PATREC
Forecasting Rail Workforce Needs:
A Long-term Perspective
Prepared for the Cooperative Research Centre for
Railway Engineering and Technologies
by
Anusha Mahendran and Alfred Michael Dockery
Centre for Labour Market Research
(CLMR)
Curtin Business School
Curtin University of Technology
GPO Box U1987, Perth WA 6845
Tel: (08) 9266 1744 Fax: (08) 9266 1743
http://www.business.curtin.edu.au/clmr
and
Fred Affleck
Planning and Transport Research Centre
(PATREC)
Curtin University of Technology
GPO Box U1987 WA 6845
Tel: (08) 9266 3295 Fax: (08) 9266 1377
http://www.patrec.org/index.html
August 2007
2
About the organisations
The Centre for Labour Market Research (CLMR) is a research consortium of the
Curtin University of Technology, the University of Western Australia, Murdoch
University and the University of Canberra. It has branches in Perth and Canberra with
its administrative office located at the Curtin Business School in Perth. The Centre's
objectives are to further the knowledge and understanding of labour markets and related
issues, particularly in the Asia / Pacific region and to promote the exchange of
knowledge and expertise on labour economics and industrial relations between the
academic community, governments, industry organisations, business and trade unions.
CLMR also produces the Australian Journal of Labour Economics.
Planning and Transport Research Centre (PATREC) is a collaborative program
involving Curtin University of Technology, Edith Cowan University, Murdoch
University and the University of Western Australia. PATREC also receives financial
funding from the State Government of Western Australia through the Department for
Planning and Infrastructure and Main Roads WA. Based in Perth Western Australia and
established in May 2003, PATREC pools resources from all four public universities in
the State to facilitate research in a wide range of issues.
PATREC’s strongest areas of educational and research focus are:
 integrated transport and land use planning
 transport economics
 logistics management and business logistics systems and tools
 transport modelling and data management
 transport sustainability, and
 transport safety and risk management
3
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY........................................................................................................................7
RAIL REFORMS .........................................................................................................................................7
ANALYSIS OF RAIL WORKFORCE ..............................................................................................................7
State by State profiles..........................................................................................................................8
MODELLING PROJECTIONS .......................................................................................................................9
TRAINING OVERVIEW ...............................................................................................................................9
MEASURES TO ADDRESS WORKFORCE ISSUES .......................................................................................10
SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................12
1.1 BACKGROUND TO THE REPORT .........................................................................................................12
1.2
THE OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY ..............................................................................................13
1.3
OVERVIEW OF THE METHODOLOGY ..........................................................................................14
SECTION 2: OVERVIEW OF THE AUSTRALIAN RAIL INDUSTRY ..........................................16
2.1 BACKGROUND ..................................................................................................................................16
2.2 ECONOMICS OF THE RAIL INDUSTRY ................................................................................................17
2.2.1 Rail Industry Reforms ..............................................................................................................17
2.2.2 Ongoing reform issues .............................................................................................................19
Rail Infrastructure ............................................................................................................................20
Monopolistic Structure of Rail Markets............................................................................................21
Competition.......................................................................................................................................22
2.3 CURRENT STRUCTURE OF THE RAIL INDUSTRY .................................................................................23
Providers of Rail Infrastructure Access............................................................................................24
Rail Train Operators ........................................................................................................................24
Maintenance and Other Related Service Providers..........................................................................25
SECTION 3: THE RAIL WORKFORCE .............................................................................................26
3.1 ANALYSIS OF ABS CENSUS DATA ....................................................................................................26
3.1.1 Aggregate employment.............................................................................................................27
3.1.2 Employment by occupation and qualification..........................................................................28
3.1.3 The age profile of the rail workforce .......................................................................................30
FIGURE 3.1: AGE PROFILE OF THE RAIL WORKFORCE; 1991 AND 2001....................................................31
FIGURE 3.2: AGE PROFILE OF THE WORKFORCE; RAIL INDUSTRY AND ALL INDUSTRIES, 2001 ................31
3.1.4 Employment By Gender ...........................................................................................................32
3.1.5 Employment by State and Territory .........................................................................................33
3.2 OVERVIEW OF WORKFORCE FROM SURVEY RESULTS ........................................................................34
3.2.1 Employment by occupation ......................................................................................................34
3.2.2 The age profile of the rail workforce .......................................................................................35
3.2.3 Employment by gender.............................................................................................................37
3.3 OVERVIEW OF RECRUITMENT AND TRAINING ARRANGEMENTS .........................................................38
3.3.1 Recruitment..............................................................................................................................38
3.3.2 Overview of training in the rail industry..................................................................................39
SECTION 4: CURRENT AND FUTURE WORKFORCE NEEDS....................................................45
4.1 THE CONCEPT OF A SKILLS SHORTAGE ..............................................................................................45
4.2 SKILLS SHORTAGES AND FUTURE EXPECTATIONS – QUALITATIVE EVIDENCE ....................................47
4.2.1 Skills shortages by occupation.................................................................................................47
4.2.2 Vacancies and wastage rates ...................................................................................................49
4.2.3 Skill shortages by region..........................................................................................................49
4.3 MODELLING FUTURE WORKFORCE NEEDS .........................................................................................50
4.3.1 A model of labour demand in the rail industry ........................................................................50
4.3.2 A model of labour supply and population ageing ....................................................................53
4.3.3 Modelling results .....................................................................................................................54
4.4 RECRUITMENT AND TRAINING IMPLICATIONS ...................................................................................58
4.4.1 Recruitment implications .........................................................................................................58
4.4.2 Training implications...............................................................................................................60
4
SECTION 5: CONCLUSIONS ...............................................................................................................63
APPENDIX A: FURTHER ANALYSIS OF CENSUS DATA BY STATE.........................................68
A.I: EMPLOYMENT SHARES BY OCCUPATION.......................................................................................68
A.II: EMPLOYMENT SHARES BY LEVEL OF QUALIFICATION .................................................................73
A.II: EMPLOYMENT SHARES BY OCCUPATION & GENDER ...................................................................77
APPENDIX B: DETAILS ON METHODOLOGY FOR PRIMARY DATA COLLECTION ........81
APPENDIX C: SURVEY INSTRUMENTS..........................................................................................82
C.1 MAIL OUT QUESTIONNAIRE...........................................................................................................82
C.2 INTERVIEW QUESTIONS ................................................................................................................89
APPENDIX D: MODELLING RESULTS BY YEAR .........................................................................93
REFERENCES .........................................................................................................................................95
5
List of Acronyms
ABS
AIM
ANTA
ANZSIC
AQF
ARA
ARRDO
ARG
ARTC
ARTI
ASCO
ASIC
BTCE
BTRE
CERT
CLMR
CQU
CRC
GDP
IT
PATREC
PTA
QR
QUT
RMIT
RTBU
RTI
RTO
TAFE
TDT
UQ
UWS
Australian Bureau of Statistics
Australian Institute of Management
Australian National Training Authority
Australian and New Zealand Standard Industrial Classification
Australian Qualifications Framework
Australasian Railways Association
Australian Railway Research and Development Organisation
Australian Railroad Group
Australian Rail Track Corporation
Australian Rail Transport Industry
Australian Standard Classification of Occupations
Australian Standard Industrial Classification
Bureau of Transport and Communications Economics
Bureau of Transport and Regional Economics
Centre for Excellence in Rail Training
Centre for Labour Market Research
Central Queensland University
Cooperative Research Centre
Gross Domestic Product
Information Technology
Planning and Transport Research Centre
Public Transport Authority
Queensland Rail
Queensland University of Technology
Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology
Rail Tram Bus Union
Rail Transport International
Registered Training Organisation
Tertiary and Further Education
Transport and Logistics Industry Skills Council
University of Queensland
University of Western Sydney
6
Executive Summary
The Australian Rail Industry faces significant constraints in the form of emerging
labour and skills shortages as a result of current tight labour market conditions, a rapidly
ageing workforce and the legacy of a period of substantial reforms and declining
employment. The objectives of this study were to construct a current profile of the rail
workforce, to generate estimates of future labour demand and supply, and to highlight
the requirements in terms of recruitment and training to address the forecasted
shortages. The research and modelling methodology uses a combination of analyses of
existing data (mainly 2001 Census data) and extensive primary research (surveys and
face-to-face interviews) involving rail operators.
Rail Reforms
The Australian rail industry has undergone significant changes over the past decade
with the implementation of initiatives by the Commonwealth and State/Territory
Governments aimed at promoting more competition and efficiency within an industry
that had previously been run predominately by state government authorities. Reforms
included privatisation, vertical and horizontal separation of networks and the
establishment of “open access” regimes which ensured third party access to essential
rail infrastructure. The reform process saw the number of rail operators increase from
12 in 1991 to 27 in 1999, and total employment in the rail industry fall by around 50%
between 1991 and 2001. The reforms have also been identified as being responsible for
reducing freight rates, improving service quality and increasing productivity within the
industry.
Analysis of Rail Workforce
Two defining characteristics of the rail workforce are its age and male dominance.
According to the 2001 Census data, women comprised just 12% of the rail transport
workforce, and those female employees were concentrated in clerical, sales and service
jobs. Under 35s comprised 40% of the overall Australian workforce, compared to 26%
for the rail industry. The average age of male rail workers was 42.3 years, more than
three years higher than the average for the Australian male workforce as a whole. For
drivers, who make up over one-fifth of the rail transport workforce, the ageing problem
is even more acute, with an average age of 43.6 years in 2001.
Analysis of age data derived from surveys with current rail operators indicates that over
75% of workers employed are 35 years or older and that almost half of the workers are
aged 45 years or above. Almost all the rail operators interviewed had concerns about
the ageing of workers with regard to at least one occupational group within their rail
workforce. Retirement rates of around 20% over the next five years were nominated for
train drivers and for controllers and signallers by several operators. The occupations
which rail operators felt most uncomfortable about, with regard to the ageing of their
workers also appears to be ones that they identify skill shortages in.
7
Another salient feature of the rail workforce is its relative concentration of employment
within occupations with elementary to intermediate skill levels. Compared to the
average for all Australian industries, a higher proportion of rail workers have a
certificate qualification or possess no recognised qualification and, conversely, are less
likely to have tertiary education qualifications
State by State profiles
In 2001 New South Wales had the largest number of rail transport employees of the
Australian states and territories, followed in descending order by Queensland, Victoria,
Western Australia, South Australia and Tasmania. Few rail transport employees were
recorded in either of the territories. This relative ordering among the states was
unchanged from that revealed in the 1991, however, all states experienced very
substantial reductions in rail employment. Overall Victoria and Tasmania experienced
the greatest percentage reduction in their workforce with each recording a decrease of
around 70%. Significant falls in the number of rail transport employees were also
recorded for South Australia (63%) and Western Australia (58%).
The relatively older age profile of rail workers applies across all states and territories.
Each jurisdiction reveals a higher average age than the average for all Australian
workers, and higher than for all Australian male workers. Workforce ageing is
particularly acute in Western Australia, where the average age of rail workers was 44.2
years in 2001.
Skills Shortages
Rail operators most readily identified skills shortages amongst higher skilled
occupations and those that had significant lead time for training and capability
development. Concerns about skill shortages appear to be greatest with respect to
workers with qualifications gained through the higher education and the VET system,
and for which the training rate is significantly impacted by public education and training
policy and investment. Occupational groups for which skills shortages were recognised
as being of most concern for rail operators included train drivers, tradespersons,
managerial and engineering personnel. Operators reported higher turnover rates
amongst tradespersons, clerical and customer service staff, train drivers and engineers.
The majority of rail employers also believed that skills shortages were more prevalent
and pronounced in rural regions such as Kalgoorlie, Merredin and remote regions of
northern Western Australia, northern and central Queensland and New South Wales.
Most of these areas were also expected to experience continued shortages into the
future. Some capital cities including Brisbane, Sydney and Melbourne were also
identified by several respondents as being locations where they currently experienced
skills shortages, and this was largely attributed to shortages of suitable housing with
reasonable commuting times in many of these city localities.
8
Modelling Projections
Forecasts for employment demand by occupation to 2020 were derived from existing
forecasts of the passenger and freight task, and based on assumptions relating to
changes in labour productivity and occupational distribution. Projections of labour
supply were based on a continuation of current intake levels of the 15 to 24 year olds,
and older groups by applying age, gender and occupation specific net retention rates
observed between the 1996 and 2001 Census to the existing rail workforce from the
base year of 2001. The differences between the projections for labour demand and
supply for each occupation were then taken to represent shortages or surpluses.
Although the total rail task is expected to increase significantly, conservative
assumptions relating to ongoing labour productivity growth results in rail employment
being forecast to remain relatively constant to 2020. On the supply side, the rail
workforce is projected to continue to age rapidly. By 2021, the average age of the rail
worker is projected to be around 49 years old. In the case of managers the average age
is projected to reach 55.9 years by 2021, and 52.2 years for intermediate production and
transport workers (which includes drivers). These modelling projections appear to
resonate with the expectations of rail operators who were interviewed, who expressed
concern about the ageing of their drivers and managerial staff.
Severe shortages are forecast to emerge for managers and intermediate production and
transport workers, and modest shortages for tradespersons, associate professionals and
advanced clerical and service workers. An initial shortage of professionals is projected
to give way to a surplus by 2020. A surplus of workers is also predicted for elementary
and intermediate clerical, sales and service workers. The projections appear to be
consistent with many of the views expressed by the rail operators in the study who
anticipated they would experience shortages amongst tradespeople, intermediate
production and transport workers and managerial and professional staff in the future.
Thus one potential means of addressing predicted shortages within some occupations
would be to retrain and upskill workers from occupational groups likely to experience a
labour surplus in the future.
Training Overview
Rail operators believe there had been a substantial reduction in training investment
across the industry, following the implementation of major microeconomic reforms over
the last decade. Many interviewees asserted that this was because there was increased
emphasis on cost minimisation and fear of poaching, which resulted in a prevailing
reluctance amongst rail employers to invest significantly in the training of workers. This
coincided with the substantial rationalisation of many of the large scale training
programs and resources sustained by government owned rail organisations, which
followed the push towards enhanced privatisation within the rail industry. All these
factors have made it increasingly difficult for the training needs of the rail industry to be
adequately met.
The predominant reluctance of rail operators in the recent past, to invest in the training
and development of their workers, also led to there being a distinct decline in the
number of apprentices and trainees that were recruited during this period within the
9
industry. This trend was affirmed by many of the study participants who asserted that
rail employers over the last 10 years have increasingly looked to recruit workers with
pre-existing rail qualifications and experience. Many share the view that this has
exacerbated increased competition and poaching of qualified and experienced rail
workers and contributed to the ageing of the industry workforce.
Other trends identified in training practices within the rail industry include:
 Increased outsourcing of training services to external providers and an associated
emergence of niche markets for the provision of rail training by specialised training
providers and labour hire organisations;
 A streamlining of rail training to reduce completion times. Many operators felt that
training processes had become more efficient due to the implementation of
improved training techniques and better development of training personnel and
trainers. Others however feared that the training had become too short and general
and thus was not comprehensive enough, for example in relation to rail safety
issues.
 A shift towards more competency based training and greater alignment with the
Australian Qualifications Framework as determined by external regulatory boards,
which has also lead to a more standardised training framework for the industry and
greater utilisation of Registered Training Organisations (RTOs).
Some measures, which rail operators believed would improve future training outcomes
for the rail industry included:
 Having a more standardised, national skills recognition and accreditation system
 Establishing more indepth partnerships and alliances between rail organisations, the
government, industry groups and training providers to foster the development of
more rail training programs and facilities
 Developing a more mature external industry training network to enable rail workers
to acquire base qualifications in core competencies such as in safe working and
occupational health and safety training (e.g. associated with Certificate 1 or
Certificate 2 in Rail Operations)
 More equitable provision of Government funding and assistance for training
schemes such as apprenticeships and traineeships
 More flexible arrangements with regard to how training is delivered to rail workers
to minimise interruption to working hours and business operations thereby
improving cost efficiency for rail employers (e.g. by using more computer based
training, internet based and self paced training modules)
Measures to Address Workforce Issues
Most operators exhibited tangible concern in relation to the issues of skills shortages,
ageing and high turnover rates amongst their rail workers. As a result, many were
developing and looking to implement several medium to long term strategies to address
these workforce issues including:

Providing older workers with financial incentives and flexible working conditions in
an attempt to get more of them to delay retiring
10




Developing and instigating more mentoring programs and initiatives to promote the
transfer of knowledge from more experienced workers to their younger
contemporaries
Increasing their intake of apprentices and trainees
Developing more graduate recruitment and cadetship programs
Increasing their investment in training and capability development of existing
workers and new recruits
Nonetheless, one still senses there is a largely “business as usual” attitude amongst rail
employers, albeit within a more difficult recruiting environment, rather than a sense of
urgency for longer term planning to increase entry rates of younger workers into the
industry. There are therefore real concerns that the rail industry will face critical
workforce challenges in the imminent future. There are thus several compounding
factors, which if left unchecked could potentially have an adverse multiplier effect on
attraction and retention in the rail industry in the future. These factors include the older
age profile of the rail workforce, relative inability to attract and retain younger workers
and the industry wide under-investment in training and capability development. Unless
effective measures are implemented to address these issues, the Australian rail industry
will struggle to meet its future skills needs and will continue to lose its market share to
other modes of transport.
11
Section 1: Introduction
1.1 Background to the report
Adequate transport infrastructure and an efficient transport industry are critical if any
economy is going to achieve production at or near its capacity. The timeliness and cost
efficiency with which raw materials and intermediate goods are brought to the
production process and of the delivery of final goods has a significant bearing on
competitiveness in terms of both cost-structure and service quality. Equally, passenger
transport is a major determinant of the livability and functionality of cities and of the
commercial connectedness between cities and regional areas. The transport sector takes
on an even greater significance for a country such as Australia. Australia’s large
resource base requires extensive bulk haulage over long distances. Second, Australia
has a vast land mass, but is also one of the most highly urbanised countries in the world,
with around 64% of the population living in the capital cities (ABS 2006: p.2).
The rail industry has played a pivotal role in Australia’s economic and social
development and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future. Rail is a major
provider of passenger transport, both in the form of inner city rail networks and
regional/interstate networks, and of freight transport. Rail accounts for around one-fifth
of the value of output from transport, and a higher share as an intermediate input into
other industries. Expectations are for the importance of rail to continue. In the ten
years to 2001, the rail freight task increased by an average of 4.4% per annum (BTRE
2006: p. 45) and passenger kilometres by 1.5% per annum (Apelbaum Consulting
Group 2005).
However, the rail industry is currently facing significant constraints in the form of the
availability of appropriately skilled and trained labour to meet its growth potential and
this situation is set to worsen dramatically in the next two decades. As policy-makers
have begun to grapple in earnest with the potential implications of the ageing of the
Australian population for labour supply and productivity, the extraordinary run of
strong economic growth since the early 1990s has wound Australia’s unemployment
rate down from just over 10% throughout 1992 and 1993 to be currently running at
below 5%. As a consequence, concern about emerging shortages of skilled labour and
the constraints this may be placing on further economic growth has become widespread,
as evidenced in policy statements, current political debate and frequent media reporting
on the ‘skills crisis’.
The Australian rail industry is a prime example of an industry facing recruitment
difficulties associated with a tight labour market. However, the synopsis of skills
shortages in the rail industry is far more unique and complex than that of a generally
tight labour market. On the one hand, the industry has undergone a lengthy period of
restructuring that has seen total employment in rail transport fall by roughly half in the
decade spanning from 1991 to 2001. From this perspective, the industry might be
expected to be immune to some extent from the effects of rapidly growing aggregate
labour demand. On the other hand, the long term reduction in the rail workforce has
reduced the need to actively cultivate sources of new entrants and to minimise wastage
among existing workers. This has exacerbated the ageing of the rail workforce.
12
Further, where employment and growth opportunities are popularly seen to be strongest
in emerging technology based occupations and industries, such as the information
technology and telecommunications sector, and in tertiary services, such as health,
business administration and other technical services, the rail industry suffers from being
viewed as an ‘old economy’ sector, reducing its attraction to school leavers and
graduates from post-secondary education and training.
To secure the future of the rail industry and its contribution to Australia’s ongoing
economic development, both industry and policy makers need to respond to these
challenges with a degree of expediency. As an initial part of that response the
Cooperative Research Centre for Railway Engineering and Technologies (Rail CRC),
with support from many of the nation’s major rail operators, commissioned the Centre
for Labour Market Research (CLMR) in conjunction with the Planning and Transport
Research Centre (PATREC) to undertake this study. This report sets out in detail the
extent and nature of the skills shortage facing the rail industry and the likely time
horizon over which it will develop, and provides recommendations for the alternative
courses of action available to industry and government.
The research undertaken for this report utilised a combination of secondary data and
primary data collected through surveys and personal interviews. The authors would like
to express their deep gratitude to the organisations and their representatives who kindly
agreed to participate in the study. The information and insight provided has been
invaluable in constructing a picture of the national rail workforce and in determining
parameters used in the projections and modelling exercises described in the report. The
research team would also like to acknowledge and thank the principal sponsors of the
study, the Rail CRC, for providing the financial funding which enabled the study to be
conducted.
1.2 The Objectives of the Study
The objectives of the study are:

To develop a profile of the industry, including current employee numbers, by
competency group, current age, probable retirement age/intentions, trends in nonretirement exits and geographic location (by State).

To develop estimates of future demand for the railway workforce, by competency
groups, by State and through time. The research will examine the relationships
between task and the workforce requirements by competency groups.

To estimate trend scenarios in future total demand, retirements and non-retirement
exits for major competency groups in the next 10-15 years, to provide estimates
of net demand by competency groups and related training needs.

To estimate the future required ‘pipeline’ including training and recruitment needs
by time and location.

To estimate future requirements for training system capacity, by competency groups,
time and State and to contrast projected industry training requirements with current
capacity and forward plans of relevant training agencies.
13
1.3 Overview of the methodology
To construct a profile of the rail workforce and to generate forecasts of future labour
demand and supply, the research integrates data from existing published sources,
customised tables requested from the Australian Bureau of Statistics’ (ABS) Census of
Population and Housing and primary data collected through surveys and interviews with
rail operators. A model is developed which forecasts employment demand by
occupation to 2020 based upon existing projections for the total freight and passenger
task. The demand estimates are contrasted with estimates of supply under a ‘business as
usual’ scenario which takes into account the current age-profile of the rail workforce
and current training rates, and the implications for future training requirements assessed.
To obtain a picture of the composition of the rail workforce and how it has changed,
tables of employment by occupation and qualification were requested from the 1991,
1996 and 2001 Census, with the data further broken down by State, age and gender.
These were requested for all industries in total and separately for the Australian Rail
Transport Industry.1 Unfortunately this data is a little dated, but the five-yearly Census
provides the only accurate source of population estimates at such a highly disaggregated
level, and customised data from the 2006 Census was not available at the time.
The current profile of the rail workforce had to be generated through primary data
collection. A list of the major Australian rail operators that provided freight and/or
passenger transport services was made. As the Australian industry is highly
concentrated, 27 major operators were identified and these are estimated to account for
around 90% of output and employment in the industry. The purpose of the primary
research was three-fold:




To collect factual data on the composition of the workforce by gender, age and
skill level
To collect information to feed into the setting of parameters in the modelling
(such as scale economies and rates of technological change)
To understand the industry’s perceptions of skills needs and the factors
impacting upon the balance between labour availability and labour requirements.
To understand how operators monitor and respond to perceived skills shortages
and how they are planning to meet future requirements
This data was collated through an initial mail-out questionnaire, followed up by indepth face-to-face interviews conducted between and December 2006 and March 2007.
Questionnaires were received from 22 of the operators targeted and 24 participated in
the in-depth interviews. In the majority of cases the person interviewed was the Human
Resource Manager or (the director/manager of Operations). Where possible, the data on
each operator was supplemented with Annual Reports and other such published sources.
Projections of future workforce demands out to 2020 were developed based on existing
forecasts of the passenger and freight loads. Full details of the modelling and
assumptions are set out in Section 4. Due to the rationalisation of the industry, it is
difficult to use past trends for key parameters, such as the growth in labour productivity
1
Australian Standard Industry Classification 5200
14
and changes in the occupational/qualification composition of the workforce. The model
therefore draws heavily on information provided in the interviews and indeed the
questions were designed specifically to extract this information. These projections are
contrasted with likely trends in labour supply to the industry. The results of the
modelling are combined with information provided by operators to draw out
implications for training and recruitment in the rail transport industry into the future.
15
Section 2: Overview of the Australian
rail industry
2.1 Background
The rail industry has a long standing and distinguished record of contributing to
economic and social development within Australia (Hensher et al. 1994). The inception
of railways in Australia occurred in the 1850’s, prior to Federation (Affleck Consulting
2003). Primarily the rail network of each colony was centred on the capital city or other
major ports and extended out into rural regions (Productivity Commission 2000a). As
stipulated under the 1901 Australian Constitution, the primary legislative power over
railways was granted to, and remains with, the States and the early development of
railway infrastructure was undertaken by state and colonial governments (Everett 2006).
The Commonwealth has however played a leading role in the development of the rail
network, by establishing and augmenting key links in the national rail system (Affleck
Consulting 2003).
Trains transformed transportation in Australia and enabled the linking of cities and ports
to rural areas which allowed for export growth and facilitated greater movement of
people into different regions of the country (Productivity Commission 2000a). Nearly
all the “public” railways (available for hire and reward) were owned by government or
were initially owned by private companies in their early years but were then taken over
by government. Some privately owned railways (not available for hire and reward) were
authorised to be constructed and operate for specific purposes (often ancillary services)
under special legislation, such as the Pilbara iron ore railway which is currently owned
by the Rio Tinto Group (Affleck Consulting 2003).
In modern times the railways continue to be an essential component of Australia’s
transport system, playing major roles in transporting general freight, bulk commodities
and passengers within states and across state boundaries. Rail operators have the
majority of the market share for the transport of interstate linehaul freight across the east
to west coast transport routes of Australia (Graham 2001). In total, the Australian rail
industry, encompassing rail transport, rolling stock maintenance and manufacture,
consultants and signals and communications and other services, contributes 1.6% of the
national gross domestic product (GDP) with an annual output of goods and services
estimated to be $8 billion.
The rail transport industry (which comprises of rail operators involved in freight and/or
passenger transport) is estimated to contribute 0.54% to the national GDP, representing
12.9% of output from the Australian transport industry. It is responsible for
approximately 50% of the total freight tonne-kilometres moved by land transport and
approximately 650 million passenger journeys annually, with the estimated passenger
task being more than 11.3 billion passenger-kilometres (Productivity Commission 2006,
Rail CRC 2006, Apelbaum Consulting Group 2005).
As an input into other industries, the rail industry therefore has an important influence
on efficiency and competitiveness, especially in those industries with an export focus
such as mining and agriculture. For example, rail freight charges constitute 15-30% of
16
the free on board cost of coal exports in New South Wales (Productivity Commission
2000a). In total, rail contributes an estimated of $0.5 billion per year to the value of
exports (Transport and Logistics Industry Skills Council [TDT] 2005). The industry is
also a prominent contributor to rural and regional economies, generating substantial
economic benefits through the output of goods and services worth $7 billion per annum
(Rail, Tram & Bus Union [RTBU] 2004).
2.2 Economics of the Rail Industry
It is clear that an efficient rail transport sector will deliver substantial and diverse
benefits to the economy. However, unique aspects of the production and consumption
of rail services mean that the market is far removed from that of the standard economic
textbook. Some important characteristics of the rail industry are:




High infrastructure (sunk) costs, meaning that variable costs are very low relative to
average costs. That is, once the infrastructure is in place and maintained, the
marginal cost of carrying additional freight or additional passengers is very small.
As a result of its high fixed cost structure and relatively low variable costs, the
economics of rail transportation are heavily dependent on economics of scale (Rail
Productivity Information Paper, 2007)
These ‘natural monopoly’ conditions tend to result in one viable operator providing
services within a given area or network, rather than a competitive marketplace
There are positive externalities associated with consumption of rail services. For
rail passenger transport, for example, these are in the form of reduced pollution and
congestion for road transport users. Further, one passenger’s use of rail services
generally does not limit the use of the service by other passengers – in fact greater
demand leads to enhanced services by allowing more frequent schedules.
The development of an efficient rail sector, therefore, cannot be left to private markets.
Rather, governments must play a leading role in their structure and regulation while at
the same time trying to harness benefits available from competition. How infrastructure
is to be funded, the separation of activities (such as ‘above track’ and ‘below track’,
regulation of access to infrastructure and the pricing of services are all highly
contentious issues. This also has implications for the labour market. Once externalities
are involved and prices are influenced by regulatory decisions, the textbook link
between the marginal product of labour and wages also becomes tenuous. While this
report is mainly concerned with labour market issues facing the rail industry, it is useful
to first provide an overview of the evolving structure of the Australian rail industry.
Indeed, such structural reforms over the past two decades have had lasting implications
for the current rail workforce.
2.2.1 Rail Industry Reforms
Many rail sectors could be viewed as natural monopolies as the level and nature of the
demand that exists for these often means that, in most cases, a single operator can
provide the required level of service at a lower cost than multiple operators would be
able to achieve. As capital costs are so large, most rail operators often face the prospect
of extremely low marginal costs and high fixed costs (Productivity Commission 2006,
Bradshaw 1997). The implication of this is that average costs continue to fall as an
17
incumbent provider expands in scale, making entry into the market of a second provider
unviable. Consequently, the vast bulk of passenger and freight rail in each Australian
state came to be operated through government owned monopolies.
In recent decades, however, Australia’s railway sectors have undergone significant
changes. Initiatives by the Commonwealth and State/Territory Governments to promote
more competition and efficiency within the rail industry have resulted in an increase in
private rail activity and a decline in government ownership and management of railways
(TDT 2005, Hensher et al., 1994). These deregulation policies were part of a wider
microeconomic policy framework and were designed to open the rail industry to more
private sector competitive forces and remove the existence of state based government
monopolies (Everett 2006).
The reforms involved significant deregulation of the industry following the publication
of the 1991 Industry Commission inquiry into rail transport, the 1993 Hilmer Report as
well as the National Competition Policy (Everett 2006, Productivity Commission
2000a). Many of the policies that were implemented were based on a fairly broad
microeconomic reform framework and involved enforcing a more commercial focus on
rail operators to improve cost recovery. The structure of railways in most Australian
jurisdictions consequently changed with many of the previously integrated State rail
authorities being vertically and horizontally separated. Prior to the implementation of
the reforms, most railways were controlled by State specific rail organisations which
managed both below and above track operations within their jurisdiction (vertically
integrated) and provided a combination of urban passenger, non urban passenger and
freight services (horizontally integrated). Effectively, a single government agency
controlled activities such as track provision, signalling, maintenance, train operations
and timetabling. The implementation of rail reforms in the 1990’s however resulted in
several rail networks in Australia being structurally separated (Productivity Commission
2000a).
Deregulation paved the way for the establishment of “open access” regimes which
allowed competition within the rail industry by enabling competitors to have access to
below track infrastructure (Productivity Commission 2000c, Everett 2006). This
provision was designed to allow competition and removed the ability of state
government authorities to earn monopoly rents. Following deregulation and
introduction of “open access” regimes, the number of rail operators within the
Australian rail industry increased from 12 in 1991 to 27 in 1999. There are presently
over 30 major private rail operators in Australia compared to the 8 that existed 10 years
ago (RTBU 2004). Deregulation also enabled rail enterprises to extend their operations
more freely interstate and rail operators have increasingly moved towards the provision
of integrated intermodal services (ie. integration of rail with road, air and water
transport services). As a result many operators have evolved from being simple linehaul
operators in bulk freight or container markets, to focusing their operations on the
provision of third party services in a range of integrated functions (Everett 2006).
Many commentators have also purported that the reforms have facilitated structural
separation within the Australian rail sector which has enabled increased product
differentiation and market segmentation within the interstate rail markets. Evidence
indicates that such segmentation enhances the ability of rail operators to more
effectively compete with the sea and air modes of transport. Vertical separation of the
interstate rail network has enabled greater integration of niche players into the transport
logistics chain and has enhanced competition between rail operators for train schedules.
18
Vertical separation has also enabled some expansion in the geographic markets of above
rail operators and allowed for improved coordination of freight flows across
infrastructure networks (Productivity Commission 2000a, 2006).
Outcomes identified from the rail reforms introduced in the 1990’s have included
reduced freight rates, improvements in service quality and increased productivity
(Productivity Commission 2000a, 2000c). In turn, this has been credited with enabling
productivity improvements estimated to be worth more than $2 billion (RTBU 2004).
The development and implementation of new technologies has also strongly contributed
to productivity growth within the Australian rail industry and it is likely that this trend
will continue and accelerate in the future (Rail CRC 2006). The improvements in the
levels of productivity and competition experienced within the Australian rail industry
have contributed to an 18% decrease in freight rates over the period spanning from 1990
to 1997 and a 30% reduction in real national freight rates from 1989 to 1998 (Everett
2006, Productivity Commission 2000b).
Another consequence of the reform process and resulting labour productivity growth
has been a large scale reduction in employment in the rail industry. Employment fell by
around one half between 1991 and 2001. The Productivity Commission estimated that
the number of full time employees in the rail industry decreased from 88500 in 1986 to
36500 in 1998 (2000c). Analysis of ABS Census data (see section 3) also shows a
halving of employment in the rail transport industry between 1991 and 2001. Other
factors believed to be responsible for the decline in demand for rail labour include
increased competition from alternative transport modes; increased
contracting/outsourcing of rail operations and the redefining of labour arrangements
with greater emphasis on multitasking or multiskilling. As an example of the latter,
many train drivers are now responsible for a wider range of duties including inspecting
locomotives, planning shunting work and completing minor repairs (TDT 2005,
Productivity Commission 2000a).
The fall in rail employment in Australia may also be partly due to the large increases in
real average labour costs which were recorded by many rail operators following the
introduction of Enterprise Bargaining Agreements in 1992-93 and 1996-97. One study
reported that over the period spanning from 1990 to 1998 real average labour costs, as a
proxy for remuneration, increased by 27% within the Australian rail industry
(Productivity Commission 2000b). Research reveals that the losses in employment
among rail workers was less pronounced in Australian capital cities than in less densely
populated regions such as rural and outer-city areas. A “Progress in Rail Reform”
Report released in 2000 revealed that approximately two thirds of the 60% reduction in
railway employment that occurred since 1986, was concentrated in regional areas, with
devastating economic implications for some rural communities (Productivity
Commission 2000a). The greatest reductions were recorded for occupational groups
relating to clerical and service staff, labourers, tradepersons and managerial staff, all of
which experienced a decrease of more than 50% in the number of their workers.
2.2.2 Ongoing reform issues
Despite the extensive reform process that has already taken place, there are a number of
important outstanding issues relating to the Australian rail industry. As governments
seek to address these issues, further reform of the industry is to be anticipated, with
ongoing implications for rail employment. A brief overview of some of the more
19
important of these issues — investment in infrastructure, access regulation and market
structure — is provided below.
Rail Infrastructure
One major issue facing rail operators in Australia is the state of rail infrastructure. An
insufficient level of infrastructure investment has commonly been blamed for the
deterioration of rail infrastructure nationally and for many of the current service
difficulties (Banks 2002). Many rail operators assert that the levels of infrastructure
investment are inadequate to enable the output and employment potential of the rail
industry to be maximised and that this has adversely impacted on service quality and
contributed to higher operating costs. The major infrastructure concerns voiced by most
rail operators seems to be associated with the capacity and condition of the interstate
track. Poor quality track negatively affects productivity by contributing, for example, to
there being lighter axle loads, slower train speeds, longer transit times and higher fuel
and crew costs (Productivity Commission 2000a).
Rail performance is also hindered by diminished track capacity. For example, short
passing loops limit train length and an inadequate number of passing loops constrains
traffic along a specific railway line (Productivity Commission 2000a). Additional
pressures may also be placed on Australian rail operators due to the fact that the rail
infrastructure which is utilised may be shared (Bradshaw 1997). Within some urban rail
networks it has also been shown that congestion of track infrastructure used by multiple
operators may be a problem especially during peak periods. For example rail operators
in the Sydney metropolitan area face significant congestion problems, which has
implications for rail operators throughout the interstate network. There is thus a need for
the deficiencies in rail network in these areas to be alleviated with adequate
infrastructure investment and consolidation (Productivity Commission 2000a).
Apart from private railways such as those used for the transport of iron ore and coal by
mining companies, the majority of investment for rail infrastructure has derived from
government borrowing and grants (Productivity Commission 2000a). It has been widely
acknowledged that the pricing of many rail services is inadequate to recover full
economic cost and ensure the continuation of current services. This has eventuated due
to the exclusion of substantial rail infrastructure assets from the regulated asset base and
because the prices charged by rail operators have been less than the full economic costs
as determined by various regulators. This has lead to a continued heavy reliance on
public funding to maintain rail infrastructure nationally (Banks 2002).
Unlike funding for road infrastructure, Australia’s rail infrastructure now functions
under a more commercial structure. In this system regulators set maximum access
charges (which effectively act as ceilings) based on the whole of life cycle costing of
capital assets, although actual access charges continue to be much less (Banks 2002). In
recent times, the Federal Government has also reduced its infrastructure outlays relative
to GDP and revenue. This trend of fiscal consolidation as well as the tendency of
governments to prioritise recurrent spending above capital expenditure when faced with
budgetary limitations has lead to there being constrained levels of investment spending
on rail infrastructure (Productivity Commission 2000a). Take for instance the fact that
in the 2006-07 Federal Budget, only 10% of the total land transport funding allocation
was assigned for rail (RTBU 2007). In addition, during the period between 1974 and
1990 the Federal government is believed to have distributed an estimated $2.2 billion
20
for rail capital works compared to approximately $58 billion for roads (RTBU 2007). In
a practical sense, often investment of public funds into rail infrastructure only occurs
when the deterioration of the infrastructure threatens service viability. The reduced
levels of funding from the government sectors is therefore believed by many to be a
leading in the deterioration of rail infrastructure and service levels (Banks 2002). Thus
in the case of rail transport, budgetary pressures can delay or impede projects despite
the fact that the projects are expected to generate high social and economic returns
(Productivity Commission 2000a).
The deficiencies in rail infrastructure are thus likely to undermine the ability of rail
operators to contribute to modal substitution and effectively compete with road
transport operators. Take, for instance, the fact that demand for bulk freight transport
services is now based on more geographically dispersed origins and destinations. In
light of such changing market conditions, it is unlikely that rail currently has adequate
infrastructure in place to effectively compete for the provision of such transport services
(Productivity Commission 2006).
Monopolistic Structure of Rail Markets
The provision of rail infrastructure services and rail track service more specifically, are
generally considered as natural monopolies, although these providers face significant
competition in the freight market especially from road operators. Vertical separation
has promoted new entrants into market segments of the interstate track, though its effect
in opening up these markets has been limited in some respects. In niche railway
markets characterised by economies of network density, it is still likely that there will
only be one service provider. Rail infrastructure providers incur many “common costs”
that are not specifically linked to any above rail operator or services provider. These
“common costs” include sunk costs that are incurred regardless of the extent of use and
non sector specific overhead and operating costs (e.g. administration expenses,
buildings) (Productivity Commission 2006).
In addition, rail infrastructure provision is subject to economies of density such that the
average costs of providing access to the use of rail infrastructure decreases with
increased use of the infrastructure. Thus even in cases where there may only be a single
provider, the minimum capacity that can be supplied may be large compared to the level
of demand that exists for the use of rail infrastructure (Productivity Commission 2006).
The potential therefore exists for an incumbent owner-operator to limit access to rail
infrastructure it controls by unfairly leveraging its infrastructure ownership as a barrier
to entry. Thus competition in these rail markets could effectively be stifled by the
setting of overly high access charges for competitors as well as by the implementation
of restrictive access conditions (Productivity Commission 2000a).
The OECD has pointed out that in markets where rail transport experiences intermodal
competition it is likely that there will be limited opportunities for the entrance and
profitable existence of new rail competitors. This is supported by the fact that the
majority of new entrants into the rail freight market in Australia have been either
established operators with the capacity to access interstate markets or niche railway
operators (Productivity Commission 2000a). Many rail industry stakeholders therefore
maintain that the system of competitive access has failed to prevent third party operators
21
from facing barriers to entry (Affleck Consulting 2003). In addition, the fact that the
above rail sector is subadditive means that there is little scope for much competition.
Competition
Railways have continued to experience competitive pressures basically since the 1920’s
and this has been a consistent trend globally with railways now servicing a smaller
share of the transport market than was previously the case (Productivity Commission
2006). The Australian railways face competition from other transport modes such as
road, aviation/air and shipping service providers (Productivity Commission 2000a).
Improvements and developments in sea, air and road transport have severely impacted
on the level of demand for rail transport in Australia. One result has been that now there
are limited markets in which rail charges, rates or fares can be increased without there
being a higher proportionate revenue loss for operators (Bradshaw 1997).
Although urban rail passenger networks exist in the vast majority of all mainland state
capital cities (excluding Darwin), rail transport is only responsible for a small
percentage of total non-urban passenger movements. In particular deregulation of the
interstate road coach and airline industries induced price cutting which lead to the
majority of non urban rail operators investing heavily to improve service quality to
minimise revenue losses. Competition from other transport modes such as airlines and
coaches has therefore played a more significant role in determining non-urban
passenger rates than urban passenger rates. The potential for further competition
between rail operators in Australia is however limited by the relatively small size of
many of the urban passenger markets within the country (Productivity Commission
2000a).
Increased competition from road transporters is thus another emerging challenge facing
the Australian rail industry. The railways have increasingly specialised in the
transportation of bulk commodities such as agricultural products (e.g. wheat), iron ore,
coal and other minerals. These freight operations are often large in scale and in some
cases feature the transport of long haul freight. Rail operators face significant
competition from road transport in markets relating to the transport of non-bulk freight,
and rail’s dominance in this market has consequently been diminished with rail
continuing to lose market share to road in the non-bulk freight transport sector
(Productivity Commission 2000a). However in more recent times, rail seems to have
recovered some of its previous market share, particularly on the East-West link.
Therefore rail operators face continued pressure to attain improvements in efficiency
comparable to those achieved by road operators and other competitors. As an input to
the production process, the demand for rail freight transport is a “derived demand” —a
function of the demand for other goods. There is thus additional onus on railways to
consistently increase their levels of efficiency and productivity due to the benefits which
are passed on to the industries they serve, which in turn will generate further positive
flow on effects for the rail industry by increasing demand for their services. Reductions
in freight rates will lead to increases in output from the industries serviced by rail
operators, and in turn generate greater demand from these industries for rail transport
services (Productivity Commission 2000a). This is particularly relevant for industries in
the mining sector, such as coal, for which freight transport costs represent a large
proportion of total costs (almost 20% of intermediate input costs by some estimates). In
22
such export driven, mining related industries, increased demand for these exports
resulting from price reductions will translate into elevated demand for rail freight
services (Productivity Commission 2006).
There are also various forms of competition within the Australian rail industry including
competition between operators for franchises or contracts, and “rail on rail” competition
which occurs when rail operators vie for the same passenger or freight markets. In
addition, there is competition for network train schedules when train operators compete
to acquire desired schedules. This competition has been found to exist between nonurban passenger, urban passenger and freight train operators across Australia.
Following deregulation, increased competition within the Australian rail industry has
been created by former public sector rail operations that have been either privatised or
corporatised and non traditional rail operators such as trucking and freight forwarders
who have diversified their operations into the provision of rail services (Productivity
Commission 2000a). There is also continuous pressure on smaller firms to consistently
adopt systems used by larger companies, in order to remain efficient and competitive
(Department of Education, Science and Training 2006).
2.3 Current structure of the Rail Industry
The Australian rail industry is now very diverse in nature. The industry consists of
suppliers, track access corporations, rail operators, (including those specialising in
heritage, tourist, freight, passenger transport) and a diversity of other companies
covering all sectors of the industry (TDT 2005). Although there are roughly 250 firms
in total within the Australian rail industry, approximately 10 large rail enterprises
dominate the majority of the operating and infrastructure sectors. These are (Rail CRC
2006):
-
Queensland Rail (QR)
Pacific National
Australian Rail Track Corporation (ARTC)
Veolia Transport- Connex
Rail Corp
South Spur Rail Services
Freight Link
Public Transport Authority of Western Australia (PTA)
Transadelaide
V/Line
Transfield
Australian Railroad Group (ARG)
WestNet
Most of the companies in the Australian rail industry are generally profitable private
enterprises that operate in monopolistic domestic markets (RTBU 2004).
Each sector of the rail industry has unique and different corporate and community
objectives (TDT 2005). Urban and passenger rail service providers offer a range of
23
community transport services that are largely financed by taxes and fares. In contrast
freight and track access providers are predominantly commercial organisations focussed
on making profitable rates of return and being corporately accountable for their capital
investments and capital stock.
The organisations that are principally focused on in this study include those that are
associated with one or more of the following sectors within the Australian rail industry;
Providers of Rail Infrastructure Access
These organisations either lease or own the track they control and thus administer track
access to other parties. The category also includes organisations that are involved in the
provision of signaling and communications. In some Australian states rail access
providers own and control major rail yards and sidings used for the assembling,
maintenance and repair of trains. In addition, many of these organisations may also be
responsible for controlling train movements to ensure that trains that may be sharing the
same track are separated, thereby effectively securing “train control”. Such
organisations may solely specialise in the provision of rail infrastructure access which
would mean that they are ‘vertically separated’. Alternatively, these organisations may
be ‘vertically integrated’ meaning that they have ownership of train operating services
in conjunction with being rail infrastructure access providers (Affleck Consulting 2003).
Rail Train Operators
These organisations can be broadly classified as being involved in “Private Railways”
or “Public Railways” within the Australian rail industry. The Private Railway group
includes a small number of train operators whose rail services are not available for hire
and reward (Affleck Consulting 2003). These rail operators often have operations
integrated with the extraction, refining and transportation of natural resources and
minerals. Public railway operators offer rail services for hire and reward. These rail
operators may thus be owned by both private and public sector entities. Train operators
may also be categorised according to whether they are involved in the transportation of
freight or passengers or a combination of both. Rail operators are referred to as being
“horizontally integrated” enterprises if they are involved in the operation of both
passenger and freight rail services (Affleck Consulting 2003).
Passenger train operators specialise in the provision of commuter, regional and/or
tourist train services for the transportation of passengers within metropolitan areas,
between capital cities and regional areas and also across states and territories.
Commonly inter-urban service and urban commuter operators also manage and control
ticketing, passenger stations and reservation systems (Affleck Consulting 2003).
The majority of rail freight operators in Australia are engaged in the commercial
transportation of cargo, most commonly primary agricultural products and mineral
resources. Often rail freight operators own and manage major rail yards and sidings.
These serve numerous functional purposes including allowing for the provisioning and
fuelling of trains. The rail yards and sidings also provide a base for the storage,
assembly and en route management of trains (Affleck Consulting 2003). In addition,
24
many freight operators also own and control intermodal freight terminals. There is a
prevailing trend for freight operators to be increasingly integrated into multimodal and
logistics entities (Rail CRC 2006).
Maintenance and Other Related Service Providers
These organsiations are involved in the manufacture, maintenance and repair of rolling
stock including the overhaul of wagons, passenger carriages and locomotives. Rail
enterprises classified within this category may also be involved in the lease and hire of
locomotives and wagons. It also includes organisations involved in the provision of
services related to the development, maintenance and inspection of rail track as well as
of communications and signaling systems. A small subsection of enterprises classified
in this group are also responsible for providing services related to the recruitment and
training of skilled rail personnel (Affleck Consulting 2003).
25
Section 3: The rail workforce
This section provides a detailed analysis of the current profile of the rail transport
industry workforce and of recent trends in employment. It draws on data from three
consecutive ABS Population and Housing Censuses (1991, 1996 and 2001) and on
primary data collected in the surveys and in-depth interviews conducted for this
research. Data on rail employment is available from a number of existing published
reports. Estimates of employment vary according to the methodology that is used and
depending on how the ‘rail industry’ is defined.
Recent estimates of employment within the Australian rail transport industry put the
number at around 40,000, representing just under 10% of total employment in the
transport sector (Productivity Commission 2006a, TDT 2005). In 2005 the ARA
reported that roughly 44 100 workers were employed in the rail industry (ARA 2005a).
According to the ARA 15 777 (35.8%) of these employees worked in the freight sector,
with the vast majority of rail workers (25 784 or 59%) being employed in the passenger
transport sector (ARA 2005a). The remaining 2539 rail workers (5.2%) were identified
as labour that was supplied from other sources such as labour hire firms (ARA 2005a).
Approximately half of all Australian rail employees are believed to be employed in the
private sector (Rail, Tram & Bus Union 2004). Australian railways also employ
roughly 25 000 people in an indirect manner, through businesses which supply services
to the rail industry (Rail CRC 2006).
For the purposes of future workforce planning and assessing training needs, the only
existing source of data on rail industry employment that has the required level of detail
is the full population Census. This data allows analysis of trends in employment by
occupation, gender, age and level of qualification. However, at the time of writing this
report, data from the 2001 Census was the most recently available, and it is likely that
further significant changes have taken place over the past five years. Section 3.2, based
on the data from the questionnaires and interviews, provides a more recent snapshot of
the rail workforce. It must be noted, however, that, the sample consists only of major
rail operators, and hence the coverage is quite different to that of the Census. Section
3.3 then contains a summary of recruitment and training arrangements, drawing largely
on information from interviews with the major rail operators.
3.1 Analysis of ABS Census data
This section provides a detailed analysis of trends in the rail transport industry
workforce using data from the 1991, 1996 and 2001 ABS Census of Population and
Housing. The 1996 and 2001 Censuses classified employment according to the 1993
version of the Australian and New Zealand Standard Industrial Classification
(ANZSIC), while the 1991 Census used the Australian Standard Industrial
Classification (ASIC). Both classification systems included a category of ‘Rail
Transport’ and this category is used to represent employment in the rail industry. This
will exclude workers engaged in rail activities but for whom their employer’s main
activity relates to another industry, as may be the case with some haulage activities
within mining companies.
26
The analysis highlights some salient features of employment in the rail industry. These
are:




There has been a dramatic decline in employment in both absolute terms and as a
share of total employment in Australia. Employment fell by around one half
between 1991 and 2001. This is consistent with previous estimates that the number
of full time employees in the rail industry decreased from 88500 in 1986 to 36500 in
1998 (Productivity Commission, 2000c).
The rail workforce is significantly older than the wider Australian workforce and
continues to age at an alarming rate.
The rail workforce is relatively less skilled than the wider Australian workforce,
with a concentration of workers with elementary-intermediate level qualifications
and with no recognised qualification, and a lower proportion of workers with
diploma or tertiary qualifications.
Employment in the sector is very highly male dominated.
The fact that most rail workers are older males with less than half having acquired
secondary school qualification was forwarded as one of the explanations as to why the
ABS Labour Force Survey findings indicated that rail employees were less “mobile”
and less able to adjust to structural change than workers in other industries (Productivity
Commission 2000a). Similar results were uncovered by the Bureau of Transport and
Communications Economics (BTCE) in 1990 when it undertook a survey of redundant
and redeployed rail workers and found that 44% remained unemployed after
redundancy. It was also found that more than 56% of these unemployed rail workers
were lowly skilled employees (Productivity Commission 2000a).
3.1.1 Aggregate employment
According to the 2001 ABS Census data there were 28,875 workers employed in the
Australian Rail Transport Industry. This represents a decrease from the equivalent 1996
Census figure of 33,295 and a considerable reduction from the 54,677 figure that was
derived from the 1991 Census. In effect a significant downsizing in the Australian rail
workforce of almost 50% occurred in the decade spanning from 1991 to 2001. With
total employment in Australia growing by 17% between 1991 and 2001 the Rail
Industry’s share of employment more than halved, declining from 0.77% of total
employment in 1991 to just 0.35% in 2001. The bulk of the downsizing in the rail
industry occurred between 1991 and 1996, with employment falling by an average of
9.4% per annum over that period. In the five years from 1996 to 2001, employment
declined by 2.8% per annum.
This downsizing of the rail workforce in all Australian States and Territories is likely to
have been induced by the billion dollar annual deficits that were incurred across the
national rail industry over the period. Furthermore, rail workforce downsizing and
labour market reform were major outcomes that resulted from the implementation of
deregulation policies across the Australian rail industry in recent decades (Everett
2006).
27
3.1.2 Employment by occupation and qualification
The 2001 Census classifies employed persons using the Australian Standard
Classification of Occupations (ASCO), which identifies nine major occupational groups
as shown in Table 3.1. In terms of the major ASCO categories, the distinctive feature of
the rail industry relative to all industries in total is the very high concentration of
employment in the category ‘intermediate production and transport workers’, as would
be expected. A second feature is the lower proportion of rail industry jobs that are
within the professions. The industry thus has a relative concentration of employment
within occupations with elementary to intermediate skill levels.
Within the ‘intermediate production and transport workers’ major category, the largest
occupation is that of drivers, representing around one-fifth of all rail industry jobs.
‘Intermediate plant operators’ also represent a significant share of employment within
this major group. Among tradespersons, the most important occupations are the
mechanical and fabrication engineering trades and the electrical/electronics trades.
The ASCO categories are not consistent between 1991 and 1996, the inter-census period
in which the rail industry experienced the greatest decline in employment. However,
between 1996 and 2001, Table 3.1 shows that within the rail transport industry the share
of employment in managerial, professional and associate professional occupations
increased, while unskilled labouring positions and the trades suffered the greatest
decline. In absolute terms, the largest falls in employment within the rail transport
industry were among ‘other labourers and related workers’ (down by 1,630 workers),
‘road and rail transport drivers’ ( down by 745 workers), electrical and electronic
tradespersons (down by 545 workers), ‘elementary service workers’ (down by 508
workers), ‘mechanical and fabrication tradespersons’ (down by 502 workers). Increases
in employment occurred for ‘specialist managers’ (408 workers), ‘business and
administration associate professionals’ (361 workers) and ‘business and information
professionals’ (283).
Table 3.1 Employment shares by occupation, rail and all industries, 2001
1. Managers
2. Professionals
3. Associate Professionals
4. Tradespersons
5. Advanced Clerical & Serv. Wrkrs
6. Interm. Clerical, Sales & Serv. Wrkrs
7. Interm. Prod. & Transport Wrkrs
8. Elem. Clerk, Sales & Serv. Wrkrs
9. Labourers & Related Workers
Total
1996
share
(1)
2.9%
4.9%
6.4%
14.2%
1.5%
10.6%
31.7%
12.9%
15.0%
100.0%
Rail Industry
Change in
2001
share
share
(2)-(1)
% pts
(2)
4.9%
2.0
7.4%
2.5
8.7%
2.3
11.0%
-3.2
1.8%
0.3
11.4%
0.8
31.5%
-0.2
13.6%
0.7
9.8%
-5.3
100.0%
All
Industries
2001
Share
9.4%
18.6%
12.0%
12.5%
3.8%
16.8%
8.3%
9.7%
8.8%
100.0%
28
Occupational trends within the rail industry thus suggest a degree of skill-biased
structural change, most notably the falls in the number of unskilled, labouring and lowor semi-skilled service positions juxtaposed with increased employment of business
administration and information professional and associate professional positions. Such
skill-biased structural change is most commonly associated with changes in technology.
The skill composition of the workforce can be more directly assessed through the
Census data on workers’ highest level of qualification (see Table 3.2). It is clear from a
comparison of the qualification profile of workers overall in 2001 (column 3) with the
rail industry (column 2) that a higher proportion of rail industry workers have a
certificate qualification when compared to the national average for all Australian
industries, and are also more likely to possess no recognised qualification. Conversely,
rail workers are less likely to have tertiary education qualifications, with the percentage
of rail employees possessing a postgraduate degree, graduate diploma and/or certificate,
bachelor degree and/or an advanced diploma or diploma, being recognisably lower than
the Australian industry average.
This broad profile of a concentration of skills in the ‘intermediate’ range, is also evident
in data from the 1991 Census, and can be primarily attributed to the high proportion of
employment within the occupations of transport drivers, intermediate transport
operators and intermediate clerical workers. However, caution must be taken in
investigating the trends between the Censuses as the classifications of qualifications
changed from 1996 to 2001. Most importantly, in 2001 certificates were no longer
distinguished as basic or skilled as they were in 1996. Despite these shortcomings, the
general trend towards higher levels of qualification within the rail workforce is
confirmed. Employed persons with ‘No recognised qualification’ is the only group to
have declined, with their share of employment falling by seven percentage points. Rail
workers with bachelor degrees displayed the largest increase in their share of
employment, up by three percentage points between 1996 and 2001, although at 7.2%
this is still half the proportion with bachelor degrees in the wider workforce. By and
large, the increases in the proportion of qualified workers with qualifications, and the
fall in those with no qualifications between 1996 and 2001, has been more pronounced
than in the wider workforce. This suggests these recent changes are associated with
reforms within the rail industry rather than just a more general trend of ‘credentialism’
within the labour force as a whole. It also reverses the trend between the 1991 and 1996
Censuses in which rail industry workers became, on average, less qualified than the
workforce as a whole.
Table 3.2 Employment shares by level of qualification, rail & all industries, 2001
Rail Industry
Postgraduate Degree
Grad Dip & Grad Certificate
Bachelor Degree
Advanced Diploma & Diploma
Certificate (skilled vocational)
Certificate (basic vocational)
No recognised qualification
Total
1996
share
(1)
0.8%
0.4%
4.2%
3.4%
20.4%
4.1%
66.6%
100.0%
2001
share
(2)
1.6%
0.9%
7.2%
4.7%
Change in
share
(2)-(1)
% pts
0.7
0.4
3.0
1.3
All
Industries
2001
Share
(3)
2.9%
2.2%
14.9%
8.2%
26.2%
1.6
21.6%
59.5%
100.0%
-7.1
0.0
50.3%
100.0%
29
3.1.3 The age profile of the rail workforce
The ageing of the rail workforce is demonstrated in Figures 3.1 and 3.2. Figure 3.1
compares the age profiles for the rail industry in 1991 and 2001. The feature which
immediately stands out is the lower proportion of employees in 2001 in the age groups
from 15 to 34. Whereas persons under 35 made up 40% of the rail transport workforce
in 1991, ten years later the under 35s comprised just 26% of rail transport workers.
This suggests an alarming decline in employees coming in at the entry level. The
average age of rail workers as indicated by the Census data in 1991 was 39 years,
compared to 37 years for the employed Australian population. By 2001, the average
age of rail workers had increased by two and a half years to 41.5 years, while the
employed workforce as a whole aged by just one and a half years. This bears a striking
resemblance to the findings released in a 2006 ARA report which estimated the average
age of workers in the rail industry to be 41.3 (which was representative of the average
age of workers in the transport and storage industry) compared to an average age of 38.6
for workers in all Australian industries (ARA 2006c). Figure 3.2 shows the underrepresentation of rail transport workers in the younger age groups relative to workers in
all industries, and the significant over-representation of workers in the 35 to 54 age
groups. In 2001, under 35s comprised 40% of the overall Australian workforce,
compared to the 26% figure for the rail industry. Further evidence of the aging
phenomenon within the Australian rail workforce is presented in ABS Census figures
indicating that between 1991 and 2001 the greatest reduction in rail employees was
among those aged 15-19 years, with the number of workers in this age group declining
by over 70% during the period. The Census data also indicates that there was a greater
than 60% reduction in the number of rail workers aged 20-34 years over the ten year
span. In addition, the only increase in rail workers recorded over the decade was
amongst those aged 60-64 years, with the numbers of employees in this age group
growing by more than half between 1991 and 2001.
Table 3.3 shows the average age of rail workers by major occupational group and
contrasts these averages with those for the wider workforce. Male rail workers are
older, on average compared to other workers in every occupation with the exception of
managers. This age difference is particularly pronounced for male clerical, sales and
service workers. Such workers at the elementary skilled occupations are 7.2 years older
than workers in theses occupations in all industries, and 5.4 years older for intermediate
level occupations. Male labourers are also on average nearly six years older. In the
largest occupational category of the rail industry, intermediate production and transport
workers males are on average 3.6 years older. It has also been noted elsewhere that rail
safety workers are predominantly males with an average age well above the average for
Australian workers (ARA 2005). Looking specifically at drivers, who make up over
one-fifth of the rail transport workforce, the ageing problem is even more acute, with an
average age of 43.6 years in 2001. Only 11% of drivers in the rail industry were less
than 35 and more than one in ten was aged 55 or over and thus would reach retirement
age by 2011.
Females who work in the rail industry are in fact slightly younger, on average, than the
wider female workforce and this holds for all individual occupations except elementary
clerical, sales and service workers and labourers and related workers. As they make up
only 12% of the rail workforce (see below), however, this has little impact on the
overall age profile of rail employment.
30
Figure 3.1: Age profile of the rail workforce; 1991 and 2001
65+
60-64
55-59
Age Group
50-54
45-49
2001
40-44
1991
35-39
30-34
25-29
20-24
15-19
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
16%
18%
20%
Proportion of workers
Figure 3.2: Age profile of the workforce; rail industry and all industries, 2001
65+
60-64
55-59
Age Group
50-54
45-49
All Industries
40-44
Rail Industry
35-39
30-34
25-29
20-24
15-19
0%
2%
4%
6%
8% 10% 12% 14% 16% 18% 20%
Proportion of workers
31
Table 3.3: Average age by occupation and gender, rail industry and all
industries, 2001
Males
Managers
Professionals
Associate Professionals
Tradespersons & Related Workers
Advanced Clerical & Service Workers
Interm. Clerical, Sales & Service Workers
Interm. Production & Transport Workers
Elem. Clerical, Sales & Service Workers
Labourers & Related Workers
Total all Occupations
(a) Cell count too small to make inferences.
Rail
44.7
41.7
42.9
40.0
42.2
43.1
43.1
40.6
41.8
42.3
All
Industries
44.7
40.8
40.5
36.9
40.6
37.7
39.5
33.3
36.1
39.1
Rail
38.9
33.8
37.1
(a)
36.6
36.4
36.1
35.2
43.6
36.3
Females
All
Industries
43.3
39.2
38.9
36.0
40.2
36.8
39.2
32.0
40.0
37.8
3.1.4 Employment By Gender
Employment within the Australian Transport and Logistics Industry has been
traditionally very male dominated. In 1984, the Australian Railway Research and
Development Organisation (ARRDO) reported that female employees represented only
6% of all workers in the Australian rail industry (ARRDO 1985). A recent report by the
TDT estimated that female employment in rail operations was approximately 8-9%, and
that female representation in the industry could be expected to change only marginally
in the near future (TDT 2005). This assertion appears to have been affirmed by figures
released in 2006 indicating that a significant gender imbalance still exists despite the
fact that the number of female employees as a proportion of the national rail workforce
had increased to 16% (RTBU 2007). The 2001 Census figures show that women
accounted for 12% of the Australian rail workforce. This compares to 7.3% in 1991 and
7.8% in 1996. This improvement in female represent does not reflect an increase in
employment of women. Female employment in the industry in fact fell by 13%
between 1991 and 2001. Rather, it reflects the fact that restructuring has had the biggest
impact on the male dominated trade and labouring occupations.
It can be seen from Table 3.4 that over half (65%) of all female workers in the rail
industry were employed within clerical, sales and service positions, be that elementary
(27% of female rail workers), intermediate (also 27%) or advanced (9%). By contrast,
21% of male rail workers are employed in such clerical, sales and service positions.
Occupational categories which are very highly male dominated include the trades,
intermediate production and transport workers and labourers and related workers.
Looking at more specific occupations, 97.2% of secretaries and personal assistants
employed within the rail industry are females; 2.2% of intermediate plant operators and
1.3% of transport drivers. The high degree of occupational segregation by gender
remained relatively unchanged between 1991 and 2001.
32
Table 3.4: Employment by occupation and gender, 2001, Australian rail industry
Managers
Professionals
Associate Professionals
Trades & Related Workers
Adv. Clerical & Service Wkrs
Interm. Clerical, Sales & Service Wkrs
Interm. Production & Transport Wkrs
Elem. Clerical, Sales & Service Wkrs
Labourers & Related Workers
Total all Occupations
Number Employed
Male
Female
1239
159
1727
379
2107
377
3107
12
185
327
2290
943
8830
139
2914
956
2610
167
25384
3491
%
Female
11.4%
18.0%
15.2%
0.4%
63.9%
29.2%
1.5%
24.7%
6.0%
12.1%
Share of Employm’t
Male
Female
4.9%
4.6%
6.8%
10.9%
8.3%
10.8%
12.2%
0.3%
0.7%
9.4%
9.0%
27.0%
34.8%
4.0%
11.5%
27.4%
10.3%
4.8%
100.0%
100.0%
Data collected from the ABS Labour Force Survey in 2005 indicated that the percentage
of full-time train drivers who were female was only 1.5%, which compared poorly to
the average of 24.4% full-time female workers reported for all occupations (Australian
Job Search 2006). The data also indicated that there were no female train drivers
employed on a part time basis which was well below the 20.7% figure representing the
proportion of females working part-time in all occupations (Australian Job Search
2006). The dominance of males in the train driving profession may well have increased
since 2001. According to Australian Job Search (2006), from 2000-2005 a 2% increase
in the proportion of male workers was recorded and that over the same 5 year period the
proportion of female train drivers fell by -0.1%.
3.1.5 Employment by State and Territory
In 2001 New South Wales had the largest number of rail transport employees of the
Australian states and territories, followed in descending order by Queensland, Victoria,
Western Australia, South Australia and Tasmania. Few rail transport employees were
recorded in either of the territories. This relative ordering among the states was
unchanged from that revealed in the 1991 and 1996 Censuses. However, all states have
experienced very substantial reductions in rail employment. Overall Victoria and
Tasmania experienced the greatest percentage reduction in their workforce with each
recording a decrease of around 70%. Significant falls in the number of rail transport
employees were also recorded for South Australia (63%) and Western Australia (58%).
The Victorian and Queensland rail industries appear to have led the restructuring
process, with the decline in employment occurring mainly between 1991 and 1996.
Employment in Queensland in fact recovered slightly between 1996 and 2001, and this
State recorded the smallest decline in employment overall (30%). For the other states
the rationalisation of employment continued through both inter-censal periods. New
South Wales recorded a relatively modest fall in employment in proportional terms
(40%), but due to that State being the largest employer of rail workers, it suffered the
largest absolute decline in employment of around 8,000 workers between 1991 and
2001. Employment in Victoria fell by a similar number.
33
Table 3.5: States and territories: Employment trends and average workforce age
Number Employed
State/Territory
New South Wales
Victoria
Queensland
South Australia
Western Australia
Tasmania
Northern Territory
A.C.T
Australia
1991
20137
11502
14746
3552
4016
570
112
42
54677
1996
15131
3507
9754
2203
2308
336
44
12
33295
2001
11994
3285
10336
1296
1704
174
50
36
28875
% change
19912001
-40.4
-71.4
-29.9
-63.5
-57.6
-69.5
-55.4
-14.3
-47.2
Average
Age
2001
41.7
42.8
40.6
41.0
44.2
43.0
42.6
43.7
41.5
As the final column of Table 3.5 reveals, the relatively older age profile of rail workers
applies across all states and territories. Each jurisdiction reveals a higher average age
than the average for all Australian workers, and higher than for all Australian male
workers (see Table 3.3). Workforce ageing is particularly acute in Western Australia,
where the average age of rail workers was 44.2 years in 2001.
Employment in the rail freight sector in New South Wales shrunk from 16300 in 1989
to 7000 in 1996, representing a decrease of approximately 60%. Further reductions
occurred in 2002 when FreightCorp cut its workforce to less than 2500. Another
prominent rail operator who instigated substantial reductions in the number of its
employees was Queensland Rail which decreased its workforce from 24000 in 1990 to
below 14000 by 2002 (Everett, 2006).
3.2 Overview of workforce from survey results
This section presents an in-depth profile of the Australian rail transport industry
workforce using data that was forwarded by rail operators participating in the study. The
findings presented in the following section are thus based on information acquired from
the participants through the mail out questionnaires and face to face interviews.
Specifically data was sourced from rail operators in the questionnaires as to the number
of workers by gender and age group in a list of occupational categories, which were
broadly based on similar occupational classifications used to report data on the
Australian rail workforce with the ABS Census information.
3.2.1 Employment by occupation
The results revealed that the 22 rail operators who provided employment data through
the questionnaires in the study, employed a total of 46 048 workers. The study data
revealed that over one third of the workers of the rail operators surveyed were currently
employed as train drivers and/or assistants or in clerical and customer service roles.
This would appear to resonate with the findings from the analysis of the ABS Census
data in Section 3.1.2, which indicated that there was a concentration of employment in
elementary to intermediary skilled occupations. According to the figures derived from
rail operators participating in the study, workers employed as tradespersons represented
approximately 14% of employees. Over half of these workers were classified as
34
‘mechanical and fabrication tradespersons’ with the remainder falling into the category
of being either ‘electrical’ or ‘other tradespersons’. This reflects similar trends evident
in the 2001 Census data which also appeared to indicate that mechanical and fabrication
tradespersons dominated the occupational group.
In total, workers employed in professional vocations comprised almost 14% of all rail
employees, based on the data provided by the rail operators participating in the study.
More than 50% of these professional workers were engineers. Most of the other
professional workers were classed as ‘business, finance or IT professionals’, with ‘other
professionals’ only representing a very small proportion of all professionals. Almost all
associate professional workers identified in the study were ‘engineering associate
professionals’. This group represented 98% of all employees classified as associate
professionals, with only a smaller number of ‘other associate professionals’ being
reported by the study participants. In total, associate professionals comprised roughly
3% of all rail workers reported by operators in the study.
3.2.2 The age profile of the rail workforce
Analysis of age data derived from the study indicates that over 75% of workers
employed by the study participants are 35 years or older and that almost half of the
workers are aged 45 years or above. There is also an evident under-representation of rail
transport employees in the 15-34 age group, with these workers representing only 23%
of all employees. Another interesting finding is that there is a high concentration of
workers aged 35-54 years, with over 60% of employees falling into this age group.
These trends are consistent with the ABS Census figures relating to the Australian Rail
Transport Industry (ARTI) workforce, as outlined in Section 3.1.3 and are clearly
depicted in Figure 3.3.
Figure 3.3: Age Profile of Rail Workers from 2006 Study Results
Rail Workforce- 2006 Study Results
65+
Age Group
55-64
45-54
Rail Industry
35-44
25-34
15-24
0%
5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40%
Proportion of Workers
According to the data from the rail operators collated through the study, their ageing
concerns relating workers is more acute for some occupational groups than others.
35
Interestingly the data appears to support the assertions made by many of the study
participants in the face to face interviews about their ageing concerns relating to their
engineering personnel, managerial staff, train drivers and assistants and other plant and
machine operators. The data from the operators indicated that 55% of workers in almost
all these occupational groups were aged over 45 years, with most having almost 40% of
their workers in the 45-54 age group. These occupational groups also had a
comparatively low proportion of workers aged 15-34 years with most having less than
15% of their workers belonging to this age group.
Consequently many of the operators interviewed stated that the ageing of their rail
workforce was a major issue for them, with 22 of the 24 respondents identifying ageing
as a concern in at least one occupational group (92%). A large proportion of the
respondents identified train drivers as being an occupational group in which ageing was
of particular concern with 46% (11 out of the total of 24 operators interviewed) making
this assertion. This appears to be a logical concern given that an average age of nearly
45 was calculated for train drivers from the workforce data that was supplied by the
study participants (see Table 3.6). Engineers was another group of professionals that
many interviewees were apprehensive about with regard to ageing, with one third of
respondents stating they had ageing concerns associated with this occupational group.
Roughly 29% of rail operators acknowledged ageing amongst their trades staff
including electrical and mechanical tradespeople as a primary concern for their
organisations. One quarter of the respondents also identified ageing concerns amongst
their managerial staff and over one fifth (21%) had similar concerns with their labourers
and related workers. Both of these were occupational groups which were found to have
relatively high average age amongst their workers (as indicated in the Table 3.6) with
the average age for managers being above 45 and the average age for labourers and
related workers being roughly 44. Rail operators also had ageing concerns relating to
their operational staff with approximately 17% reporting that this was the case.
According to the study data, other plant and machine operators were also found to have
a comparatively high average age of above 44 years. Retirement rates of around 20%
over the next five years were nominated for train drivers and for controllers and
signallers by several operators. High average ages were also evident amongst the
engineering and other associate professionals who were employed by the rail operators
surveyed, with their average age being around 45. The occupations which rail operators
felt most uncomfortable about with regard to the ageing of their workers also appear to
be ones that they identify skill shortages in.
36
Table 3.6: Average age by occupation, rail industry, 2006
Occupational Group Name
Business, Finance or IT Professionals
Clerical & Customer Service Staff
Electrical Tradespersons
Engineering Associate Professionals
Engineers
Labourers & Related Workers
Managerial Staff
Mechanical & Fabrication Tradespersons
Other
Other Associate Professionals
Other Plant & Machine Operators
Other Professionals
Other Tradespersons
Rail Controllers & Signallers
Rail Guards & Attendants
Technical Officers/Technicians
Train Drivers & Assistants
TOTAL
Avg Age
42.1
41.1
42.1
44.7
43.4
43.6
45.2
42.7
36.3
45.0
44.2
40.4
43.2
43.5
43.4
43.1
44.7
43.0
The sentiments expressed by operators relating to their ageing concerns for their rail
employees appears to correspond with TDT predictions that many rail workers will take
up voluntary retirement within the next 10 year period. In its 2005, Industry Skills
Report, the TDT also identified that the increased standards of medical fitness required
by changing regulations may further accelerate retirement among Rail Transport
workers and contribute to a rise in the non-retirement labour turnover rate within the
industry.
3.2.3 Employment by gender
The fact that the Australian rail transport industry is dominated by male employees is
further supported by the data provided by the rail operators in the study, with male
workers accounting for almost 87% of the reported workforce. The representation of
female employees at roughly 13% of the total is similar to the corresponding figure of
12% from the 2001 Census. Occupations which had a very low proportion of female
employees included trade staff (i.e. electrical tradespersons, mechanical and fabrication
tradespersons, other tradespersons), other plant and machine operators and train drivers
and assistants. In each of these occupational groups more than 96% of the workers were
male. Other occupational groups which had high percentages of male employees
included technical officers/technicians, rail controllers and signallers and labourers and
related workers, with all these having around 90% or more of their workers being male.
The percentage of female workers was highest amongst business, finance and IT
professionals along with clerical and customer service staff, with these two groups
accounting for more than half the number of female employees reported by the rail
operators surveyed in the study. These findings indicating there is a fairly high degree
of occupational segregation by gender amongst workers in the Australian rail industry,
is consistent with similar patterns that were reflected in the 2001 ABS Census data.
37
Table 3.7: Employment by occupation and gender, (From Study Data - 2006),
Australian rail industry
Number employed
%
Share of Employment
Occupational Group Name
Total
Business, Finance or IT
Professionals
Clerical & Customer
Service Staff
Electrical Tradespersons
Engineering Associate
Professionals
Engineers
Labourers & Related
Workers
Managerial Staff
Mechanical & Fabrication
Tradespersons
Other
Other Associate
Professionals
Other Plant & Machine
Operators
Other Professionals
Other Tradespersons
Rail Controllers &
Signallers
Rail Guards & Attendants
Technical
Officers/Technicians
Train Drivers & Assistants
TOTAL
Males
Female
Female
Total
Male
Female
2566
1808
758
29.5%
5.6%
3.9%
1.7%
7722
1391
5162
1376
2560
15
33.2%
1.1%
16.8%
3.0%
11.2%
3.0%
5.6%
0.0%
1519
3831
1495
3293
24
538
1.6%
14.0%
3.3%
8.3%
3.3%
7.2%
0.1%
1.2%
4747
2859
4448
2387
299
472
6.3%
16.5%
10.3%
6.2%
9.7%
5.2%
0.6%
1.0%
3763
998
3730
900
33
98
0.9%
9.8%
8.2%
2.2%
8.1%
1.9%
0.1%
0.2%
31
26
5
16.1%
0.1%
0.1%
0.0%
1363
157
1402
1313
88
1385
50
69
17
3.7%
43.9%
1.2%
3.0%
0.3%
3.0%
2.8%
0.2%
3.0%
0.1%
0.1%
0.0%
1990
3900
1861
3221
129
679
6.5%
17.4%
4.3%
8.5%
4.0%
7.0%
0.3%
1.5%
424
7385
46048
377
7112
39982
47
273
6066
11.1%
3.7%
13.2%
0.9%
16.0%
100.0%
0.8%
15.4%
86.8%
0.1%
0.6%
13.2%
3.3 Overview of recruitment and training arrangements
3.3.1 Recruitment
In terms of the recruitment methods used, a broad generalisation is that rail firms could
be categorised as having either very strong ‘internal labour markets’ or else quite open
labour markets. The rail operators surveyed either used internal recruitment or training
as the main method for filling vacancies across the vast bulk of occupations, or else they
recruited from other firms and industries for many of the occupations. From the
feedback received, it appears that few positions in any occupational category have been
filled by recruiting overseas workers or through skilled migration. It seems therefore
that rail employers in large, are confident of availing themselves of replacement
workers, either through recruitment or internal training and promotion, for workers in
lower-to-medium skilled jobs which have high turnover rates, even if they have a
substantial number of current vacancies to be filled.
38
3.3.2 Overview of training in the rail industry
Changes to Rail Training in the last 5-10 years
A high proportion of the rail operators interviewed believed that there had been a
substantial reduction in training investment across the industry, over the last decade.
Most of the interviewees purported that this downsizing of training occurred around or
slightly before the period in which some of the major microeconomic reforms were
implemented in the 1990’s, during which the majority of the previously government
owned rail organisations began to be privatised. There was thus a significant structural
shift within the rail industry which resulted in changes in how workers were recruited,
trained and developed. Many of the respondents identified that the large scale training
programs and resources sustained by the government owned rail organisations were
subsequently substantially rationalised or viewed as a non-core part of operations. This
was fuelled by the increased focus placed by many rail employers on competitive
tendering processes, especially in the more technical areas (such as track and rolling
stock maintenance) where services were increasingly being outsourced. In addition,
many rail employers preferred not to have to contend with the considerable financial
costs and time required to effectively train workers and the risk of losing this training
investment due to the loss of workers to other operators as a result of poaching. The
prevailing view is that this effectively resulted in a void being created with regard to the
vast training needs of the rail industry being largely unmet.
Numerous respondents pointed out that there had been a significant shift from previous
industry practices, since rail employers no longer provided staff with a career path in
which they recruited workers and trained them throughout their whole career
progression, as was the case in the past. The predominant reluctance of rail operators in
the recent past, to invest in the training and development of their workers, also led to a
distinct decline in the number of apprentices and trainees recruited during this period
within the industry. This trend was affirmed by many of the study participants who
asserted that rail employers over the last 10 years have consequently increasingly
looked to recruit workers with pre-existing rail qualifications and experience. Many
share the view that this has acted to exacerbate increased competition and poaching of
qualified and experienced rail workers as well as contributing to the ageing of the
industry workforce, since operators deliberately attempted to minimise their recruitment
of younger, less experienced and qualified workers. Furthermore, it has been identified
as one of the principal reasons why the rail industry now faces critical skills shortages in
key occupational groups.
In addition, several rail organisations who did continue to recruit trainees and
apprentices stated that now they did so through third party providers who took care of
the administrative and contractual responsibilities. Under these arrangements, the
trainees and apprentices worked for the rail operator but were employed by a different
organisation, most commonly a group training company. This thus represents a definite
shift from the past when it was more likely that these rail operators would have directly
employed the apprentices and trainees themselves.
Some smaller operators interviewed, most commonly those involved in freight transport
and “below rail” operations, asserted that they would prefer to continue recruiting
already skilled and experienced rail workers and will attempt to proceed to do so,
wherever possible in the future. However many of the larger rail organisations and the
39
majority of operators in the passenger transport sector, expressed that they were already
committed to or were looking to increase their investment in training and their intake of
apprentices and trainees going forward, in an attempt to mitigate many of the skill
shortages and ageing workforce issues they currently face. Most of these rail employers
believed that it was unproductive and unsustainable for the industry to continue
tolerating the “training gap” which had prevailed in recent times and that more effective
measures had to be taken to address many of the problems operators were confronted
with in relation to skill shortages, poaching and the ageing of their workforces.
Many of these larger sized rail employers were thus also more likely to offer
apprenticeships, traineeships, internships, cadetships and professional graduate
recruitment programs. The majority of these rail employers also offered generous study
assistance programs to encourage their staff to take on additional study or further
training. This often involved providing financial assistance and support to workers to
help meet the costs associated with undertaking the additional training or education. In
addition, many of these organsiations offered workers incentives in the form of
monetary rewards and bonuses and allowed them time off and study leave provisions to
enable them to better accommodate their training and study needs.
Fourteen out of the 24 rail operators interviewed stated that they delivered most of their
training internally, with eleven of these organisations asserting that they had their own
internal Registered Training Organisation (RTO). Another two of the respondents
indicated they were looking at the possibility of developing an internal RTO within their
organisations in the future. Despite the fact that the majority of respondents used
predominantly internal training resources to deliver training to their workers in-house,
most rail operators interviewed commented that there had been a definite trend in recent
years, favouring the increased outsourcing of more training services to external
providers. Many believed that this has lead to the emergence of niche markets for the
provision of rail training within the industry and the ascendance of many specialised
training providers such as the Centre for Excellence in Rail Training (CERT), RTI (Rail
Transport International) and Skilled Rail.
Similarly several respondents commented that the current market conditions and skills
shortages had led to the emergence in recent times of specialised labour hire
organisations (e.g. CERT, Skilled Rail, Southern Cross, etc.) that trained rail workers in
specific vocations and then hired them out to rail organisations that required these types
of workers. Many of the interviewees believed that this was of benefit to rail employers
as it enabled them to have greater flexibility from a human resources perspective and
also improved labour mobility within the rail industry. Most operators also predicted
that the growth in demand for the services and labour offered by these specialist
organisations which had occurred over the last decade, would likely to continue in the
future.
This shift towards increasingly using external training providers was especially
prevalent amongst the comparatively smaller sized rail operators and appears to have
coincided with many of these operators downsizing their internal training resources. It
was also reported that due to the involvement of more corporate institutions and other
organisations in the provision of rail training, operators in the rail industry now had
more choice and flexibility with regard to how they delivered training to their staff.
Many of the larger sized operators, particularly most of those involved in the provision
of passenger transport services, however seemed to have continued delivering the
40
majority of their training for workers internally, with many using their accredited RTO
status and internal rail schools or training colleges to do so. Most of these operators
believed that it was more optimal for them to deliver the training in-house due to their
expertise in the relevant areas, their intimate knowledge of what specific training their
workers required and their ability to adapt the training so that it was better suited to
their specific systems and business operations. Some of these respondents also pointed
out that in addition to improving flexibility, maintaining the delivery of training
internally enabled them to better facilitate the retention of business knowledge within
their respective company and also ensured that they weren’t overly reliant on external
providers to service their training needs. Therefore many of these rail operators either
did not outsource any of their training or only minimally utilised external training
providers to deliver specific training outside of their areas of expertise such as in the use
of computer/IT resources, first aid and manual handling training.
Another prominent trend that was noted by several of the interviewees was that there
had been a streamlining of rail training such that duration of many of the training
regimes undertaken by workers had been reduced, so that they now took less time to
complete than had been the case in the past. Many of these operators felt that such
training processes had become more efficient due to the implementation of improved
training techniques and better development of training personnel and trainers. An
example which was commonly mentioned was in relation to locomotive driver training.
Numerous study participants cited that the time required to train a worker to become a
fully qualified driver had reduced from being 2-2.5 years minimum (and in some cases
even longer) in the past, to now only requiring 14-18 months.
However some rail operators believe that the streamlining of such rail training has led to
training being too short and general and thus not comprehensive enough in terms of the
content and subject matter that is covered. In particular, several of the interviewees
expressed concern that this decline in comprehensive rail training has lead to reduced
coverage of rail safety issues and diminished training in this area, resulting in workers
now being less proficient in their knowledge of safety standards and procedures. The
strength of criticism of some of these operators in relation to this is so potent that they
feel that this decline in comprehensive rail training has resulted in safety within the
industry being increasingly compromised and is one of the main factors which has
contributed to the increased incidence of rail accidents in recent times.
One prominent change with regard to training in the Australian rail industry that was
identified by the study participants as having occurred in the last decade, was the shift
towards more competency based training. As a result, training within the industry is
now nationally accredited with standards being externally driven by a governing
authority that establishes the criteria for training and assessment. This has resulted in
rail training being more aligned with national standards so that training is increasingly
based on achieving specific outcomes to qualify for a certificate of competency that is
nationally recognised. Thus in recent years, the skill and qualification requirements
across the rail industry have become more standardised and often linked to national
guidelines (e.g. the Australian Qualifications Framework - AQF) as determined by
external regulatory boards, which has also lead to the emergence of more skill based
programs.
Prior to the emergence of competency based training, the actual training standards and
requirements were largely determined for each rail organisation by the individual
operators themselves. Therefore, although there were likely similarities between most of
41
the different training modules and regimes delivered by specific rail organisations to
workers, the majority of the training was not nationally accredited and in most cases,
was not recognised by any other rail employer other than the particular one that was
responsible for developing and/or delivering the training. However after implementation
of a more standardised training model framework for the industry, the rail regulators
increasingly insisted on the delivery of rail training by RTOs who were independently
audited to ensure safety and accreditation requirements were met by the respective
training providers. Therefore RTOs became subsequently increasingly utilised by
operators to deliver rail training as they had the authority to determine and certify the
competencies and qualification levels of rail workers.
This trend towards a more nationalised and standardised training framework has also
resulted in the increased use by rail operators of training resources and packages
developed and administered by the TDT. This fact was confirmed by many of the rail
employers interviewed, who acknowledged that they now increasingly used the TDT’s
training resources to deliver training to their staff. Many respondents also believed that
there was now a renewed focus on matching training to the skills that rail workers in
specific occupations required (more “training for the job”), as opposed to training
academically just for a qualification, which had tended to occur more commonly in the
past. These operators further asserted that there had thus been a distinct decline in the
rail industry of what some might call “unnecessary training” i.e. training not directly
related to improving the organisation’s profit margins. From the perspective of most of
these interviewees, there was now instead a greater awareness for the need for targeted
training which involved providing workers with more precise and detailed training to
meet the needs of their specific vocation within the organisation.
Current Rail Training Practices
Most rail operators stated that the majority of training for operational staff involved a
combination of different components including some in class training, supplemented
with some on the job training experience. However the exact composition of how
training took place varied depending on the specific operator and respective
occupational group involved. Many of the interviewees stated that training delivered in
a class room type setting was generally reserved for theoretical material and that the
majority of the training particularly for frontline staff (i.e. drivers, shunters, etc.) was
completed on the job. Numerous operators also asserted that they were constantly
looking at how they could better deliver training to their staff to best accommodate their
diverse capabilities especially in relation to their familiarity and aptitude in using IT and
other technological resources.
Some rail organisations also used computer and web based resources to deliver their
training to workers. A few rail operators did assert that they believed there had been an
increased trend towards the use computer based training, with some saying that there
was a definite rise in the use of online resources and simulators (especially in relation to
locomotive driver training) by their organisations in recent years. Several interviewees
also felt that there were now more numerous training courses for the use of different
types of technology (e.g. ultrasonic training) offered by external training organisations.
Others also predicted that the increased use of computer based training and online
delivery of training would continue to occur within the rail industry in the future, with
several respondents (especially the larger sized operators) stating that it was definitely
an option that they were looking to implement and expand on going forward.
42
However some of the smaller operators felt that they preferred to continue using largely
on the job training, as opposed to using simulators and more computer based training
resources. This was because the majority of them believed that on the job training was
more effective and practical, especially when it came to their operational and “on the
ground” staff, since on the job training allowed these workers to develop a more
relevant and useful skill set. Another impediment to the enhanced use of simulators and
other sophisticated training technologies for some operators was the considerable
associated expense and disruption to their normal operations that would occur if such
training resources were utilised. Other respondents felt that such modern training aids
were ineffective because they were too unrealistic when compared to the real life
scenarios they were supposed to model. Some were also perturbed by the difficulty
these training tools presented to older workers, who were generally less accustomed to
the use of such modern technological resources than their younger colleagues.
Another sentiment commonly shared by the study participants was their belief that there
was a lack of rail specific training programs and courses offered by the more generic,
training providers and educational institutions such as TAFEs and universities. This was
thus listed as one of the principal reasons why many of the rail operators abstained from
sourcing training for their staff from such institutions (and in particular largely
explained the low demand for TAFE training services from rail organisations). Several
operators were of the view that TAFEs and similar educational institutions did not
currently offer any relevant rail specific training courses or programs. Many also
commented that this was in contrast to the considerable amount of training offered for
other transport, distribution and logistics disciplines that is currently available from
some TAFEs and universities.
Some felt that a fair degree of the responsibility for the lack of rail specific training at
TAFEs, universities, etc. lay with the rail operators and the industry overall for not
being more proactive with such institutions and taking the initiative to encourage them
to develop and establish more rail specific training programs. Many interviewees
however felt that it would take such institutions a considerable amount of time and
resources to be able to efficiently offer training of the same standard and quality as
existing rail specific training providers. Many also posed the question of whether it
would be worthwhile and profitable for such institutions to attempt to deliver rail
specific training courses due to the substantial amount of time and resources that would
be required to develop such quality rail specific training programs, especially given that
efficient and effective rail training providers already exist.
Some operators did note that some TAFEs did offer some pre trade and shunter training
which was utilised by some rail organisations. A few of these organisations also
asserted that they were more likely to use TAFEs for training in regional areas due to
the reduced number of training providers often available in those areas compared to
metropolitan areas and the fact that TAFEs often had the vast resources required to cater
for their training needs. A few rail operators stated that often TAFE was the only
training provider in certain regional locations that had the facilities and resources they
required to effectively train their workers.
Several operators were also aware of rail specific training programs and courses offered
by several universities, some of which they incorporated as part of their training
regimes for their workers. Examples of universities with rail specific training courses
that were utilised by some of the study participants included the Central Queensland
43
University, Queensland University of Technology, Royal Melbourne Institute of
Technology, University of Western Sydney and University of Queensland.
External training providers including universities and organisations such as the
Australian Institute of Management and SHL were commonly used by many rail
operators to deliver specialised training to professional staff in the areas of business,
leadership and management development and also to develop their skills and expertise
in the areas of finance, industrial relations and corporate affairs. Some respondents also
believed there had been growth in the market for capability enhancement and
development programs with increased demand for courses that were designed to
improve the proficiency of staff in specialised areas such as in relation to financial
literacy and contract management. The outsourcing of training related to specialised
equipment was also common within the industry with most rail organisations utilising
the training services of the providers or manufacturers of the equipment to deliver the
relevant training to their workers relating to the specific equipment. This included using
the equipment related training services of organisations such as Westinghouse,
Motorola, Siemens, who were often responsible for manufacturing or supplying the rail
operators with the equipment in the first place.
Many rail operators also reported that even when they utilised training services from
RTOs from within the industry and other external training providers, most still had to
work closely with them to design and customise their training programs so that they
were specialised enough to service their specific business and operational needs.
Therefore although these operators outsourced the training of their staff to external
training agencies, they still provided a lot of internal input. Such training regimes often
involved open training systems, where RTOs are very much utilised to deliver the
training. Hence, despite the fact that these rail organisations delivered their training
through external training providers, many stated that they still contributed internal
resources from a subject matter perspective and spent time working with the training
provider(s) to tailor and adapt the training to best suit their needs. In this way, localised
content training is often provided to enable workers to adapt to an operator’s specific
rail equipment and operations and thus acts to supplement the broad based theoretical
understanding that is provided as part of the general training. This is reflective of the
trend across the industry towards more operator aligned training as opposed to broadbrush theoretical training.
44
Section 4: Current and future
workforce needs
The previous section provided a detailed profile of the rail workforce and the industry’s
recruitment and training practices, and highlighted the major trends that have occurred
in the nature of employment in the rail industry. We now turn to the question of how
well the industry is placed to meet its current and future human resource needs. Section
4.2 collates information provided through the surveys and in-depth interviews on rail
operator’s perceptions on the skill shortages and recruitment difficulties currently faced
and their future expectations. This qualitative evidence is supplemented in Section 4.3
by projections of future skills and labour imbalances derived from quantitative models
of labour supply and demand by occupation. Section 4.4 draws together the information
provided in the interviews and from the modelling results to discuss the major training
and recruitment implications for the rail industry.
While the term ‘skills shortage’ is commonly used, it should be acknowledged that there
is no widely accepted definition of the term. Identification and interpretation of skills
shortages may vary significantly depending upon one’s viewpoint, and when the
different incentives facing employees, employers and the government are taken into
consideration. It is important to bear this in mind in interpreting the research findings,
and particularly in assessing the qualitative evidence on employers’ perceptions. This
chapter therefore commences with a brief discussion of the concept of a skills shortage.
4.1 The concept of a skills shortage
In the neo-classical economics’ perfect market model of the labour market there can be
neither labour shortages nor labour surpluses (unemployment). If there are more
workers wanting to work at the prevailing wage rate than are demanded by firms,
competition for jobs among the homogenous workers bids the wage down, thereby
increasing demand and reducing supply until a single equilibrium wage rate is reached
that precisely equates labour supply to labour demand. Similarly, an excess of demand
for labour over the number of people willing to work will lead to an increase in the
wage rate, eliminating the possibility of a persistent shortage. Relaxing the assumptions
of perfect information, perfect mobility and zero transaction costs suggests that shortterm ‘frictional’ imbalances may occur due to the search processes that match job
vacancies to available workers. In aggregate, a certain level of ‘frictional
unemployment’ is always present due to these processes. Similarly, short lags will
occur before vacancies are filled.
Of course, workers and jobs are not homogenous. The contemporaneous existence of
an unemployed worker and an unfilled vacancy may not allow a match to be made even
with perfect information and mobility. In particular, workers live in different
geographical regions and possess different skills and knowledge, just as jobs occur in
different regions and have different skill requirements. Accepting the more realistic
view of the labour market as one that is highly segmented along a number of
dimensions and that adjustments between these segments can require significant time
and resources — that is, mismatches can be structural rather than just frictional — then
shortages or surpluses of labour within different segments (industries, occupations or
45
regions) may well exist and be highly persistent. Wage setting in this environment
entails a high degree of uncertainty. If employers in one sector are having trouble
filling vacancies (or workers having trouble finding work) it may be because the wages
they are offering (asking) are below (above) the market clearing wage for that sector.
However, it may also just be because of frictional and structural impediments to the
market clearing. Since neither party can know what the ‘true’ equilibrium wage is,
there is a tendency to rely on past wages and those paid in similar jobs in other sectors
as a frame of reference in wage setting. For this and other institutional reasons, the role
of the wage in clearing markets is much muted, particularly in the short term, relative to
its prominence as the means of adjustment in the theoretical model.
Shah and Burke define a skill as “an ability to perform a productive task at a certain
level of competence.” (2005: 45). Formal education and training as well as on-the-job
experience contribute to the level of skill possessed by a worker, and the achievement of
formal qualifications, such as under the Australian Qualifications Framework, is an
important mechanism by which individual workers accumulate skills and signal their
skill levels to potential employers. As Shah and Burke explain, the concept of a ‘skills
shortage’ is by no means clear cut, and interpretations vary from a public policy
perspective to those of employers and unions. In the parlance of the popular media,
skills shortages are seen to reflect some form of allocative inefficiency or policy failure.
Skill shortages are most commonly measured by the incidence of hard-to-fill vacancies
in given occupations as reported from the employers’ perspective (see Shah and Burke
2005).
However, the profit maximisation objective of firms readily leads us to appreciate that
employers will always prefer more skilled labour to be available at a given wage rate
rather than less. As discussed above, it can be difficult to distinguish between a
‘shortage’ and an employer simply offering wages below the going rate. In a period of
high unemployment, it might readily be accepted that employers struggling to fill
vacancies was evidence of some failure within the labour market. In the current
macroeconomic environment of high output growth and low unemployment, however,
the text-book outcome is that competition among employers bids up wage rates such
that labour is allocated to sectors in which labour productivity is highest; that is, to the
sectors which can afford to pay the highest wages. That other sectors struggle to attract
skilled workers at wage rates in line with their (lower) level of marginal productivity of
labour may indeed be the desired outcome.
In this sense, skills shortages need to be viewed through a lens of ‘Pareto efficiency’.
Vacancies being hard to fill, or employers expressing a desire for more trained workers
at the wage rates they have on offer, should not be considered a failure or ‘skills
shortage’ unless reallocation of labour to those employers could be achieved without
leaving other employers or sectors worse off. At a public policy level, dealing with
apparent ‘skills shortages’ is thus very complicated. The first question that should be
asked is whether policy makers really have the ability to identify skills shortages that
represent ‘true’ instances of allocative inefficiency. Even if the answer to this is in the
affirmative, there is the second question of whether resources invested in addressing
skills shortages are of a net social benefit once their potential alternative uses (including
a reduced tax burden) are considered. Integral to this assessment is the question of why
it is that, if such investments are ‘profitable’, the incentives facing firms and workers
have not already resulted in private investments to generate such skills or to reallocate
labour within the economy. Drawing upon Becker’s (1962) distinction between general
and specific training, some potential explanations for under-investment in training from
46
a social perspective include high rates of staff turnover which suppress the incentive for
firms to invest in specific training; or minimum wage legislation or capital market
imperfections which prevent workers paying for general training through receiving a
training wage below the value of marginal product or through borrowings.
Despite the obvious difficulties in identifying true ‘skills shortages’ and deciding
whether policy measures are appropriate, a public role in skills training is unavoidable.
The government’s role in funding higher education and Vocational Education and
Training necessitates the government adopting something of a ‘planners’ role. That the
government is now under considerable pressure to address skills shortages implies a
general acceptance of allocative inefficiency and that these shortages are constraining
Australia’s economic growth. One way this is seen to occur is through the emergence
of ‘bottlenecks’ in the economy, where constraints to output in one sector reduce the
rate of capacity utilisation in downstream sectors that rely on those inputs. Thus in its
planning role, it can be argued that the government needs to place greater emphasis
upon addressing skills shortages in industries like rail that primarily provide inputs
rather than final consumption goods.
4.2 Skills shortages and future expectations – qualitative
evidence
The following results are based on data provided by rail operators participating in the
study. The information was acquired through questionnaires and face to face interviews
that were completed with the rail organisations. Almost all respondents stated that they
were experiencing difficulties in recruiting and/or retaining workers in at least one
occupation, consistent with the proposition that the Australian rail industry is currently
facing significant labour shortages. Moreover, it was predominately in the higher skilled
occupations in which recruitment difficulties were nominated. The operators’
perceptions of skill shortages are summarised below, with the discussion organised by
occupational group. Evidence is then presented on vacancies and turn-over rates within
the industry and regional dimensions to the skills shortages and recruitment difficulties
being experienced.
4.2.1 Skills shortages by occupation
Tradespersons
The occupational group for which shortages were most commonly reported was
tradespersons, with 45% of rail operators experiencing shortfalls in trade staff. This
included shortages in electrical tradespeople such as electrical fitters and electricians,
with approximately 27% of rail operators experiencing shortages of workers in this
occupational group. Entry into trade professions within the rail industry generally
requires an AQF Certificate III or higher qualification, typically involving a standard
three to four year apprenticeship, although in some instances additional experience may
also be necessary. Some operators indicated that they were unable to attract applicants
with the appropriate experience, while others indicated that they had not been able to
attract any applicants at all. Operators facing shortages of electrical tradespersons
generally attributed the shortage to the current tight labour market conditions, although
47
one participant blamed competition from foreign firms for the shortfall. Operators also
identified recruitment difficulties in other trades, including boilermakers and
mechanical tradespersons. This current shortage in tradespersons as recognised by the
operators interviewed is consistent with similar findings which were reported by the
ARA in 2006 (ARA 2006c).
Signalling Staff
In addition, 32% of the study participants identified having difficulties in attracting or
retaining signalling staff, including signal electricians, signal maintainers and signal
technicians. The mandatory requirements for workers in this occupational group is
usually an AQF Certificate III or higher qualification, with additional relevant
experience sometimes also being considered essential. The shortages amongst signalling
staff were generally attributed to a lack of applicants with the appropriate qualifications
and or experience. However, in the case of signal technicians, the rail operators in the
study stated that they had no applicants at all. Factors that the respondents believed
contributed to the shortages in signalling staff included increased competition for these
workers due to the current booms in the resources and construction industries and an
inability to compete with the rates of pay offered by firms in these competing industries
and other organisations including foreign companies.
Professionals- Engineers
Around 32% of respondents indicated difficulties in attracting or retaining engineers. In
particular, a lack of appropriately tertiary qualified applicants with the necessary
specialisations in civil, electrical, mechanical engineering and signal maintenance
engineering was identified. Rail operators participating in the study attributed the
shortages in engineering personnel to competition from other rail operators as well as
increased demand for engineering professionals due to the booms currently occurring in
the mining and resources sector as well as the building and construction industries. The
evident shortage of engineers within the Australian rail industry identified through the
study therefore supports similar findings that were published in a 2006 ARA report
(ARA 2006c).
Train Drivers
A number of rail operators (around 27%) reported shortages among train drivers. The
majority stated that this was because there were insufficient numbers of applicants who
were appropriately qualified and experienced to assume train-driving positions within
their organisations. Two study participants indicated they had no applicants at all for
these positions. Consideration for this occupation generally required an AQF Certificate
II or higher qualification or at least one year of relevant experience (although in some
cases relevant experience in addition to the formal qualification is required). The time
required to fully train a worker to become a qualified driver as reported by the
respondents varied from 14 to 30 months depending on the specific training regime
utilised and the previous training and experience of the recruits. A shortage in train
driver assistants was reported by two of the rail operators who had stated that they were
also experiencing difficulties in recruiting train drivers. Both of these operators
indicated that applicants for these positions did not possess the necessary qualifications
and one also stated that applicants lacked adequate experience.
48
4.2.2 Vacancies and wastage rates
The respondents’ assessments of recruitment difficulties were backed up by data
provided on current vacancies. A significant number of vacancies were noted for
engineers, tradespersons and drivers. Interestingly, many vacancies were also reported
in occupations that were not acknowledged as ones for which the operator was facing
recruitment difficulties. These included rail controllers and signallers, rail guards and
attendants and customer service staff. The existence of vacancies in these professions is
consistent with shortages being associated predominantly with higher skilled
occupations.
In the mail-out survey, most rail operators were not able to provide reliable estimates of
either the typical wastage rates within given occupations or the proportion of employees
likely to retire in the coming 5 years. Among those who could, the estimated annual
wastage rates were often very high, notably among tradespersons and rail guards and
attendants. The responses suggest that rail employers do not focus particularly strongly
on calculating specific wastage rates or retirement rates in their analysis of workforce
data. In the face to face interviews, however, a high proportion of rail operators (15 out
of the total of 24 respondents) asserted that they were concerned about turnover rates
amongst specific occupational groups within their organisations. Respondents were
most commonly concerned with turnover among their trade staff, including electrical
and mechanical tradespeople, with approximately 29% of those interviewed reporting
this. More than one fifth of the study participants identified high turnover rates
associated with their clerical and customer service staff as well as with their train
drivers. The other occupational group for which comparatively high wastage rates were
reported by some operators was engineers including electrical and signalling engineers,
with around 12% of operators identifying shortages amongst this group of professionals.
Most occupations reported by the respondents as having relatively high turnover rates
were also occupations in which these operators believed they faced skill shortages.
Higher turnover rates were also reported by some rail operators amongst younger staff
(namely those aged under 25 years) and employees who had been with their
organisation for a relatively short period of time – i.e. less than 3 years. This appears to
reflect general trends associated with younger “generation Y” workers who are
commonly more career mobile and often prefer to have shorter employment tenures in
each of their occupational roles, than their older contemporaries.
4.2.3 Skill shortages by region
Skill shortages were reported by the rail operators interviewed in the study to be more
common in rural regions throughout Australia. This was generally attributed to the
remoteness of these areas acting as a deterrent for many workers but in some of these
regions housing difficulties was also considered to be a contributing factor. In
particular, Kalgoorlie was identified as a locality where many rail organisations
experienced labour shortages. Kalgoorlie and Merredin (also in Western Australia) were
recognised as places where some rail operators recorded comparatively higher turnover
rates among their rail personnel especially with regard to tradespeople, drivers and
managerial staff. Other areas where skill shortages were reported included several
locations in rural New South Wales (mainly agricultural hubs) and remote regions of
49
Northern Western Australia (predominantly mining towns). Interestingly, some capital
cities were also nominated by some operators as being places where they experienced
difficulty in attracting and retaining rail workers. This included the cities of Melbourne,
Brisbane and Sydney where issues and problems relating to housing and commuting
were believed to have contributed to the shortages experienced in these localities.
The relevant rail operators anticipated skill shortages to continue in the future in
Kalgoorlie and Merredin. Other areas of concern identified by rail operators where they
were expecting shortages going forward included regions in rural NSW and several
predominant mining towns in northern Queensland and northern Western Australia.
Turnover rates amongst tradespeople, drivers and managerial staff were also considered
by many respondents to be comparatively higher in these regions.
4.3 Modelling future workforce needs
Aggregating the expectations of individual operators to generate a picture of the future
outlook for the rail industry as a whole could potentially be highly misleading. In many
respects these operators are in competition with one another – such as for passengers,
freight, infrastructure access and for new recruits. One operator’s expectations may only
be achievable at the expense of another’s. Secondly, as discussed in Section 4.1, the
assessment of skills shortages can be highly subjective. This section takes the opposite
‘tops down’ approach of starting with forecasts of aggregate output of the sector, and
working backwards to derive the labour requirements by occupation to meet that
demand. To highlight potential skill shortages, these demand projections are contrasted
with the likely supply of workers by occupation under a ‘business as usual’ scenario
which takes into account the profile of the existing rail workforce, assumes a
continuation of recent entry rates by occupation for the industry and applies age, gender
and occupation specific net-retention rates derived from Census data.
4.3.1 A model of labour demand in the rail industry
To illustrate the approach taken to forecasting labour demand, assume initially that there
is just one homogenous output from the rail industry, which we denote Y, produced by
homogenous units of labour, X. In any one period, t, then output per worker (or labour
productivity) is defined by;
(1)
lt 
Yt
Xt
Given data on both output and employment in a base year it is possible to determine
labour productivity. Forecasts for future output, combined with assumptions regarding
changes in labour productivity, are then used to generate a forecast of total employment
in each period. The distribution of employment by occupation is also known for the
base year. Forecasts for employment by occupation are then derived from the forecasts
of aggregate employment based on assumptions relating to the change in occupational
distribution.
50
The basic forecasting approach is therefore straightforward - it is deriving the most
plausible assumptions regarding labour productivity and the occupational distribution of
employment that is more involved. It is also necessary to take account of the fact that
the rail industry produces more than one type of output. The model differentiates
between passenger and freight task. The data sources and the basis for each assumption
are detailed below, with the resulting projections presented in Section 4.3.2.
Output forecasts
The model differentiates between freight and passenger outputs for the rail industry.
Recent data and forecasts for each are taken from existing published sources.
Projections for the freight task are taken from BTRE (2006), and passenger task from
Apelbaum Consulting Group (2007). However, data on employment is not
disaggregated between the provision of freight and passenger services in each year. For
relating trends in output to employment, it is therefore necessary to translate the
projected changes in the freight and passenger tasks into changes in a ‘composite’ index
of output.
In their 2006 report Freight measurement and modelling in Australia, the BTRE
provides forecasts of the total Australian rail freight task by single year to 2020. The
task is predicted to grow by around 2.2% per annum between 2003 and 2020; increasing
from 161 billion tonne-kilometres in 2003 to 234 billion tonne-kilometres in 2020
(2002, Table 1.4). Data and projections on the passenger task are provided by
Apelbaum Consulting Group’s publication “Australian Rail Transport Facts 2007”. This
contains estimates of total actual passenger kilometres (including light rail, urban and
non-urban passenger) up to 2005, and forecasts to 2015 (2007: Table D1-2). To take
the projected series out to 2020, we assume that the forecast trend growth rate between
2010 and 2015 continues to 2020. Under this assumption, passenger task is forecast to
increase from 11.3 billion passenger-kilometres in 2005 to 13.8 billion passengerkilometres in 2020, an average rate of growth over those 15 years of 1.4% per annum.
Total freight task is therefore projected to grow significantly faster than passenger task.
In fact, the projected growth rate for freight is 50% higher than for passenger. Estimates
for employment by freight and passenger available for 2003 and 2005 (ARA 2003a,
ARA 2005a) show that 157 persons were employed per 1 billion tonne-kilometres of
freight carried, compared to 1,422 persons per 1 billion passenger-kilometres. To
generate a composite measure of output consistent with employment requirement,
freight and passenger kilometres are weighted accordingly. We standardised this
composite measure to equal 1 million in 1991. The projections in freight and passenger
output imply a rate of growth of 1.8% per annum in weighted output from 2006 to 2020.
Labour productivity and aggregate employment
Although composite output increased by one-third between 1991 and 2001, as noted
previously total employment in the rail industry decreased by 47% as a result of
extensive restructuring. Using the composite index of output and ABS Census
employment figures, labour productivity is found to have increased by 13% per annum
between 1991 and 1996, and by a further 6.5% per annum between 1996 and 2001. In
all, output per worker increased by a factor of just over 21/2 in those 10 years. The
assumption regarding future developments in labour productivity are critical to the
projected estimates for labour demand. Clearly, the restructuring process cannot
continue indefinitely at such a pace and, given that the rate of growth in labour
51
productivity halved from 1991-96 to 1996-2001, we believe that the reform process had
largely run its course by 2001. We assume a further halving of the rate of growth in
labour productivity to 3.25% per annum between 2001 and 2006, followed by a trend
rate of growth in labour productivity of 2% per annum from 2007 onwards.
Considering that this ‘trend’ will embody further industry restructuring, reforms to work
practices and job redesign, technological change and economies of scale as the level of
output increases, the assumption of a 2% per annum growth in labour productivity
seems reasonably conservative. Even though, the resulting projection is for total
employment to fall from 28,875 in 2001 to 27,915 in 2020. This slight decline in
aggregate employment contrasts to an increase in output over the same period of 50%.
Employment by Occupation
Having generated estimates for aggregate employment, estimates of employment by
occupation then requires an assumption regarding the occupational composition of
employment. Past data is available on a consistent basis by ASCO categories from the
1996 and 2001 Censuses. As noted in section 3.1.2 above, there was significant change
in occupational composition between those years, including growth in the share of
managers, professionals, and associate professionals, a decline in the share of
employment for tradespersons and a significant decline in the share of labourers and
related workers. To arrive at a distribution for 2006, consistent with the approach for
labour productivity, we first assume that the reform process continued but at half the
rate of change that occurred between 1996 and 2001. This resulting profile is then
compared to the aggregate occupational employment profile of the firms who responded
to the questionnaires sent out in the second half of 2006. Although the coverage of the
survey and the ABS defined ‘rail industry’ will not directly correspond, the survey data
suggests two adjustments to our projected distribution for 2006 are warranted: first there
appears to have been more rapid continued growth in the employment of professionals,
and second the decline in tradespersons may have been reversed. In each case the
difference between our projections based on the Census data and the survey data is 5-6
percentage points. Given the likely inconsistencies between definitions used and
coverage of the industry, we conservatively adjust the shares of both these groups up
two percentage points, and then re-scale all shares so they sum to 100.
The projected trends in occupational distribution between 2006 and 2011 are based on
information collected in the in-depth interviews on what changes the operators expected
in their workforce in the coming five years. Based on a general consensus of the views
expressed across operators, occupational groups are assigned changes in their share of
either +1, +0.5, 0, -0.5 or -1 percentage points by 2011, with the compositional change
occurring linearly for the years in between. From 2011 onwards, changes in
occupational shares are based on estimates of the effect of scale on employment
demand. In the in-depth interviews, respondents were asked to indicate how
employment within each occupational category would change if there was a 50%
increase in output. The average responses are used to provide an estimate of the
elasticity of employment with respect to output (remember that this impacts upon shares
only – aggregate employment is already determined through projected output and labour
productivity). We believe these economies of scale effects will be important and can be
justified because, as discussed in Section 2, increases in output in the rail industry are
likely to lead to a higher scale of operation for existing operators rather than new
operators entering the market, due to low marginal costs and falling average costs with
output levels. These estimated elasticities range from a low of between a 6 to 8%
52
increase in employment for professionals, clerical and sales workers and managers
resulting from a 50% increase in output, to a high of a 36% increase in employment for
intermediate transport and production workers (which includes drivers, controllers and
signallers, other plant and machine operators).
4.3.2 A model of labour supply and population ageing
Projections of labour supply by occupation are calculated separately by occupation, age
and gender starting from the base year of 2001, the most recent year that such detailed
data is available. The projections require assumptions to be made regarding the number
of persons recruited to the rail industry at entry-level, and net retention rates.
Unfortunately historical trends in employment in the rail industry cannot be used as a
realistic guide for these assumptions because of the significant restructuring and labour
shedding that occurred between 1991 and 2001. In contrast to a continuation of these
trends, our output and employment projections show rail employment having stabilised
and starting to expand slightly from 2006. Therefore recent trends for the economy as a
whole will provide a better yardstick for future retention rates in the rail industry, rather
than rail specific ones.
The approach can be illustrated as follows. Note that the Census data on employment
by occupation has been collated by 5-year age groups — 15-19 year olds, 20-24 year
olds, and so on to 60-64 year olds. Persons 65 and over make up the final category.
Note also that the Census is taken every five years. Thus all persons who were in the
25-29 year age group, for example, in the 1996 Census, must have been in the 30-34
year age group for the 2001 Census. It is possible to calculate the net retention rate
from one Census to the next. This is a ‘net’ rate in that it that it represents the balance
between wastage rates (leaving the labour force through retirement, disability,
temporary non-participation in the labour force or workers changing to a different
occupation, out-migration) and entry rates (new entrants, people returning from outside
the labour force, people entering the occupation from a different occupation, inward
migration).
These net retention rates from 1996 to 2001 are calculated separately by occupation (at
the major group level), age and gender for all Australian workers. As would be
expected, the net retention rates vary significantly by gender and age. For men, they
range from +11.3% for 20-24 year olds to -31.8% for 55-59 year olds. For women, the
rates are much lower around age 20-29, but increase markedly from age 50 onwards.
The proportion of people employed in lower skilled and manual occupations also falls
with age. Using the profile of employment by occupation, age and gender for the rail
industry in the 2001 base year, it is then a simple mechanical matter to generate the
projected workforce profile every fifth year from 2006 onwards, with the intervening
years estimated through linear interpolation. The strength of this approach is that it
explicitly takes into account the older average age of the rail workforce, as well as its
specific gender and occupational distributions.
The remaining assumption needed to complete the forecasting exercise relates to the
number of new recruits at entry level. Given that employment levels in the rail industry
are estimated to be very similar for 2006 as for 2001, it seems reasonable to assume that
the training and recruitment levels will also have remained roughly constant. In each
occupational group in the rail industry, the number of 20-24 year olds in 2001 is much
higher than the number of 15-19 year olds. Therefore it is assumed that the number of
53
employees in the age group 15-24 is constant at the 2001 level as an estimate of the
training rate in each year. This is in contrast to the alternative of holding the 15-19 year
old intake constant and applying the net retention rate estimates to generate the figure
for 20-24 years olds in subsequent years. This latter approach is unlikely to reflect
actual training and recruitment practices, particularly for more skilled occupations in
which people will not complete their qualifications until after they have turned 20.
4.3.3 Modelling results
The final results are shown in table 4.1. Total employment (demand) in the rail
transport industry is forecast to rise initially to 2010 due to robust forecasts for output
growth, but then to contract steadily to be around 27,015 (1,000 persons lower) by 2020
as a slower rate of output growth is more than offset by the trend increase in labour
productivity. In contrast, applying the retention rates observed for all industries by
occupation, gender and age to the rail workforce’s current profile and recruitment levels
suggests the supply of workers will fall to 24,353 persons by 2020. The projected
shortfall in supply relative to demand is predicted to grow steadily starting from 2006 to
reach 3,562 persons in 2020.
Given total employment demand is forecast to moderate slightly we believe the output
and employment demand projections are quite conservative. This suggests that the
factors most likely to lead to labour shortages in the rail industry lie on the supply side.
The declining supply projections result from both the assumptions used and the current
profile of the rail workforce. With respect to the assumptions, addressing the shortfall
will require the industry to significantly increase their entry level recruitment over 2001
levels, or else achieve much higher retention rates of older workers relative to other
industries. The model indicates that entry rates to the rail industry in the 15-24 year old
age groups would have to approximately double over 2001 levels to balance the demand
and supply projections. Admittedly recruitment levels in 2001 may have been
suppressed due to the prior periods of labour shedding, however in the current climate
of very tight labour markets and the resources boom, it seems unlikely that the rail
industry could expand recruitment levels by the required degree necessary to avoid
shortages. The option of doing so by substantially increasing the wages and conditions
on offer at entry level seems unrealistic given that the degree of price competition the
industry faces from other transport modes. Increases in wages at entry level will also
inevitably eventually flow on to some degree to incumbent workers.
The more important supply-side factor lies in the simple reality of the ageing, maledominated rail workforce and hence the high expected wastage rates of exiting workers
over the coming 15 years. As noted in Section 3.1.3, the average age of all workers in
the rail transport industry in 2001 was 41.5 years. Under the supply projections, this
increases to 49.1 by 2021 (see Table 4.2). Even with the hypothetical doubling of the
intake of 15-24 year olds it still increases to 46.0 years.
Projections by occupation
The projected shortages are given in the final panels of Table 4.1 expressed in both the
number of persons and as a percentage of projected demand (a positive figure indicates
a shortage and a negative figure a surplus). The most significant shortage arises with
54
respect to intermediate production and transport workers, which include drivers and
other transport operators. This arises because the occupation share is forecast to
increase and because of low retention rates expected for these occupations, as they are
dominated by older males. Significant shortages are also projected for managers and
tradespersons. Table 4.2 illustrates the importance of the age profile of the workforce in
determining these projected shortages. In the case of managers the average age is
projected to reach 55.9 years by 2021, and 52.2 years for intermediate production and
transport workers.
55
Table 4.1: Rail workforce projections
1996a
2001 a
2006p
2011 p
2016 p
2020 p
110.25
10.12
1.12
136.91
11.40
1.34
174.95
11.58
1.56
195.96
12.77
1.73
217.03
13.32
1.88
234.06
13.84
2.00
33.7
46.3
54.3
59.9
66.2
71.6
33295
28875
28679
28922
28387
27915
2.9%
4.9%
6.4%
14.2%
1.5%
10.6%
31.7%
12.9%
15.0%
100.0%
4.9%
7.4%
8.7%
11.0%
1.8%
11.4%
31.5%
13.6%
9.8%
100.0%
5.7%
10.3%
9.5%
10.9%
1.9%
11.3%
30.2%
13.4%
6.9%
100.0%
6.9%
9.3%
9.8%
10.1%
2.0%
11.9%
31.3%
14.2%
4.5%
100.0%
6.8%
9.1%
9.7%
10.0%
2.0%
11.7%
32.3%
14.0%
4.5%
100.0%
6.7%
9.0%
9.6%
9.9%
2.0%
11.5%
33.1%
13.8%
4.5%
100.0%
Demand by occupation (persons)
Managerial
Professionals
Associate Professionals
Tradespersons
Adv. Clerical & Service
Int. Clerical, Sales & Service
Int. Production + Transport
Elem. Clerical, Sales & Service
Labourers & Related Workers
Total
971
1618
2123
4721
498
3516
10558
4293
4998
33295
1418
2136
2520
3164
519
3279
9097
3925
2817
28875
1629
2942
2730
3128
538
3242
8660
3846
1965
28679
1987
2676
2848
2920
583
3439
9063
4112
1294
28922
1922
2579
2759
2834
562
3319
9171
3969
1272
28387
1868
2500
2685
2763
545
3219
9234
3850
1252
27915
Supply by occupation (persons)
Managerial
Professionals
Associate Professionals
Tradespersons
Adv. Clerical & Service
Int. Clerical, Sales & Service
Int. Production + Transport
Elem. Clerical, Sales & Service
Labourers & Related Workers
Total
971
1618
2123
4721
498
3516
10558
4293
4998
33295
1418
2136
2520
3164
519
3279
9097
3925
2817
28875
1423
2311
2531
2989
507
3334
8516
4181
2563
28357
1360
2502
2523
2786
516
3488
7702
4495
2029
27402
1230
2694
2500
2542
532
3635
6542
4714
1591
25982
1084
2839
2417
2339
500
3662
5419
4780
1313
24353
Rail output forecasts
Freight (billion tonne-kms)
Passenger (billion passenger-kms)
Index of weighted output (millions)
Output per worker
Total employment (persons)
Occupational share
Managerial
Professionals
Associate Professionals
Tradespersons
Adv. Clerical & Service
Int. Clerical, Sales & Service
Int. Production + Transport
Elem. Clerical, Sales & Service
Labourers & Related Workers
Total
56
Table 4.1: Rail workforce projections (cont’d)
1996a
2001 a
Projected shortage – persons
(Demand minus Supply)
Managerial
Professionals
Associate Professionals
Tradespersons
Adv. Clerical & Service
Int. Clerical, Sales & Service
Int. Production + Transport
Elem. Clerical, Sales & Service
Labourers & Related Workers
Total
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Projected shortage - % of projected
demand
Managerial
Professionals
Associate Professionals
Tradespersons
Adv. Clerical & Service
Int. Clerical, Sales & Service
Int. Production + Transport
Elem. Clerical, Sales & Service
Labourers & Related Workers
Total
2006p
2011 p
2016 p
2020 p
206
630
199
139
31
-93
144
-336
-598
322
626
174
325
134
66
-49
1361
-382
-735
1520
692
-115
259
292
31
-316
2629
-746
-319
2405
784
-339
267
423
45
-443
3814
-930
-61
3562
12.6%
21.4%
7.3%
4.4%
5.7%
-2.9%
1.7%
-8.7%
-30.4%
1.1%
31.5%
6.5%
11.4%
4.6%
11.4%
-1.4%
15.0%
-9.3%
-56.8%
5.3%
36.0%
-4.5%
9.4%
10.3%
5.5%
-9.5%
28.7%
-18.8%
-25.1%
8.5%
42.0%
-13.6%
10.0%
15.3%
8.3%
-13.8%
41.3%
-24.1%
-4.8%
12.8%
Notes: a. actual, p. projected.
Table 4.2: Average age by occupation, rail workforce projections
Managers
Professionals
Associate Professionals
Tradespersons
Adv. Clerical & Service
Int. Clerical, Sales & Service
Int. Production + Transport
Elem. Clerical, Sales & Service
Labourers & Related Workers
Total
Notes: a. actual, p. projected.
2001a
44.0
40.3
42.0
40.0
38.6
41.2
43.0
39.3
42.1
41.6
2006p
47.5
42.2
44.7
41.9
42.3
44.4
46.3
42.2
44.3
44.4
2011p
50.8
44.1
46.9
43.0
45.5
47.6
49.1
44.7
45.3
46.6
2016p
53.7
45.8
48.6
43.3
48.4
50.2
51.2
46.7
45.2
48.4
2021p
55.9
47.2
49.3
42.9
49.0
51.8
52.2
47.8
43.5
49.1
The projections appear to be consistent with many of the views expressed by the rail
operators in the study who anticipated they would experience shortages amongst
tradespersons, intermediate production and transport workers and managerial and
professional staff in the future. Most of the respondents, including 17 of the total of 24
rail operators who were interviewed believed that they were likely to experience skill
shortages in at least one occupational group in the future. Half of these operators were
expecting to experience shortages amongst engineering staff including electrical, civil,
57
mechanical and bridge engineers. Many operators were also of the opinion that they
would face shortages in tradespeople (e.g. electrical) with approximately 38% of
interviewees expressing this sentiment. One quarter of respondents identified train
drivers as being an occupational group in which future shortages were likely.
Managerial staff was another group of professionals singled out by several operators as
an area where they also predicted experiencing future shortages with roughly 17% of
respondents stating this would be the case. Shunters were also identified by 2 operators
(8%) of those interviewed as being a profession in which future shortages were likely.
Relatively large surpluses of labourers and related workers and elementary clerical,
sales and service workers are projected to emerge by 2011. For labourers and related
workers, this largely results from the assumption of a continued decline in the
occupational share of this group in line with recent trends, with the surplus looking like
moderating by 2020. For elementary clerical, sales and service workers, however, the
surplus arises due to the occupations being dominated by younger (relatively) females
with much higher expected net retention rates. In this case, the projected surplus
increased out to 930 persons in 2020, or around one quarter of projected demand. In the
immediate term, one possible remedy to labour shortages (amongst drivers and
operators) is the upskilling of labourers and related workers to drivers and operators,
though the potential for this decreases over time. The same potential does not exist for
the surplus of elementary clerk, sales and service workers because of the mismatch in
gender profiles of the two occupations.
4.4 Recruitment and training implications
Addressing a skills shortage requires both the recruitment of personnel and the
embodiment of the requisite skills in those workers. Given the specificity of skills
required in the rail industry it is not feasible, by and large, that experienced workers
who already possess the required skills can be recruited in adequate numbers. Such a
strategy may work for individual operators, but it cannot work for the industry as a
whole. Rather, the rail industry needs to simultaneously attract workers and address
their training needs, or secure a sufficient flow of workers at the entry level from the
relevant training courses.
4.4.1 Recruitment implications
Given the current and projected shortages amongst intermediate production and
transport workers, managerial, associate professional and trade staff within the rail
industry over the next 15 years, there is a need to increase the number of personnel that
are recruited within these occupational groups. The largely unfavourable image of the
rail industry and its lack of career appeal to many potential recruits mean that it is likely
to be quite a challenge to ensure sustainable and adequate levels of staff recruitment will
be achieved. In the case of managers and intermediate production and transport workers
it also seems imperative that rail operators should place greater emphasis on recruiting
younger workers due to the consistently higher average age of workers in these
occupational groups as predicted by the modelling results.
58
One potential strategy to address the ageing workforce problem and labour shortages
within the rail industry would be an aggressive campaign to attract women re-entering
the labour force into those rail occupations currently dominated by men. However,
gender biases in employment patterns are typically strongly rooted in social norms that
are not easily overturned. A second strategy would be to achieve net retention rates of
existing employees that are well above the average for all industries, given the workers’
ages. Net retention rates can be increased either by reducing the rate at which existing
workers leave the industry or by increasing the rate at which new workers enter. In
either case, the success of any such strategy would depend upon increasing the
attractiveness of the rail sector as an industry of employment relative to other industries.
An alternative approach is to try to encourage older rail workers to delay retirement.
This has been promoted as one of the required responses in addressing the challenges of
population ageing in the Australian economy more generally. If this could be achieved
in the rail industry, it would smooth the anticipated spike in wastage rates associated
with the concentration of workers in the older age groups and at least delay emerging
skills shortages, thus allowing greater time for human resource adjustments to be made.
However, note from Figure 3.2 that the concentration of workers in the older age
categories for the rail industry, relative to all industries, is actually reversed for 60-64
year olds and for workers 65 and older. The proportion of rail workers in these age
groups is lower than for the workforce as a whole, and very much lower for the 65s and
over. This seems to suggest that rail industry jobs are typically not well suited to
workers in their 60s and beyond, thus limiting the potential for delayed retirement as a
mechanism to address skills shortages. It also suggests that the modelling approach
may well have underestimated the extent of skill shortages in the rail industry, given
that the net retention rates used were not specific to the rail industry. On the other hand,
the rationalisation of employment that occurred in the rail industry throughout the 1990s
may have contributed to an abnormally high incidence of early retirement within the rail
workforce prior to 2001.
According to the projections, there will be a need for rail employers to recruit increasing
numbers of professional staff in the short to medium term due to current shortages in
these personnel being predicted to continue until 2011. However according to the
modelling results, this recruitment drive to attract professionals into the rail industry
will not have to be sustained over the long term since surpluses are predicted to
eventuate by 2016. One potential strategy that could be implemented to help operators
better adjust to their workforce needs over the next decade would be to train some
additional professional staff into becoming managerial staff to minimise the extent of
shortages predicted amongst the latter occupational group. The modelling results also
suggest the need for an increase in recruitment of associate professionals and, to a lesser
degree, advanced clerical and service staff. Shortages in both these occupational groups
are projected to peak in 2011. Some potential would seem to exist for retraining and
upskilling intermediate and/or elementary clerical and service staff to work as advanced
clerical and service personnel, and from the advanced level to the associate professional
level. In these cases there seems to be a better match between the skills sets and gender
concentration of the workers involved.
59
4.4.2 Training implications
The following section outlines what the operators interviewed stated they would like to
see eventuate with regard to changes in rail training going forward, given the current
situation and their future expectations. In particular this section outlines some policies
and measures which rail operators believe, if implemented, would assist in improving
training outcomes within the industry.
All operators interviewed believed they would at the very least consolidate their
organisation’s current levels of training investment, with many asserting that there
would likely be significant increases in the extent of resources devoted to training in the
future, particularly as the size of their workforce and operations grew. The
overwhelming majority of respondents expressed the intention to maintain and expand
the existing relationships they had established with training providers, rather than
develop new training relationships with training agencies they had not previously
utilised. Several of the interviewees also anticipated that they were likely to invest more
in capability development training with an enhanced focus on personal, management
and leadership development programs. Consequently many of these operators believed
that demand for training organisations that offered such courses and programs would be
likely to grow in the future. This would appear to be an appropriate response given the
shortages forecast to occur among managerial and professional staff.
The results of the modelling indicate that a significant increase in training must be
committed to by rail operators to develop and ensure there is an adequate supply of
workers in the occupational groups predicted to experience significant shortages in the
future including among intermediate production and transport workers, managerial,
associate professional and trade staff. Therefore considerable resources are likely to be
needed to be invested in developing training programs and courses designed for driving,
trade, associate professional and managerial staff operating within the rail industry.
Many rail operators expressed the desire to develop more in-depth partnerships with
other rail organisations, the government, industry groups, educational institutions and
training providers to foster the development of more rail training programs and
facilities. The need to promote greater training alliances between rail operators was
especially identified as an important outcome to work towards, due to the fact that many
of the organisations within the industry had similar training needs. The predominant
view was that it would be beneficial for the operators to share training resources and
services wherever possible. This would be especially pertinent in cases where
specialised training only needed to be provided for a small number of workers.
Many rail operators expressed a desire for a more nationalised and standardised training
framework and accreditation system across the industry. This would principally involve
the establishment of a more standardised skills recognition model which accommodates
greater consistency in the rail training programs and competencies between all the
states. Most of the rail organisations believed however, that in order to achieve this
there must be a cohesive framework developed in terms of the types of technology and
rail systems that were utilised, such as nationally standardised communication and
signalling systems. More specifically many of the operators felt that a lot of the training
relating to rail specific risks and technology such as with track safety awareness, should
be adapted to a national model.
60
Several of the operators stated that they would also like to see the development of a
more mature external training network for the industry which would facilitate the
training of rail workers to acquire base qualifications addressing core competencies in
safe working or occupational health and safety training (e.g. associated with a
Certificate 1 or Certificate 2 in Rail Operations). Some of these respondents believed
that this should be an industry wide initiative in which all operators contributed towards
the establishment of a centralised training provider (whether that be through a largely
government funded institution such as TAFE or some other privately operating training
agency) which administered basic rail training and then placed the trained workers with
rail operators. This would prevent duplication in relation to the provision of training
services by rail operators and also minimise their individual training and development
costs. In addition it would also ensure that there was a pool of base qualified rail
workers and trainers for all rail operators, which would also assist in improving labour
mobility within the industry.
Other rail operators would prefer to see more general training initiatives developed at an
industry level and then delivered through relevant training providers (i.e. TAFEs, RTOs,
etc.) depending on the specific region in question. A specific model cited by one
interviewee was the example of a TAFE institution that provided a particular rail
organisation with direct rail training for their workers. However all the training
delivered by this TAFE had been developed previously by the rail organisation but was
handed over to the TAFE to do the training delivery and assessment as the RTO.
Most operators did mention that they received financial funding from the government to
help support and assist them with the apprentices that they took on. However one issue
that was raised with regard to government funding assistance for the provision of rail
training was in relation to the fact that rail operators who also had an internal RTO
received less funding, with most receiving roughly half the amount that other training
providers were entitled to. This was viewed as inequitable by the majority of the
interviewees, with many believing it acted as a disincentive for rail operators to develop
and facilitate internal training and an inconsistency that needed to be resolved in the
future in order to promote more employer sponsored training within the industry.
An increased focus on safety was also listed by some study participants as what they
would like to see incorporated more in rail training in the future. Although the coverage
of safety content in rail training currently is generally seen as satisfactory, many wanted
an even greater onus placed on this component of training over the next decade. These
operators felt the decline in comprehensive rail training and the resulting reduced focus
on rail safety training to be of particular concern. They believed this was especially
pertinent since the emphasis on equivalent training in similar industries such as the
airline and shipping transport sectors had been enhanced in recent years and was thus
definitely an issue that clearly needed to be addressed by the rail industry going
forward.
Another preference expressed by rail operators was to have more flexible arrangements
with regard to how the training is delivered to their workers such that it could be
completed with minimal interruption to the normal working hours of staff and business
operations. This would make training more cost efficient for rail employers. Some of
the measures that the respondents were looking at in this regard included developing
more computer based training and incorporating more internet based, self paced training
modules.
61
Government or industry sponsored programs designed to increase employer funded rail
training are also likely to be more effective if they include:
 Schemes that assist in improving the awareness of rail operators as to the many
advantages that derive from investing in training, particularly in terms of enhancing
profits and contributing to the intellectual capital of their organisation
 Subsidies, tax relief or other financial incentives coupled to the employer’s level of
training expenditure
 Initiatives that enable firms to recoup a greater proportion of the benefits that result
from increased training investment
 Assistance in developing effective training regimes and the provision of
infrastructure support such as promoting information for “best practice” and other
benchmarks.
62
Section 5: Conclusions
The microeconomic reform policies that were introduced into the Australian rail
industry in the 1990’s contributed to increased privatisation and fragmentation of the
rail sector, and were principally designed to achieve several short term operational goals
such as improved industry productivity and cost minimisation. This has however largely
been at the expense of long term investment in the workforce, the adverse effects of
which are presently being realised. The rail reforms have resulted in a significant
decline and underinvestment in training and capability development by employers
across the rail industry. Consequently there has been a reluctance for operators to invest
substantially in the training of rail workers due to the considerable costs involved and
the increased prevalence of poaching within the industry. This has proved unsustainable
for rail employers and has contributed to and exacerbated many of the workforce issues
the industry now faces, including the problems relating to ageing, skills shortages and
the attraction and retention of workers.
The rail industry acknowledges that the attraction and training of new recruits has
become a critical issue. The transformation of the Australian rail industry from largely
consisting of government organisations to now predominantly comprising of private
operators has placed additional demands on employees. These changes combined with
the dynamic nature of the industry in Australia has meant that personnel, especially
those who are new, need a more comprehensive understanding of railway systems and
technology and will increasingly be required to work effectively in a multi-disciplinary
manner. The Industry Skills Report released by the TDT in 2005 also reported that rail
workers needed a wider skills base to allow them to be more flexible and responsive to
industry needs. Therefore, a major challenge facing the Australian rail industry is to
build the skills and capacity of its existing workers as well as those of new entrants to
the rail workforce.
Employers both within Australia and internationally are demanding a more skilled
workforce possessing technical, generic and employability skills (ANTA 2003).
Consequently the focus of meeting the skill needs of the rail industry should be on
developing an efficient, flexible and innovative response, which coincidently also
delivers a quality skills and knowledge outcome. Training programs must thus
incorporate such skills to assist rail operators to effectively and profitably compete in a
modern economy. Improvements resulting from increased investment in training can act
to raise the quality of service delivery and improve efficiency and productivity. In
addition, maintaining such a focus would help to ensure that individual workers are best
positioned to respond to the dynamic needs of the rail workforce and still be
employable. Hence the Australian rail industry’s ability to effectively respond to the
emerging skills crisis will largely depend on its ability to reduce barriers to higher levels
of participation for both new recruits and existing rail workers.
In the next ten year period, the Australian rail industry faces several different
challenges. One is the likely high rate of labour turnover, which is predicted to occur
due to the ageing profile of the rail workforce. This will largely be due to the high
prevalence of “baby boomer” rail workers who were predominantly recruited in the
period lasting from the 1960s -1980s. The problem is likely to be further exacerbated by
the fact that the downsizing of firms in all rail sectors since the mid 1980’s has resulted
in low recruitment levels. Consequently a large proportion of the rail industry’s existing
workforce is likely to retire during the next decade (Rail CRC 2006). Recently collected
63
input from Australian rail operators also reveals that current recruitment practices and
turnover trends have compounded the ageing workforce effects and thus further
intensified problems relating to rail labour supply.
Analysis of the Census data confirms that workers in the rail industry, and particularly
in the major occupations of drivers and plant operators, are older and that the rail
workforce is ageing more rapidly than the overall average for all Australian industries.
This was also supported by the results of the modelling of future labour supply and
ageing within the rail industry. These trends were further confirmed by sentiments
expressed by the majority of the rail operators interviewed who indicated concerns
about ageing among their rail workers, particularly with regard to their train drivers,
engineering, trade and managerial staff.
The ageing of the industry’s workforce is also likely to mean more workers in the sector
will face a range of health issues. This includes such things as diminished hearing, sight,
reactivity, impaired movement and the increased prevalence of age related diseases such
as Type 2 Diabetes. All these may adversely impede the ability of employees to work
efficiently, thereby contributing to reduced productivity and other labour problems. The
relevance of this is particularly pertinent to the rail transport industry due to the physical
nature of the work undertaken by the majority of employees, the stringent health and
safety standards that have to be met and the often high risk work environment that much
of the workforce is exposed to.
Due to the high proportion of older rail workers occupying positions of seniority, their
eminent departure from the workforce due to retirement or other reasons is likely to
result in a substantial loss of industry experience and expertise. This is of particular
concern in a number of key rail occupations and is especially pertinent considering that
there is likely to be an insufficient pool of adequately experienced and skilled workers
available to replace them. The Census data shows an ongoing decline in the number of
workers in the younger cohorts, at least up until 2001. Information acquired from the
study participants support the proposition that this trend was likely to continue going
forward. The result of this is likely to be increased turnover rates due to accelerated
retirement rates in coming years.
These factors combined are likely to result in a significant loss of experience and skills
as a large group of older workers retire, which will overlap with there being an
insufficient number of adequately qualified or suitably experienced workers to fill their
positions. The retirement of experienced workers will also mean there will be a lack of
mentors to effectively train and develop the younger workers. A lack of effective
workforce planning and training of younger rail workers by Australian rail operators can
thus be identified as having contributed to the skilled labour shortage currently being
experienced by the industry nationally.
That the number of younger workers entering the rail transport industry is not sufficient
to replace ongoing wastage and retirement rates has yet to greatly impact upon the
sector because of the long run reduction in employment brought about by industry
restructuring and technological change. However, given general expectations that
output in the rail industry will grow, it seems unlikely that the rationalisation of
employment can continue at the rate it has in recent decades. Furthermore, the rail
operators interviewed in the study provided no clear indication that they were expecting
further declines in employment either in aggregate or within specific occupations. The
ageing of the workforce is therefore likely to become a major issue in the near future
64
and further dilemmas are likely to derive from the increasing dissatisfaction among
workers regarding their work-life balance (Workplace Research Centre, 2006).
In addition, the industry is now facing very tight labour market conditions brought
about by the booming Australian economy. The demand for both skilled and unskilled
labour within the Australian market is currently quite intense and competitive, and looks
like remaining like this for some time to come. Many competing industries have already
made significant progress towards ensuring their skill needs are met and so in this
regard the rail industry could be viewed as being behind in developing effective
strategies to tackle the issue. As other competing industries seek to improve their
practices and strategies for attracting and retaining workers in the future, the challenge
facing the rail sector to ensure it has an adequately qualified workforce is likely to
become even more difficult. The rail industry faces a predicament in which it is
competing for an ever declining portion of the available labour market. The skills crisis
facing the rail sector is likely to be further exacerbated by the fact that the industry has
been largely unsuccessful in attracting new recruits.
The problem is also complicated by the fact that, in the past, the rail industry has
enjoyed the benefits of having a very loyal, passionate and dedicated workforce who
have had a largely “cradle to grave” perspective on a career in the rail industry. This
combined with the prevalence of traditional rail families helped to ensure sufficient
numbers of recruits could be attracted and retained to continue working within the
industry on a long term basis. However in recent times with the decline in traditional
rail families and the changing employment attitudes of younger workers, much of the
appeal for recruits, that was once associated with a career in the rail industry has been
diminished. This trend appears to be reflected by the higher rates of turnover reported
by operators among younger workers (namely those under the age of 25) and workers
who have only been employed for a short period of time (i.e. generally less than 3 years)
with their specific organisations.
The industry’s ability to meet its labour and skill needs in many areas will therefore
certainly be challenged in the coming five to ten years, and this was confirmed by much
of the information provided by participants through the questionnaires and in-depth
interviews which were completed as part of this project. The significant amount of
recruitment that is required of younger workers (especially in the under 25’s age group)
to accommodate the demand projections for the future would seem particularly hard to
achieve given the current labour market conditions. Thus, the industry may need to look
to other solutions, including expecting to have to pay increasingly high wage premiums
to secure skilled workers in engineering and the trades, at least for the duration of the
booms currently occurring in the resource, building and construction industries.
However, there are already indications from what respondents have said that rail
operators are often not able to effectively compete with the financial incentives offered
to recruits by larger firms in competing sectors such as the mining, building,
construction and infrastructure development industries.
As has been identified elsewhere, (see, for example, Department of Education, Science
and Training 2006) the image of careers within the rail industry needs to be improved in
order to attract young workers. Factors identified as negatively impacting on the
attraction and recruitment of workers into the rail transport sector included such things
as the lack of clear career pathways, the industry image (i.e. as old, dirty and
unsophisticated) and specific issues relating to the employment of younger workers
(such as the attitudes of most “Generation Y” employees concerning the traditionally
65
hierarchical nature of most rail workplaces). It would also be productive to address the
entrenched gender segregation that exists within the major semi-skilled occupations in
the industry. Currently, half of the potential supply of young workers is effectively
excluded from major rail occupations, such as driver and intermediate plant operator
positions, due to the almost complete domination of males within these occupations.
Policies to address this imbalance would likely include greater flexibility in working
hours and other family-friendly working arrangements and a visible antidiscrimination
regime.
Rail operators exhibit tangible concern in relation to the issues of skills shortages,
ageing and high turnover rates amongst their rail workers. As a result, many are
developing and looking to implement medium to long term strategies to address these
workforce issues including:





Providing older workers with financial incentives and flexible working conditions in
an attempt to get more of them to delay retiring
Developing and instigating mentoring programs and initiatives to promote the
transfer of knowledge from more experienced workers to their younger
contemporaries
Increasing their intake of apprentices and trainees
Developing more graduate recruitment and cadetship programs
Increasing their investment in training and capability development of existing
workers and new recruits
Nonetheless, one still senses there is a largely “business as usual” attitude, albeit within
a more difficult recruiting environment, rather than a sense of urgency for longer term
planning to increase entry rates of younger workers into the industry. Therefore there
are reasons to be concerned that the rail transport industry is not well placed to meet its
future skills needs. This is especially alarming since, even if major policy reforms were
implemented within the rail sector, these are unlikely to have a substantial effect on
overall domestic labour supply for a number of years.
A useful strategy for addressing the rail industry’s many workforce issues would be to
differentiate the workforce by specific occupational groups to identify and implement
tailored policies based on the type of skills being sought. In this sense, it would be
desirable for the industry to implement measures to promote the development of rail
careers as well as develop policies designed to enhance the sustainability of industry
workforce skills and experience to ensure the continued effective operation of the sector
in the future. The future workforce model for the rail industry may even have to be
based on increased outsourcing using external contractors, instigating employment
tenures of shorter duration and substantially increasing pre-industry training for
workers.
Without the development and implementation of effective strategies to address many of
the workforce issues currently facing the rail industry, the sector’s human resource
outlook is likely to deteriorate and this will have implications for all sectors of the
industry. In the event that no effective action is taken, many have predicted that the
Australian rail industry is likely to experience a labour attraction and retention crisis.
The main objective of the Australian rail industry should therefore be to develop and
maintain a motivated, flexible and adequately skilled workforce through innovative and
coordinated employee recruitment, retention, training and development strategies. There
is thus an onus for rail companies and industry organisations within Australia to work
66
cooperatively and take effective action to curtail the skills shortages and other
workforce issues that currently exist in the Australian rail industry.
67
Appendix A: Further analysis of
Census data by State
A.I:
Employment Shares by Occupation
Table A1: NSW - Employment shares by occupation, Rail and All
industries, 2001
All
Industries
Rail Industry
1. Managers
2. Professionals
3. Associate Professionals
4. Tradespersons
5. Advanced Clerical & Serv. Wrkrs
6. Interm. Clerical, Sales & Serv.
Wrkrs
7. Interm. Prod. & Transport Wrkrs
8. Elem. Clerk, Sales & Serv. Wrkrs
9. Labourers & Related Workers
Total
1996
2001
share
share
(1)
3.3%
5.8%
7.1%
12.4%
1.8%
(2)
5.6%
7.4%
9.1%
8.5%
2.5%
12.4%
27.3%
15.3%
14.6%
100.0%
12.5%
27.3%
18.4%
8.7%
100.0%
Change
in
share
(2)-(1)
2001
Share
% pts
2.3
1.6
2.1
-3.9
0.7
9.7%
19.5%
11.9%
12.2%
4.2%
0.1
0.00
3.1
-5.9
16.9%
8.0%
9.5%
8.1%
100.0%
The Table above indicates that New South Wales (NSW) had a higher employment
share of elementary clerical, sales and service rail workers in both 1996 and 2001
compared to the industry averages recorded for these years. The state also experienced
an above average rate of growth in the employment share of this group of rail
employees between 1996 and 2001. The employment share of intermediate clerical,
sales and service workers in NSW was also higher than the national average for the
industry in 1996 and 2001, despite the rate of growth in employment share for these
employees between these two time periods being less than what was recorded nationally
across the rail sector.
Advanced clerical and service workers also occupied a larger employment share in
NSW in 2001 compared to the national average for the industry, with the rate of growth
in employment share for the occupational group from 1996 to 2001 also being higher
than the national average. The employment share of tradepersons and intermediate
production and transport workers in 1996 and 2001 was below the average reported for
the rest of the rail sector. In the case of tradepersons, a greater than average decline in
employment share was recorded in NSW between 1996 and 2001. However with
intermediate production and transport workers no change in employment share in NSW
was reported between the two time periods, whereas nationally a slight decline was
recorded for the occupational group over the five year period.
68
Table A2: VIC. - Employment shares by occupation, Rail and All industries,
2001
Rail Industry
Change
in
share
1996
2001
(2)-(1)
share
share
1. Managers
2. Professionals
3. Associate Professionals
4. Tradespersons
5. Advanced Clerical & Serv. Wrkrs
6. Interm. Clerical, Sales & Serv. Wrkrs
7. Interm. Prod. & Transport Wrkrs
8. Elem. Clerk, Sales & Serv. Wrkrs
9. Labourers & Related Workers
Total
(1)
(2)
2.4%
5.1%
2.3%
4.1%
6.6%
6.7%
13.7%
6.7%
0.8%
1.4%
8.0% 10.2%
37.0% 42.4%
17.7% 19.1%
11.5%
4.4%
100.0% 100.0%
All Industries
2001
Share
% pts
2.7
1.8
0.0
-7.1
0.6
2.2
5.4
1.4
-7.2
9.7%
19.6%
11.6%
12.5%
3.7%
16.4%
8.3%
9.8%
8.4%
100.0%
Within Victoria, growth in employment share from 1996 to 2001 amongst advanced,
intermediate and elementary clerical, sales and service workers was greater than the
average recorded for the rail industry nationally. In all these (above mentioned)
occupational groups the increase in the employment share within the Victorian rail
workforce was double that recorded nationally. In addition the percentage share of
workers belonging to the elementary clerical, sales and service workers occupational
group was higher in Victoria than the national industry average in both 1996 and 2001.
The number of professionals as a proportion of the total Victorian rail workforce was
also less than the average for the industry nationally (roughly half) according to both the
1996 and 2001 ABS Census figures.
The proportion of the state rail workforce represented by tradespersons and labourers &
related workers respectively in both 1996 and 2001 was also lower than the industry
average recorded for both these occupational groups. The reduction in the employment
share of these occupational groups between 1996 and 2001 was also larger than the
average recorded nationally, with a fall of roughly 7 percentage points in each over the
five year period. The employment share of associate professionals was also lower in
Victoria than the industry average, with the employment share amongst this group of
workers from 1996 to 2001 noticeably less than that recorded nationally. The Census
figures also indicate that intermediate production and transport workers held a greater
employment share in Victoria during 1996 and 2001, than was the case across the
remainder of the rail sector. Interestingly between 1996 and 2001, this occupational
group actually increased its employment share in the Victorian rail workforce while
nationally the employment share of this group of workers declined, on average.
69
Table A3: QLD. - Employment shares by occupation, Rail and All industries,
2001
Rail Industry
Change
1996
2001 in share
(2)-(1)
share
share
1. Managers
2. Professionals
3. Associate Professionals
4. Tradespersons
5. Advanced Clerical & Serv. Wrkrs
6. Interm. Clerical, Sales & Serv. Wrkrs
7. Interm. Prod. & Transport Wrkrs
8. Elem. Clerk, Sales & Serv. Wrkrs
9. Labourers & Related Workers
Total
(1)
(2)
1.7%
3.4%
3.9%
8.6%
5.7%
9.2%
17.0% 16.0%
0.8%
1.1%
8.5% 10.5%
32.6% 28.9%
11.3%
8.8%
18.5% 13.5%
100.0% 100.0%
All Industries
2001
Share
% pts
1.7
4.7
3.5
-1.0
0.4
2.0
-3.7
-2.5
-5.0
8.7%
16.3%
12.2%
13.0%
3.6%
17.3%
8.7%
10.3%
9.9%
100.0%
The 2001 figures listed in the Table above indicate that Queensland had a higher share
of professional and associate professional rail workers when compared to the equivalent
averages for the Australian rail industry. Larger increases in the employment share of
these occupational groups was also recorded in the state between 1996 and 2001 than
was the case nationally. A similar trend was experienced amongst intermediate clerical,
sales and service workers, with this occupational group experiencing more growth in
Queensland than the average that was recorded across the remainder of the rail sector.
Tradespersons and labourers & related workers represented a larger employment share
in both 1996 and 2001 in Queensland’s rail workforce compared to the Australian
industry average. The state also recorded a less substantial decline in the employment
share of tradespeople over the five year time period in between (which was only one
third of the decline experienced across the industry nationally).
In 2001, Queensland had a lower employment share amongst intermediate production
and transport workers and elementary clerical, sales and service workers than was the
case in the rail workforces of the other states, on average. With respect to intermediate
production and transport workers, there was a larger decline in the employment share in
Queensland between 1996 and 2001 than what was reported nationally. In the case of
elementary clerical, sales and service workers there was a decrease in employment share
in Queensland, which was in contrast to the growth that was recorded for the
occupational group over the period (on average), nationally.
70
Table A4: SA- Employment shares by occupation, Rail and All industries, 2001
Rail Industry
Change
in
share
1996
2001
(2)-(1)
share
share
1. Managers
2. Professionals
3. Associate Professionals
4. Tradespersons
5. Advanced Clerical & Serv. Wrkrs
6. Interm. Clerical, Sales & Serv. Wrkrs
7. Interm. Prod. & Transport Wrkrs
8. Elem. Clerk, Sales & Serv. Wrkrs
9. Labourers & Related Workers
Total
(1)
(2)
5.4%
8.7%
5.8%
6.2%
5.5%
8.1%
17.8%
7.0%
3.1%
2.6%
10.9% 13.7%
36.5% 41.1%
5.0%
6.6%
10.1%
6.1%
100.0% 100.0%
All Industries
2001
share
% pts
3.3
0.4
2.7
-10.9
-0.5
2.7
4.6
1.6
-4.0
9.6%
17.2%
11.7%
12.5%
3.4%
16.8%
8.5%
9.4%
10.8%
100.0%
The rail workforce in South Australia (SA) had a higher share of employment attributed
to managerial, advanced clerical and service workers and intermediate production and
transport workers in both 1996 and 2001 when compared to the national figures for the
rail sector. The employment share of intermediate clerical, sales and service workers
was also larger in 2001 in SA than the industry average. Between 1996 and 2001 the
employment share of advanced clerical and service workers declined by a small margin
in SA, while there was slight growth for the occupational group recorded on average
nationally. With respect to managerial and intermediate clerical, sales and service
workers the percentage increase in employment share between 1996 and 2001 was
higher in SA than the industry average. Interestingly in the case of the intermediate
production and transport workers, SA recorded an increase in the employment share of
this occupational group which contrasted with the national trend where a decline in
employment share was reported.
Amongst elementary clerical, sales and service workers as well as labourers and related
workers the share of employment in both 1996 and 2001 was less than the industry
average. This was despite the fact that the employment share of elementary clerical,
sales and service workers grew by more and the employment share of labourers and
related workers declined less in SA than was the case nationally, over the time period.
Although the employment share of professionals in SA was higher than the national
average in 1996, by 2001 the employment share of this occupational group in the state
was less than the industry average. This can be largely attributed to the lower than
average growth recorded for professionals between 1996 and 2001 in SA compared to
the average for the other states. Tradespersons is an occupational group that had a
higher employment share in SA in 1996. However by 2001, due to a higher than
average decline in employment share over the time period in between, the employment
share of this group of workers was lower than the industry average.
71
Table A5: WA - Employment shares by occupation, Rail and All industries, 2001
All
Industries
Rail Industry
1. Managers
2. Professionals
3. Associate Professionals
4. Tradespersons
5. Advanced Clerical & Serv. Wrkrs
6. Interm. Clerical, Sales & Serv. Wrkrs
7. Interm. Prod. & Transport Wrkrs
8. Elem. Clerk, Sales & Serv. Wrkrs
9. Labourers & Related Workers
Total
1996
2001
share
share
(1)
3.6%
6.1%
5.7%
8.8%
1.9%
11.1%
42.9%
6.6%
13.4%
100.0%
(2)
6.1%
8.2%
7.5%
8.1%
1.3%
9.7%
46.9%
5.4%
6.8%
100.0%
Change
in
share
(2)-(1)
2001
share
% pts
2.5
2.1
1.7
-0.7
-0.6
-1.3
4.1
-1.2
-6.6
8.8%
17.4%
12.5%
13.6%
3.8%
16.4%
8.7%
9.7%
9.0%
100.0%
The employment share of managerial and professional staff in Western Australia (WA)
was higher in both 1996 and 2001. WA also had a higher employment share of
intermediate production and transport workers in 1996 and 2001, with this occupational
group also experiencing a higher than average rate of growth over the time period. The
employment share of tradespersons, labourers & related workers and elementary
clerical, sales & service workers was lower in WA than nationally in both 1996 and
2001. This was despite the decline in employment share over the time period for
Tradespersons being less than the national average. The decline in the employment
share between 1996 and 2001 for labourers and related workers was also higher in WA
compared to the average for the rest of the sector.
In the case of the employment share of elementary clerical, sales & service workers
over the same time period, in WA a small decline was recorded whilst nationally slight
growth was reported. Similarly the employment share of advanced clerical and service
workers in WA decreased slightly between 1996 and 2001, which contrasted with the
growth that was experienced within the occupational group nationally. With respect to
intermediate clerical, sales and service workers, this group had a higher employment
share in WA in 1996 compared to the industry average. However by 2001 this group of
workers represented a lower proportion of the WA rail workforce than the national
average, with the employment share of the occupational group declining while
nationally it increased.
72
A.II:
Employment Shares by Level of Qualification
Table A6: NSW - Employment shares by level of qualification, Rail and All
industries, 2001
Rail Industry
Postgraduate Degree
Grad Dip & Grad Certificate
Bachelor Degree
Advanced Diploma & Diploma
Certificate (skilled vocational)
Certificate (basic vocational)
No recognised qualification
Total
1996
share
(1)
1.4%
0.6%
5.4%
4.0%
19.5%
4.1%
65.0%
100.0%
2001
share
(2)
2.5%
1.0%
8.2%
5.0%
25.1%
58.2%
100.0%
All Industries
Change
in share
(2)-(1)
% pts
1.1
0.4
2.8
1.0
1.6
-6.8
2001
share
(3)
3.6%
2.0%
15.9%
8.9%
22.8%
47.0%
100.0%
In New South Wales, the employment share of rail workers with postgraduate degree
and advanced diploma and diploma qualifications was higher than the industry average
in both 1996 and 2001. A higher than average rate of growth in employment share was
also recorded amongst these types of rail employees over the time period between 1996
and 2001. The employment share for the state of rail workers with no recognised
qualification was lower than the industry average, with the rate of decline in the
employment share for these employees between 1996 and 2001 also being less than the
national average for the rail sector.
Table A7: VIC. - Employment shares by level of qualification, Rail and All
industries, 2001
Postgraduate Degree
Grad Dip & Grad Certificate
Bachelor Degree
Advanced Diploma & Diploma
Certificate (skilled vocational)
Certificate (basic vocational)
No recognised qualification
Total
Rail Industry
Change in
share
1996
2001
(2)-(1)
share
share
% pts
(1)
(2)
0.5%
0.9%
0.4
0.3%
0.7%
0.5
4.5%
5.8%
1.3
2.8%
5.3%
2.5
20.7%
25.0%
-0.8
5.2%
66.1%
62.2%
-3.9
100.0%
100.0%
All Industries
2001
share
(3)
2.8%
2.8%
16.2%
8.3%
20.0%
50.0%
100.0%
The employment share of rail workers with bachelor degrees was lower for Victoria in
2001 compared to the average for the rest of the rail sector. The increase in employment
73
share of rail workers possessing bachelor degrees between 1996 and 2001 was also
lower in Victoria than that recorded nationally. In addition Victoria’s employment share
of workers with advanced diplomas and diplomas was slightly less than the industry
average in 1996. However by 2001 this situation was reversed due to the state
experiencing a larger increase in the employment share of workers with this
qualification than was reported nationally between 1996 and 2001. In 2001, Victoria
also had a higher employment share of rail workers with no recognised qualification
compared to the industry average, with the reduction in this group of workers being less
(roughly half) for the state than what was recorded nationally. Another point of interest
is the fact that in 1996, Victoria had a higher proportion of rail workers with a basic or
skilled vocational certificate than the national average. However due to Victoria
experiencing a decline in the share of these type of qualified workers between 1996 and
2001, while nationally an increase in employment share was recorded, by 2001 the state
had a lower share than the industry average.
Table A8: QLD. - Employment shares by level of qualification, Rail and All
industries, 2001
Rail Industry
Postgraduate Degree
Grad Dip & Grad Certificate
Bachelor Degree
Advanced Diploma & Diploma
Certificate (skilled vocational)
Certificate (basic vocational)
No recognised qualification
Total
1996
share
(1)
0.2%
0.2%
2.6%
2.1%
20.7%
2.7%
72.0%
100.00%
2001
share
(2)
1.0%
0.7%
7.0%
4.1%
26.8%
60.5%
100.0%
All Industries
Change in
share
(2)-(1)
% pts
0.7
0.5
4.4
2.0
3.4
-11.0
2001
share
(3)
2.1%
1.8%
12.5%
7.4%
21.5%
54.7%
100.0%
In 1996, Queensland had a lower employment share of rail workers with bachelor
degrees when compared to the national average. However by 2001 the state was more or
less on par with the industry average, largely due to a higher rate of growth in the
employment share of workers who had acquired this qualification during the period in
between. A similar scenario was also evident amongst rail workers in Queensland with
basic vocational certificate qualifications between 1996 and 2001. In the case of rail
employees with no recognised qualification, the state had a higher than average
employment share of workers in 1996. Queensland however experienced a higher than
average rate of decline in this group of employees between 1996 and 2001, such that by
2001 Queensland’s employment share of these workers had levelled out to be relatively
similar to the industry average.
74
Table A9: SA - Employment shares by level of qualification, Rail and All
industries, 2001
Rail Industry
Postgraduate Degree
Grad Dip & Grad Certificate
Bachelor Degree
Advanced Diploma & Diploma
Certificate (skilled vocational)
Certificate (basic vocational)
No recognised qualification
Total
1996
share
(1)
0.2%
0.6%
3.6%
4.9%
24.9%
4.6%
61.3%
100.0%
2001
share
(2)
0.5%
0.5%
5.9%
5.3%
28.6%
59.2%
100.0%
All Industries
Change
in share
(2)-(1)
% pts
0.3
-0.1
2.3
0.4
-0.8
-2.1
2001
share
(3)
2.0%
2.0%
12.6%
7.6%
21.7%
54.1%
100.0%
South Australia had a larger percentage of rail employees with advanced diploma &
diploma qualifications than the national average 1996 and 2001, despite recording a
lower than average rate of growth amongst the employment share of this group of
workers. The state also had a higher proportion in both 1996 and 2001, of rail workers
with basic certificate qualifications when compared to the industry average. However
between these two years a small decrease in the employment share of this group of
workers was reported in the state while nationally growth was recorded. Similarly a
slight decline in the employment share of workers with graduate diploma and graduate
certificate qualifications was reported in SA between 1996 and 2001, while on average
the industry experienced minor growth in the employment share of this group of
workers. As a result, although the employment share of workers with these
qualifications was slightly higher in SA in 1996, by 2001 this was reversed so that the
employment share of workers in the state with these qualifications was slightly lower
than the national average. In 1996, SA had a lower employment share of rail workers
with no recognised qualification than the industry average. However due to the state
experiencing a decline between 1996 and 2001 in the employment share of this group of
workers that was less than what was reported nationally, by 2001 SA’s figures almost
matched the industry average. The state also had a lower percentage of rail employees
with postgraduate graduate degree qualifications in 1996 which was maintained in
2001, as SA recorded a lower increase in the employment share of this group of workers
in the period in between.
75
Table A10: WA - Employment shares by level of qualification, Rail and All
industries, 2001
Rail Industry
Postgraduate Degree
Grad Dip & Grad Certificate
Bachelor Degree
Advanced Diploma & Diploma
Certificate (skilled vocational)
Certificate (basic vocational)
No recognised qualification
Total
1996
share
(1)
0.8%
0.3%
3.7%
4.6%
19.0%
8.4%
63.3%
100.00%
2001
share
(2)
0.9%
1.4%
6.3%
5.0%
29.6%
56.9%
100.00%
All Industries
Change
in share
(2)-(1)
% pts
0.1
1.1
2.6
0.4
2.2
-6.4
2001
share
(3)
2.2%
1.9%
13.8%
8.3%
22.4%
51.5%
100.0%
The employment share of rail workers with postgraduate degree qualifications in WA
was pretty much on par with the average for the industry in 1996. However the rate of
growth in this group of workers between 1996 and 2001 was lower than the national
average so that by 2001, WA actually had a lower employment share of rail employees
with postgraduate degree qualifications than was the case nationally. WA had a higher
employment share of rail employees with basic certificate qualifications in both 1996
and 2001 when compared to the equivalent averages reported nationally. The state also
recorded an above average rate of growth in the employment share for this group of
workers between the two time periods. WA had a lower employment share of rail
employees with no recognised qualification than the industry average in 1996 and 2001
but also recorded a smaller than average decline in the employment share of this group
of workers. In 1996, WA had a lower proportion of rail workers with graduate diplomas
& graduate certificates when compared to the industry average but by 2001 this trend
had reversed, with the state experiencing a higher than average rate of growth in the
employment share of these workers between the two time periods. With respect to rail
workers with advanced diplomas and diplomas, WA had a higher employment share in
both 1996 and 2001 but experienced lower than average percentage growth amongst this
group of employees over the five year period.
76
A.II:
Employment Shares by Occupation & Gender
Table A11: NSW - Employment by occupation and gender, 2001, Australian rail
industry
Number Employed
Managers
Professionals
Associate Professionals
Trades & Related Workers
Adv. Clerical & Service Wkrs
Interm.Clerical, Sales & Service Wkrs
Interm. Production & Transport Wkrs
Elem. Clerical, Sales & Service Wkrs
Labourers & Related Workers
Total all Occupations
Male
591
719
946
991
121
1024
3152
1573
926
10043
Female
74
155
133
12
172
456
73
597
105
1777
Share of Employment
%
Female
11.1%
17.7%
12.3%
1.2%
58.7%
30.8%
2.3%
27.5%
10.2%
15.0%
Male
Female
5.9%
7.2%
9.4%
9.9%
1.2%
10.2%
31.4%
15.7%
9.2%
100.0%
4.2%
8.7%
7.5%
0.7%
9.7%
25.7%
4.1%
33.6%
5.9%
100.0%
The figures listed in the Table above indicate that NSW had a lower percentage of
female advanced clerical and service rail workers in 2001 compared to the national
industry average. The state overall however had a higher proportion of female
employees in its rail workforce than the average for the rest of the rail sector.
Specifically NSW had higher percentages of females amongst labourers and related
workers as well as elementary clerical, sales and service workers. Elementary clerical,
sales and service workers as an occupational group also represented a higher proportion
of total employment for both male and female rail workers in NSW compared to the
average for the other states. Interestingly, intermediate transport & production and
trades & related workers represented a lower proportion of total employment for male
rail employees in NSW in 2001, compared to the average for the rest of the industry.
Table A12: VIC. - Employment by occupation and gender, 2001, Australian rail
industry
Number Employed
Managers
Professionals
Associate Professionals
Trades & Related Workers
Adv. Clerical & Service Wkrs
Interm.Clerical, Sales & Service Wkrs
Interm. Production & Transport Wkrs
Elem. Clerical, Sales & Service Wkrs
Labourers & Related Workers
Total all Occupations
Male
144
111
198
216
18
258
1361
477
133
2916
Female
20
22
19
0
28
74
15
144
9
331
%
Female
12.2%
16.5%
8.8%
0.0%
60.9%
22.3%
1.1%
23.2%
6.3%
10.2%
Share of Employment
Male
4.9%
3.8%
6.8%
7.4%
0.6%
8.9%
46.7%
16.4%
4.6%
100.0%
Female
6.0%
6.7%
5.7%
0.0%
8.5%
22.4%
4.5%
43.5%
2.7%
100.0%
77
In 2001, Victoria had a lower proportion of female employees as a percentage of the
total state rail workforce than was the case nationally. There was an evident shortfall in
the percentage of female rail workers in Victoria assuming roles as associate
professionals and advanced & intermediate clerical, sales and service personnel
compared to the equivalent figures for the industry nationally. Interestingly associate
professionals represented a higher percentage of total employment for males in the
Victorian rail workforce than was the case for female rail workers in the state. This was
in contrast to the national trend where on average, associate professionals accounted for
a greater proportion of total female employment in the rail industry when compared to
their representation as a percentage of total male employment in the sector.
Employment of women as elementary clerical, sales and service workers and men as
intermediate production workers as a proportion of total rail employment for each of the
respective genders was also higher in the state than the national average. However in
Victoria the percentage of total male employment accounted for by labourers and
related workers and the percentage of female workers occupying intermediate clerical,
sales and service positions (as a proportion of the total rail employment) was less than
was the case for the rail sector Australia wide.
Table A13: QLD. - Employment by occupation and gender, 2001, Australian rail
industry
Number Employed
Managers
Professionals
Associate Professionals
Trades & Related Workers
Adv. Clerical & Service Wkrs
Interm.Clerical, Sales & Service Wkrs
Interm. Production & Transport Wkrs
Elem. Clerical, Sales & Service Wkrs
Labourers & Related Workers
Total all Occupations
Male
307
714
765
1635
37
768
2921
745
1341
9233
Female
37
164
178
0
78
303
35
150
41
986
%
Female
10.8%
18.7%
18.9%
0.0%
67.8%
28.3%
1.2%
16.8%
3.0%
9.7%
Share of
Employment
Male Female
3.3%
7.7%
8.3%
17.7%
0.4%
8.3%
31.6%
8.1%
14.5%
100.0%
3.8%
16.6%
18.1%
0.0%
7.9%
30.7%
3.6%
15.2%
4.2%
100.0%
Within the Queensland rail workforce in 2001 there was a lower percentage of female
employees compared to the national average, with the proportion of women employed
as elementary clerical, sales and service workers in the state also less than the industry
average for that year. The state however had a higher percentage of females employed
as advanced clerical and service workers and associate professionals compared to the
national average. Employment for female rail workers as professionals and associate
professionals in Queensland was higher as a proportion of total employment for females
in the rail sector when compared to the industry average. The percentage of males
employed as trades and related workers in 2001, as a proportion of all male rail
employees was also higher in Queensland than nationally.
78
Table A14: SA - Employment by occupation and gender, 2001, Australian rail
industry
Number Employed
Managers
Professionals
Associate Professionals
Trades & Related Workers
Adv. Clerical & Service Wkrs
Interm.Clerical, Sales & Service Wkrs
Interm. Production & Transport Wkrs
Elem. Clerical, Sales & Service Wkrs
Labourers & Related Workers
Total all Occupations
Male
97
64
75
88
6
106
510
54
65
1065
Female
13
14
28
0
27
67
10
29
12
200
%
Female
11.8%
17.9%
27.2%
0.0%
81.8%
38.7%
1.9%
34.9%
15.6%
15.8%
Share of
Employm’t
Male Female
9.1% 6.5%
6.0% 7.0%
7.0% 14.0%
8.3% 0.0%
0.6% 13.5%
9.9% 33.5%
47.9% 5.0%
5.1% 14.5%
6.1% 6.0%
100.0% 100.0%
Overall females represented a higher proportion of the rail workforce in SA than was
the case on average, nationally in 2001. Within the state there was a higher percentage
of females employed as associate professionals, advanced, intermediate & elementary
clerical, sales & service workers as well as labourers and related workers. With respect
to associate professionals along with advanced & intermediate clerical, sales & service
workers, the percentage of women workers as a proportion of total female employment
in the rail industry was higher in SA compared to the average figures for the other
states. Likewise the state also had a higher percentage of men working as intermediate
production and transport personnel, as a proportion of total male employment in the rail
industry when compared to the national average. However, when it came to male rail
employees assuming roles as trades & related workers, elementary clerical, sales &
service workers and labourers & related workers, SA had a lower percentage as a
proportion of total employment for these groups than the national industry average.
Similarly there was also a lower percentage as a proportion of total employment of
females employed as professionals and elementary clerical, sales & service workers
than the equivalent 2001 average for the rail sector.
79
Table A15: WA - Employment by occupation and gender, 2001, Australian rail
industry
Number Employed
Managers
Professionals
Associate Professionals
Trades & Related Workers
Adv. Clerical & Service Wkrs
Interm.Clerical, Sales & Service Wkrs
Interm. Production & Transport Wkrs
Elem. Clerical, Sales & Service Wkrs
Labourers & Related Workers
Total all Occupations
Male
93
113
108
135
3
128
775
56
113
1524
Female
9
24
16
0
19
34
6
33
0
141
%
Female
8.8%
17.5%
12.9%
0.0%
86.4%
21.0%
0.8%
37.1%
0.0%
8.5%
Share of
Employm’t
Male Female
6.1% 6.4%
7.4% 17.0%
7.1% 11.4%
8.7% 0.0%
0.2% 13.5%
8.4% 24.1%
50.9% 4.3%
3.7% 23.4%
7.4% 0.0%
100.0% 100.0%
Female rail employees in WA comprised a smaller percentage of the workforce
compared to the national average for the industry in 2001. The state also had a lower
percentage of women assuming roles as labourers and related workers with no female
rail employees reported for this occupational group in WA. However amongst
advanced, intermediate and elementary clerical, sales & service workers the percentage
of female employees in WA was higher than the industry average. In WA the proportion
of female workers employed as professionals and advanced clerical & service workers
was also higher as a proportion of total female employment than was the case
nationally. Employment of women as elementary & intermediate clerical, sales &
service workers as a proportion of total female employment in the rail industry was
lower in the state compared to the national average. The percentage of male
intermediate production and transport workers as a proportion of total male employment
in WA’s rail workforce was also unusually high. The percentage of men employed as
trades and related workers, elementary clerical, sales & service workers and labourers &
related workers was less as a proportion of total male employment in the state’s rail
industry compared to the 2001 industry average.
80
Appendix B: Details on methodology
for primary data collection
Initially a mail-out questionnaire was compiled and forwarded to relevant contacts in
each of the 27 rail organisations who were identified as potentially suitable participants
for the study. The questionnaire was designed to collect mainly factual human resource
data from rail operators to assist in contributing to developing a more thorough profile
of the national workforce in the rail transport sector. It was later determined that 2 of the
companies were inappropriate candidates to participate in the study because they
considered themselves to be freight forwarders rather than rail operators. Another rail
organisation who was invited to participate declined to do so due to their belief that they
had insufficient time and resources to do so. This thus reduced the total number of rail
employers who agreed to participate in the study to 24. Due to a concerted effort in
promoting the importance of the research project to the industry contacts and an
intensive follow-up effort, a very high response rate was achieved from the study
participants. In total, 22 rail operators completed and returned the mail-out
questionnaire, equating to a response rate of approximately 92%.
Following this, in-depth face-to-face interviews were then conducted between
November 2006 and March 2007. In the majority of cases the individuals interviewed
were human resource managers and/or other senior human resource personnel from
each of the rail organisations who had agreed to participate in the study. However in the
case of many of the smaller sized operators who didn’t have specialised human
resources staff, the general manager of the organisation was generally interviewed.
Additional data was thus accessed from interviews conducted with 24 rail respondents
across Australia. This included all 22 operators who returned completed questionnaires
as well as another operator who participated in the interview process but failed to return
the questionnaire data. For one of the larger rail operators (who also completed the
questionnaire), two separate interviews were completed with human resource staff from
the same organisation who were based at two main sites of operation in different states
(in two different capital cities). Full face-to-to face interviews were conducted with 21
operators. In the case of the face to face interviews, a copy of the interview questions
was often forwarded to the participants prior to the interview taking place to provide the
interviewees with an idea of the nature and scope of the questions that were going to be
asked during the course of the interview. A further three operators opted to complete the
interview questions independently, without a face to face interview needing to take
place. The relevant human resource personnel within these organisations were thus
provided copies of the interview questions and subsequently forwarded their responses
to the research team.
81
Appendix C: Survey Instruments
C.1
Mail Out Questionnaire
1. Please complete the following table with regard to your rail workforce;
Table 1:
Occupational Group
Managerial Staff
Engineers
Business, Finance or IT Professionals
Other Professionals
Technical Officers/Technicians
Engineering Associate Professionals
Other Associate Professionals
Mechanical & Fabrication Tradespersons*
Electrical Tradespersons*
Other Tradespersons
Train Drivers & Assistants
Rail Controllers & Signallers
Total
Number of Employees
Males
Females
Other Plant & Machine Operators*
Rail Guards & Attendants
Clerical & Customer Service Staff*
Labourers & Related Workers*
Other
Note: *See attachment for examples of professions classified in this occupational group
2a. What proportion of your rail employees are employed on a part-time (i.e. less than
35 hours per week)
basis?_________________________________________________________________
b. Roughly what would this figure have been for this organisation 5 years
ago?___________________________________________________________________
82
3a. What proportion of your rail employees are employed on a casual (i.e. nonpermanent) basis? _______________________________________________________
b. Roughly what would this figure have been for this organisation 5 years ago?_______
4a. What are the unions that your rail workers are able to
join?__________________________________________________________________
4b. What proportion of your rail workforce is
unionised?______________________________________________________________
4c. Roughly what proportion of your rail workforce was unionised 5 years
ago?___________________________________________________________________
5a. Please complete the following table with regard to your rail workforce:
83
Table 2:
Occupational Group
Managerial Staff
Engineers
Business, Finance or
IT Professionals
Other Professionals
Technical
Officers/Technicians
Engineering
Associate
Professionals
Other Associate
Professionals
Mechanical &
Fabrication
Tradespersons*
Electrical
Tradespersons*
Other Tradespersons
Train Drivers &
Assistants
Rail Controllers &
Signallers
Other Plant &
Machine Operators*
Rail Guards &
Attendants
Clerical & Customer
Service Staff*
Labourers & Related
Workers*
Other
15-24
Total Number of Employees In Each Age Group
25-34
35-44
45-54
55-64
65+
Note: *See attachment for examples of professions classified in this occupational
group
6. In the following table, for each occupational group please indicate the number of rail
vacancies that you are currently trying to fill; the typical annual wastage rate (the
proportion of rail employees leaving the firm for other jobs or for personal reasons other
than retirement); the approximate proportion of rail employees you would expect to
retire in the next five years and whether employment growth is expected in the next 1-5
years.
84
Table 3:
Number of
current
vacancies
Occupational Group
Managerial Staff
Engineers
Business, Finance or IT
Professionals
Other Professionals
Technical Officers/Technicians
Engineering Associate
Professionals
Typical annual
wastage rate
Proportion
likely to retire
in next 5 years
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
Other Associate Professionals
Mechanical & Fabrication
Tradespersons*
%
%
%
%
Electrical Tradespersons*
%
%
Other Tradespersons
%
%
Train Drivers & Assistants
Rail Controllers & Signallers
Other Plant & Machine
Operators*
Rail Guards & Attendants
Clerical & Customer Service
Staff*
Labourers & Related Workers*
Other
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
Is Employment
Growth Expected
for the
Occupational
Group in the Next
1-5 Years (Y or
N)
Note: *See attachment for examples of professions classified in this occupational
group
7. Are there any particular jobs or positions (such as train drivers, electricians, rail
signallers, etc.) for which your organisation experiences particular difficulty in
recruiting and/or retaining rail workers? If so, please list these jobs and indicate what
you see as the main reason(s) for the shortage.
85
Table 4:
Position/Job title
Main reason(s) for shortage (Tick one or indicate other reason)
No
No applicants
No applicants
Other (please specify)
applicants at with adequate
with adequate
all
experience
qualifications
8a. Please tick the states and/or territories in which your organisation has rail operations
and the percentage of your total rail workforce that is employed in each state or territory
where your rail operations occur.
State/Territory
% of Total Rail Workforce
NSW
_______________________
VIC.
_______________________
QLD
_______________________
WA
_______________________
SA
_______________________
TAS
_______________________
NT
_______________________
ACT
_______________________
8b. Does your organisation subdivide any of its rail operations within specific states or
territories on a regional or some other intrastate basis?
Yes
No
go to 8c
go to 8d
86
8c. Please list these regional divisions and the specific states or territories to which they
apply
e.g. rail operations in WA - may be divided into Northern (Pilbara region) and South West
(Metropolitan area)
8d. Are there any specific regional areas where you find it particularly difficult to attract
and retain rail workers? If so, please list these regions.
9. For each of the occupational categories, the following table presents four sources of
recruitment: internal; graduates or students from training and/or educational institutes;
other firms and foreign workers. Thinking of your current recruitment practices for rail
employees; rank the importance of each source using the following scale:
1.
2.
Most positions in this occupation are filled this way
A significant number of positions are filled this way, but it is not the most
important means of recruitment.
87
3.
4.
Very few employees are recruited this way
Not used at all.
If other methods are used, please list these in the final column along with their ranking.
Table 5:
Occupational Group
Managerial Staff
Engineers
Business, Finance or IT
Professionals
Other Professionals
Technical
Officers/Technicians
Engineering Associate
Professionals
Other Associate
Professionals
Mechanical & Fabrication
Tradespersons*
Electrical Tradespersons*
Other Tradespersons
Train Drivers & Assistants
Rail Controllers &
Signallers
Other Plant & Machine
Operators*
Rail Guards & Attendants
Clerical & Customer
Service Staff*
Labourers & Related
Workers*
Other
Training
Foreign
Internal
and/or
workers
recruitment educational Other
(e.g.
or training
institutions, firms or
through
within the
programs industry
skilled
organisation or courses sectors migration) Other- please specify
Note: *See attachment for examples of professions classified in this occupational group
88
ATTACHMENT
Occupational Group
Mechanical and Fabrication
Tradespersons
Examples
Maintenance Tradespersons, Mechanics
Structural Steel and Welding
Tradespersons
Metal Tradespersons
Electricians
Electrical and Electronics
Tradespersons
Communications Tradespersons
Other Plant and Machine Operators
Engine and Boiler Operators
Crane, Hoist and Lift Operators
Clerical & Customer Service Staff
Terminal Operators & Cashiers,
Receptionists
Data Entry Clerks, Payroll/Account Clerks
Labourers & Related Workers
Railway Labourers, Cleaners,
Kitchenhands
C.2
Interview Questions
With respect to the major changes that have occurred in the rail industry over the past 5-10 years?
1A) Which sectors of the industry have
experienced growth or decline?
- by how much?
1B) Have there been any major
technology/operational developments? – if
so please explain
-what have been the implications to
efficiency + productivity
-need to retrain staff to use technology
1C) Have there been any changes in the training and
education resources available to rail operators and rail
staff?- if so please explain
- preemployment training and education e.g. TAFE courses,
training colleges
- on the job training e.g. apprenticeships
1D) Have there been any changes in the way that rail
workers acquire their skills/education?
i.e. do a higher a higher proportion of rail workers gain
skills/education prior to being employed or after
89
With respect to the major changes that have occurred in your rail workforce over the past 5-10
years?
2A) How have the skills requirements for rail
workers changed?
-what skills/knowledge/experience are now more in
demand?
-what training, skills/knowledge/experience or other
specific qualifications do you look for and value in
your employees and new recruits?
2C) What changes have you noticed in the
occupational structure of your rail workforce?
- which occupational groups have experienced a
growth in employment in recent years?
- which occupational groups have experienced a
decline in employment in recent years?
2B) What training and education opportunities do
you offer or encourage your employees to pursue?
-what training and education resources/facilities do
you currently use to train your rail staff?
e.g. training colleges, trade schools, TAFE courses
2D) Is there a lot of competition to recruit and retain
workers among firms in the rail industry?
-if so, in which professions/occupations?
- how do you attract new rail employees or
recruits?
- what incentives do you offer?
With respect to the major changes you are anticipating will occur in the rail industry over
the next 5-10 years?
3A) Do you expect output for the rail industry to
grow?
- by how much, what sectors will be impacted?
-which sectors of the industry are likely to
experience growth or decline?- by how much?
3C) Are you aware of any major rail infrastructure
developments that your organisation is planning or
maybe involved with in the future?
-what sectors/occupational groups are likely to be
impacted?
3B) Are you anticipating any
technological/operational developments?- if so,
explain
-changes to efficiency and productivity
-implications for your rail labour force
3D) What changes to the training and education
resources that are available to rail operators and
rail staff do you anticipate will occur in the future?
-would you like to see occur?
With respect to the changes you are anticipating will occur in your rail workforce over the
next 5-10 years?
4A) Do you expect to employ more rail workers or
invest more in training?
-what are you looking to implement in your
workforce planning for the future?
4B) How concerned is your organisation about
4E) How concerned is your organisation about the
aging of your rail workforce? i.e. the imminent
retirement of rail workers
-which occupations do you feel will be most
affected?
-do you have any measures in place to monitor the
aging of your rail workforce?- if so, explain
4F) What programs or incentives do you offer to get
90
turnover rates among your rail workers?
-which occupations are most affected?
-do you have any measures in place to monitor
the turnover rate of your rail workforce?- if so,
explain
older employees to delay retirement and continue
working?
4C) What programs or incentives do you offer to
retain existing employees?
4G) What are some of the reasons why you may
experience labour shortages/recruitment difficulties
in specific regions/occupations?
4H) In which rail occupations is employment
sensitive to changes i.e. increase in rail output?
4D) Are you anticipating labour shortages and/or
recruitment difficulties in any regions or
occupations in the next 5-10 years?
- how much would employment in the
occupational group be affected by changes in
rail output?- Please complete Table 1 (see
below- next page)
Table 1: Please complete
Occupational Group
Managerial Staff
Engineers
Business, Finance or IT Professionals
Other Professionals
Technical Officers/Technicians
Engineering Associate Professionals
Other Associate Professionals
Mechanical & Fabrication Tradespersons*
Electrical Tradespersons*
Other Tradespersons
Train Drivers & Assistants
Rail Controllers & Signallers
% Effect on Employment if Rail Output Increased by 50%
Other Plant & Machine Operators*
Rail Guards & Attendants
Clerical & Customer Service Staff*
Labourers & Related Workers*
Other
Careers in the Rail Industry/Rail Careers in Your Organisation
5A) What do you believe are the main factors
impeding the attraction of employees into the
rail industry?
5C) Do you think potential recruits know much
about the benefits/advantages of a career in the
rail industry?
-do you think the public’s perceptions about
being employed in the rail industry i.e. the public
- what type of public image do you think the rail
industry has? (i.e. among young people,
students, etc.)
91
image of the rail industry, has some effect?
-what do you believe are the main causes for the
labour shortages/recruitment difficulties in the rail
industry?
5B) Do you think enough resources are being
invested to educate the public/potential
employees about the rail industry?
i.e. in advertising marketing, promotions etc
5D) What information and guidance do you
provide potential or existing employees with, in
regard to their career options and opportunities
within your organisation and the rail industry?
-what changes would you like to see in the way
this is done? e.g. would you prefer to see
increased focus/funding from governments or rail
industry groups?
e.g. do you promote rail career options within your
organisation at highschools, universities or career
fairs
-do you offer any work experience, apprenticeship
or graduate entry programs
92
Appendix D: Modelling Results by Year
Appendix Table D1: Rail workforce projections by year
2006
p
2007
p
2008
p
2009
p
2010
p
2011
p
2012
p
2013
p
2014
p
2015
p
2016
p
2017
p
2018
p
2019
p
2020
p
Rail output forecasts
Freight (billion tonne-kms)
Passenger (billion pssnger-kms)
Index of weighted output
(millions)
Output per worker
Total employment (persons)
174.95
179.33
183.42
187.56
191.75
195.96
200.15
204.38
208.59
212.81
217.03
221.26
225.49
229.75
234.06
11.58
11.86
12.04
12.29
12.57
12.77
12.92
13.02
13.12
13.19
13.32
13.45
13.58
13.71
13.84
1.56
1.60
1.63
1.66
1.70
1.73
1.76
1.79
1.82
1.85
1.88
1.91
1.94
1.97
2.00
54.3
55.4
56.5
57.6
58.8
59.9
61.1
62.4
63.6
64.9
66.2
67.5
68.8
70.2
71.6
28679
28807
28810
28863
28935
28922
28858
28756
28635
28494
28387
28275
28158
28037
27915
6.7%
Occupational share
Managerial
Professionals
Associate Professionals
Tradespersons
Adv Clerical & Service
Int Clerical & Service
5.7%
6.1%
6.3%
6.5%
6.7%
6.9%
6.8%
6.8%
6.8%
6.8%
6.8%
6.8%
6.7%
6.7%
10.3%
8.8%
8.9%
9.0%
9.1%
9.3%
9.2%
9.2%
9.2%
9.1%
9.1%
9.1%
9.0%
9.0%
9.0%
9.5%
9.9%
9.9%
9.9%
9.9%
9.8%
9.8%
9.8%
9.8%
9.7%
9.7%
9.7%
9.7%
9.6%
9.6%
10.9%
9.5%
9.6%
9.8%
9.9%
10.1%
10.1%
10.0%
10.0%
10.0%
10.0%
10.0%
9.9%
9.9%
9.9%
1.9%
2.0%
2.0%
2.0%
2.0%
2.0%
2.0%
2.0%
2.0%
2.0%
2.0%
2.0%
2.0%
2.0%
2.0%
11.3%
11.8%
11.8%
11.8%
11.9%
11.9%
11.8%
11.8%
11.8%
11.7%
11.7%
11.7%
11.6%
11.6%
11.5%
Int Production+Transport
30.2%
31.4%
31.4%
31.4%
31.3%
31.3%
31.5%
31.7%
31.9%
32.1%
32.3%
32.5%
32.7%
32.9%
33.1%
Elem Clerk,Sales & Service
13.4%
14.0%
14.1%
14.1%
14.2%
14.2%
14.2%
14.1%
14.1%
14.0%
14.0%
13.9%
13.9%
13.8%
13.8%
6.9%
100.0
%
6.6%
6.1%
5.5%
5.0%
4.5%
4.5%
4.5%
4.5%
4.5%
4.5%
4.5%
4.5%
4.5%
4.5%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
Labourers & Related Workers
Total
Demand by occupation (persons)
Managerial
1629
1758
1813
1872
1932
1987
1976
1963
1950
1935
1922
1909
1895
1882
1868
Professionals
2942
2531
2565
2603
2643
2676
2660
2641
2620
2599
2579
2560
2540
2520
2500
Associate Professionals
2730
2849
2846
2848
2852
2848
2834
2816
2797
2777
2759
2741
2722
2704
2685
Tradespersons
3128
2735
2779
2827
2878
2920
2906
2890
2871
2851
2834
2817
2799
2781
2763
Adv Clerical & Service
Int Clerical & Service
538
565
569
574
579
583
579
575
571
566
562
558
554
550
545
3242
3394
3402
3416
3433
3439
3419
3395
3370
3343
3319
3294
3269
3244
3219
Int Production+Transport
8660
9042
9040
9052
9071
9063
9104
9128
9143
9150
9171
9190
9206
9220
9234
Elem Clerk,Sales & Service
3846
4033
4049
4073
4098
4112
4088
4060
4030
3997
3969
3940
3910
3880
3850
Labourers & Related Workers
Total
1965
1900
1747
1597
1448
1294
1292
1287
1282
1276
1272
1267
1262
1257
1252
28679
28807
28810
28863
28935
28922
28858
28756
28635
28494
28387
28275
28158
28037
27915
93
2006
p
2007
p
2008
p
2009
p
2010
p
2011
p
2012
p
2013
p
2014
p
2015
p
2016
p
2017
p
2018
p
2019
p
2020
p
Supply by occupation
(persons)
Managerial
1423
1411
1398
1386
1373
1360
1334
1308
1282
1256
1230
1194
1157
1121
1084
Professionals
2311
2350
2388
2426
2464
2502
2541
2579
2618
2656
2694
2730
2767
2803
2839
Associate Professionals
2531
2530
2528
2527
2525
2523
2519
2514
2510
2505
2500
2480
2459
2438
2417
Tradespersons
2989
2949
2908
2867
2826
2786
2737
2688
2640
2591
2542
2492
2441
2390
2339
Adv Clerical & Service
Int Clerical & Service
507
509
511
513
515
516
519
522
525
529
532
524
516
508
500
3334
3365
3396
3426
3457
3488
3517
3547
3576
3606
3635
3642
3648
3655
3662
Int Production+Transport
8516
8353
8191
8028
7865
7702
7470
7238
7006
6774
6542
6262
5981
5700
5419
Elem Clerk,Sales & Service
4181
4244
4307
4369
4432
4495
4539
4583
4626
4670
4714
4731
4747
4763
4780
Labourers & Related Workers
Total
2563
2456
2350
2243
2136
2029
1941
1854
1766
1679
1591
1521
1452
1382
1313
28357
28166
27975
27784
27593
27402
27118
26834
26550
26266
25982
25575
25167
24760
24353
Projected shortage – persons (Demand minus Supply)
Managerial
206
347
415
487
559
626
642
655
667
679
692
715
738
761
784
Professionals
630
181
177
177
179
174
119
61
3
-57
-115
-171
-227
-283
-339
Associate Professionals
199
319
318
322
327
325
315
302
288
272
259
261
263
265
267
Tradespersons
139
-213
-129
-40
51
134
169
201
232
260
292
325
358
391
423
31
57
59
61
65
66
60
53
45
38
31
35
38
42
45
Int Clerical & Service
-93
29
7
-10
-24
-49
-98
-152
-206
-263
-316
-347
-379
-411
-443
Int Production+Transport
144
689
849
1025
1206
1361
1634
1890
2137
2375
2629
2928
3225
3520
3814
Elem Clerk,Sales & Service
-336
-211
-257
-297
-333
-382
-450
-522
-597
-673
-746
-791
-837
-883
-930
Labourers & Related Workers
-598
-557
-603
-646
-688
-735
-650
-566
-484
-402
-319
-254
-190
-125
-61
322
640
835
1079
1342
1520
1740
1922
2085
2228
2405
2701
2990
3277
3562
Adv Clerical & Service
Total
Projected shortage - % of projected demand
Managerial
12.6%
19.7%
22.9%
26.0%
29.0%
31.5%
32.5%
33.4%
34.2%
35.1%
36.0%
37.5%
38.9%
40.4%
42.0%
Professionals
21.4%
7.2%
6.9%
6.8%
6.8%
6.5%
4.5%
2.3%
0.1%
-2.2%
-4.5%
-6.7%
-8.9%
-11.2%
-13.6%
Associate Professionals
7.3%
11.2%
11.2%
11.3%
11.5%
11.4%
11.1%
10.7%
10.3%
9.8%
9.4%
9.5%
9.7%
9.8%
10.0%
Tradespersons
4.4%
-7.8%
-4.6%
-1.4%
1.8%
4.6%
5.8%
7.0%
8.1%
9.1%
10.3%
11.5%
12.8%
14.1%
15.3%
5.7%
10.0%
10.3%
10.7%
11.2%
11.4%
10.3%
9.2%
8.0%
6.7%
5.5%
6.2%
6.9%
7.6%
8.3%
-2.9%
0.9%
0.2%
-0.3%
-0.7%
-1.4%
-2.9%
-4.5%
-6.1%
-7.9%
-9.5%
-10.5%
-11.6%
-12.7%
-13.8%
Adv Clerical & Service
Int Clerical & Service
Int Production+Transport
Elem Clerk,Sales & Service
Labourers & Related Workers
Total
1.7%
7.6%
9.4%
11.3%
13.3%
15.0%
17.9%
20.7%
23.4%
26.0%
28.7%
31.9%
35.0%
38.2%
41.3%
-8.7%
-5.2%
-6.4%
-7.3%
-8.1%
-9.3%
-11.0%
-12.9%
-14.8%
-16.8%
-18.8%
-20.1%
-21.4%
-22.8%
-24.1%
-30.4%
-29.3%
-34.5%
-40.5%
-47.6%
-56.8%
-50.3%
-44.0%
-37.7%
-31.5%
-25.1%
-20.1%
-15.0%
-9.9%
-4.8%
1.1%
2.2%
2.9%
3.7%
4.6%
5.3%
6.0%
6.7%
7.3%
7.8%
8.5%
9.6%
10.6%
11.7%
12.8%
94
References
Affleck Consulting 2003, The Australian Rail Industry: Overview and Issues- Report prepared for the
National Road Transport Commission.
Available from: http://www.ntc.gov.au/ViewPage.aspx?page=A02205505300960020
Apelbaum Consulting Group 2005, Australian Rail- The 2004 Productivity Report, Australasian Railways
Association [ARA] Inc., Australia.
Available from: http://www.ara.net.au/dbdoc/ARA%20Productivity%20Report%202004.pdf
Apelbaum Consulting Group 2007, Australian Rail Transport Facts 2007, Apelbaum Consulting Group
Pty Ltd, Australia.
Australian Bureau of Statistics. 2006. Australian Social Trends 2006, Cat. no. 4102.0, ABS, Canberra.
Australian Job Search. 2006. “Train Drivers”, Australian Government, Canberra.
Available from:
http://www.jobsearch.gov.au/joboutlook/default.aspx?PageId=AscoDesc&ASCOCode=7315
Australian National Training Authority [ANTA]. 2003. Submission by the Australian National Training
Authority; Senate Inquiry into Current and Future Skills Needs, p 33, Australia.
Australasian Railways Association [ARA] 2003a, Australian Rail - Industry Report 2003, ARA Inc.,
Australia.
Available from: http://www.ara.net.au/dbdoc/Industry%20Report%202003.pdf
Australasian Railways Association [ARA] 2003b, Yearbook and Industry Directory 2003, ARA Inc.,
Australia.
Australasian Railways Association [ARA] 2005a, Australian Rail – Industry Report 2005, ARA Inc.,
Australia.
Available from: http://www.ara.net.au/dbdoc/Industry%20Report%202005.pdf
Australasian Railways Association [ARA] 2005b, Yearbook and Industry Directory 2005, ARA Inc.,
Australia.
Australasian Railways Association [ARA] 2006a, Yearbook and Industry Directory 2006, ARA Inc.,
Australia.
Australasian Railways Association [ARA] 2006b, Submission to the House of Representatives Standing
Committee on Transport and Regional Services- Inquiry into the integration of regional rail and road
networks and their interface with ports, ARA Inc., Australia.
Available from: http://www.aph.gov.au/house/committee/trs/networks/subs/sub070.pdf
Australasian Railway Association [ARA] 2006c, The Changing Face of Rail - A Journey to the employer
of Choice, ARA Inc., Canberra, Australia.
Australian Railway Research and Development Organisation [ARRDO], 1985, Characteristics of the Rail
Transport Workforce: Information Paper 2, Melbourne, Table 3.1, p 12.
95
Australian Transport Safety Bureau [ATSB]. 2004. “Rail Transport Activity in Australia”, Australian
Government, Canberra.
Available from: http://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/2004/Rail_Act_1.aspx
Banks, G. 2002, ‘Regulating Australia’s infrastructure: looking forward’, Presentation by the Chairman
of the Productivity Commission to the National Infrastructure Summit, hosted by The Australian
Financial Review and AusCID, Melbourne, 14 August.
Becker, G. S. 1962. Investment in human capital: a theoretical analysis. Journal of Political Economy, 70:
Supplement, p 9-49.
Bradshaw, W. 1997. Competition in the rail industry. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 13 (1): p 93103
Bureau of Transport and Regional Economics [BTRE]. 2006. Freight measurement and modeling in
Australia, BTRE, Report 112, Department of Transport and Regional Services, Commonwealth of
Australia, Canberra.
Department of Education, Science and Training [DEST]. 2006. National Industry Skills Report – May
2006, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra.
Available from: http://www.dest.gov.au/NR/rdonlyres/9364A212-6183-4A66-81459165CB98C9F7/10627/NationalIndustrySkillsReportMay2006.pdf
Everett, S. 2006. Deregulation and reform in Australia: Some emerging constraints, Transport Policy, 13
(1): p 74-84, January.
Graham, V. 2001, Fuel Taxation Inquiry Submission, National Rail Corporation, Australia.
Available from:
http://fueltaxinquiry.treasury.gov.au/content/Submissions/Industry/NRail_253.asp
Hensher, D.A, Daniels R., DeMellow I. 1994, Revisions and Update: Productivity of Australian Railways
1971/71 to 1991/92, Institute of Transport Studies, Graduate School of Business- The University of
Sydney.
Pacific National 2006, Rail Reform, Pacific National, Australia.
Available from: http://www.pacificnational.com.au/corporate/rail_reform.asp
Productivity Commission. 2000a. Progress in Rail Reform, Productivity Commission (Australian
Government), Canberra.
Available from: http://www.pc.gov.au/inquiry/rail/finalreport/index.html\
Productivity Commission. 2000b. An Assessment of the Performance of Australian Railways 1990-1998,
Productivity Commission (Australian Government). Canberra
Available from:
http://www.pc.gov.au/inquiry/rail/finalreport/supplement/supplement.pdf
Productivity Commission. 2000c. Draft Report- Progress in Rail Reform (Media Release), Productivity
Commission (Australian Government). Canberra
Available from: http://www.pc.gov.au/inquiry/rail/draftreport/mediarelease.html
Productivity Commission. 2006. Road and Rail Infrastructure Pricing, Productivity Commission
(Australian Government). Canberra
Available from: http://www.pc.gov.au/inquiry/freight/draftreport/index.html
96
Rail Collaborative Research Centre [Rail CRC] 2006, Research: Theme 6 Industry Skills Development
(Education and Training), Rail CRC. Australia
Available from: http://www.railcrc.cqu.edu.au/uploads/theme%206.pdf
Rail, Tram & Bus Union [RTBU] 2004, Skills Crisis in Australia’s Railways.
Rail, Tram & Bus Worker, 12 (3): p 1
Available from: http://www.rtbu-nat.asn.au/journal/303/1098065251_21378.html
Rail, Tram & Bus Union [RTBU] 2007, Inquiry into Workforce Challenges in the Transport IndustrySubmission to Inquiry by Senate Employment, Workplace Relations & Education Committee. January.
Available from:
http://www.aph.gov.au/Senate/committee/eet_ctte/transport_employment/submissions/sub27.pdf
Shah, C. and Burke, G. 2005. Skills shortages: concepts measurement and policy responses, Australian
Bulletin of Labour, 31(1): p 44-71.
Transport and Logistics Industry Skills Council [TDT] 2005, Industry Skills Report, Australian National
Training Authority, February, p 9-28.
Available from: http://www.tdtaustralia.com/files/documents/1111027027transportlogistics%20final.pdf
Workplace Research Centre 2006, Human Resources in Practice (HiP) Report- Succession Management,
Newsletter Issue 33, July, University of Sydney.
Yates, A. 1999, Engineering for rail sector growth: a report on engineering rail skills shortages in
Australia, Institution of Engineers, Australia.
Available from:
http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:pgrhY4ur6mcJ:www.ieaust.org.au/library/publications/railreport.doc
+rail+sector+growth+athol+yates&hl=en&gl=au&ct=clnk&cd=2
97