers it would be beneficial for tender documents to require providers to consider the existence of family violence when tailoring service responses.

8.80 The IEP is separately tendered by DEEWR to support ‘activities that will develop the capacity of employers, Indigenous Australians and their communities to increase opportunities through employment, business and other development activities’.^[75] Assistance is available either directly from DEEWR or through two panels of providers. IEP providers are selected by DEEWR through an open tender process. Panel Guidelines form part of the contract for services purchased by the Department. The ALRC considers that it may be appropriate for tender documents, Panel Guidelines or contracts for IEP services to include an understanding of how family violence can be a barrier to employment for Indigenous Australians.

Training

8.81 The need for training of JSA, DES and IEP provider staff is vital to ensuring that the employment service system is able to respond to and protect job seekers experiencing family violence.

8.82 A number of stakeholders emphasised the need for education and training for JSA providers.^[76] For example, WEAVE suggested that providers should be required to participate in such training

as part of their accreditation process so they can deal with the issue of family violence professionally. Such accreditation should be displayed so that clients know that the JSP staff has been trained in responding to family violence. This would increase clients’ confidence to disclose.^[77]

8.83 Similarly, Northern Rivers Community Legal Centre recommended training for JSA provider staff to ‘recognise signs that an individual may be or have been a victim of family violence and may be reluctant to disclose this’ and in relation to ‘appropriate response strategies to victims so the job service agency does not compound the impact on the victim of family violence’.^[78]

8.84 The ALRC considers it is necessary and appropriate that participants in the JSA, DES and IEP systems, in particular provider staff receive consistent training, with a particular focus on the potential effect family violence may have on work capacity and barriers to employment. A proper understanding of the nature, features and dynamics of family violence and its impact on victims, in particular those from high risk and vulnerable groups, and its potential impact on work capacity and barriers to employment, will better enable JSA, DES and IEP provider staff to support and assist job seekers.

8.85 However, DEEWR does not prescribe the training that JSA, DES and IEP providers are required to give to their staff. Rather, providers are contracted to deliver employment services. In addition, JSA and DES providers are committed to observe the Employment Services Code of Practice.^[79] The ALRC therefore recommends that DEEWR require providers to ensure that all JSA, DES and IEP staff receive regular, consistent and targeted training to ensure that the existence of family violence is appropriately and adequately considered.

Providers—processes and responses

8.86 JSA and DES providers include a range of for-profit and not-for-profit organisations of differing sizes that operate in geographical employment service areas. This section of the chapter outlines how improvements could be made to the processes and responses of providers to enhance the safety of victims of family violence, including:

• the process of allocation to a JSA provider;
• screening for family violence by JSA and DES providers; and
• JSA and DES provider responses to disclosure of family violence—including: referral to Centrelink social workers as well as systems and programs to assist job seekers experiencing family violence.

Allocation

8.87 Each JSA provider is given a ‘business share’, the guarantee of being specified percentage of the referrals of job seekers in a particular area.^[80] Upon referral to a provider, job seekers are usually able to choose the JSA provider to which they are allocated. In some cases, however, where the JSA provider has already achieved ‘its upper tolerance of business share’, the job seeker will be requested to choose another preferred JSA provider.^[81] Where a job seeker does not choose a preferred provider, they will be allocated a provider, depending on factors such as geographical location and the availability of appointments.

8.88 Job seekers usually remain with the same JSA provider while looking for work, however in some circumstances they may change providers. For example, a job seeker may change provider where the job seeker changes address and cannot access the provider’s office, or requests to change provider in circumstances where the job seeker:

• is unable to maintain a reasonable and constructive servicing relationship with the provider;
• both new and old providers agree to the change; or
• can demonstrate they would receive better services from another provider that could enhance their employment prospects.^[82]

8.89 Stakeholders suggested that there may be a need to ensure that a victim of family violence can change JSA or DES providers where the perpetrator of family violence attends the same provider.^[83] For example, WEAVE submitted that, in its experience, ‘victims have gone to [providers] and found their perpetrator in the same seminar’.^[84]

8.90 DEEWR suggested that the current arrangements do not preclude a job seeker in such a situation from changing providers. DEEWR advised that a job seeker could change providers where he or she demonstrated that he or she would receive better services from another JSA provider that could enhance employment prospects or could reach a mutual agreement with the current and potential JSA provider.^[85] However, the National Welfare Rights Network (NWRN) submitted that the scenario of a person experiencing family violence being registered with the same JSA or DES provider as the person using family violence does not fit into any of the current circumstances for changing providers.^[86]

8.91 In some areas, for example rural areas, it may be difficult to change providers where there is limited access to provider services. However, in light of the safety concerns that may arise where a job seeker experiencing family violence is required to attend the same provider as the person using family violence, the victim should be entitled to change JSA or DES providers.

Identifying family violence-related safety concerns

8.92 In light of the barriers to disclosure of family violence noted in Chapter 1, there may be a need to identify safety concerns through the JSA or DES systems.^[87] The ALRC has heard that, in some cases, a job seeker may disclose family violence to a JSA or DES provider, without necessarily having previously disclosed family violence to a government agency such as Centrelink.

8.93 Disclosure of family violence may occur at a number of stages of the JSA or DES provider service delivery, including: formulation of a job seeker’s EPP; the administration of the JSCI; in the general course of the provider assisting the job seeker to obtain relevant education or training.

8.94 The primary benefits of by JSA or DES providers promoting the disclosure of family violence include that it may:

• improve identification of job seekers experiencing violence;
• assist JSA and DES providers to provide more appropriate and tailored employment services; and
• foster interagency collaboration, for example between DEEWR, Centrelink, DHS, and JSA and DES providers.

8.95 In the context of the JSA system, WEAVE submitted that providers:

like to argue that domestic violence cases have been screened out so they don’t need to do anything … JSPs [job service providers] also need to inquire on intake if there are any threats to the person’s safety or other in their household. If the person discloses current or recent violence they should be given full information about all Centrelink supports and exemptions available to them so they can make an informed decision about their next steps.^[88]

8.96 A range of other stakeholders supported the introduction of some form of risk identification for family violence in the context of the pre-employment system.^[89] For example, the ADFVC recommended ‘the introduction of standard questions for raising family violence issues with clients’.^[90]

8.97 Instead of ‘screening’, the AASW (Qld) and WRC Inc (Qld) submitted that clients should be given information about what family violence is and how it may affect them, their options, entitlements, exemptions and pathways to support.^[91]

8.98 While there was strong support for Centrelink employing risk identification of family violence-related safety concerns, the NWRN raised some notable differences between Centrelink and providers identifying safety concerns. For example,

providers will generally have limited, perhaps even inadequate levels of skills, knowledge and capacity to deal appropriately with many of the critical issues around family violence … Employment consultants are not social workers, nor do many possess the required skills and expertise that are required to deal with family violence in an appropriate manner.^[92]

8.99 In ensuring that the JSA and DES systems are effective in assisting job seekers, all circumstances and barriers that may affect a job seeker’s ability to work are relevant and need to be considered. While there are difficulties with introducing the proactive identification of family violence by JSA or DES provider staff, it may facilitate consideration of the impact of family violence on a job seeker, and ultimately assist the job seeker to gain or retain employment, The tender process, Employment Services Deeds or Codes of Practice are areas through which proactive identification of family violence-related safety concerns could be required.

8.100 Regular, consistent and targeted training should be given to provider staff who conduct such risk identification. Monitoring and evaluation should also be built into the process to ensure that screening increases the disclosure of family violence, and that it assists job seekers experiencing family violence and does no harm to vulnerable individuals. Monitoring and evaluation should also be conducted routinely and the outcomes made publicly available.

Referrals

8.101 Any identification of family violence-related safety concerns must be followed by a positive and appropriate response. In particular, there must be a ‘clear signal’ to victims that they will receive assistance and support following disclosure of family violence.^[93]

8.102 The current response is referral back to a Centrelink social worker. A range of existing DEEWR material given to JSA and DES providers includes information about the appropriate response where a job seeker discloses ‘domestic violence, family grief or trauma’, in which case

the job seeker should be immediately referred to a Centrelink social worker. The Social Worker will assess the job seeker’s eligibility for a participation activity exemption and refer the job seeker to other appropriate services for immediate assistance. If the information is being disclosed while the JSCI is being conducted, the JSA provider should complete and submit the JSCI.^[94]

8.103 WEAVE commented that there is a low level of awareness among providers regarding the availability of Centrelink social workers.^[95]

8.104 Referral to social workers allows job seekers to have their eligibility for exemptions from activity and participation requirements considered and facilitates connections to support services. However, particularly as referral to a Centrelink social worker may lead to a cycle of referrals, the ALRC considers that referral to other expert services should also be made available.

8.105 The ALRC considers that information about such referrals should form part of the training set out in Recommendations 5–2 and 8–7.

Information sharing and privacy

8.106 When employment agencies share information about their clients, particularly information about family violence, they should have strict privacy safeguards.

8.107 Information sharing between agencies and providers is vital to ensuring the JSA and DES systems effectively identify and respond to family violence where it may affect a job seeker’s capacity for work, or creates barriers to employment. The sharing of information is also central to ensuring steps taken in a pre-employment context are based on all the relevant information and that information is shared appropriately to ensure, as far as possible, the safety of job seekers experiencing family violence.

8.108 In Chapter 4, the ALRC recommends that DHS should consider developing a ‘safety concerns’ flag to be placed on a customer’s file when family violence-related safety concerns are identified. The ALRC recommends further that, in developing such a flag, it should be shared between relevant DHS programs and other relevant departments or agencies upon the informed consent of the customer.^[96]

8.109 The ALRC understands that there are information-sharing protocols and arrangements already in place between some of these agencies and providers^[97] and that, in addition, some information-sharing systems under the Human Services portfolio are being integrated as part of the Service Delivery Reform.^[98] The Employment Services Deeds also contain information on the control of personal and protected information and specifies that providers must carry out and discharge the obligations contained under the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth), as if they were an agency.^[99]

8.110 However, in considering the sharing of personal information about job seekers between agencies and providers, there is a need to ensure that information is shared when it will assist the job seeker and that privacy concerns associated with such sharing are addressed. For example, when sensitive personal information, such as family violence, is disclosed, this may raise issues of consent.

8.111 Stakeholders expressed particular concern about ensuring the confidentiality of job seeker information. WEAVE submitted that, in their experience,

[t]here have been reports of instances where perpetrators have rung JSPs and successfully obtained personal information by tricks such as ‘my sister Judith has an appointment there today and asked me to pick her up when she finished but I forgot the time she told me and I don’t have her mobile number, can you tell me when her appointment is or give me her phone number so I can call her?’^[100]

8.112 The NSW Women’s Refuge Movement raised one circumstance where a person’s safety was compromised by a provider:

The woman, who was being accommodated by one of our member refuges previous [provider] had disclosed to the perpetrator’s sister not only the town the woman had moved to but also that she was staying at the refuge. The perpetrator then proceeded to make threats (involving the use of firearms) against the woman’s safety and the safety of the refuge staff on numerous occasions. The woman has since left Australia as a result of the very real threat to her safety.^[101]

8.113 Stakeholders agreed that appropriate privacy safeguards should be in place with any information-sharing arrangement.^[102] A balance must be struck between ensuring information is shared when it will assist the job seeker and avoiding job seekers having to re-disclose family violence, with privacy concerns associated with the sharing of personal information.^[103]

8.114 The ALRC does not specify the exact content or type of information-sharing arrangements that should exist. However, Centrelink, DEEWR, JSA, DES, IEP providers and ESAt and JCA assessors—through DHS—should consider issues arising with respect to the personal information of individual job seekers who have disclosed family violence in the context of their information-sharing arrangements. The information-sharing arrangements between DEEWR, Centrelink, DHS, the Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs (FaHCSIA), the Family Assistance Office and the Child Support Agency FAO and CSA, referred to in Chapter 4, are relevant to the arrangements made or developed in this context.

8.115 Secondly, in sharing information between these agencies and providers, there is a need to ensure the confidentiality of that information and adherence to obligations under the Privacy Act as well as any associated requirements under Employment Services Deeds.

Systems or programs for job seekers experiencing family violence

8.116 There are a number of other system responses to disclosures of family violence, including potential access by providers to funds under the EPF, which is a flexible pool of funds available to providers to purchase a broad range of assistance to help job seekers access training and support to find and retain a job.^[104]

8.117 As far as the ALRC is aware, JSA and DES providers do not currently have formal systems or programs in place within the stream system to account for the particular needs of job seekers experiencing family violence. However, the ALRC understands that some JSA providers have measures in place, on an informal basis, to assist job seekers experiencing family violence to gain and retain employment.

8.118 The ALRC suggested in the Family Violence—Commonwealth Laws, ALRC Discussion Paper 76 (2011) (Discussion Paper) that the safety of job seekers experiencing family violence may be improved through the introduction of specialist systems and programs by JSA and DES providers. The ALRC envisaged that JSA and DES providers could introduce a range of initiatives, such as:

• a targeted job placement program that screens employers for understanding or support of issues arising from family violence, relevant workplace policies and clauses, and provision of access to flexible working arrangements or leave; or
• making arrangements to ensure a job seeker can work in a position that will not require them to work alone, or have contact with external clients, in order to avoid any risk posed by the person using family violence attending the workplace.^[105]

8.119 The development of specific systems or programs could ensure that, where job seekers are either not eligible for activity or participation exemptions, or make the choice to work, they are provided with additional tailored pre-employment support. In particular, the ADFVC suggested the development of a targeted job placement program that

screens prospective employers who might be more supportive of employees who are victims of violence, and likely to provide flexible hours and other measures to enable workforce participation.^[106]

8.120 In addition, such moves may address stakeholder concerns that, under the current system, ‘there is no clear signal to victims that they will receive any help by disclosing violence’.^[107]

8.121 The NWRN considered such arrangements might be beneficial, but noted that specialist providers may not be located in sufficient numbers and locations.^[108] Other stakeholders disagreed with such a proposal, claiming that such arrangements would further stigmatise, isolate and marginalise people,^[109] and may lead to them being ‘stuck in low paid, unstable jobs’ which have a detrimental impact on their physical and mental health.^[110]

8.122 In light of concerns of stakeholders, the ALRC does not recommend specialist programs and systems for job seekers experiencing family violence. The ALRC considers that an individual tailored approach—such as accessing the EPF—would be a more appropriate response.