How many organisations have taken indigenous opportunity as seriously as the AFL ? I know that the AFL win by having indigenous players in the game, but the AFL seem to be on a track of continuous improvement when it comes to the promotion of indigenous participation and even better - respect for indigenous culture.
Check out the indigenous players map on the AFL website. Very impressive, just need to tighten up the spelling ! And their reputation is spreading - see this from World Footy.
Wednesday, May 16, 2012
Wednesday, May 2, 2012
Funny Stuff
A bit of light relief.....
Chaser's view of the indigenous view of the NBN Rollout. Beware - some people dont find this funny. Personally I reckon it is spot on as it show the irrelevance of white Australia's priorities to remote indigenous people. Plus it gives a hint of the indigenous sense of humour that many whitefellahs wouldnt know existed. Check out the movie Ten Canoes if in doubt.
Chaser's view of the indigenous view of the NBN Rollout. Beware - some people dont find this funny. Personally I reckon it is spot on as it show the irrelevance of white Australia's priorities to remote indigenous people. Plus it gives a hint of the indigenous sense of humour that many whitefellahs wouldnt know existed. Check out the movie Ten Canoes if in doubt.
Tuesday, May 1, 2012
Good News Week - Education
Good News stories on Education
The Australian Indigenous Education Foundation provides opportunities for indigenous students to attend boarding schools then move onto university
The Australian Indigenous Education Foundation provides opportunities for indigenous students to attend boarding schools then move onto university
Sunday, April 29, 2012
Indigenous Employment - The Road to 'Real' Jobs
This page started as a good news story about the Australian Employment Covenant. And the AEC is still a good news story. Andrew Forrest is to be admired for his attempt to employ indigenous people. But the success of such initiatives is never clear cut......
The first article comes from The Australian and paints a very positive picture.
Engaged in the real economy
From: The Australian
April 13, 2012 12:00AM
AFTER decades of economic separatism, welfare dependency and despair, increasing numbers of Aborigines in remote Australia are playing an important role in the nation's most productive industry - mining.
We congratulate Western Australian mining magnate Andrew Forrest for helping place more than 55,000 Aborigines in jobs since 2008 when he launched the Australian Employment Covenant. Since then he has employed hundreds of Aborigines in his Fortescue Metals Group, where they total about 10 per cent of the workforce. Mr Forrest's lateral thinking and practical leadership have succeeded where many other programs, however well meaning, failed to draw Aborigines from the margins into the mainstream economy.
As indigenous lawyer Noel Pearson said at the outset of the covenant, for every 10 jobs a hundred flowers would bloom in the lives of indigenous children: "We're going to look back on this ... as that moment in the history of the country when government and society made a commitment to people that if you take up the cudgels of responsibility we will guarantee you a job, we will set forth before you a prospect of climbing up in the world - a home, a future for your children, a fair stake in this, your own land."
That vision is beginning to become a reality, as indigenous workers and their families swap Centrelink payments for the generous salaries available in mining and save for their own homes and futures. The transformation, individual by individual, family by family, promises long-term success because it is devoid of all vestiges of welfare and handouts. As Aborigines step up to take responsibility for themselves as they discover job satisfaction and pursue financial security, governments must continue facilitating the trend by improving health, education and housing services.
Unlike previous employment initiatives that have been motivated by paternalism, the trend to employ remote Aborigines in mining is being driven by a more hard-headed motive - the push by mining companies to secure a comparative advantage in a sector where workers are scarce. Kevin McLean, general manager of FMG's Cloudbreak iron ore mine in the Pilbara summed up the reality when he said companies were "screaming out for labour" so "if you can tap into people who already have housing, you are a step ahead." It's a win-win process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The True Numbers
For every indigenous jobs initiative it must be possible to measure the results. Surely we can establish how many indigenous applicants there are, how many people are employed and how long they are retained for. And then it should be a matter of looking at which employers are most successful.
Twiggy Forrest of the AEC claims to have placed 10501 indigenous job-seekers and of these 71% were still employed after 6 months. He compares that to the government Job Services program that has a 45% retention rate after only 3 months.
The government then claim that 7043 people have been employed and only 30% of these were retained.
How hard can it be to establish the true figures ?
Forrest claims the government isnt providing the training that they promised. He's already upset the government by protesting against the mining tax. Let's hope politics aren't getting in the way of evaluating or supporting the AEC.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
More jobs at the Ayers Rock Resort
Another good news story. The next question is - what is the retention rate ? Let's hope these are long term.
The first article comes from The Australian and paints a very positive picture.
Engaged in the real economy
From: The Australian
April 13, 2012 12:00AM
AFTER decades of economic separatism, welfare dependency and despair, increasing numbers of Aborigines in remote Australia are playing an important role in the nation's most productive industry - mining.
We congratulate Western Australian mining magnate Andrew Forrest for helping place more than 55,000 Aborigines in jobs since 2008 when he launched the Australian Employment Covenant. Since then he has employed hundreds of Aborigines in his Fortescue Metals Group, where they total about 10 per cent of the workforce. Mr Forrest's lateral thinking and practical leadership have succeeded where many other programs, however well meaning, failed to draw Aborigines from the margins into the mainstream economy.
As indigenous lawyer Noel Pearson said at the outset of the covenant, for every 10 jobs a hundred flowers would bloom in the lives of indigenous children: "We're going to look back on this ... as that moment in the history of the country when government and society made a commitment to people that if you take up the cudgels of responsibility we will guarantee you a job, we will set forth before you a prospect of climbing up in the world - a home, a future for your children, a fair stake in this, your own land."
That vision is beginning to become a reality, as indigenous workers and their families swap Centrelink payments for the generous salaries available in mining and save for their own homes and futures. The transformation, individual by individual, family by family, promises long-term success because it is devoid of all vestiges of welfare and handouts. As Aborigines step up to take responsibility for themselves as they discover job satisfaction and pursue financial security, governments must continue facilitating the trend by improving health, education and housing services.
Unlike previous employment initiatives that have been motivated by paternalism, the trend to employ remote Aborigines in mining is being driven by a more hard-headed motive - the push by mining companies to secure a comparative advantage in a sector where workers are scarce. Kevin McLean, general manager of FMG's Cloudbreak iron ore mine in the Pilbara summed up the reality when he said companies were "screaming out for labour" so "if you can tap into people who already have housing, you are a step ahead." It's a win-win process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The True Numbers
For every indigenous jobs initiative it must be possible to measure the results. Surely we can establish how many indigenous applicants there are, how many people are employed and how long they are retained for. And then it should be a matter of looking at which employers are most successful.
Twiggy Forrest of the AEC claims to have placed 10501 indigenous job-seekers and of these 71% were still employed after 6 months. He compares that to the government Job Services program that has a 45% retention rate after only 3 months.
The government then claim that 7043 people have been employed and only 30% of these were retained.
How hard can it be to establish the true figures ?
Forrest claims the government isnt providing the training that they promised. He's already upset the government by protesting against the mining tax. Let's hope politics aren't getting in the way of evaluating or supporting the AEC.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
More jobs at the Ayers Rock Resort
Another good news story. The next question is - what is the retention rate ? Let's hope these are long term.
Sunday, April 22, 2012
Mainstream or Customised?
If there’s one never-ending debate in indigenous affairs it must be the choice between ‘mainstream’ or ‘customised’ delivery of services to indigenous people. Put simply, mainstreaming says that 1 set of rules is applied to everyone. The same benefits, the same laws, the same responsibilities.
The proponents of this approach argue that disadvantaged communities or groups ultimately suffer by having a distinct set of rules applied to them. The latest offering is from John Watson from The Age
An example of a customised solution might be the CDEP scheme that employs indigenous people in remote communities to clean up the streets. Given the lack of employment opportunities the theory is that it’s better to require welfare recipients to perform some service in return for a wage, rather than simply handing out the dole with no return obligation.
Mainstream theory would suggest that the ‘clean-up’ jobs are really only ‘pretend’ jobs that would not exist in mainstream society. Possibly in mainstream they would be performed by offenders operating under community orders. The theory is that by creating such ‘pretend’ jobs you are entrenching inequality as the worker is performing a role that does not develop skills in the mainstream marketplace. So abolish the role and apply the same standards that apply to ‘everyone else’. Mainstream policies really imply you need to ‘shape up or ship out’ – to whitefellah standards and culture.
But these issues are never so simple. Current Centrelink rules may require a job-seeker to attend 10 job interviews within a fortnight in order to qualify for the dole. How would that restriction work in a remote community where there may be 50 jobs for 700 people?
Mainstreaming also implies that the same facilities and services are to be available to all. Is the government going to build hospitals, schools, child care centres, police and fire stations in every remote community?
Most feedback from indigenous communities favours local solutions. Customised solutions that are a result of listening to the local elders and implemented in response to local needs are usually more successful. They empower the community to be involved and to take responsibility. The Mt Theo program, http://www.mttheo.org/home/mt-theo/the-mt-theo-story/ that ended petrol sniffing at Yuendumu is a good example.
Watson makes the point that the overall cost of existing programs is significant. Is it possible that we owe indigenous Australia the cost and effort involved in developing localised solutions across the country? Rio Tinto are doing it when they factor in sorry business into indigenous employment arrangements. No mainstreaming there. But they are displaying a lot of respect for indigenous culture.
Epilogue : Read about Twiggy Forrerst from the Australian Employment Covenant. Are these 'real' jobs ? It may be that the 60,000 are only 'pledges' but you cant argue with 10,501 off welfare benefits. This is amazing and holds lessons for all employers and government if it's true.
Epilogue : Read about Twiggy Forrerst from the Australian Employment Covenant. Are these 'real' jobs ? It may be that the 60,000 are only 'pledges' but you cant argue with 10,501 off welfare benefits. This is amazing and holds lessons for all employers and government if it's true.
Tuesday, March 13, 2012
Payback
March 2012 and Liam Jurrah , the Melbourne AFL footballer from Yuendumu, is all over the front pages of newspapers and websites after he is arrested for a machete attack that left a victim seriously injured. Jurrah has denied being involved in the fight.
An ongoing feud between 2 'mobs' started in 2010 when a young man was killed after a football game. Indigenous culture says 'payback' should be practiced in order to settle the score. The theory is that the feud has been ongoing due to the inability of the indigenous community to practice their own law. They cant settle the issue, creating frustration and then anger.
So what is payback and how does it work ?
The common elements are the involvement of kin and the role of the Elders to ensure that there is a degree of restraint by opposing parties. The matter would generally be resolved once the offender had been speared in the thigh or blood had been drawn.
Clearly it's not legal under whitefellah law. Can we (Australia, the government, the police...) let an indigenous person spear another in the leg, causing injury that requires hospitalisation? What about if the injury becomes infected and somehow leads to death ? And once there's alcohol involved is there any chance that a measured and appropriate punishment would be meted out ?
On the other hand - is it possible this ongoing and widespread feud (impacting the entire Yuendumu community of 1500 people for over 2 years) could have been settled, allowing everyone to move on ? Would the spearing of the offender have satisfied the community, and in particular, the victim's family ? Would there be acceptance that the 'law' had been observed ?
I would have previously said that we have to have one law in Australia. And being a whitefellah I would have said that's whitefellah law. But I think there's been too much of that over the last 200 years. It's usually been whitefellah way as the only option. Could it be that allowing indigenous elders to oversee 'payback' might help settle disputes, while also help restoring some dignity and pride to indigenous communities ? Could it help re-establish the authority of Elders ? (especially male elders whose authority has been decimated by welfare ). And couldn't we have an ambulance on hand ?
I've heard it argued that indigenous people are happy to enjoy TVs, electric appliances and brick homes. The theory is that if they accept that then they have to take everything we throw at them. All of 'our' rules and our way of life. Surely we can do much better than that. We can respect their culture and make real attempts to allow it to be practiced. Indigenous Australians never asked to have their language, their culture and their land removed.
I'm not 100% sure about payback. It sounds dangerous and difficult to integrate with whitefellah law.
READ THIS........ more thoughts.......
An ongoing feud between 2 'mobs' started in 2010 when a young man was killed after a football game. Indigenous culture says 'payback' should be practiced in order to settle the score. The theory is that the feud has been ongoing due to the inability of the indigenous community to practice their own law. They cant settle the issue, creating frustration and then anger.
So what is payback and how does it work ?
The common elements are the involvement of kin and the role of the Elders to ensure that there is a degree of restraint by opposing parties. The matter would generally be resolved once the offender had been speared in the thigh or blood had been drawn.
Clearly it's not legal under whitefellah law. Can we (Australia, the government, the police...) let an indigenous person spear another in the leg, causing injury that requires hospitalisation? What about if the injury becomes infected and somehow leads to death ? And once there's alcohol involved is there any chance that a measured and appropriate punishment would be meted out ?
On the other hand - is it possible this ongoing and widespread feud (impacting the entire Yuendumu community of 1500 people for over 2 years) could have been settled, allowing everyone to move on ? Would the spearing of the offender have satisfied the community, and in particular, the victim's family ? Would there be acceptance that the 'law' had been observed ?
I would have previously said that we have to have one law in Australia. And being a whitefellah I would have said that's whitefellah law. But I think there's been too much of that over the last 200 years. It's usually been whitefellah way as the only option. Could it be that allowing indigenous elders to oversee 'payback' might help settle disputes, while also help restoring some dignity and pride to indigenous communities ? Could it help re-establish the authority of Elders ? (especially male elders whose authority has been decimated by welfare ). And couldn't we have an ambulance on hand ?
I've heard it argued that indigenous people are happy to enjoy TVs, electric appliances and brick homes. The theory is that if they accept that then they have to take everything we throw at them. All of 'our' rules and our way of life. Surely we can do much better than that. We can respect their culture and make real attempts to allow it to be practiced. Indigenous Australians never asked to have their language, their culture and their land removed.
I'm not 100% sure about payback. It sounds dangerous and difficult to integrate with whitefellah law.
READ THIS........ more thoughts.......
Education - Using rewards in an indigenous context
Rewarding students for excellence in class, or even for doing their best, is a well established approach to motivation. Well I dont think it works too well for remote-community indigenous kids.
Scenario - students are told that first 3 to finish their assigned task ( I wont say worksheet ) will receive a small reward. Lets assume its a stationery item or worst case its a lolly.
At the end of the lesson the rewards are distributed and the lucky 3 are quite happy. But the others are not. They know that you still have rewards in your bag that you have not given out. And they are quite annoyed that you refuse to hand them a reward regardless of the progress they have made on their task.
My theory is that 'demand sharing' is coming into play. Demand sharing is a practice in indigenous communities that says you have to share what you have with anyone who asks you to share. Well, not quite anyone, but at a minimum it's anyone who is relate to you. And within a remote community that usually means most people. So when you hand out rewards to a selected few, and still have other rewards being held back ,there is a sense of injustice. You've got some more of those, why cant I have one ?
An idea that could motivate students to greater efforts becomes a barrier that breaks down the teacher-student relationship.
Scenario - students are told that first 3 to finish their assigned task ( I wont say worksheet ) will receive a small reward. Lets assume its a stationery item or worst case its a lolly.
At the end of the lesson the rewards are distributed and the lucky 3 are quite happy. But the others are not. They know that you still have rewards in your bag that you have not given out. And they are quite annoyed that you refuse to hand them a reward regardless of the progress they have made on their task.
My theory is that 'demand sharing' is coming into play. Demand sharing is a practice in indigenous communities that says you have to share what you have with anyone who asks you to share. Well, not quite anyone, but at a minimum it's anyone who is relate to you. And within a remote community that usually means most people. So when you hand out rewards to a selected few, and still have other rewards being held back ,there is a sense of injustice. You've got some more of those, why cant I have one ?
An idea that could motivate students to greater efforts becomes a barrier that breaks down the teacher-student relationship.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)