They were giving a presentation about the current economic situation in Australia and got to a slide about labour demand. They went on to explain that due to the lockdowns making it difficult for international students to enter Australia, we were experiencing a high demand for “low skilled labour” in construction and hospitality. I sent a question through to ask them to clarify what they meant when they say “low skilled labour” and what metric they used to differentiate between low skilled labour and high skilled labour, whether it was training and certification or productivity/output/benefit or necessity to society.
They skirted over the question by just saying they meant training. I followed up with them after the talk to explain how the use of the phrase “low skilled labour” perpetuates the justification for low wages in what are essential job functions, that do require a lot of skill and training.
International students in Australia get extremely exploited, as they are under threat of not being able to support themselves while facing very high tuition fees, living costs and having to go home before completing their studies. Some of them come from priveledged backgrounds with big safety nets, but a large proportion of them get exploited in the Australian labour market, as well as travellors and migrants in general. Not sure if my point made it through and they would choose their words more wisely next time, but I hope so.
This was an industry conference, where many people in attendance are managing directors and CEO's, a few sales people and technical people like myself.