WEBVTT - How WFH has become an election issue

0:00:00.520 --> 0:00:03.720
<v Speaker 1>Already and this this is the Daily This is the

0:00:03.800 --> 0:00:05.120
<v Speaker 1>Daily OS.

0:00:05.120 --> 0:00:15.800
<v Speaker 2>Oh, now it makes sense. Good morning and welcome to

0:00:15.800 --> 0:00:18.440
<v Speaker 2>the Daily OS. It's Tuesday, the twenty fifth of March.

0:00:18.560 --> 0:00:19.960
<v Speaker 3>I'm Zara, I'm Sam.

0:00:20.160 --> 0:00:23.800
<v Speaker 2>Earlier this month, the Coalition announced it once public servants

0:00:23.880 --> 0:00:26.760
<v Speaker 2>in the office five days a week. That's, of course,

0:00:26.840 --> 0:00:30.040
<v Speaker 2>if it wins the next election. Then over the weekend,

0:00:30.200 --> 0:00:33.960
<v Speaker 2>Prime Minister Anthony Aberzi came out swinging against the proposal,

0:00:34.240 --> 0:00:37.600
<v Speaker 2>saying that working from home is important for flexibility, women

0:00:37.680 --> 0:00:41.199
<v Speaker 2>in the workplace and the economy. In today's podcast, we're

0:00:41.200 --> 0:00:43.760
<v Speaker 2>going to take you through what the coalition is proposing

0:00:43.960 --> 0:00:47.520
<v Speaker 2>and some of the criticisms that the government has leveled since.

0:00:50.760 --> 0:00:52.960
<v Speaker 3>Zara. We first heard of working from home as an

0:00:53.000 --> 0:00:56.400
<v Speaker 3>election campaign issue when the Coalition announced its plans to

0:00:56.440 --> 0:00:59.640
<v Speaker 3>make public servants work from the office. Yeah, tell me

0:00:59.640 --> 0:01:00.960
<v Speaker 3>about election commitment.

0:01:01.280 --> 0:01:03.760
<v Speaker 2>Yeah. So it was earlier this month and the coalition

0:01:03.960 --> 0:01:07.560
<v Speaker 2>announced that if it wins the election, it expects all

0:01:07.600 --> 0:01:11.639
<v Speaker 2>public servants to work from the office five days a week.

0:01:12.240 --> 0:01:15.560
<v Speaker 2>At the time, Shadow Finance Minister Jane Hume described the

0:01:15.600 --> 0:01:19.320
<v Speaker 2>current work from home arrangements for federal public service workers

0:01:19.400 --> 0:01:21.959
<v Speaker 2>as unsustainable.

0:01:21.240 --> 0:01:23.720
<v Speaker 3>And So by public service workers, you mean people who

0:01:23.760 --> 0:01:25.479
<v Speaker 3>work for government agencies, right.

0:01:25.480 --> 0:01:29.040
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, exactly, So people that are working for the federal

0:01:29.040 --> 0:01:34.000
<v Speaker 2>Department of Health, Defense, Education, among other things. We're talking

0:01:34.040 --> 0:01:37.160
<v Speaker 2>about three hundred and sixty five thousand people when we

0:01:37.240 --> 0:01:39.520
<v Speaker 2>talk about the public servants in this story. So just

0:01:39.600 --> 0:01:41.720
<v Speaker 2>to give you a sense of who would be impacted

0:01:41.760 --> 0:01:45.320
<v Speaker 2>by this potential policy, the Coalition has spent quite a

0:01:45.319 --> 0:01:47.840
<v Speaker 2>bit of time talking about the public service. This isn't

0:01:47.960 --> 0:01:50.800
<v Speaker 2>a one off. They have made the public service a

0:01:51.000 --> 0:01:54.960
<v Speaker 2>kind of election issue for themselves. Last month they vowed

0:01:55.000 --> 0:01:58.640
<v Speaker 2>to cut wasteful government spending and that included the number

0:01:58.680 --> 0:02:01.880
<v Speaker 2>of people who work in the public service. Just quickly

0:02:02.080 --> 0:02:04.960
<v Speaker 2>to connect those two things when they say wasteful government

0:02:05.040 --> 0:02:07.640
<v Speaker 2>spending and then connect it to the public service, we're

0:02:07.640 --> 0:02:11.520
<v Speaker 2>talking there about the fact that public servants are taxpayer funded.

0:02:12.600 --> 0:02:15.400
<v Speaker 2>So back to the work from home announcement. The most

0:02:15.440 --> 0:02:19.400
<v Speaker 2>recent Australian Public Service survey showed that sixty one percent

0:02:19.400 --> 0:02:22.840
<v Speaker 2>of public servants worked away from the office at least

0:02:22.880 --> 0:02:25.560
<v Speaker 2>some of the time in twenty twenty four. So that's

0:02:25.560 --> 0:02:29.280
<v Speaker 2>a majority have worked at some point away from the

0:02:29.320 --> 0:02:32.760
<v Speaker 2>office some of the time. In this context, the Coalition

0:02:33.000 --> 0:02:35.600
<v Speaker 2>said as I led with that it once works in

0:02:35.639 --> 0:02:38.880
<v Speaker 2>the office every day of the week now At the time,

0:02:38.919 --> 0:02:43.040
<v Speaker 2>Opposition Leader Peter Dunnen said that Australian taxpayers expect government

0:02:43.040 --> 0:02:46.120
<v Speaker 2>employees to be working as hard as they are. People

0:02:46.160 --> 0:02:48.760
<v Speaker 2>refusing to go back to work in Canberra is not

0:02:48.919 --> 0:02:50.000
<v Speaker 2>acceptable and.

0:02:49.960 --> 0:02:53.720
<v Speaker 3>We've seen similar moves from private companies across Australia who

0:02:54.120 --> 0:02:57.560
<v Speaker 3>have said that they want to increase productivity and that's

0:02:57.600 --> 0:02:59.919
<v Speaker 3>why they're asking people to come back into the physical

0:03:00.840 --> 0:03:03.640
<v Speaker 3>Is the Coalition using the same argument in putting forward

0:03:03.639 --> 0:03:04.840
<v Speaker 3>this idea.

0:03:04.400 --> 0:03:07.360
<v Speaker 2>I mean, essentially, yeah, it's exactly the same idea. The

0:03:07.400 --> 0:03:10.880
<v Speaker 2>policy was first announced by Shadow Finance Minister Jane Hume

0:03:11.400 --> 0:03:13.800
<v Speaker 2>in a speech to the Menzies Center, and I was

0:03:13.800 --> 0:03:15.920
<v Speaker 2>reading through that speech and just pulled out a few

0:03:16.040 --> 0:03:19.000
<v Speaker 2>key quotes there. She said that working from home has

0:03:19.040 --> 0:03:23.480
<v Speaker 2>become a right that is creating inefficiency. She also cited

0:03:23.560 --> 0:03:27.520
<v Speaker 2>a recent report from Stanford that claimed that after working

0:03:27.560 --> 0:03:30.639
<v Speaker 2>from home arrangements were put in place, productivity fell by

0:03:30.639 --> 0:03:33.600
<v Speaker 2>about twenty percent. She didn't go into the kind of

0:03:33.680 --> 0:03:37.240
<v Speaker 2>technicalities of that research, so we don't know particularly what

0:03:37.320 --> 0:03:40.760
<v Speaker 2>workforce it's talking about. There. She also, as you said,

0:03:40.840 --> 0:03:44.280
<v Speaker 2>highlighted the fact that other big Aussie companies, including NAB

0:03:44.320 --> 0:03:47.720
<v Speaker 2>and CBA, have instructed their staff to return to the office.

0:03:47.720 --> 0:03:50.280
<v Speaker 2>So she was saying there that the government wouldn't be

0:03:50.320 --> 0:03:53.160
<v Speaker 2>an outlier if it were to have this proposal come

0:03:53.200 --> 0:03:56.200
<v Speaker 2>into fruition. And I do just want to clarify before

0:03:56.200 --> 0:03:58.640
<v Speaker 2>we go any further that she did say that there

0:03:58.680 --> 0:04:02.160
<v Speaker 2>could be exceptions for people coming into the office. She

0:04:02.240 --> 0:04:05.040
<v Speaker 2>said that if the working from home arrangements work for

0:04:05.080 --> 0:04:08.000
<v Speaker 2>the employee's department, the team, and the individual, that they

0:04:08.080 --> 0:04:10.600
<v Speaker 2>would be willing to allow for that to happen.

0:04:11.160 --> 0:04:15.360
<v Speaker 3>So the coalition's position is really clear. What about the government,

0:04:15.440 --> 0:04:18.560
<v Speaker 3>how have they responded, you said. Anthony Aberenezi responded to

0:04:18.640 --> 0:04:20.600
<v Speaker 3>this policy over the weekend. What did he say?

0:04:21.120 --> 0:04:22.800
<v Speaker 2>Well, I think it's fair to say this is one

0:04:22.800 --> 0:04:25.760
<v Speaker 2>of those times where we aren't seeing bipartisanship. I think

0:04:25.839 --> 0:04:28.840
<v Speaker 2>a lot of the time we have an announcement by

0:04:28.920 --> 0:04:30.800
<v Speaker 2>either the government or the coalition and then the other

0:04:30.880 --> 0:04:33.320
<v Speaker 2>kind of matches it. That's sort of what happens during

0:04:33.320 --> 0:04:36.599
<v Speaker 2>a campaign period. That's not what's happening here. This kind

0:04:36.600 --> 0:04:41.039
<v Speaker 2>of light and day between the two parties positions. On Sunday,

0:04:41.160 --> 0:04:45.440
<v Speaker 2>in a press conference, Anthony Albernesi defended working from home.

0:04:45.520 --> 0:04:46.840
<v Speaker 2>Here's a bit of what he said.

0:04:47.360 --> 0:04:52.400
<v Speaker 1>This is an advantage in modern families that have enabled

0:04:52.440 --> 0:04:55.839
<v Speaker 1>them to take advantage of it. It is also meant

0:04:56.000 --> 0:05:01.120
<v Speaker 1>for working families where both parents are working, they're able

0:05:01.279 --> 0:05:05.000
<v Speaker 1>to deal with those issues of working from home has

0:05:05.120 --> 0:05:08.480
<v Speaker 1>enabled them to work full time and therefore it has

0:05:08.600 --> 0:05:10.520
<v Speaker 1>increased workforce participation.

0:05:11.200 --> 0:05:14.279
<v Speaker 2>So clearly they're Labour coming down hard on the other side,

0:05:14.440 --> 0:05:17.919
<v Speaker 2>advocating for work from home options continuing to be available

0:05:17.960 --> 0:05:20.920
<v Speaker 2>for the public service and also for kind of Aussies.

0:05:20.560 --> 0:05:21.680
<v Speaker 3>Across the country.

0:05:21.839 --> 0:05:26.279
<v Speaker 2>Yeah. The government's criticism of the opposition's policy has broadly,

0:05:26.320 --> 0:05:29.760
<v Speaker 2>i'd say, been from two main angles. The first is

0:05:29.960 --> 0:05:33.680
<v Speaker 2>the impact on women and the second is the economic

0:05:33.800 --> 0:05:36.160
<v Speaker 2>impact of cutting work from home options.

0:05:36.240 --> 0:05:38.920
<v Speaker 3>Why don't we start then by talking about this impact

0:05:39.000 --> 0:05:40.080
<v Speaker 3>on women argument?

0:05:40.320 --> 0:05:43.880
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, So this criticism was really led by Labour's Minister

0:05:43.920 --> 0:05:47.760
<v Speaker 2>for Women, Katie Gallagher, who said when the Coalition's policy

0:05:47.800 --> 0:05:51.240
<v Speaker 2>was first announced that they again referring to the Coalition,

0:05:51.480 --> 0:05:54.400
<v Speaker 2>don't have women's interests at heart. They don't see it

0:05:54.440 --> 0:05:57.240
<v Speaker 2>as a central economic driver of growth. She went on

0:05:57.279 --> 0:05:59.720
<v Speaker 2>to say that clearly the Opposition have no idea about

0:05:59.720 --> 0:06:02.599
<v Speaker 2>how modern families operate, and that women have a right

0:06:02.640 --> 0:06:07.000
<v Speaker 2>to feel at risk. In response, we heard almost immediately

0:06:07.040 --> 0:06:10.440
<v Speaker 2>from Opposition leader Peter Dudden, who said that this policy

0:06:10.440 --> 0:06:13.560
<v Speaker 2>doesn't discriminate against people on the basis of gender, and

0:06:13.880 --> 0:06:17.479
<v Speaker 2>he suggested that there were plenty of job sharing arrangements

0:06:17.560 --> 0:06:20.520
<v Speaker 2>available for women who couldn't be in the office five

0:06:20.600 --> 0:06:21.239
<v Speaker 2>days a week.

0:06:21.560 --> 0:06:24.039
<v Speaker 3>Okay, so that's Labour's argument around the impact on women.

0:06:24.120 --> 0:06:27.159
<v Speaker 3>But then another issue there highlighting is the economic impact.

0:06:27.440 --> 0:06:30.880
<v Speaker 2>I found this one really interesting. So basically over the

0:06:30.880 --> 0:06:35.760
<v Speaker 2>weekend Labor released new modeling that's just numbers that they

0:06:35.880 --> 0:06:40.200
<v Speaker 2>said shows that Ozzie's would be worse off financially if

0:06:40.400 --> 0:06:42.880
<v Speaker 2>they couldn't work from home. So let me walk you

0:06:42.920 --> 0:06:46.840
<v Speaker 2>through it. According to this analysis, again by Labor, that

0:06:46.920 --> 0:06:50.120
<v Speaker 2>needs to be said, the Coalition's plan would cost the

0:06:50.160 --> 0:06:54.040
<v Speaker 2>average worker up to an extra four nine hundred and

0:06:54.120 --> 0:06:57.520
<v Speaker 2>seventy six dollars a year because of the cost of

0:06:57.640 --> 0:06:59.159
<v Speaker 2>transport and parking.

0:07:00.080 --> 0:07:01.560
<v Speaker 3>They were forced to go to the office five days

0:07:01.600 --> 0:07:01.920
<v Speaker 3>a week.

0:07:02.040 --> 0:07:05.720
<v Speaker 2>Correct, So they're saying that if you work from home

0:07:05.800 --> 0:07:08.000
<v Speaker 2>then you're not paying for the commute, inn you're not

0:07:08.040 --> 0:07:09.920
<v Speaker 2>paying for a parking spot if that's how you get

0:07:09.960 --> 0:07:12.800
<v Speaker 2>into work, and that if you have to do those things,

0:07:13.240 --> 0:07:15.800
<v Speaker 2>you as the employee, will be worse off than if

0:07:15.800 --> 0:07:18.880
<v Speaker 2>you were able to work from home. Labor also claimed

0:07:18.920 --> 0:07:21.960
<v Speaker 2>that commuters would have to spend an extra two hours

0:07:22.000 --> 0:07:24.680
<v Speaker 2>additionally in the car each week, or around ninety seven

0:07:24.720 --> 0:07:26.920
<v Speaker 2>hours a year if they were required to be in

0:07:26.920 --> 0:07:28.760
<v Speaker 2>the office every day of the week.

0:07:28.520 --> 0:07:30.360
<v Speaker 3>Which would probably be good for podcasting.

0:07:30.600 --> 0:07:32.960
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, so listening to this podcast.

0:07:32.560 --> 0:07:35.640
<v Speaker 3>Well, it is an interesting angle given the economic argument

0:07:35.680 --> 0:07:37.920
<v Speaker 3>that we normally engage with on this topic is on

0:07:37.960 --> 0:07:39.400
<v Speaker 3>the other side of things, right.

0:07:39.360 --> 0:07:41.720
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, I was really surprised to read this because, as

0:07:41.760 --> 0:07:45.680
<v Speaker 2>you said, usually the economic argument is used to justify

0:07:45.840 --> 0:07:48.880
<v Speaker 2>bringing people back to work, not keeping them at home.

0:07:49.280 --> 0:07:52.000
<v Speaker 2>I remember last year Billy and I did a podcast

0:07:52.160 --> 0:07:55.440
<v Speaker 2>about the New South Wales government wanting to implement something

0:07:55.520 --> 0:07:58.280
<v Speaker 2>similar and at the time there was a lot of

0:07:58.320 --> 0:08:02.560
<v Speaker 2>talk about how it could reinviger rate Sydney's CBD. That's

0:08:02.600 --> 0:08:05.120
<v Speaker 2>because at the time some businesses were saying that they'd

0:08:05.160 --> 0:08:08.200
<v Speaker 2>lost up to twenty five percent of profit on Fridays

0:08:08.200 --> 0:08:11.520
<v Speaker 2>compared to pre pandemic levels. It's because the after work

0:08:11.560 --> 0:08:13.960
<v Speaker 2>bev Regino was not happening. When you're working from home,

0:08:13.960 --> 0:08:17.080
<v Speaker 2>you're not going into the city and things like office

0:08:17.080 --> 0:08:20.400
<v Speaker 2>spaces were becoming vacant at a rapid rate. And so

0:08:20.440 --> 0:08:23.720
<v Speaker 2>that really dominated a lot of the announcement as to

0:08:23.800 --> 0:08:26.480
<v Speaker 2>why the New South Wales government wanted New South Wales

0:08:26.560 --> 0:08:29.320
<v Speaker 2>public servants back into the office.

0:08:29.360 --> 0:08:32.240
<v Speaker 3>And obviously that comes from you know, business groups and

0:08:32.480 --> 0:08:34.760
<v Speaker 3>the businesses in the city who not just want the

0:08:34.840 --> 0:08:36.960
<v Speaker 3>drinks after work, but the coffee in the morning and

0:08:37.280 --> 0:08:40.920
<v Speaker 3>the cleaning of offices. I mean, so many businesses attached exactly.

0:08:41.120 --> 0:08:44.559
<v Speaker 2>But I guess for the federal government there's different jurisdiction,

0:08:44.800 --> 0:08:47.240
<v Speaker 2>there's different kind of things that they have power over,

0:08:47.720 --> 0:08:50.440
<v Speaker 2>and labor has as I said, kind of whittled it

0:08:50.480 --> 0:08:52.960
<v Speaker 2>down to these two key areas of criticism.

0:08:53.360 --> 0:08:55.840
<v Speaker 3>And I think what's really interesting about having this debate

0:08:56.000 --> 0:08:59.040
<v Speaker 3>as an election topic, it sounds like, is that there

0:08:59.080 --> 0:09:02.079
<v Speaker 3>is for most people point to relate to it really closely. Yeah,

0:09:02.120 --> 0:09:04.120
<v Speaker 3>I mean this is a discussion about setting the tone

0:09:04.120 --> 0:09:06.920
<v Speaker 3>of how government sees flexible work. I mean, it just

0:09:06.920 --> 0:09:09.520
<v Speaker 3>affects public servants at the moment, But.

0:09:09.760 --> 0:09:12.400
<v Speaker 2>I mean public servants a kind of the only workers

0:09:12.400 --> 0:09:14.680
<v Speaker 2>who can be affected by a government ruling like this

0:09:14.840 --> 0:09:17.199
<v Speaker 2>if you were for a private company and it's come

0:09:17.240 --> 0:09:19.760
<v Speaker 2>down from your private company, not from the government. But

0:09:19.760 --> 0:09:22.840
<v Speaker 2>you're right, it's a really interesting tone and precedent.

0:09:23.240 --> 0:09:26.240
<v Speaker 3>And we've previously pulled our audience on this topic. What

0:09:26.440 --> 0:09:28.600
<v Speaker 3>was the response like from TDA readers.

0:09:29.120 --> 0:09:32.120
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, so we asked them, I believe when the new

0:09:32.160 --> 0:09:36.560
<v Speaker 2>South Wales government announcement was first tabled, and at the time,

0:09:37.320 --> 0:09:40.079
<v Speaker 2>ninety percent of respondents to our pole said that office

0:09:40.120 --> 0:09:43.920
<v Speaker 2>policies should be hybrid so that they allow for both

0:09:43.960 --> 0:09:46.200
<v Speaker 2>work from home and in the office, which is as

0:09:46.280 --> 0:09:49.960
<v Speaker 2>we know what happens in most workplaces now. Only six

0:09:50.040 --> 0:09:53.640
<v Speaker 2>percent of respondents said office policies should be a mandate

0:09:53.720 --> 0:09:56.320
<v Speaker 2>to work in the office full time. It's quite a

0:09:56.360 --> 0:09:59.320
<v Speaker 2>low percentage there. We then also went on to ask

0:09:59.360 --> 0:10:02.360
<v Speaker 2>them if they would reconsider working for a company if

0:10:02.400 --> 0:10:04.800
<v Speaker 2>they were required to always be in the office, and

0:10:04.840 --> 0:10:08.559
<v Speaker 2>around sixty percent said that they would reconsider it, And

0:10:08.600 --> 0:10:10.840
<v Speaker 2>so I think these are interesting numbers to keep in

0:10:10.880 --> 0:10:13.320
<v Speaker 2>mind if the coalition, you know, there's a lot of

0:10:13.360 --> 0:10:16.560
<v Speaker 2>ifs here but if the coalition does win the next

0:10:16.559 --> 0:10:19.640
<v Speaker 2>election and then does follow through on this election commitment,

0:10:20.120 --> 0:10:22.600
<v Speaker 2>I do think that trying to understand how the public

0:10:22.679 --> 0:10:26.720
<v Speaker 2>service both attracts and retains young staff will be really

0:10:26.760 --> 0:10:27.520
<v Speaker 2>really interesting.

0:10:27.679 --> 0:10:31.880
<v Speaker 3>That's a very interesting way for a lot of people

0:10:31.920 --> 0:10:33.720
<v Speaker 3>to have a touch point with this election. I mean,

0:10:34.200 --> 0:10:37.040
<v Speaker 3>as you just said, this is just about the public service.

0:10:37.040 --> 0:10:39.680
<v Speaker 3>But if sixty percent of people responding to a poll

0:10:40.080 --> 0:10:42.400
<v Speaker 3>are going to reconsider their jobs, if they're told to

0:10:42.400 --> 0:10:44.600
<v Speaker 3>work from the office every day, then a lot of

0:10:44.600 --> 0:10:47.160
<v Speaker 3>private businesses will be looking at the tone that's set

0:10:47.360 --> 0:10:49.200
<v Speaker 3>in this discussion as well and the views that come

0:10:49.240 --> 0:10:50.080
<v Speaker 3>out on this topic.

0:10:50.400 --> 0:10:53.240
<v Speaker 2>Of course, and it must be said that young people

0:10:53.320 --> 0:10:56.360
<v Speaker 2>have a different perspective on this. You know. We a

0:10:56.400 --> 0:10:58.640
<v Speaker 2>lot of us entered the workforce for the first time

0:10:58.679 --> 0:11:01.679
<v Speaker 2>around COVID and I don't really know anything else. So

0:11:01.920 --> 0:11:04.040
<v Speaker 2>there's lots of layers to this, lots of nuance and

0:11:04.160 --> 0:11:05.480
<v Speaker 2>definitely one to keep an eye on.

0:11:05.720 --> 0:11:08.320
<v Speaker 3>Thank you so much, Sarah. We are certainly getting into

0:11:08.520 --> 0:11:11.240
<v Speaker 3>election territory now that we're starting to break down these

0:11:11.280 --> 0:11:14.400
<v Speaker 3>kind of foreign against on some big issues. We'll be

0:11:14.480 --> 0:11:17.480
<v Speaker 3>back again with some headlines in the afternoon. Until then,

0:11:17.600 --> 0:11:20.120
<v Speaker 3>have a fantastic day if you're working from home or

0:11:20.440 --> 0:11:26.800
<v Speaker 3>at work. My name is Lily Maddon and I'm a

0:11:26.800 --> 0:11:31.520
<v Speaker 3>proud Arunda Bunjelung Kalkutin woman from Gadighl country. The Daily

0:11:31.640 --> 0:11:34.680
<v Speaker 3>oz acknowledges that this podcast is recorded on the lands

0:11:34.679 --> 0:11:37.920
<v Speaker 3>of the Gadighl people and pays respect to all Aboriginal

0:11:38.000 --> 0:11:40.920
<v Speaker 3>and Torres Strait island and nations. We pay our respects

0:11:41.080 --> 0:11:44.120
<v Speaker 3>to the first peoples of these countries, both past and present.