There are no easy answers to the causes of unemployment. Just as there are no easy answers as to the remedies. It's accepted by people of widely differing political viewpoints that NZ is facing an unemployment crisis similar to that of the ′30s. The answers and remedies which people put for forward, depend more on an ideological perspective than on an analysis of the concrete situation.

If people are to work towards the solving of the employment crisis, they must have some conception or analysis of the problem. Activity which is aimed at doing something about the employment situation, which is not informed by any analysis, is meaningless and counterproductive. It does not confront the basis of the problem, only its effects.

Similarly, activity which is not backed by any analysis; which specifies changing the government or the economic and political system, is based on wistful thinking and illusions about the mechanics of the present employment crisis.

There are two polar positions which are taken by people when forwarding solutions to the present employment crisis. Both are based on stated and unstated political viewpoints.

The first position states that people out of work are responsible for their own situation. If they are out of work, this view goes, they must be dole bludgers, lazy and don't want to work. They are often at a loss as to why there has been an upsurge in lazy people though.

The people who propound this position would say change the unemployed themselves, give them training. This will give them not only better chances for obtaining work, but the right attitudes and habits towards work as well. The focus here is on the unemployed themselves, as they are the obvious cause of their own plight.

The deficiencies of this approach are evident. First, it assumes that in training people to higher levels of skill and ability, there will be work available for them when they complete their training. If there are no jobs for them at the end of their training, the sense of frustration and anger will be compounded.

It assumes that other measures for the creation of work will be undertaken in the meantime. It assumes that government will take some responsibility for controlling such things as the investment and areas to which investment is made, which will in turn produce jobs.

There is no evidence to suggest that either of the majority parties are prepared to do this. What has been evident is the fact that both parties are prepared to drive public money into the hands of entrepreneurs. The last Labour government gave away public money for regional development with no guarantees for the workers involved that jobs in those regions would be provided on a continuing basis. The present National government has flogged off public money in a number of ways too, the most recent being their employment subsidy schemes.

Spending public money in this way does nothing to attack the basis of the unemployment problem. There is no guarantee for the voter or the taxpayer that the necessary structural changes in the economy will be made to produce jobs on a continuing basis. The effect of the schemes mentioned are rather like the effect of a disprin on a man with a major heart problem.

Short term measures which aim to train people and change their attitudes to, work will not work unless there are other factors within the economic and political system which are controlled and ultimately changed. Short term measures which involve n the spending of public money, for schemes which are designed as palliatives are irresponsible. They are designed more for political expediency, rather than the necessary economic and political change. The focus on the victims of the employment situation pays scant attention to the system which has produced the crisis in the first place.

At the other end of the spectrum, we have the people who propound the big bang theory. Crudely summarised, this position says, don't change the people, change the system. Unemployment will be solved by the advent of socialism in some form or another.

This approach is deficient in specifying what people should do in the short term while waiting for the collapse of capitalism and the ushering in of the millenium. It ignores the fact that any political and economic change will be constrained by the habits, attitudes and traditions from the past. It is based on the hope that things will be better in the future, without too much regard for the activities which must be undertaken in the short term for producing change. The focus of this position, is on the economic and political system which has produced the crisis with scant regard for the victims and their immediate personal problems.

Whatever the ideological position taken, whether it's conscious or unconscious, there are certain objective matters of which we should be aware.

The Problem

It's widely accepted that the employment crisis here reflects the situation of most Western industrial countries.

Young people have borne the brunt of the employment crisis which has been occuring throughout the Western world. Youth unemployment in many Western countries is on average, three times higher than the adult rate.

In New Zealand, 52% of the registered unemployed are under the age of 20. Of these, 72% of all female unemployed are under the age of 20. The corresponding male figure is 41%.

There are a number of identifiable reasons for a higher unemployment rate in NZ. These are the obvious reasons, which are politically controlled. They include deliberate government policy to deflate the economy, by reducing wage levels and living standards, reduction in government expenditure, staff ceilings for government departments and so on.

Attempts have been made to smother the unemployment problem in a humber of ways, thus to reducing the visibility of the problem to the public. Unemployment statistics are fudged by ignoring accepted international standards for measuring un-employment; employment levels of special workers in government departments are built up by make work schemes and so on.

The second part of the government response has been to offer an array of tax incentives, government financial and advisory services, wage subsidies to private businesses in order that the economy can recover on the basis of an export led drive, and that a number of unemployed workers can be 'soaked' up.

The contradictions which this approach raises are obvious. An export drive requires a docile work force which is prepared to accept lower wage levels in order for our goods to be more competitive internationally. As wage levels have surely been reduced, so has internal demand. There have been cutbacks in production, idle plant capacity and more unemployed. It is generally accepted that an export drive must be based on a secure domestic market. Rising unemployment and static levels of productivity are hardly the thing on which to base this.

An export drive requires high levels of productivity. This can only be achieved by reducing input in terms of labour costs — or by increasing output — by getting more work from the existing work force by the application of more plant. But more productivity with fewer workers and more plant mean fewer work opportunities.

There are other factors which will mean also fewer work opportunities for younger people. First there is the fact that more people are coming onto the employment market than ever before. In 1956, there were 103,700 people under 20 in the work force. By 1976, this figure had risen to 162,000.

Secondly, there are changing social attitudes to married women working, and the economic necessity for many of them to work. This has meant that the female participation rate in the work force has increased.

The right of all people to paid employment must now be accepted. When we combine these sorts of things with a falling demand for our agricultural products, growing trade protectionism, rapidly escalating energy prices and higher costs on imported manufactured goods, we have the makings of a major employment crisis.

The Party Politics of Unemployment

The reaction of many people to the employment problem is simplistic. They associate the problem with the stewardship of a particular government. Inflation continues to be a constant and unemployment levels continue to rise. The answer many people put forward to this is the changing of the present government.

The question which most young people will have to ask themselves, is whether a change of government in November will give them any greater guarantee of a job. It's the view of this writer that it won't. A number of factors are operating which will mean whichever of the majority parties assumes power in November, the situation will remain relatively unchanged.

The smother job which is being done on the present employment crisis bears witness to the last point. First employment statistics are recorded by direct registration, rather than by sample of the potential work force. This latter method is used in a number of Western countries for calculating the numbers of unemployed. Under 16 year olds can't register and many married women don't consider it worthwhile registering because they can't get the benefit in many cases.

The process of registration is made deliberately difficult, with the continued need to report in regularly despite the fact that there are few if any job opportunities for many people. These sorts of things drive the numbers of registered unemployed down.

The public service too, plays its part in helping to disguise the true extent of unemployment in NZ. Some departments have almost entire sections staffed by special workers. Departments such as Railways, have nationally 700 or so special workers on.

This serves two purposes. The 700 workers are a direct charge to the Labour Department, and so this reduces the publicly stated cost of running the railways. The Railways, like a number of other government departments, acts as a sponge for the Labour Department, where the latter can shuffle off a number of special workers to other departments and so reduce the registered un-employed. Putting special workers out to other departments in this way fulfills another purpose in this smothering of the problem.

A hallmark of the 1930s was the relief gangs. Today the special worker working alongside the permanent worker in a government department, is not identifiable or visible either to the public or his workmates. He or she is just one of them.

Unemployed people never physically come together as they used to in the ′30s with dole queues either, which again reduces the visibility of the problem to the public. The cheque paid through the mail to the beneficiary's address has seen to that.

This also means that it is far more difficult for unemployed people to organize, a fact which has not been lost on many politicians and departmental officials.

The party political response overall has been to deal with the problem of the unemployed, rather than the problem of un-employment. It has done this in a number of ways to try to make the problem of the unemployed less visible, and so mask over the whole problem of unemployment. Despite all the attempts to deal with the problem of unemployment through Export ′78, energy research and exploration, these have been at best superficial attempts to deal with a major economic problem.

It is not the writer's aim to create cyncism about party politics in NZ, or about politics in general, but young people voting for the first time should be well aware of the limits of party politics. They should not expect too much from the single act of exercising the vote to put this or that party into power.

Voting for a party is only one minor political act and decision which can be made in a whole range of political acts and decisions. For the unemployed and those concerned about employment, a far more important activity is self help activity - organizing in local areas around local issues and local needs. This will be dealt with more fully in another section.

The Responsibility for Employment and Unemployment

The issue of employment and unemployment is the great bandwagon issue of 1978. There is a definite risk of unemployment overkill, with many people all wanting to page 9 get into the act 'to do something about the unemployment situation'. The unemployed must be aware of the variety of motives which exist for those wanting to do something about unemployment, and the unemployed.

Some people want to be involved, not because they want to do something about the unemployment situation, but because they want to control the unemployed. As one gentleman from the Social Welfare Department in Lower Hutt expressed it so succinctly, 'these young people without jobs, quite frankly could do a lot of damage to our lovely city, unless something is done about them'. Others will see it as an area in which they can wring a few dollars out of a government to maintain a social work hierarchy.

The big guns in the field are the government departments. The Labour Department has a statutory responsibility for the area of employment. The Department is supposed to run an employment advice service, for the placement of unemployed people. The experience of many unemployed people with this has been bad. Many employers are reluctant to place jobs with the Department, and many young unemployed people are reluctant to use the Department's employment service because they feel it is a waste of time. Departmental officers are snowed under trying to cope with the immediate situation of registration, interviewing and the like, that their ability to discharge other duties required of them is limited. To this writer's knowledge, there are very few contacts made with employers to determine what employment opportunities are available.

The Social Welfare Department is responsible for administering a very conservative, and at times anomalous piece of legislation in the form of the Social Security Act 1976 (reprinted). The amount of discretionary authority which rests with the Social Security Commission, with its power to make regulations governing the payment of unemployment benefit and the conditions under which the benefit may be received, are wide. Single people may be stood down anything up to six weeks without benefit. They are expected to live and lead a straight life in the meantime while they go without any financial support whatsoever.

Married people are hard hit by this piece of legislation. Where one or the other spo-spouse becomes unemployed, they are not automatically entitled to a benefit, despite the fact that they have been making a tax contribution. All unemployment benefits are means tested. Yet if one of the same couple had fallen ill, they would have been entitled to a sickness benefit, without regard to the other spouses income, provided that a few other conditions are met.

Other government departments involved are Recreation and Sport which funds various youth work schemes, and Maori and Island Affairs. The latter is responsible for dealing specifically with the employment problems of Maori and Island youths, through such schemes as trade training, pre-employment courses and the like.

There are other semi-government agencies involved such as the polytechs, and technical instutes, which are responsible for running some dubious employment courses of short duration. One classic course prospectus for a local polytech stated that the course had as its aim 'to help vocationally confused young people define their job goals'. The writer's view is that is not so much the young people who are confused but the people in these institutions who think that they can suck young people in with these kinds of foboffs.

The trade union movement too is concerned about unemployment, and sees itself having a large responsibility to protect the welfare and conditions of those in and out of work. To date, the actions of the movement haven't matched its words. The movement has been confined to fighting a number of ineffective rearguard actions against redundancies. There has been no defence against the insidious lowering of employment levels in many firms by 'natural attrition', non replacement of staff, and greater use of part time workers.

The movement at this time is not organizationally or politically equipped to deal with an employment crisis of this size. The top leadership makes irrelevant posturings about the need for greater productivity, without understanding the logical consequences that a productivity drive will have for employment levels.

It is the writer's view that the movement must be pushed, or otherwise persuaded into making greater effort for dealing with the overall employment situation. A clear responsibility for the welfare and living standards of workers which exists, is not being exercised.

After the government departments and the trade union movement (and not necessarily in that order) come the voluntary groups, church groups, youth groups and so on. In Wellington at least, there is the Wellington Inner City Ministry, Young Christian Workers which are amongst the concerned church groups. Then there are groups such as the YMCA, the Community Volunteers, ad hoc groups such as the Te Reo Tamariki, work trusts and the like.

There is from the unemployed persons viewpoint, a bewildering array of departments, agencies, church and youth groups, labour movement groups, all dedicated 'to doing something about the employment problem'. All feel some responsibility, or they have this responsibility put upon them by law The sincerity and integrity of most of the people involved in the organizations mentioned can't be doubted What the unemployed person must ask is 'what are the motives behind the persons or organizations concern?'

Unemployed people must realise that most of the organizations concerned are working with short term perspectives in mind. Many are under the impression that this employment crisis is just a temporary thing, and that the situation will somehow improve. Many organizations will want to make the position of unemployed people easier, by pressuring for improvements in the welfare system, providing recreational schemes, or by being involved in temporary make shift schemes. Cushioning the blow of being out of work won't solve the problem. The solutions to the problem and its causes must be grappled with in the now, and not put off until some vague date in the future.

What can be Done about the Problem?

A two pronged strategy must be adopted which attacks the problem of unemployment as well as the problems of the unemployed. This strategy must link short term tactics with long term goals. The relationship between the two must be made explicit. This strategy must deal with both the symptoms and the victims of the employment situation, as well as dealing with the causes of unemployment; the political and economic system.

The first requirement is to deal with the immediate situation in which unemployed people find themselves, and the immediate needs which arise out of that situation. It must be realised by those working with the unemployed that it is the unemployed themselves who are the ones who must define the activities, set the pace, and organize the action.

The best example of this to date has been the action of the young unemployed kids in Porirua who pressured for the setting up of a Labour Department office there. They organized a disco to draw other young unemployed along, advertised the action at this disco, picketed the Labour Department Offices in Wellington and won public support for their case.

The lesson from this is for those wishing to work in this area, let those involved decide on the action. Young people must be encouraged to set winnable and achievable goals. A success such as that had in Porirua can only help build the confidence and ability of people to organise around the is issues and problems of their own situation.

If this means pressuring the Social Welfare Department for reforming the benefit system, then young people should look at the kind of activities which will produce this reform. Publicity and exposure of tardy bureaucrats is always an effective weapon.

What is required too is the promotion of activities which will bring people together. The whole benefit system and un-employment situation keeps people apart and physically isolated. Activity which will break down this is needed. Whether this can be done through such things as discos, local house gatherings, will be determined by the people in the locality.

People must come together for some purpose, and the most obvious is the need for work. Some assessment should be made of local resources to see what areas could be developed to produce work. Local community agencies, such as the councils and countries, must be pressured to develop trading activities and to sponsor work coops by offering administrative back-up or whatever is required.

The logic of this is that if public money is going to be spent in dealing with the employment situation, then the local community is entitled to some return on money spent. It private employers can't keep labour on in hard times, then they have no right to expect that the pool of labour will be just sitting around waiting to be tapped when times pick up.

In the long term, we must work towards creating significantly different employment relationships, which challenge the right of private individuals to hire and fire at will with the ups and downs of the economy.

Labour is a social commodity, the consequences of labour being employed or not employed have social effects which everyone pays for. We are entitled to see some measures of social control introduced in the labour process. Already we see this with some of the work co-ops which are now operating.

Similarly, investment decisions which have been made up until now by private individuals on the basis of the greatest profit and the greatest return must be looked at. Investment decisions have social consequences. An area of high return for investment, may not be socially desirable or produce secure jobs on a continuing basis. This right of a few people to control large amounts of public money, whether this be in the form of institutional finance from banks and insurance companies, or from tax, must be looked at.

In all of this there must be the thread of self sufficiency which holds everything together. Unemployed people in the ′30s came to realise that it was only going to be through their own activities that something would be done about their situation. No-one else was going to organize for them, though a number of people were prepared to help them. So it must be today, that the importance of self-help and self-activity be promoted.

This principle can be extended to encompass the demand for the necessary political and economic changes which must be made to deal with the employment situation. Measures taken to build employment must produce greater self reliance of NZ economically. The whole area of energy is a priority area in this sense. Measures taken to build more democratic work place relationships, must also be underpinned by this concept of greater self reliance of those employed.

In this way, we can build on what always has been a tradition in NZ, that of the strong sense of independence which many people have. Many people feel with the growth of the state and the power of big businesses in NZ that this has become more threatened.

What is needed is not so much a return to some mythical past, but a willingness to promote change, based on the better traditions and values of the past.