A few weeks ago whilst driving down to Yallingup for a field trip with my Oceanography students, I was amazed by and at the same time greatly irritated by Radio National’s Life Matter Program ‘What Did You Do With Your Degree’. Being a member of the Precariat, it repeated many of the rubbish, meaningless and glib phrases that I’ve heard all of my life about education.
It latched onto the now common debate about whether university degrees are still worth doing. And the answer from those working for Universities was a resounding, “yes”. The problem of graduates finding it hard to gain employment is still all someone else’s problem. It was an extraordinarily self serving debate and got me more than a little riled up.
Following your passions, your interests etc is still the mantra of university marketers. Well, passions don’t pay your bills. And unless you have wealthy parents, your passions aren’t going to save you from poverty if you’re overqualified with useless skills and an education that makes you overqualified for everything you try to apply for.
The debate conveniently ignored many of the factors that impact upon recent graduates and those of my generation. Or the hosts blithely glided over them and put them in the same basket as the “casualisation” of entry level jobs.
I am without a doubt a card carrying member of our generation known as the Precariat. Since graduating in 2009, I’ve had one interview. Since completing my Master of Science last year, I’ve had none.
I exist on using personal contacts (none of which have been developed from study) and casual insecure contracts. Although I have a good work history, I probably live in borderline poverty from time to time, and without family I would already be homeless.
But recently (and it took me a long time to realise this), is that of course we are producing too many university graduates. That much is obvious, despite the answers given by the panellists. But this is a function of a society that is task focussed, vocationally focussed and exceptionally removed from a world of self critique and self examination, cohesion and social betterment.
The real discussion, which wasn’t overtly set out was why we might want to have a society where we have a lot of graduates that are performing valuable roles in society. And this is the argument that needs to be made and needs to be carried if employers are actually going to take on more local graduates.
There is an implicit message sent with Australia’s policy settings regarding graduates, immigrants and skilled workers. In my field, I have to compete with workers on 457 visas, who have already been trained elsewhere, and are cherry picked by companies who don’t want to have to invest the minimum investment required to skill me in what I need to do. Despite the fact that I have valuable skills and knowledge that I deliberately targeted because of what I thought would be desired (if you want to hire me, get in touch by the way).
It’s also the case that 457 workers are working illegal hours, and then signing legal documents to say that they aren’t working those illegal hours – knowing full well if they don’t do those hours or sign the documents, their 457 sponsorship will be jeopardised. It is really another example of a disadvantage that local workers are facing.
I have friends who have graduated in Nursing; a skill in high demand, as we are frequently told. But they have not been able to secure any ongoing employment apart from casual, agency type work. Yet, we are still employing nurses on 457 visas. It does not make any sense. Unless there is an implied assumption that our own graduates are not up to standard.
The real issue is what we do with so many graduates facing insecure or few job prospects, whilst competing with policy that is actively working against them.
But it is not just policy that is working against graduates and members of the Precariat. HR departments and HR workers have become notorious and synonymous with misunderstanding the skills that graduates have. They are themselves a parody of what employment and education in Australia has become.
However, this is not exclusively the fault of those in the HR industry. Given that many companies are completely outsourcing their recruitment functions, HR consultants are constrained by the types of employees they are willing to recommend for positions. Gone are the days where employers would understand the translatable nature of the skills that people have in different positions. Instead, many skills are frowned upon.
I myself have had this happen with one HR consultant. After looking at my resume, he informed me that he didn’t have any work going in the education field. Well, if you’re in HR and think that I’m in education because I work for a university and not in education because I have specific skills and knowledge related to particular fields of expertise, then it is a problem.
Or an argument I had with one who concluded that academics and those in Higher Ed were completely unaccountable for the public funding they received. I had to remind her that she did not have to gain ethics approval to do her job, nor have to acquit her funding on the basis of performance or outcomes. Nor was a failure to understand what constituted accountability by way of production of research and inability to cognise academic production the fault of the academic, but a symptom of the problem of HR types and their interaction with the Higher Ed sector.
And don’t get me started on HR in Higher Ed! Often the most obstructive and counterproductive people in Universities to research production and outcomes within the University!
But it is a problem partly of the making of Universities and the higher education sector as well. Those working in HR are “skilled”, rather than “educated” and really probably don’t have enough grounding in alternative fields to understand what particular potential workers can bring to a workplace. It’s all well and good to say that architects and arts graduates can work in banks advising on different scenarios (as the radio programme did), but if you have a HR department that doesn’t understand different attributes, then it is a pointless discussion.
I could go on for hours and hours about my frustrations with employment following graduation, about the lack of understanding of my generation’s skills; the precariousness of employment that my Dad’s generation simply does not understand. I guess the important thing to take out of this is that the problem is known. What we need to do is actually talk about the problem that exists. It isn’t going to be helped by increasing student enrolments, which is what one of the pushes is on for. Nor do we need 457 visa workers in a lot of the areas we have them. Employers and those in the HR have to be more aware of the skills that are actually out there – and be prepared to train people up. Unlike previous generations it is not something that is being provided for my Precariat generation.