Government's mature age push fades to grey

Corporate Champions fiasco

Unfortunately the $15.6 million Champions project, aimed at helping employers prepare for the demographic change as the Boomers retire, will flounder as the Government launched it too late in the electoral cycle. The Prime Minister's call for a September 14 poll, and the Government's primary vote standing at about 30 per cent, has squibbed employer interest. Why sign up to a program that will be scrapped if and when the Coalition form government? The project is also extraordinarily complicated.

I had a small hand in getting businesses on board the Champions project in South Australia. I got seven businesses signed up but then between Walter Mitty (a non de plume I was subcontracted to) and Australian Industry Group, which manages the project, they decided to only select two as Corporate Champions. This was a Federal Government policy initiative of national importance.

Few employers, large or small, have heard of the Corporate Champions program and only 250 companies will be selected over the next four years. The scale of the endevour requires at least 2500 Champions. DEEWR Media had done almost nothing to promote the Government's mature age initiatives.

Each Corporate Champions provider (consultancies) uses a different methodology born from different 'workplace philosophies'. Many come from the diversity paradigm and believe employers have a moral obligation to employ more older workers because 'it is the right thing to do' – much like gender equity.

Whether or not an employee holds their position depends on a raft of factors but the most important is whether they can contribute to the business plan. The older worker push is not a diversity or equity issue. It relates directly to business planning – to capability and profit.

The timidity of the Experience+ and Corporate Champions push matches the will of the Government and DEEWR to place this issue high on the national agenda. It is hoped the Opposition, if it forms government, won't make the same mistake.