Associate Professor
Betina Szkudlarek,
The University of Sydney
Business School

The University of Sydney Business School

Engaging business inrefugee employment

sydney.edu.au/businessEngaging Business in
Refugee Employment
The employers’ perspective
The University of Sydney Business School

In collaboration with

Thank you to everyone who took the time to participate in this study. This
report would not have been possible without your contribution.

Contact for further information:
Dr Betina Szkudlarek
Betina.Szkudlarek@sydney.edu.au+61 2 9351 4606
The University of Sydney Business School
Acknowledgements
This report has been authored by Dr Betina Szkudlarek from The University of Sydney Business
School in close collaboration with the Centre for Policy Development (CPD), and with theassistance of a small team of volunteers from Boston Consulting Group who have been assisting
the CPD in leading the Cities and Settlement Initiative since 2017.
Dr Betina Szkudlarek wishes to thank Sophia Johnson, PhD and Duc Cuong Nguyen for theircontribution to the acquisition of the data, Fiorella Jansen-Nicorescu for support with analysis
and interpretation of the study results and Professor John Buchanan and Selena Choo for their
ongoing support.
This study was funded in part by the Australian Government Department of Employment, Skills, Smalland Family Business. The views in this report do not necessarily reflect the views of the department.

Contents
1. Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................. 1
Background..................................................................................................................................... 1
Research objectives and methods .............................................................................................. 1
Main findings.................................................................................................................................. 2
Summary of recommendations.................................................................................................... 3
Next steps ....................................................................................................................................... 4
2. Introduction ............................................................................................................................................... 5
Problem identification .................................................................................................................. 5
Literature review ........................................................................................................................... 5
3. Data Overview ........................................................................................................................................ 7
Research objectives....................................................................................................................... 7
Methodology .................................................................................................................................. 7
4. Recommendations ................................................................................................................................. 10
5. Research Findings ................................................................................................................................. 13
The prevalence of hiring and retaining refugees, and related challenges andmisconceptions ............................................................................................................................. 13
Motivators and effective incentives for hiring and retaining refugees ........................... 18
Effective recruitment, integration and retention strategies used by employers ............ 25
Insights from employers not seeking to hire refugees......................................................... 33
Role of service providers in facilitating refugee workforce participation ..................... 38
General remarks from employers .......................................................................................... 41
In-depth case studies ................................................................................................................. 42
6. Closing Words ...................................................................................................................................... 44
Author Biography ...................................................................................................................................... 45
Appendix 1 – Online Survey Questions ............................................................................................... 46
Appendix 2 – In-depth Interview Questions ........................................................................................ 56
Appendix 3 – Service Providers and Other Referral Organisations ............................................. 60
Appendix 4 – References........................................................................................................................ 61

1. Executive Summary
Background
Since 1945, when the first federal immigration portfolio was established to administer
Australia’s post-war migration program, over 800,000 refugees and other humanitarian
entrants have settled in Australia (Phillips, 2017, p1). Fast forward to 2017–18, and a total of
16,250 visas were granted under the Humanitarian Program, of which 7,909 were refugeevisas (Australian Government Department of Home Affairs, 2019). In 2018–19, the
Humanitarian Migration Program is set at 18,750 places (Australian Government Departmentof Home Affairs, 2019) and that level is expected to be maintained for the current term ofgovernment.
Humanitarian migrants in Australia are an extremely diverse cohort in terms of their countriesof origin, levels of education, educational background and English skills (BNLA, 2017); factors
which affect their employment prospects across the majority of industries. The opportunities forworkforce integration of many humanitarian migrants may also be adversely affected by thelack of recognition of foreign credentials (BNLA, 2017) and lack of local work experience andreferences (Colic-Peisker & Walker, 2003).
Despite the human potential and ambitious aspirations of humanitarian migrants (Ilaj, 2014),
they face higher levels of unemployment and lower levels of labour market participation than
the average Australian (Settling Better, 2017). The aim of this report is to understandemployers’ perceptions and experiences of hiring refugees, and how public policy could
encourage or support employers to employ refugees successfully in greater numbers on asustainable basis.

Research objectives and methods
This study looks at the perceptions of employers that have and have not hired refugees. The
aim is to gain insight into employers’ perceptions, misconceptions and experiences of theintegration of refugees into the workforce by investigating:••••motives for hiring refugees;
challenges and best practices for integrating refugees into the workforce;desired support and incentives that could help employers hire refugees successfully;
andmeasures that government or non-governmental groups could take to increasesustainable refugee employment in Australia.

The study is based on the results of an online survey and in-depth interviews. 118 respondents
participated in the online survey between February and April 2019. The insights of 15
companies (29 research participants in total) were collected through in-depth interviews
between December 2018 and April 2019. Research participants were sought through multiple
avenues, including publicly available databases and employer networks of service providers,local government and other intermediaries.

1

Main findings
1. The perceived benefits of hiring refugees often outweighed the challenges for
employers seeking to hire them. Employers indicated that hiring refugees gives them theability to serve certain customer bases in their own language and with cultural
sensitivity; they appreciated the work ethic of refugee employees and valued theexperience and diversity in perspectives that refugees brought to the workplace. Many
employers described refugees as eager to learn, hardworking and committed.
2. Employers who had hired or actively sought to hire refugees perceived most potential
barriers as less challenging than those who had not sought to hire refugees. Assumed
challenges and misconceptions around factors such as visa status, work rights, uncertainty
about the duration of stay and absenteeism were rarely a concern among employers
who had employed refugees and who had sought to hire refugees.
3. Successful hiring and retention of refugees requires a long-term, holistic approach,involving all levels of management, the support of influential staff members and theengagement of peers and supervisors. Employers identified corporate social
responsibility (CSR) and senior leadership as main motivators for refugee hiring
initiatives.
4. First experiences can be very powerful. Due to unfamiliarity with the refugee cohort andthe visibility of ‘refugees’ as a social category of employees, some employer feedback
suggests that the level of success of the first contact could be decisive in determining
whether an employer would or would not continue hiring refugees.
5. Wage subsidies were not a motivating factor for most employers (though some noted
their potential relevance). Many large companies did not see a need for government
subsidies or felt that the use of subsidies was not justified in the absence of a strong
financial need on the part of the employer. Small businesses often had no capacity tomake use of a potential subsidy as they wouldn’t consider hiring refugees due toperceived barriers such as the need for additional upskilling of refugee jobseekers,
which was difficult for smaller employers to deliver on site.
6. Specialist service providers played a significant and positive role. These providers areoften not-for-profits or social enterprises (other than jobactive providers) whose core
mission is to place refugees or other jobseekers from culturally diverse backgrounds into
appropriate employment. This finding is in contrast to the recent expert review ofmainstream jobactive service providers 1.
7. Many employers used a full suite of service provider offerings (e.g. search, culture
training, resume and interview preparation, etc). Poor quality candidate referrals werethe main reason that employer collaborations with service providers were discontinued.
8. Social procurement targets 2 were only perceived as relevant in certain industries (e.g.
infrastructure /construction). Within these industries, the use of social procurement
frameworks was considered effective for creating scalable employment opportunities
for refugees and other disadvantaged groups.
9. Industry-specific training (e.g. English language, technical skills) was flagged by
employers as important. Generic training programs provided by the government wereseen as insufficient to set up a refugee employee for success.
10. Employers lacked knowledge regarding refugee employment, including how to identify
and reach refugee job seekers and what government incentives are available.
11. The perceptions of refugee workforce integration differed within organisations. Even
within small employers, human resources (HR) staff and senior management were often
disconnected from the reality of daily interactions and workplace integration challenges
faced by refugees or possible hidden costs.
1 Employment Services Expert Advisory Panel report, I Want to Work:

Employment Services 2020 (2018).

2 This refers to the concept of organisations choosing to pursue a certain social outcome when they buy a good or aservice and may involve organisations setting targets for employment of individuals with particular backgrounds.

2

Summary of recommendations
Based on the findings of this study, the following recommendations are an initial set of possible
measures to encourage and support greater employer engagement with refugee jobseekers.
A. Highlight and communicate benefits, success stories and ‘best practices’:•

Share success stories, educate and create awareness among business leaders anddecision makers, to address misconceptions and create a positive public narrativearound refugee employment.

•

Provide industry-specific sample cases of refugee workforce integration that could be
widely shared and readily replicated.

•

Better promote the availability of existing support services for employers (including
government and non-government services).

B. Rethink wage subsidies and increase funding for partnerships and sustainable refugee
employment initiatives:••••

Rethink the use of wage subsidies as an incentive for employer engagement, drawing
on Australian and international evidence to inform their future structure and design.
Consider increased support for service providers that have developed effective
methods for achieving sustainable refugee employment.
Use grants in addition to or instead of wage subsidies to encourage employer
programs and/or partnerships between employers and specialist service providers,with minimal ‘red tape’ to encourage engagement of small and mid-sized employers.
Fund programs to help offset the cost of recruiting refugees and ensuring theirsuccessful integration within the workplace.

C. Increase the use of social procurement frameworks:•

Ensure that social procurement frameworks clearly identify ‘refugees’ as a desired
employee/contractor category and expand social procurement to more industries toreplicate success achieved in some parts of the infrastructure industry.

•

Explore opportunities to include ‘refugee employment’ as a positive screening measure
within ethical investment frameworks.

D. Add training, education and resources for employers:•

Create training or information sharing opportunities to help employers learn from theirpeers about effective refugee employment strategies.

•

Support the development of a jobs portal for employers seeking to recruit refugees,
including listings of job opportunities and useful resources, such as how to meet social
procurement targets. Give all employment service providers access to this portal(including those that are not jobactive providers).

E. Support matching refugee skills/qualifications with industry needs:•

Guide employers how to think laterally about the qualifications and skills that areneeded for a particular role.

•

Provide support and frameworks for industry-specific language and skills training tohelp upskill refugees in fields where there is high demand for labour (including throughthe use of place-based approaches.

3

F. Engage communities and employers to provide mentorship and support:•

Consider opportunities to encourage and empower community members, employers
and relevant target groups (such as industry associations) to take ownership of the taskof increasing refugee employment through mentoring programs, workplace-fundedinternships or more holistic approaches.

G. Encourage customised, collaborative community efforts:•

With the importance placed on collaborative efforts, refugee workforce integration
requires collaboration of multiple stakeholders in specific geographic locations. In
places where there is a large number of humanitarian migrants, the use of placebased approaches or ‘community deals’ (harnessing federal, state and local efforts)
could provide key local actors with the resources and freedom to collectively develop
and implement tailored local solutions.

Next steps
The authors plan to undertake further research and consultation with a wider variety of
stakeholders to develop a more detailed set of policy recommendations for Australian
governments and other stakeholders. These recommendations will be published in an Options
Paper: Increasing Sustainable Refugee Employment in the second half of 2019.
This study opens numerous avenues for further research into employer engagement acrossindustries, the challenges faced by employers of various sizes, and workforce integration of
refugees with diverse backgrounds and employment profiles (e.g. gender, skilled vs. unskilled
jobseekers, ethnic minorities). Specific investigations could focus on the utilisation of subsidies
and the design of partnership grants. More research is also needed to identify successful casestudies in specific industries that could be shared and replicated.

4

2. Introduction
Problem identification
Finding suitable employment is one of the most important steps in the integration of a refugee
into a new community (Feeney, 2000; Lee et al., 2018). Yet global experience reveals thatmany refugees end up unemployed (Beiser & Hou, 2001), under-employed (Krahn et al.,
2000; Vinokurov et al., 2017), or working in the informal economy sector (Crush et al., 2017),
and often failing to find permanent jobs that match their skill levels (Krahn et al., 2000;
Mahuteau & Junankar, 2008; Cheng et al., 2017). Our literature review outlines workforce
integration challenges faced by refugees in developed economies such as Australia.
These challenges are unfortunate and avoidable. Refugees bring qualifications and skills to thereceiving country (e.g. Phillimore & Goodson, 2006), with the potential to meet labour
shortages in urban and rural areas and in a wide range of white- and blue-collar occupations(e.g. Brees, 2008; Bais et al., 2017). Refugees in Australia are also highly entrepreneurial (seerecent Centre for Policy Development report – Seven Steps to Success, 2019) and beyond
doubt provide long-term macro-economic benefits to receiving countries through both
workforce participation and business activities (e.g. d’Albis et al. 2018).
There is a great deal of research documenting various support systems available to refugees
who seek employment and the challenges faced by refugees in their quests for employment(Lee at al. 2018). Yet the role and experiences of employers are topics that have been
largely neglected in this research. We know little about industry experience of hiring refugees,
engagement drivers, which incentives or support measures are the most effective at influencing
the behaviours and choices of employers with respect to refugees, or which incentives are mostsalient to businesses that currently hire refugees. These gaps have been confirmed by acomprehensive literature review (Lee et al. 2018) and our consultation with numerous
stakeholders working within the sector (e.g. Friendly Nation Initiative, Refugee Council ofAustralia and Settlement Council of Australia). At the same time, there is significant anecdotal
evidence that many Australian employers are interested in employing refugees and areseeking to do so of their own accord.
More needs to be understood about how public policy settings could encourage or support
employers to continue to employ refugees, to employ more refugees in greater numbers, andto employ refugees in a way that leads to optimum outcomes from the perspective of
employers and individual refugees. This report is the first step towards the understanding of
the role of employers in refugee workforce integration.

Literature review
Multidisciplinary insights on the role of employers in refugee workforce
integration
This research project started with an extensive interdisciplinary literature review undertakenby the University of Sydney Business School. This review exposed the presence of the canvas
ceiling – invisible, multi-level, systemic barriers to refugee workforce integration (Lee, et al.,2018). It also revealed the scarcity of knowledge on employers’ perspectives on refugee
employment, their experiences of hiring refugees, and drivers of engagement to hire refugees.
Research shows that refugees are often offered and accept, low-skilled, low-paying,
dangerous and illegal jobs in many countries, despite constituting a widely accessible andattainable talent pool (e.g. Thornton 2006; Brees 2008; Kenny and Lockwood-Kenny 2011).
Further research on refugee workforce integration indicates that substandard employmentoutcomes are often induced by poor organisational structures and practices on the part of
employers, in addition to ethnocentrism and discrimination spreading through organisations.

Recruitment
Despite acknowledging the importance and positive impact of diverse workforce onorganisational performance (Sheehan and Anderson 2015), refugees tend to be ignored in
employers’ diversification plans, which stagnates their employability and earning potential(Syed 2008; De Vroome and Van Tubergen 2010; Gaillard and Hughes 2014). In fact,
refugees are victims of multiple levels of discrimination associated with perceptions, such as
5uncertain legal status, ethnicity, religious beliefs, gender, accent and appearance (Hugo
2014). Such discrimination is especially prominent among visibly different groups of refugees,
such as Muslim women in Australia (Northcote et al. 2006). Swedish scholars Lundborg and
Skedinger (2016) revealed systemic marginalisation during refugee recruitment, whereby
employers knowingly established higher standards for refugee applicants compared to local
employees. UK researchers also found employers refrained from hiring refugees due todemanding and time-consuming processes of assessing foreign qualifications and education(Phillimore and Goodson 2006). At the same time, those who successfully hired refugees wereinclined to recruit from this group of migrants again (Lundborg and Skedinger 2016).
Australian research indicates that employers are often unaware of their unfair practices anddeny marginalising refugee applicants (Fozdar and Torezani, 2008).

Training and development
Without post-employment training and development opportunities, refugees find sustaining
employment especially difficult (Aycan and Berry 1996; Miletic 2014). An Australian study
found perceived organisational support from employers was positively associated with thepsychological well-being of refugee employees (Newman et al. 2018). However, cultural and,to a lesser extent, occupational training is only offered by support organisations immediately
post-migration, and not by employers at workplaces (Nawyn 2010). More broadly, theliterature suggests that employers seldom invest in job-related up-skilling and on-the-job
training designed specifically for refugees. In a UK study, the employers of refugees in menial
and low-paid jobs did not identify a need for workplace training for these employees (Bloch2008). Yet, particularly for highly-skilled refugees, periods of unemployment induce skills
deterioration, making post-employment training or retraining essential (Stewart 2003; Bloch2008). Without such training, refugees’ upward mobility is impeded by a lack of workplaceskill development (Bloch 2004).

Compensation
Employment terms and conditions for refugees in receiving countries are conspicuously poor
compared to other migrants (Yu et al. 2007; Phythian et al. 2009). Despite an upward trend
in earnings from 2000 and 2010 in Canada, refugees lingered at the lowest end of theearning scale (Sweetman and Warman 2013). Wage discrepancies persist for numerous
reasons. In the UK, only a high level of local education was positively associated with higher
employment rates and greater earnings for refugees (Bloch 2008). A similar Australian study
suggested this may be due to employers’ lack of understanding, as well as time and resource
restraints in recognising home-country qualifications (Cheng et al. 2019). Yet, even following
the acquisition of local qualifications, refugees continued to have lower earnings whencompared to other ethnic minority groups in the UK (Bloch 2008). Lower wages and poor
employment terms and conditions were not solely the result of shortcomings in understanding
qualifications and experiences, but also a by-product of discriminatory biases against refugee
employees. Swedish researchers found that employers’ preconceptions that refugee employees
lacked co-operation skills, was one reason for pay disparities between local and refugee
employees (Lundborg and Skedinger 2016). In such cases personal judgements andstereotypes, rather than objective measures of performance, were shown to have unfairly
influence remuneration assessments.

Workplace integration
Existing research suggests refugees can experience a general climate of exclusion or isolationin the workplace (Lamba 2003; Baranik et al. 2018; Knappert et al. 2018). Refugees often
perceive employers, supervisors and co-workers as uninformed, rather than malicious
perpetrators of discrimination and exploitation (Boese 2015). Despite anti-discrimination andequal opportunity policies, refugees are often excluded from the inner circle of workplaces.
(Baranik, et al., 2018). A Canadian survey of 525 refugees found 70% of individuals were
unsatisfied with their current employment and 60% considered they were over-qualified andexcluded from promotions (Lamba 2003).
These insights paint a rather negative image of the refugee employment experience. They also
underscore the importance of employer engagement with the workforce integration of
refugees. Facilitating refugee integration into the labour market of the receiving country canalso facilitate social inclusion more generally. This study aims to address this important issue by
exploring the drivers, perceptions and experiences of employers when they engage in refugee
workforce integration.
6

3. Data Overview
Research objectives
To understand more about the role of employers in refugee workforce integration in Australia,
the University of Sydney and the Centre for Policy Development (CPD) collaborated to conduct
an online survey and in-depth interviews with employers in late 2018 and early 2019 to gain
insight into:••••

employers’ motives for hiring refugees;
challenges and best practices in integrating refugees into the workforce;
support and incentives that could help employers hire refugees successfully; andmeasures that might be taken by government or non-government groups to increasesustainable employment of refugees in Australia.

Methodology
Two sources of data have been utilised to create this report:••

results of an online survey; andin-depth interviews.

The online survey collected feedback from employers who have and have not hired refugees,
specifically the survey data divided employers in the following three categories:•••

employers that have employed and actively sought to hire refugees;
employers that have employed but not actively sought to hire refugees; andemployers that have not employed refugees.

The in-depth interviews specifically focused on employers who had direct experience
employing refugees.
While the overall composition of both data collection methods is similar, the sets of respondents
were different. As a result, the findings are discussed separately at times and throughout thereport we note whether the results refer to interviews, surveys or both.

Online surveys
The online survey was led by CPD with assistance from a small team of volunteers from BCG.
Together they engaged around a dozen intermediary organisations, including not-for-profit
employment service providers, the Australian Industry Group, local government authorities andseveral other intermediaries with large employer networks across Australia, to disseminate theonline survey via email.
Of the 118 survey responses, 60 were completed in full and the remaining 58 were partiallycompleted. Respondents represented employers operating in all states and territories acrossAustralia. Most respondents had roles in management or human resources (29% in humanresources, 27% at CEO/director level, 27% in other management roles). Respondents camefrom a broad spread of industries including manufacturing (13%), construction (11%),
professional, science and technology (11%), and health care (9%).

In-depth Interviews
In addition to the online survey, the University of Sydney conducted in-depth interviews with agroup of employers who had direct experience hiring refugees. Fifteen (15) employers wereinterviewed about their hiring practices of refugees. A wide range of employers representing
a variety of industries were approached to reflect a broad scope of perspectives.
Employers were based predominantly in New South Wales and Victoria, and operated in the
agriculture, construction, finance, food, government, manufacturing, and retail sectors, among
others. Company size ranged from 20 to over 100,000 employees.
Of the 15 employers interviewed, 13 were hiring refugees at the time the study took place
while two had discontinued hiring refugees. A total of 29 individuals were interviewed, with7

roles ranging from CEO or director, to diversity and inclusion staff, human resources personnel
and line managers. They shared their views on refugee employment.
The findings are reported in order of importance, assessed by the frequency of a given
statement as conveyed in interviews.

In-depth cases
To gain insight into different perspectives within the workplace, five in-depth cases wereconducted in which three to five people per company were interviewed. These in-depth cases
aim to provide a more thorough understanding of how perceptions of refugee workforce
integration differ based on roles within an organisation.

Limitations
Not all of the 118 employers surveyed online answered all the questions in the survey, with 58
failing to complete the entire surveys. Their responses have been included where relevant.
The interviews included the perspectives of 15 diverse organisations across Australia. Due tothe small sample, feedback should be considered as opportunities for further research andpolicy recommendations should be treated with caution.
Several employers surveyed and interviewed for this study were approached via existing
networks of numerous service providers. Their relationships with service providers might haveaffected the data pertaining to employers’ view of service provider support.

Definitions
The following definitions were used for the online surveys and in-depth interviews:
Refugee: Anyone who self-identified as a refugee or whom an employer believed to haveentered Australia on a humanitarian visa or as an asylum seeker within the last 20 years.
Employers actively seeking to hire: Organisations deploying deliberate efforts to hire
refugees with specific recruitment practices.
Employers that have not employed refugees: Organisations that have not hired any refugees
within the last five years.
Employers that have employed and actively sought to hire refugees: Organisations thathave hired at least one refugee within the last five years and have made deliberate efforts to
do so with specific recruitment practices.
Employers that have employed but not actively sought to hire refugees: Organisations thathave hired at least one refugee within the last five years but have not made any deliberate
effort to hire refugees.
Employers that have not actively sought to hire refugees: Organisations that have not
implemented any specific recruitment practices in order to actively seek out refugees,
including:••employers that have not employed refugees; andemployers that have employed but not sought to hire refugees.

Service providers: Not-for-profit organisations and social enterprises, fulfilling social missions
such as refugee workforce-integration, reduction of poverty, or newcomer settlement, among
others. The findings for jobactive providers are discussed separately from those of otherservice providers.
In-depth cases: Instances where three to five people per company were interviewed, to gain
an in-depth understanding of how perceptions on refugee workforce-integration could differ
based on roles within an organisation.

Confidentiality statement
Individuals participating in the survey and/or interview have provided feedback underconfidentiality. All references connecting specific feedback to individual interviewees, survey
respondents or employers, have been omitted from this report.

8

Table 1 – Overview of employers who participated in the in-depth interviews
Number ofinterviewees

Location

Size

Industry

2 HR/Diversity & Inclusion
2 Supervisory

Victoria

Large

Construction

2 HR/Diversity & Inclusion
2 supervisory

NSW

Large

Finance3

1 HR/Diversity & Inclusion
2 Supervisory

NSW

Large

Food

3

1 HR/Diversity & Inclusion
2 Supervisory

NSW

Large

Retail3

1 Leadership
1 Supervisory
1 Training

NSW

Small

Food

2

2 HR/Diversity & Inclusion

NSW

Large

Finance2

1 Leadership
1 Supervisory

Victoria

Small

Food

1

1 HR/Diversity & Inclusion

NSW

Large

Government

1

1 HR/Diversity & Inclusion

Victoria

MediumAgriculture

1

1 Supervisory engaged in
hiringNSW

LargeConstruction

1

1 Supervisory engaged in
hiring

NSW

MediumServices

1

1 HR/Diversity & Inclusion

Victoria

Large

Government

1

1 HR/Diversity & Inclusion

NSW

Large

Finance1

1 HR/Diversity & Inclusion

NSW

Large

Hospitality

1

1 HR/Diversity & Inclusion

Victoria

Large

Construction

4
4

Role

9

4. Recommendations
The following recommendations are based on the findings of this study and constitute possible
measures to explore further. Following the publication of this report, the authors plan toundertake further research and consultation with a wider set of stakeholders to develop a
more detailed set of policy recommendations for Australian governments and otherstakeholders. These recommendations will be published in an Options Paper: Increasing
Sustainable Refugee Employment in the second half of 2019.
The findings of this study suggest that Australian governments and other stakeholders explore
a number of policy settings and measures to support employers to successfully hire and retain
refugee jobseekers in Australia.
A. Highlight and communicate benefits, success stories and ‘best practices’•

As CSR and top-management’s initiative were key motivators of engagement, thebusiness case and other benefits of hiring and retaining refugees need to becommunicated to business leadership. Established employer networks such as industry
groups, should be used to mobilise wider support.

•

Positive narratives and success stories need to be more widely publicised to reflect thepositive experiences of many employers.

•

Parliamentarians and all arms of government should carefully consider their publicstatements about refugees to prevent unintended negative consequences for refugee
jobseekers and employers who may otherwise benefit from hiring them.

•

Employer misconceptions that prevent or hinder successful refugee recruitment should
be corrected by the sharing of accurate information and advice.

•

Attempts should be made to further increase the visibility and/or promotion of existingsupport services for employers (including government and non-government services).

B. Rethink wage subsidies and increase funding for partnerships and sustainable refugee
employment initiatives•

Subsidies need to be approached with caution, as few employers saw them as
motivating factors and some considered them as possibly encouraging undesirable
employer behaviours (e.g. short-term hiring to obtain subsidy). Moreover, wage
subsidies do not address job readiness, which was identified as a major challenge forrefugee employment.

•

Wage subsidies could possibly be restructured to create a more effective incentive for
employers, while avoiding unintended consequences such as stigmatisation of refugee
jobseekers. Areas for future investigation include: revisiting the categories ofjobseekers that wage subsidies apply to; the delivery method for wage subsidies(currently only through federal employment service providers such as jobactive); howemployers recognise subsidies within their own systems and budgets; and introducing
more sophisticated objectives/criteria to enhance the impact of wage subsidies (e.g.
more attractive subsidies where employers also include workplace language training
for employees from a refugee background).

•Grant funding may offer greater flexibility to employers and could be used to coveremployers’ costs (such as onboarding programs) rather than relying on subsidies which
are tied to individual recruits. Larger companies are more likely to apply for grants
due to the scale at which they engage in employment and their greater capacity torespond to grant opportunities. ‘Red tape’ should be minimised to encourage theengagement of small and mid-sized employers.

•

Grants could serve as a tool to separate funding of refugee hiring and retention
efforts from the business cycle of a company, by providing resources to maintain
refugee employment if a company is facing financial pressures.
10•‘Partnership grants’ have potential to encourage further collaboration between service
providers and employers. They could be initiated by employers and/or service
providers for a wide range of initiatives including hiring practices, onboarding,
workplace readiness and training.

•

Specific grants could alleviate the costs associated with using effective service
providers.

C. Increase the use of social procurement frameworks•

Social procurement frameworks offer a way to rapidly scale-up refugee recruitment
but targets for refugee recruitments are reportedly only used in theconstruction/infrastructure sector. There is potential for expansion into other industries.

•

Policy makers should consider the potential benefits and drawbacks of ‘hard’ versus‘soft’ procurement targets. This could include considering the feasibility of employers
reaching certain targets in different locations across Australia and whether a universal
approach is reasonable or desirable.

•‘Soft’ targets, where hiring targets are suggested as a desirable business practice,
could be beneficial in enabling employers to ‘own’ the effort instead of just ‘comply’
with externally imposed hard targets.

•‘Hard’ procurement targets, where hiring targets are regulated or included in
mandatory procurement requirements, would need to be accompanied by support(e.g., tools for accessing refugee job seekers or support to establish organisational
onboarding programs) to make it easier for employers to comply and to avoid
creating employer resentment or backlash towards refugee employees.

•

The use of social procurement targets (currently a feature of some Victoriangovernment infrastructure procurement arrangements) could be expanded acrossgovernment and into the private sector (e.g. local council services, superannuation
investments).

D. Add training, education and resources for employers•

Create or support the development of a public access job portal to bring service
providers, refugees and employers together in one place.

•

Separately, or as part of a jobs portal, establish a public access portal to help
capture the skills and knowledge of refugee employment experts and support
collaboration between universities, industry groups, service providers and employers.

•

Facilitate industry-specific platforms for knowledge exchange and industry-peer
support.

•

Identify and support industry champions to share their knowledge and experience withindustry peers.

•

Support the delivery of training to employers on hiring and onboarding refugees (e.g.
adjusting hiring practices, implementing creative approaches to overcome
qualifications hurdles). Explore opportunities provided by e-learning platforms.

•

Showcase realistic examples of successful employment, including additional resources
required, and the importance of holistic perspectives to understand how refugee
workplace integration can affect peers and supervisors.

•

Promote early investment in establishing successful hiring practices to improve thechance of success.

•Train employers on other ways to support refugees (e.g. through supply chains that
positively engage refugees).

11

E. Support matching refugee skills/qualifications with industry needs•

Encourage employers to think laterally about the qualifications and skills that are
genuinely needed for a person to perform a particular role, rather than relying on
traditional recruitment pathways and practices. Recognition of relevant experience
could be more skills-based rather than ‘qualifications-based’ For example, is anengineering qualification required or could a person with the relevant skills be
supported by an Australian qualified engineer where required.

•

Achieve short-term impact by providing or supporting training in skills that are in
demand in relevant locations and do not require difficult or complex accreditations.

•Support workplace English language training that is tailored by industry (e.g.,language used in bakeries is different from language used in construction or banking).

•

Encourage and support education- and training-focused collaborations between
industry and service providers (e.g. through partnership grants).

•

Pursue ongoing efforts to facilitate recognition of international qualifications bylobbying relevant industry bodies.

F. Engage communities and employers to provide mentorship and support•

Empower industry associations, employers and other stakeholders to take ownership ofincreasing refugee employment and ensuring successful recruitment outcomes.

•

Engage employers and industry in the design of pre-employment training programsfor refugees.

•

Explore mentoring programs, workplace-funded internships or more holistic
approaches such as community sponsorship of refugees (as practiced in Canada and in
an increasing number of other countries).

G. Encourage customised, collaborative community efforts•

Encourage local parties to collaborate and allow tailoring of the way that key federal
and state-funded services (including employment, settlement and language services)
are delivered and incentivised in places where there are large numbers of refugees.
This should be done in close consultation with local employers and/or industry groups.
Support for these sorts of measures should be considered in the lead up to the expiryof key federal service contracts, with Adult Migrant English Program service provider
contracts due to expire in mid 2020 and employment service contracts and settlement
service contracts due to expire in mid 2022.

•

Consider approaches that recognise the potential role of workplaces as communities of
local residents and not just sites of employment.

12

5. Research Findings
The prevalence of hiring and retaining refugees,
and related challenges and misconceptions
Summary
Because supporting refugee language upskilling and assessing/validating overseas
qualifications, skills and experience can be a challenge, employers tend to gravitate
towards hiring what is “easy and familiar.”
Almost half (48%) of the employers surveyed actively sought to hire refugees.
Biases, English language proficiency and job readiness were widely perceived by
employers as challenges that refugees faced in finding employment. The ability of refugees
to understand cultural differences and integrate into the “Australian way of doing things”
were also concerns for most employers. However, employers who hired or sought to hire
refugees did not perceive as many challenges with employing refugees as those who had
not.
When employers shared their views on misconceptions about the refugee workforce, themost frequently mentioned presumptions were that refugees were unskilled and that refugee
integration into the workforce was going to be “too hard”.
Employer feedback suggested that employers lacked education on refugee employment,
including how to identify and reach refugee job seekers.

Prevalence of refugee recruitment
Employers interviewed were selected based on their refugee hiring experience. Employers
surveyed were asked if they had hired at least one refugee in the past five years.
More than half (59%) of the employers surveyed had employed one or more refugees. Almost
half (48%) of the employers surveyed actively sought to hire refugees.

Figure 1-3

The in-depth interviews specifically focused on employers who actively sought to hire refugees.
Two of the employers interviewed had discontinued hiring refugees. The pursuit of diversity
was a common motivator among employers interviewed and most considered their workforce
to be diverse.

13Demographic preference for refugee hires noted for ‘low-skilled’ hiring decisions: Most
employers interviewed who were pursuing diversity within their workforce had hiring objectives
by priority group (e.g. persons with disabilities, people who are chronically unemployed, or
refugees), not necessarily by demographics such as a specific linguistic or ethnic group. Some
employers hiring for low-skilled jobs that required few communications skills actively pursued
new hires within the same ethnic group who shared the same language and culture. The
practice of hiring within the same ethnic demographic seemed to be a successful strategy for
integration, support and retention. Within these groups, the refugees bonded with one anotherand refugees with more English language skills reportedly provided support to others withfewer English language skills.
For low-skilled jobs, ‘migrants’ seemed to have an advantage over ‘refugees’: The
perception among employers was that refugees and migrants faced similar barriers in terms oflack of English language skills and lack of Australian work experience. Employers hiring forlow-skilled positions found that ‘migrants’ had an advantage over ‘refugees’ because of better
English language skills and familiarity with the Australian job-seeking process.

Employer perceptions of the challenges that refugees face in finding
employment
Employers who participated in the in-depth interviews were asked to identify the challenges
that refugees faced in finding employment.
Employers’ fears, prejudices and unconscious biases: Multiple interviewees mentioned that
their staff approached recruiting based on feeling more comfortable with “taking the path ofleast resistance” and hiring what is “easy and familiar.” Negative media coverage and geopolitical influence was also mentioned several times. To prevent unconscious biases, one
employer used ‘blind’ CVs in their selection process. Another respondent reported that when
they were aware of potential biases within the organisation they did not disclose whether acandidate was referred through a refugee-hiring program. Other employers mentioned public
opinion and having to defend their refugee hiring practices against “what-about-jobs-forAustralians” scrutiny.
Lack of English language proficiency: All employers identified English language skills as animperative. English language requirements included the ability for refugees to:
•
•
•
•
•

understand instructions;
understand industry jargons and acronyms;
communicate verbally in customer-facing roles;
communicate in written form; andprovide input in meetings.

One employer identified language as an important prerequisite for establishing personal
relationships and making stronger teams.
Lack of job and workplace readiness: Most employers considered that it was crucial for newhires to have the basic required knowledge to get started on the job. Examples range frombeing able to use Microsoft Outlook or Excel, to understanding food and workplace safety.
Workplace readiness was found to be equally important. Refugees were expected tounderstand expectations within Australian workplaces around matters such as punctuality,
showing initiative, customer service and Australian social norms.
Lack of Australian work experience: Many interviewees stated that when a refugee had arecognised Australian employer on their resume, it was considered a significant advantage.
Hiring managers were looking for applicants with recognisable experience, with an employer
they knew, and to validate skills and experience.
Insight: The onus to overcome barriers to employment is laid mostly on
refugees. While service providers help refugees to ease many of thebarriers, few solutions were mentioned by employers to address“employers’ fear, prejudice and unconscious biases,” which are out of
refugees’ control.

14

Inability to pass automated recruitment systems: A few interviewees noted that larger
employers relied on automated recruitment processes to screen job applicants. This affected
job seekers with low computer literacy and job seekers with resumes that may not meet
Australian standards. “Refugees don’t generally have great CVs, making it difficult to succeed
through recruitment processes where the screening happens online.”
Difficulty navigating the Australian recruitment process: A few employers interviewed
identified resume preparation and Australia’s formalised interviewing process as barriers forrefugees who might not have these processes in their home countries.
Lack of recognition of foreign credentials: Interviewees identified lack of understanding of
the skills that refugees bring as a major barrier to employment. Employers hiring staff inregulated professions identified credential recognition as a barrier that forced some skilled
refugees to work in jobs for which they are overqualified. The process of obtaining local
registration was also noted as onerous and expensive.
Lack of confidence: Employers mentioned the reluctance of some refugees to show their skills
because they underestimate their own capabilities or because of cultural influences. One
interviewee noted, “…without knowing exactly where their experience is detailed, they're sortof starting from scratch. And that can hinder them […] I think they can be a little bit shy about
trying to show what their experience is.”Lack of a network: Some interviewees mentioned the disadvantage for refugees of not having
a solid professional network in Australia that they could tap into for job search support, job
referrals and access to the hidden job market.
No understanding of transferable skills: One employer mentioned that lack of knowledge of
the Australian workplace was a barrier to helping skilled refugees understand how their
existing skills could be transitioned into other lines of work.
Lack of knowledge on how to access opportunities for sustainable employment: One
employer noted that it was a challenge for refugees to access information and find pathways
to sustainable employment opportunities as opposed to casual or cash-in-hand work.
Temporary visas and work permits: One employer identified temporary or bridging visas asdeterrents that discouraged employers from investing in onboarding without knowing whether
an employee could stay on the job.

Perceived obstacles for hiring and working with refugees
Employers participating in the online survey and the employers participating in the interviews
were asked to identify challenging factors in employing refugees.

Figure 4

English language proficiency was considered a challenge by most employers: Insufficient
English language proficiency was the most common challenge identified by all survey
respondents who actively sought to hire refugees (57%) and employers who did not seek to15

hire refugees (85%). Coinciding with the survey responses, interviewed employers consistently
identified the lack of English language skills in technical and day-to-day vocabulary as achallenge. One interviewee said, “You can't just take someone on and expect them tounderstand the language, the business language. That can take a bit.”
Cultural differences between the refugee and the workforce: ‘Cultural differences between
the refugee and your workforce’ was the second most selected challenge (43%) by survey
respondents who actively sought to hire refugees. Matching this sentiment, several interviewed
employers discussed challenges affecting refugees’ workplace readiness, ranging fromunderstanding nuances in the “Australian way of doing things” like customer service, toadapting to cultural expectations like use of eye contact, showing initiative and being
confident to voice opinions.
Lack of Australian work experience: Lack of local experience was also widely mentioned. A
few interviewees remarked that ways of doing business within an industry or responsibilities
within a job role can differ from country to country. One interviewee noted that not being
familiar with how a specific industry works in Australia could hamper the ability of refugees to,“…understand why customers want what they want, even if they worked in the same industry
in their home country.”
Additional time and/or resources to bring refugees up to speed: One of the most common
challenges for survey respondents and interviewees was the need to invest additional time andresources. Interviewees elaborated on the challenge of training refugees to become jobready, “…anyone I hire from the street […], they have a three-month [training] program.” Thesame interviewee noted a longer integration time for refugees, “…it nearly took me 12 months
to onboard them fully.” Examples of how employers altered training for refugees incomparison to local hires included extra training to help refugees gain proficiency in thesoftware needed for a role, and training about industry knowledge to function in the role suchas client cycles, industry jargon and concepts.
Difficulty finding refugees: Most employers interviewed relied on service providers to identify
refugee candidates. One interviewee noted, “If I did not have a partnership with [service
providers] then hiring refugees would be a significant challenge.”
Internal opposition to recruiting refugees: Although “internal opposition to recruiting
refugees” was not one of the most selected challenges by survey respondents, “fear, prejudice
and unconscious biases” were mentioned often during interviews. Some interviewees found it
challenging to convince hiring managers to consider someone with experience they did notrecognise and could not easily validate.
Views on regulatory hurdles: Seventy-three percent (73%) of employers that have notactively sought to hire refugees considered regulatory hurdles a challenge, compared to 11%
of employers that actively sought to hire refugees. It could be that views on challenges such as
visas, taxes and uncertain legal status were influenced by an employer’s practical experience
with hiring refugees. Beyond being a potential deterrent, interviewees shared that
uncertainties around temporary visas and work permits could burden refugees as well as
employers. One interviewee brought up the anxiety and stress that came with “…the fear ofat any moment no longer being able to stay here and being sent back somewhere.”
Unrealistic expectations from the team: One interviewee mentioned the importance ofensuring that the team did not set unrealistic expectations and was prepared to put in theextra effort for training to successfully integrate refugee hires.
Accusation of discriminatory recruitment practices: One interviewee mentioned being
accused of discriminatory hiring practices by an unsuccessful candidate and by others who
were not part of the recruitment process.

Insight: Service providers, NGOs and social enterprises, appear to be
crucial to recruitment, selecting the right refugee for a role, andproviding ongoing training and workplace integration support to both
refugees and employers.

16

Employer perceptions on common misconceptions about hiring and working
with refugees
Employers were asked to share common (mis)understandings about hiring and working withrefugees.
(Mis)conception that refugees are unskilled: Some interviewees felt that there was amisunderstanding among the general population about the skills that refugees bring. One
interviewee spoke of the perception that “Australia has a lot of unskilled asylum seekers andrefugees.” Several employers interviewed saw the opposite, describing refugees they had
hired for STEM 3 positions as “extremely qualified.”(Mis)conception that integration is going to be too hard: Many interviewees elaborated on
the challenges in hiring refugees, with some pointing to “cultural and communicationdifferences” and “lack of job-readiness” as barriers to hiring refugees. Feedback frominterviewees showed that working with a service provider, preparing refugee candidates for
the Australian labour market, and supporting both refugees and employers in the hiring
process could mitigate many of the challenges.
(Mis)conception that refugees are taking the jobs of the local population: Some employers
who actively seek to hire refugees mentioned the impact of public opinion that “refugees
taking our jobs,” which seemed to be amplified by the media and geo-political environment. In
contrast to this negative view, a number of interviewees who were hiring for mostly low-skilled
positions saw the refugee talent pool as a solution to filling vacancies that they struggled to fillwith the local workforce.
(Mis)conception that refugees have job opportunities handed out to them: One interviewee
mentioned a perceived public opinion that refugees are getting jobs handed to them without
merit. Multiple interviewees reported a different reality, asserting that refugees were hired
because of their skills and qualifications. A few interviewees raised the challenges thatrefugees face in selling themselves and demonstrating their skills.
(Mis)conception that English proficiency is a challenge for all refugees: Multiple
interviewees noted hiring managers being hesitant to hire refugees due to concerns about
being unable to communicate in English. Not all refugee recruits were reported to lack English
language proficiency. An interviewee hiring skilled refugees mentioned that 25% of theorganisation’s refugee hires had worked in international organisations run by westerncompanies and had English language levels that were “quite often better than theassumptions.”(Mis)conception that refugees do not want to work: One interviewee commented on thegeneral misconception that refugee are unemployed due to a lack of desire to work. Whenhiring for skilled positions, the interviewee spoke of the challenges of qualification recognition,transferable skills and navigating the Australian recruitment process. They said, “They're[refugees] competing against people who have worked in Australia […] And then you see thenegative rhetoric about refugees not wanting to work, and not wanting to do anything. And it'scompletely the opposite. They're trying really hard, and we have created these barriers.”(Mis)conception that it is not okay to get to know a refugee’s history and background: One
interviewee brought up how “the Australian society is cautious not to tread into areas thatmight make someone feel uncomfortable.” However, multiple employers participating in theinterviews encouraged stories to be shared. One interviewee found that refugees were often
willing to share their story, and said sharing information helped with the overall process ofteambuilding and “getting to know someone and understand them as a person.”

3 STEM stands for science, technology, engineering and mathematics.

17Motivators and effective incentives for hiring andretaining refugees
Summary
To advance refugee employment, it takes convincing business leadership.
The successful hiring and retention of refugees requires a long-term, holistic approach,involving all levels of management, the support of influential staff members, and theengagement of peers and supervisors. Employers identified corporate social responsibility(CSR) and leadership vision as key motivators for refugee hiring initiatives. Understanding
the hardship experienced by refugees was important for empathy and engagement.
Employers with experience hiring refugees said the most important type of support was
assistance in identifying the right refugee candidate for a particular role.
Government funding and wage subsidies were not a motivating factor for most employers.
In certain industries, such as construction, social procurement was reportedly highly effective
in creating scalable employment opportunities for refugees.

Reported motivators for hiring refugees
Employers participating in the online survey were asked which factors motivated them to hire
refugees and how long they had been employing refugees. Employers participating in the indepth interviews were also asked to identify the circumstances that prompted them to hire
refugees and whether their motivation changed over time.
CSR and the influence of someone in a leadership position were the predominant motivating
factors for both survey respondents and interviewees. Interviewees said that hiring refugees
appeared to be most effective when the views of leadership were supported by corporate
mandate and policy. Interviewees also suggested that business drivers, such as the ability to
improve services or attract business, could influence CSR decisions.

Figure 5

Helping vulnerable job seekers into jobs: The inclusion of vulnerable job seekers was part ofthe corporate mission for some interviewees. In the financial sector in particular, multiple
employers said that economic inclusion and the financial wellbeing of refugees were part oftheir corporate mission, and that employment was the first step in achieving financial inclusion.
Measurements of success ranged from placement within the company itself, to equipping
refugees with local work experience to pursue further employment, which was consideredcrucial to achieve meaningful and sustainable employment.
Commitment by organisational leadership: Survey respondents and interviewees often
mentioned that the views of individuals in leadership positions within the organisation were adriving force for refugee-hiring initiatives. Incorporating refugee inclusion into corporate hiring18

policies was important for support across the organisation. One interviewee noted, “…at any
stage if I faced opposition…I would just refer them back to the project director's mandate…”.
Change in leadership had an impact on an organisation’s level of commitment too. One
interviewee stated that, “As leadership changes over time, commitments and initial vigilance
have diluted…”.
Reflecting the diversity of the community in the workforce: Most interviewees expressed thedesire for their workforce to represent the communities in which they operate. Someinterviewees considered it “…a moral obligation on Australia to provide those [employment]
opportunities.”
Self-reward: Interviewees, regardless of their job role, identified the notion of having a
positive impact on the wellbeing of others as a driver for being involved in refugee
employment initiatives.
Alleviating labour shortages: Some interviewees saw the refugee talent pool as a solution tofilling vacancies in low-skilled jobs that they were struggling to fill through the local workforce.
An employer who was struggling to fill skilled vacancies due to uncompetitive compensation
also looked to refugees as an alternative talent pool, which could signal exploitative practices.
Fulfilling diversity quotas that are self-imposed or imposed by third parties: A few
interviewees mentioned setting self-imposed diversity targets (for refugees orunderrepresented job seekers) due to government tenders stating a preference for doing
business with companies that are committed to diversity, or due to contractual commitments with
contractors who require workforce diversity from their subcontractors.
Attracting business and improving services: Business needs and the impact of diversity on
brand often drove decisions on CSR. Having a diverse workforce that reflected the community
in which the organisation operated was identified as revenue and marketing drivers by one
interviewee. Another business recognised emerging communities within its customer base andsaid hiring refugees was important to provide services to refugee communities in their own
language and culture.
Driving innovation: Some interviewees found that refugee recruitment helped them to tap intoa highly skilled talent pool. Diverse perspectives within an organisation were identified asimportant business tools for innovation and productivity. One interviewee noted that living
through challenging circumstances meant that refugees brought problem-solving skills to theirroles. Another employer noted that a diverse workforce has helped their organisation see newperspectives and “…deliver better culturally-appropriate services.”
Refugee work ethic: Interviewees described refugee employees as eager-to-learn,hardworking, committed and loyal. Some employers found employee turnover was lower
among refugees than the industry standard.

19Period of engagement with the refugee workforce
Most employers surveyed had hired a number of refugees over several years. Most had hired
between two and five refugees over the past five years, while the majority of employers havebeen hiring refugees for one-to-three years.

Figure 6

Circumstances prompting engagement with the refugee workforce
Employers participating in the in-depth interviews were asked when they started hiring
refugees and why.
Outreach efforts from service providers: A few employers mentioned attending a service
provider event about their employment program for refugees and asylum seekers and feeling“…really inspired and wanted to do something to help.”
Exposure to barriers in refugee employment: Two interviewees who volunteered for a
refugee employment initiative felt personally compelled to actively seek to hire refugees. Two
employers mentioned that someone at their company in a leadership position had met
someone from a community centre that serviced refugees which triggered the interest to hire
refugees.
Political backing: Two interviewees noted the influence of elected officials on driving refugee
employment initiatives in their organisation. “The driver was initially a personal thing…but thenonce the Ministers picked it up and launched it…”
Self-imposed social procurement targets: One interviewee said their company had
introduced self-imposed targets for hiring refugees after a corporate commitment to help theAustralian Government settle refugees.
Government’s encouragement: One interviewee recognised the Government’s priority ofsettling refugees. They introduced self-imposed social procurement targets and included hiring
a diverse workforce in how it presented itself and did business.

Does motivation change over time?
Employers interviewed were asked if the motivation to hire refugees had changed over time.
Leadership commitment and staff buy-in: Multiple interviewees spoke of the importance ofleadership commitment. One interviewee commented, “…as much as we linked it to a very
specific business strategy…a very strong senior leader view had a big impact as well.” A few
interviewees shared how a lack of commitment from new leadership could filter down tomangers, resulting in less of a commitment to hiring refugees: “…some performance issues[were] raised by managers who felt they could no longer tolerate the addition of work thatwas required to upskill some of our refugees.”
Changes in corporate environments: An employer undergoing a merger saw “…less appetite
20

among the staff to consider refugees” in a situation of understaffed teams. Another employer
facing job cuts and more pressure on staff to perform noted, “People definitely see thebenefits of it and so forth, but it's still...the environment that we're in at the moment; it's not aneasy task...”Employer views on support and incentives
Employers were asked to identify the importance of several types of support and incentives
that could facilitate refugee employment within their organisations.

Figure 7

Identifying the right refugee job seekers for particular roles (e.g. skill matching)
Pre-screening and skill matching: Assistance in identifying the right refugee for the job was
the most important support for online survey respondents who were actively seeking to hire
refugees. This sentiment was echoed by almost all employers interviewed.”
The role of service providers in skill matching: Most interviewees depended heavily on
service providers for finding refugee candidates, their pre-screening and referrals. One
interviewee said, “Having that skill matching process and that personalised ability…to do suchin depth screening, and then coaching for that candidate to be job ready, is probably key tothe success of the outcome.”
Skills matching of less importance when hiring refugees for low-skilled roles: One
interviewed employer who found skills matching of less importance said, “…we're able to takeunskilled workers pretty much in all different backgrounds and walks of life, it doesn't reallymatter too much…. They've just got to pass the medical.”
Additional ‘know‐how’ resources (e.g. refugee employment guide)
Employment guides about hiring refugees are helpful: Overall, interviewees who wereseeking to hire refugees found that employment guides about hiring refugees were helpful.
Lack of awareness about employing refugees among small businesses: A small businessinterviewee commented that more effort was needed to create awareness among small
businesses of the need for employment among refugees, the benefits to the employer, and the
support available. The interviewee said “I probably wouldn't be aware of refugees or the factthat they need work” without meeting someone from a community centre. The interviewee
noted further that, “Workshops and seminars are time consuming, not attractive. Time is better
spent to increase awareness and engagement through links to local business community groups
or employer or professional groups.”
A range of channels for small businesses to access information: Another interviewee notedthat “…for smaller companies that are time-poor, but are required to fulfil a social quota, amanual might not be the best approach. The government should offer a range of approaches
or delivery methods, such as e-learning as a training tool…”
21

Cultural awareness support and training for a company
Cultural training for supervisors: Several interviewees provide cultural training in conjunction
with service providers to educate supervisors on refugee backgrounds and experiences,
cultural nuances in communication and best ways to support refugees.
Training about trauma: In addition to cultural awareness training, a few interviewees
mentioned their efforts to educate their staff on dealing with employees who have gone
through a traumatic experience.
Ongoing English language training for refugees
English training customised per industry: A few employers mentioned the need for English
training beyond “classroom English,” stating that the “real” English challenge is in relation to
the industry or on-the-job English.
Work schedule as a barrier for on-the-job English training: Ongoing English training forrefugees with low literacy or low language proficiency deemed useful, however one
interviewee explained how on-the-job language training might affect working hours and hencemight not be seen as optimal by either the organisation or the refugee.
Pre-screening and English training: One of the employers interviewed had English-level
requirements built into its refugee candidate-screening process and noted English training tobe less relevant.
English skills for low-skilled, difficult-to-fill vacancies: Two interviewees discussed their
willingness to hire refugees with little or no English-language proficiency to fill certain
vacancies. These employers relied on translators, English training through a community centre,or translation efforts from other refugees on staff to communicate.
English as part of the pathway to higher level positions: One interviewee noted that English
training could help some of their refugee hires obtain the proficiency they need to beconsidered for higher level positions.
Pre-employment traineeships and study for refugees to help them be work readyPre-employment training: Survey respondents who were actively seeking to hire refugees
found pre-employment training was the most important type of support. For most interviewees,
pre-employment training was a hiring condition to help refugee hires become familiar with
their workplace expectations and social norms.
Funding for targeted pre-employment training: A few interviewees spoke of the need forpre-employment training targeted to specific roles. One interviewee stated, “…a lot ofmoney…gets spent on preparing people for general employment that could be directed tomore specific training….all the training needs to be linked to a real job, and not training fortraining's sake.”
Recognition of foreign qualifications by Australian government and industry bodies
Foreign credentials recognition typically not critical: Interviewees worked around the lack ofrecognised foreign credentials. One employer hiring engineers stated, “...if we employed anengineer that didn't have a degree recognised in Australia, we wouldn't put that engineer intoa senior engineering role anyway because, obviously, there's no Australian experience.”
Government wage subsidies for a company
Little interest in wage subsidies among employers seeking to hire refugees: Wage
subsidies were the lowest-rated incentive among survey respondents who actively sought tohire refugees. Several employers interviewed noted that they would not use wage subsidies as
refugees who were eligible were often not job ready.
Wage subsidies not worth the administrative burden: Some interviewees said wage
subsidies did not have a “huge” impact on reducing their cost to hire, and that the amounts
were not worth the administration cost. One interviewee said, “The ability for us to go throughthe motions to actually claim that probably costs as much as what we get back.” This sentiment
was echoed by another employer, “…the paperwork needed to access wage subsidies makes
it less attractive.”

22

Wage subsidies compromise the system: One interviewee noted the importance of keeping
the focus on the best fit for the role, with wage subsidy eligibility as a bonus. “You want to belooking for the best person, not the best person with funds.” Another interviewee expressed
concerns about wage subsidy misuse, with employers laying off refugees at the end of thesubsidy. “Some companies…they're just in it for the subsidy. And I think that should not be
encouraged…” One interviewee admitted to using subsidies as screening criteria,
substantiating the view of another interviewee who feared that wage subsidies “…send thewrong signal and the wrong motivation…instead the money can be better spent to support
service providers.”
Wage subsidies likely more attractive for small businesses: One small business feared it
was not financially viable to hire refugees without the required support and training, and some
wage subsidy. Another small business that was accessing wage subsidies also reiterated theirimportance. One large employer did not need wage subsidies to hire, with the interviewee
commenting that taking money from the government, “…would be hard for us to justify.”
Government grants to establish in‐house programs
Government grants for in-house programs of little interest: Government grants forcompanies to establish in-house programs were considered of little importance for survey
respondents and interviewees. Only two interviewees with an existing in-house program found
it was of interest. Small companies said they did not have the capacity to develop in-houseprograms.
Requirements for government grants: One interviewee with an in-house refugee program,
who believed grants were beneficial, expressed concern about potential program
requirements (e.g. conditions, such as hiring 50% men and 50% women). The employer was
also apprehensive about being required to accept limitations, such as age, that may disqualify
the refugees they currently employ.
Grants to manage refugee-hiring programs: One interviewee with an in-house refugee-hiring
program was interested in a systemic solution that would allow a long-term approach. This
employer expressed interest in government assistance to help companies bring on more staff
to increase refugee uptake.
Government targets in public procurement processes
Social procurement targets in certain industries: Social procurement targets could be a tool
to enforce behaviour. Two interviewees discussed how their industry has been affected bygovernment tenders that stated a preference to do business with companies with a diverse
workforce.
Risks and responsibilities of social procurement targets: One interviewee noted that the
government needed to recognise that social quotas affect costs and companies’ bottom lines.
“…If you're looking at industry-wide then yes, a government policy or a target is always
beneficial, but there does also need to be recognition that if you put in another policy that it
does add an additional cost onto the project…”
Social procurement targets as a barrier: Social procurement targets could be a barrier torefugees despite their skills and experience. One interviewee shared that a skilled refugee
candidate was dropped as a contender for a position because the company had an obligationto achieve a hiring quota from a population group that the refugee applicant did not belong
to.
Government funding to help refugees overcome initial costs of employment (e.g. transport,
clothing/footwear)
Government grants for helping refugees cover initial employment costs: Interviewees said
that government grants to help refugees cover the costs of finding employment were helpful,
although multiple interviewees mentioned this type of funding was best managed by theservice provider they work with.
When comparing employer views on support and incentives based on company size, survey
respondents said that small enterprises would value ongoing language training, ongoingsupport and pre-employment traineeships significantly more than other enterprises. This findingreflects the feedback from in-depth the interviews.

23

Figure 8

Views on engaging peers within the industry to hire refugees
Employers interviewed were asked to suggest methods for encouraging their peers to hire
refugees, and mentioned several ways to raise awareness and share stories from companies
that have hired refugees successfully over the longer term.
Sharing refugee-placement success stories: An interviewee suggested “…encouraging CEOs
to tell their success stories to other CEOs.”
Using existing professional networks to create awareness: One interviewee suggested
educating and promoting the hiring of refugees among groups like HR networks.
Working with alternative groups already plugged into the industry: A small businessinterviewee noted the lack of awareness among small businesses and suggested, “…working
with employer organisations on the ground (like Australian Industry Group or Chamber ofCommerce), which have offices in regional centres and staff on the ground who know theemployers, are already running funding program programs and delivering programs andhave the local networks with employers on the ground.”24

Effective recruitment, integration and retention
strategies used by employers
Summary
Successful hiring of refugees typically requires tailoring the employer’s mainstream
recruitment and onboarding processes.
Employers said identifying the right candidate was a crucial part of the recruitment process.
Preparation and ongoing training of both staff and refugees were important for successful
integration and retention. Industry-specific training (e.g. English language skills, technicalskills) was also flagged by employers as an important component of successful integration.
As part of the onboarding process, employers typically used training or internship programs
to help refugees gain the skills needed to secure and sustain employment.
Employers who were interviewed, and who identified additional costs in hiring refugees forskilled positions, perceived cost benefits in working with specialised service providers as
opposed to hiring via traditional routes such as labour hire firms.
Most interviewees found the retention rate among refugees was higher than for othergroups.

Recruitment strategies
Employers who were interviewed were asked to elaborate on the processes they used torecruit and select refugees.
Service providers played a significant role in helping employers to identify the right refugee
candidate.

Insight: Internships or trainee programs are used widely by employers
to reduce hiring risks. However, when refugees are in trainee positions
for extended periods, such as a year or longer, it puts them into a
prolonged stage of uncertainty and further marginalises them.

Methods for seeking refugees
Employers saw identifying the right candidate as an important part of the recruitment process.
Consequently, employers tended to dedicate time and resources to hire the right candidates
and mitigate the risks and cost of hiring candidates that were not a good fit. Most employers
interviewed received refugee referrals through service providers, but a few other methods
were also identified.
Service providers: Most interviewees sourced refugee hires through service providers thatwere running programs to connect refugees to employment. The role of the service providers
was mostly to:••••understand the employer’s business needs;
understand the requirements for the roles;
provide pre-employment training on workplace culture and job-related aspects; andpre-screen and refer refugee applicants.

Community centres: Some interviewees mentioned working with community centres to source
pre-screened refugee job applicants.
Word of mouth: Some interviewees mentioned getting referrals of refugees looking for
employment through refugees already on staff.
Networking: To a lesser extent, interviewees also mentioned sourcing refugees throughnetworking efforts at career expos, with multicultural organisations, churches and local
25

community groups.
Private companies: One interviewee mentioned working with a consulting company that prescreened refugee candidates obtained through service providers as part of a governmentfunded program.
Best practices adopted by employers to achieve success and mitigate hiring risks
Interviewees were asked to share methods they had used to overcome challenges whenrecruiting refugees. Methods used include:A.

Collaborating with organisations that specialise in job or skill-matching to find the rightcandidate with the skills, motivation, and interest to do the job;
B. Considering fit, in addition to skills, to assess if the refugee will like the work and fit into
the workplace;
C. Having initiatives and employees on staff responsible for job or skill matching success;D. Removing or addressing barriers that hinder refugees from being considered for a job;
E. Taking measures to help refugees acquire the Australian experience needed to better
function in the job;
F. Addressing language proficiency through pre-screening and/or training; andG. Mitigating risks of making a bad hire.
A.

Collaborating with organisations that specialise in job or skill matching to find the rightcandidate with the skills, motivation, and interest to do the job
Working with referral agencies vested in sustainable and meaningful employment:
Several interviewees found that good referrals began with refugee candidates who were
motivated to work and had an interest in the industry. Referral agencies that put in thetime to understand what the work entailed, and were vested in long-term outcomes for the
refugees, tended to provide good referrals.
Allocating time and resources to job or skill matching success: Multiple interviewees
discussed the effort that went into making sure job requirements were understood andrelayed back to the service providers and internal staff in charge of screening refugee
candidates. A few interviewees mentioned working with hiring managers to understandthe job requirements. One interviewee talked about the importance of understanding the
refugee candidate’s skills in comparison to the basic skills needed to function in the job toincrease the chances of a successful placement and avoid termination down the line.

B.

Considering fit in addition to skills
Understanding specific needs during the recruitment phase: To increase sustainable,
and successful employment, one interviewee noted that, during the interview process, theirdiversity and inclusion staff made an effort to understand the refugee candidate’s culturaland family circumstances to anticipate accommodations that could be needed. As part ofthe interview process, the diversity and inclusion staff also considered if the role could beflexible to accommodate those needs, and they also identified teams likely to besupportive to the refugee candidate.
Using work shadowing to help the candidate understand the work: To help set up a
successful placement, one employer used shadowing sessions in their recruiting process tohelp align the refugees’ expectations with what the job would be like.

C.

Having initiatives and employees on staff responsible for job- or skill-matching success
Programs and staff dedicated to refugee recruitment: Recognising diversity and inclusion
as a corporate mandate, some interviewees from larger employers had designed inhouse programs and hired dedicated staff to manage the recruitment, integration andretention of vulnerable job seekers, such as persons with disabilities, people who arechronically unemployed, refugees, and other groups.

D.

Removing or addressing barriers that stop refugees from being considered for a job
Structured hiring practices to overcome the “regular” hiring process: A few
interviewees found that having a structured hiring process geared towards hiring refugees
made it easier to avoid refugees being screened out in a “regular” hiring process
because of qualification requirements or unconscious biases. One interviewee commented,
26

“…if we have a specific process for [refugees]…what we find is that once they get to theinterview, they're amazing, but they just don't get to the interview…”.
Flexibility in screening criteria: Interviewees realised that easy and timely access to preemployment checks, such as certificates of qualification or references, were often notrealistic expectations for the circumstances of refugees. Many employers were working
with hiring managers to revisit screening criteria and identify where there was room forflexibility. One interviewee noted, “We have got a very, very, very structured risk
process in terms of hiring people. And it's not very flexible …we need to revisit that, if
we're going to hire people from countries where they're in war zones and you can't
actually get to the university to get the physical qualification…”.
E.

Taking measures to help refugees acquire the Australian experience needed to better
function in the job
Integration of internship or trainee programs into hiring practices: Some interviewees
recognised that local experience was a challenge for refugee integration andproductivity within the workplace, and had included internships or trainee programs intheir hiring process before full-time hiring. These internships or trainee programs weretypically managed in collaboration with a service provider. In some instances, refugee
hires worked several months, or up to a year or longer, before being hired into
permanent positions. While this helped to ensure job readiness, it put refugee hires into a
prolonged stage of uncertainty.

F.

Addressing language proficiency through pre-screening and/or training
Addressing language requirements in the recruitment process: Some interviewees
worked with service providers or other third parties to screen refugee candidates for the
language skills to function in customer service roles. The desired level of English
proficiency was part of their job readiness criteria, making post-employment English
training less relevant for these employers. One of the interviewees worked with a referral
organisation to incorporate language training into their refugee job readiness training
program.

G. Mitigating risks of making a bad hire
Hiring trainees on secondment or through labour hire companies: A few interviewees
mentioned hiring refuges who were still in training to avoid the risk of placing a potential
bad hire on the payroll. Recruited trainees were paid by the partnering service provider
or referred to a labour hire company that would take the refugee hires on their payroll
on behalf of the employer, with the intention of eventually moving job-ready trainees into
permanent positions. One interviewee commented, “It's a good balance of a three-monthsecondment, so then it's like giving them the local experience, but no real obligation tohire, so it's less risk.”

Pathways to employment
Employers who took part in the in-depth interviews were asked if they offered pathways toemployment for refugees.
Apprenticeship and internships to help refugees secure employment: Most interviewees
hired refugees through a training or internship program. These programs enabled employers
to train refugees and equip them with the relevant skills and experience needed to gain
permanent employment within the organisation, or gain much-needed Australian experience tosecure employment elsewhere. Beyond on-the-job experience, some training programs also
included employment workshops and coaching on resume writing and interviewing.
Career growth in sectors grappling with employee churn: An interviewee hiring for lowskilled positions prioritised resources to reduce employee churn as a business priority. The
employer was located in a regional area and operating in a sector where filling vacancies
with the local workforce was a challenge. Rather than building skills for career growth, theemployer used resources as general support to help refugee employees settle in thecommunity, with the objective of helping the refugees to integrate in the community and stay inthe job. One interviewee mentioned, “…we organise rental, we pay the board, the rent…so
we call [it a] soft landing to make sure that they're here, they're settling well…”.

27

Workplace integration strategies
Perceived challenges of integrating refugees into the workplace
Employers who took part in the in-depth interviews were asked to identify the challenges they
faced integrating refugees into their workplace.
Facilitating communication among staff and refugees: Several interviewees expected staff
and new refugee hires to be aware of how culture affects how people communicate.
Employers also expected a level of English language proficiency from refugee hires. At thesame time, they expected their staff to adjust when English was not someone’s first language.
Creating cultural awareness among staff and refugees: Interviewees expected staff to beaware of differences in workplace cultures to better understand and manage refugees.
Employers also expected refugees to understand norms and expectations within Australian
workplace culture.
Getting refugees job or workplace ready: Employers expected refugees to have the basicrole-related knowledge to start functioning in the job.
Helping refugees feel included: Employers identified feeling included as an important aspectof helping refugees integrate into the workplace.
Creating training and coaching capabilities among staff to integrate refugees: Employers
tasked their supervisors and team leaders with training, coaching and providing support tohelp refugees build confidence and settle into their new roles and workplace.
Important factors for integration of refugees into the workplace
Employers participating in the in-depth interviews shared their best practices for successfully
integrating refugees into the workplace:
A.
B.
C.

Creating a workplace conducive to integration;
Preparing and training staff; andProviding training and support for refugees.

A.

Creating a workplace conducive to integration
Multiple interviewees made efforts to adjust their workplace to facilitate the integrationof refugees. Based on employer feedback, the following best practices createdworkplaces that were conducive to refugee integration:
Staff, programs and/or procedures to integrate refugees into the workplace: Someinterviewees had staff, programs and/or procedures in place for making sure refugees
were settled into their roles. Staff responsibilities ranged from maintaining contact withthe refugee and the supervisor, to making sure refugees felt included into the team. Most
interviewees had procedures to onboard and integrate refugees.
Mentorship programs or buddy systems: A few interviewees had mentorship programsor buddy systems to provide refugees with “someone safe” within the workplace. The
mentor or buddy was not the refugee’s direct manager and was someone they could feel
comfortable asking questions. One interviewee had a mentorship program that connectedrefugees to senior staff who could provide advice and help refugees advance theircareers within the organisation.
Opportunities for socialising and networking: Multiple interviewees held company
events and activities to provide opportunities for employees to interact with each other,build networks and share stories. One interviewee mentioned providing opportunities forrefugees to network with other refugees in the same field to share experiences andchallenges, and learn from each other.
Workplace culture of inclusion: Some interviewees made efforts to build awareness andsupport among staff of the positive impact they could have on the lives of the refugees
they work with by making them feel part of the team. One interviewee noted, “Inclusion isimportant; making refugees feel they are part of the team, as opposed to part of a
project.”
Making the use of English in the workplace compulsory: To improve English language
proficiency among refugees and encourage team building, one interviewee said that, in
addition to providing English classes, the use of English in the workplace was a28requirement during working hours.
B.

Preparing and training the staff
Several interviewees discussed how they prepared their staff to integrate refugees into
their workplace.
Leadership training and engagement: A few interviewees provided their supervisors withinformation on the background of the refugees hired, along with tactics for coaching andproviding feedback and support. Some interviewees mentioned the supervisor’s role inhelping new refugee hires to build confidence in their new roles and workplace, and increating opportunities for the team to get to know each other’s cultures and overcome
biases. One interviewee with a 12-month training program for refugee hires spent asmuch time preparing staff as they spent preparing new hires to work together. “I would
absolutely say the key to success is really the education and the engagement with ourmanagers.”
Staff training on cultural awareness: A few interviewees mentioned training theirsupervisors and staff to be aware of differences in workplace cultures, and worked tomake sure their team was equipped to manage and address matters such as saying yes
without understanding, showing initiative or speaking up. Some interviewees mentioned
educating their staff on accommodating religious observance, and being mindful ofsensitivities and tensions among certain refugee cohorts.
Staff training on communication and language: Some interviewees provided training totheir staff to prepare them for nuances in communications and on how culture can affecthow someone communicates or interprets situations. A few interviewees aimed to alleviate
language barriers by encouraging staff to “explain things more broadly”, and making
their staff mindful of industry jargons and acronyms.
Setting realistic expectations for training and productivity: A few interviewees
mentioned the importance of setting realistic expectations with supervisors for the
expected productivity of refugees.
Staff education around trauma: One interviewee provided training to their staff on how
to relate to people who have gone through a traumatic experience.

C.

Providing training and support for refugees
Employers who took part in the in-depth interviews discussed how they prepared refugees
for their workplace.
Language training: A few interviewees relied on service providers to provide ongoing
English training to help refugees improve their language skills, including businesslanguage and business writing skills.
Cultural training for refugees: A few interviewees collaborated with service providers toprovide cultural training to help refugees understand matters such as punctuality, customer
service expectations, eye contact and female leadership.
Support to understand Australian work requirements: A few interviewees provided
support for refugee hires to understand work matters such as contracts, wages, their rights
as an employee in Australia, and adhering to safety regulations.

Integration challenges that remained difficult
While employers successfully mitigated many challenges for integration some remained
difficult to address.
Communication issues that are mistaken for productivity issues: A few interviewees
mentioned needing to intervene to resolve communication issues that looked like productivity
issues. In one example given, the staff assumed a new refugee hire did not want to contributein meetings, while the refugee was unable to provide input due to language barriers.
Resistance in organisations that are understaffed or operate in high-pressure
environments: A few interviewees spoke of the challenges of getting support and cooperationfrom staff who were asked to support new hire refugees. This was especially prevalent if staff
were under pressure themselves, due to understaffing or a high-stress/high-pressure
environment.
Resistance to a diverse workforce: One interviewee discussed the challenge of countering
29biases in the workplace in “a fairly conservative regional centre,” where some staff members
could be unaccepting of ethnically diverse co-workers.
Accommodation of religious beliefs: One interviewee shared how supervisors struggled tobalance accommodating for prayer time in the workplace.

Retention rates and strategies
Retention rates of refugee hires
Employers who took part in the in-depth interviews were asked about retention rates. Most
interviewees found that the retention rate among refugees was higher than other groups.
Loyalty: Refugees felt loyalty towards the employer that gave them their first opportunity;
which contributed to higher retention.
Desire to succeed: Refugees were keen to succeed in the job they had, instead of looking forthe next opportunity.
Strategies to retain refugees in the workforce
Employers who took part in the in-depth interviews were asked to discuss the actions they took
to retain refugee employees.
Preparing and training refugees and staff: Multiple employers put in the effort to prepare
and/or train both refugees and their staff, resulting in higher retention.
Showing flexibility for career pathways: A few interviewees, with larger employers, foundthat when an initial role was not a fit, having the flexibility and understanding to identifying
better suitable roles, positively impacted retention.
Creating inclusive and supportive workplaces: A few interviewees noted that helping
refugee hires feel supported and included within the team positively impacted retention.

Perceptions of productivity
Perceived advantages of hiring refugees
Employers who took part in the in-depth interviews were asked what they found to be thegreatest advantages of hiring refugees. Employers who were surveyed were asked to identify
the benefits of hiring refugees.
According to interviewees, the greatest advantages of hiring refugees were:
•
•
•
•
•

Giving staff a sense of satisfaction for “helping someone blossom in their profession;”
Improving customer service from serving communities in their own language andculture;Having hard working and loyal employees with less churn than other groups;
Experiencing more diversity in business perspectives and schools of thought; andBuilding report with refugee communities and attracting more employees.
Insight: For most interviewees, the greatest reported advantage ofhiring refugees was the sense of purpose and self-reward the staff felt
for being able to do something good for someone.

Perceived productivity of refugees
Over 85% of surveyed employers declared that their refugee employees were as productive
or more productive than the rest of their workforce.
Employers who took part in the in-depth interviews were asked how they experienced the
productivity of refugees compared to their expectations and compared to other groups.
Perceived productivity of refugees compared to expectations
Productivity during apprenticeship or internship periods: Most interviewees provided a
training period for refugee hires in which the refugee trainees were expected to be less30

productive than permanent hires.
Learning curve for refugees: Multiple interviewees noted that the learning curve was longer
for refugees. Needing to communicate in English as a second language affected the learning
curve, as did the time needed to get used to the workplace, learn a new technology or learn
about a new industry.
Issues with skills or job matching: Multiple interviewees found that the productivity of
refugees was equal to other groups, and equal to employer expectations, after they
completed their training. Productivity tended to be lower than expected when refugees wereplaced in roles that were not a good match for their skills, experience or abilities.
Lack of job readiness and English proficiency: One interviewee who was hiring refugees
without the support of a service provider said that “refugee hires were starting from too far
behind to catch up with the normal rate of productivity” due to lack of English language skills
and relevant skills base.
Perceived productivity of refugees compared to the local workforce
Circumstances of being a refugee: A few employers noted that refugee workers had higher
productivity than other groups due to loyalty, fear of losing a job opportunity, overqualification or desire for inclusion. One interviewee said refugee hires did not take sick leave
because of concerns of harming their chances of maintaining employment. Another interviewee
said refugee hires were more productive because they were working well below their
qualification level. Another interviewee said refugees felt pressured to perform and worked
13-hour days to gain the acceptance of their colleagues.
Difficult-to-fill, low-skilled roles: Some interviewees who were hiring for low-skilled positions
found the productivity of refugees was be better than the local workforce. Higher productivity
was attributed to work ethic and the “flexibility and openness to different opportunities.”
Insight: The reported higher productivity of refugees compared to othergroups can be driven by the circumstances of being a refugee in theAustralian workplace, including loyalty, fear of losing a job opportunity,
over-qualification or desire for inclusion.

Perceived cost of hiring and retaining refugees
Retention cost for refugee employees
Employers who participated in the online survey and the in-depth interviews were asked if it
costed more to employ and retain refugees compared to other employees.
Factors contributing to additional costs
The cost of hiring refugees: Sixty three percent (63%) of survey respondents who employedrefugees over the past five years said that it did not cost more to hire refugees than it cost tohire other employees.
According to interviewees, the following factors contributed to hiring and retention costs:
•
•
•
•
•

Placement fees to hire refugees through service providers’ refugee employment
programs;
Training for refugees (e.g. English, technical training);
Additional staff to create and manage refugee hiring initiatives;
Training for staff in charge of recruiting and integrating refugees in the workplace;andMentoring and coaching refugees.

31

Figure 9

Insight: Onboarding refugees takes time and effort. Employers may notalways be aware of the time and effort for their staff who may put inunnoticed additional hours to make up for lost time on the job or to
support refugee hires in their daily lives.

Hidden expenses linked to hiring and retention
Most survey respondents found that it did not cost more to hire refugees, although responses
from interviewees showed that numerous additional resources might be required (with related,but hidden ‘costs’ to employers).
Extended time for onboarding: Numerous interviewees discussed additional time required foronboarding and getting refugees up to speed with technical knowledge and workplaceadjustment.
Work of staff who integrates refugee hires: A few interviewees spoke about the impact on
the productivity of the staff who were tasked with integrating refugees into their roles. The
impacts were often due to communication issues and/or skill gaps.
Ongoing support: Interviewees shared the efforts they made to provide general support torefugees. One interviewee invested time in unaccredited training to support refugee hires infinancial management and stress management. Another interviewee spent personal timeoutside working hours to support refugees in their personal lives.
Hiring skilled refugees through placement programs could be seen as a cost or a saving:
Several service providers charge placement fees for their services. One interviewee saved onlabour hire fees by using a refugee placement program through which the employer “…hires
high-quality candidates at a lot cheaper price” than those of labour hire agencies.

32Insights from employers not seeking to hire refugees
Summary
Employers who did not seek to hire refugees rated all perceived challenges as more difficult
than those who had sought to hire refugees.
Support to overcome barriers to employ and onboard refugees also appeared to be crucial
to sustain refugee-hiring initiatives over time. In fact, lack of refugee job-readiness
reportedly resulted in integration challenges that prompted some employers to discontinue
hiring refugees.
Due to unfamiliarity with the refugee cohort and the visibility of ‘refugees’ as a social
category of employees, employer feedback suggested that the level of success of the ‘firstcontact’ could be decisive in determining whether an employer would or would not continue
hiring refugees.

The online survey separated employers who were not seeking to hire refugees into two groups:••

Have not hired refugees; andHave hired refugees, but no longer sought to hire refugees.

The in-depth interviews focused on employers that had hired refugees; two of thoseinterviewees had stopped hiring refugees.
With this in mind, this chapter explores the perspectives of survey respondents who were notseeking to hire refugees and interviewees who had stopped hiring refugees.

Reasons for not hiring refugees
Fifty-two percent (52%) of employers surveyed did not actively seek to hire refugees.
Common reasons included:
1. The idea not coming up;
2. Not seeking to hire employees from any particular background; and3. Not knowing how to access or recruit refugees.

Figure 1033Perceived challenges
Employers who were surveyed were asked to identify the challenges they expected toencounter when hiring refugees.
All challenges perceived as more difficult by employers not seeking to hire: The employersthat have not hired refugees, and the ones that had hired refugees but no longer sought tohire refugees, rated almost all challenges as significantly more difficult than companies thatsought to hire refugees.
Employers that have not hired refugees saw some challenges as more significant:Compared to employers that had hired refugees, employers that had not hired refugees said
that the most challenging factors were the additional time/resources and extra vocational
training required.
Employers that have hired but not actively sought to hire refugees placed the leastsignificance on internal opposition: Employers that have hired refugees, but no longer sought
to hire refugees, placed greater emphasis on all challenges except internal opposition.

Figure 11

Employer views on recognition, support and incentives
Employers who were surveyed, and who were not seeking to hire refugees, were also asked to
identify the support and incentives that were likely to motivate them to hire refugees.
Insight: Most employers were not aware of government incentives tohire refugees. Employers who did not seek to hire refugees said that theavailability of incentives may have motivated them to hire refugees ifthey had known about them.

Recognition of foreign qualifications and government funding for companies not seeking
to hire refugees: Employers that had not hired refugees, and employers that had hired
refugees but no longer sought to hire refugees, placed greater importance on the recognitionof foreign qualifications, government wage subsidies, and government grants to establish inhouse programs, than employers that sought to hire refugees.

34

Figure 12

Recognition of foreign qualifications and government funding for employers that have not
employed refugees: Employers that had not hired refugees placed greater importance on
recognition of foreign qualifications and government funding compared to employers that had
hired refugees.

Figure 13

Incentives perceived as more important for those that do not seek to hire refugees:
Employers that did not seek to hire refugees showed a greater likelihood of being motivatedby most factors in comparison to employers that sought to hire refugees.

35

Figure 14

Preferences of employers that had employed but not actively sought to hire refugees: This
group of employers were most likely motivated by ongoing English language training, support
for the first months of employment, and pre-employment traineeships.

Figure 15

Perspectives of employers who stopped hiring refugees
Two of the interviewees no longer hired refugees. These employers did not work with support
organizations. The following segment of the report identifies what prompted these employers
to stop hire refugees.
Time and effort required to train and onboard: One interviewee who was hiring for lowskilled positions found the education and vocational level of the refugees started at a lower
base than the local workforce. This made the effort to train refugee hires and get them up-tospeed an additional task.
Impact on staff: One interviewee spoke of the need to view workplace integration of
refugees as an opportunity for “self-learning and development.” The interviewee found it
challenging to muster the necessary commitment and patience among both refugees and local
staff to persevere with the integration project.
36

Support for integration and retention challenges: One interviewee was unaware of the
support available from service providers, and said that the challenges around language
proficiency, technical training and workplace readiness were unmanageable for the business totake on without support.
Lack of focus from government-funded agencies: One interviewee found that the social
welfare agencies lacked focus on refugee employment and resettlement. Outreach efforts
seemed to be directed towards employment programs that addressed other groups ofvulnerable job seekers.
Loss of productivity and hiring cost: One interviewee discussed the longer onboarding timeneeded for refugees to reach the level of productivity required, which he estimated at 25%
more to hire and onboard a refugee than someone from the local workforce. The employee
noted that managing labour costs was one of the main business challenges: “…as a small
business, we would need an employee to be productive for the amount we're paying.”
Lack of English language proficiency: One interviewee whose business was unable to provide
language training spoke about the challenges and concerns around the lack of English
proficiency.
Insight: Organisational commitment and additional support is crucial tosustaining refugee hiring initiatives over time. The desire to do something
positive for someone is a valuable proposition to encourage employers
to hire refugees. However, along with the desire to help, support toovercome barriers to employ and onboard refugees appear to be
crucial.

37

Role of service providers in facilitating refugee
workforce participation
Summary
Lauded service providers dedicated time and effort to understanding business needs andproposing candidates that are a good fit.
Employers seeking to hire refugees relied on the expertise and support of third-party
organisations, such as service providers, to help them mitigate many of the challenges ofhiring and integrating refugees in the workplace.
Many employers used the full suite of a service provider’s offerings (e.g. search, culture
training, resume and interview preparation). Poor referrals were seen as the main reason to
discontinue collaborations with service providers.
Employers’ feelings towards service providers were influenced by whether a service
provider’s support was aimed at successful placement and understanding their specificneeds.

Expectations of the role of service providers
The online survey and in-depth interviews showed that employers seeking to hire refugees,
relied on the expertise and support of third-party organisations to help them mitigate many of
the challenges of hiring and integrating refugees in the workplace.

Figure 14

Appendix 3 lists service providers mentioned by surveyed and interviewed employers.
Crucial service provider activities identified by employers
Feedback from the online survey and in-depth interviews showed that employer satisfaction
with service providers depended on the service provider’s ability to successfully carry out thefollowing crucial activities:•••

Finding refugees and identifying the right candidate through pre-screening and skill matching;
Offering pre-employment training for job and workplace readiness.
Providing ongoing support for refugees and employers throughout a job placement
or/and the first several months of employment.

38

Best practices for successful collaboration with service providers
Focusing on long-term relationships with a limited number of service providers: Multiple
interviewees preferred to work with fewer service providers and invest their time into building
an ongoing relationship to most effectively convey information about their business needs.
Structured refugee placement programs and placement success: Several employers spoke
positively of experienced service providers that had established placement programs thatmitigated the challenges of hiring refugees: “They've got a very structured program where
they give them the training of the Australian landscape and everything and that support
structure is there […] I think their service is very comprehensive. And we've had really goodsuccess.”
Ongoing support to resolve placement issues: Multiple interviewees relied on the
involvement of service providers to help resolve workplace issues. One interviewee mentioned
relying on a service provider on a number of occasions to manage the “escalation of stressrelated-behaviours” caused by refugee hires’ uncertainty around being able to secure apermanent position.
Periodic touchpoints between employers and service providers and alternative solutions: A
few interviewees spoke of how collaboration with service providers had helped to secure
alternative employment for a refugee when the initial role did not work out.
Service providers play different roles for employers: In some cases, service providers played
different roles for large and small businesses. Some large companies primarily used the searchcapability of service providers (e.g. to find the right candidate for the job) and supported
onboarding with their existing integration and training processes and resources. Small
businesses often needed the full suite of service provider offerings, from search to onboarding(e.g. search, culture training, resume and interview preparation).

Factors that led to failed collaboration efforts with service providers
Poor referrals due to failure to understand and communicate expectations of the job:
Numerous interviewees flagged lack of motivation, interest and skills as an issue affecting
placement success. This was attributed to service providers’ poor understanding of the businessand of the profile of the job candidate.
Lack of structured, hands-on approach causing delays in the recruitment process: One
employer spoke of unnecessary delays caused by a service provider’s lack of urgency andfailure to explain the recruitment process to a refugee applicant. “…They didn't communicate
to her properly…so the process dragged a bit because there was no urgency.”
Lack of leadership support to collaborate with a service provider: One interviewee said acollaboration with a service provider broke down because, in part, “the partnership didn't
have the organisation’s backing completely.”

Jobactive
The federal employment program, jobactive, was mentioned numerous times by interviewees. It
was mostly singled out for failing to deliver services that are considered crucial for the
successful placement of refugees. Of the five interviewees who mentioned seeking to hire
refugees through jobactive, four were from large organisations and one from a smallorganisation. With one exception, who had mixed experiences, four employers had negative
experiences with jobactive services.
Insight: Employers’ dissatisfaction with jobactive could be attributed to amismatch in objectives and priorities. The employers’ objective was tofind the right match for the job whereas several employers perceived
that jobactive’s priority was to place refugees in any job so that theywould no longer be recipients of income support payments from thegovernment.

39

Advantages of jobactive according to employers
Funding to help refugees overcome initial costs of employment: Several interviewees foundthat it was helpful for refugees to receive financial support from jobactive to cover the costs offinding employment, such as medical exams, uniforms or transport.
Placement success with jobactive providers focused on job-matching: One interviewee
commented, “It's a bit difficult at the start ….They don't really understand our industry or thework we actually do…. jobactive providers that put in more time to understand the work do
better at referrals.”
Settlement services to help refugees integrate into the community: One employer who faced
the challenge of high employee turnover discussed the impact of settlement services on
retention and spoke positively of jobactive providers that also had settlement services.
“…They'll actually introduce them to the town and the community kind of events that arearound…. We look after them inside of work and them outside of work. Kind of works out
well.”
Disadvantages of jobactive according to employers
Poor referrals of unmotivated candidates: Multiple employers mentioned the impact of the
motivation of refugees to apply for a particular role, and their interest in the role, on the
successful outcome of the placement. Several interviewees mentioned jobactive for neglecting
to refer candidates that had interest in the job. One interviewee said, “…they [job seekers]
are pushed to find any job, and do not get a say in expressing lack of interest.”Poor referrals due to absence of skill or job matching: A number of interviewees stopped
working with service providers that put little or no effort into understanding their employer’s
business and the role being advertised. Jobactive was singled out by multiple interviewees for
not putting effort into job matching. Some employers noted that having to manage service
providers with poor referrals was a burden.
Focus on volume instead of successful placement: Several interviewees spoke of theirpreference for focusing on the right candidates, rather than pursuing quantities of referrals tofill vacancies. One employer explained why they stopped working with jobactive: “...early onin the program, it became a bit of a numbers game for jobactive rather than the rightcandidate.”
Little or no support throughout the placement: Feedback from interviews and the online
survey show that ongoing assistance from service providers to employers is an integral part ofintegration. Multiple employers criticised jobactive for lacking support. One interviewee
commented, “…we didn't get the support that was promised, or additional training that waspromised was never done. So as an employer you have to do it all yourself anyway.” Anotherinterviewee said, “…it's quite frustrating when I know that they get funding for placing
someone, but then it feels like we're kind of doing all the work and actually making it happen.”40

General remarks from employers
Summary
Employers are looking for the Government to set the tone and take leadership on refugee
employment and integration.
Overall, there seemed to be resignation with or acceptance of refugee underemployment.

When sharing their thoughts about employer engagement with refugee workforce integration,interviewees made some general observations on refugee employment and their expectations
from the government.
Resignation around refugee underemployment: Despite efforts to help refugees accessemployment, there was an underlying sense of acceptance and resignation around the lack ofrecognition of foreign qualifications and subsequent underemployment. One interviewee who
was passionate about refugee employment said, “I've got engineers, I've got...petroleum
engineers, there's industrial engineers, there's teachers…from a lot of different industries, but
they're still willing to pack potatoes, and fill apples, and stack shelves, and they do it with asmile.”
Another interviewee shared the success story of an engineer, but the sentiment ofunderemployment was echoed by settlement agencies and refugees themselves: “…when she
first arrived and went through a settlement agency, she was basically told…’Don't expect to
get work as an engineer, it just won't happen’. So, she really had given up on that. So, for her
to restart her career here [when] her original career was just astonishing. It went against
everything she's been told.”
The need for government leadership on refugee integration: A few interviewees said it was
important for government to take the lead and clearly communicate its values and mission for
the integration of refugees, and to “…show society how the government looks after them, andcommunicate how government supports businesses that look after them.” One interviewee who
was hiring for trade positions connected the lack of a shared vision to underemployment: “Thesad thing about that is the people we're getting are probably more qualified andintelligent…. We've got two structural engineers, we've got an electrical engineer, a mathteacher, two business owners…”.
Businesses looked to government to share responsibilities for refugee employment: Someinterviewees expected the government to take a more active role. One interviewee noted,“The government isn’t coming forward and taking the lead; rather they are passing the buck,passing the problems to someone else to handle.”
Mixed messages around refugee integration: Some interviewees were concerned that the
government’s welcoming messages towards refugees were for publicity reasons and deflectedfrom the actual position. One interviewee said that the government needed to send aconsistent message to combat the stigmas that kept business from hiring refugees: “On one
hand, the government says, ‘We like refugees. We like migrants who come to us’, …while on
the other hand, they put [refugees] in a detention centre for a couple of years.”

41

In-depth case studies
Summary
There seems to be a lack of shared understanding among staff about the complexities ofhiring refugees.
The perceptions of refugee workforce integration were different across organisations. Evenin the case of small employers, HR and senior management tended to be disconnected fromthe reality of daily interactions and challenges faced by refugees.

To gain insight into different perspectives within the workplace, five in-depth cases wereconducted in which three to five people per company were interviewed. The aim of these indepth cases was to provide a deeper understanding of how perceptions on refugee workforce
integration could differ based on roles within an organisation.

Case 1 – Employer hiring for trade positions
Number of interviewees: 3
Interviewees’ roles:• Leadership (1)• Training Support (1)• Supervisory (1)Recruitment and integration: All interviewees found English language proficiency was achallenge in the recruitment and integration of refugees. Additionally, interviewees in training
support and supervisory roles found that job and workplace readiness required additional
attention.
Productivity: The interviewees in the supervisory and training support roles both expectedrefugees to be less productive during their training phase. These expectations facilitatedonboarding.
Cost: The interviewee in a training support role viewed the cost of hiring refugees as lower
because of wage subsidies received, while the interviewee in a supervisory role pointed outthat the cost could be perceived as higher due to some initial reduced productivity. Theinterviewee in a leadership role referred to the wider impact of refugees obtaining financial
security through sustainable employment and eliminating their dependency on financial
assistance from the government, rather than looking at the cost of refugee employment. In thisregard, the direct supervisor interacting with refugees on a daily basis was more likely toidentify the possible additional costs of refugee workplace integration and ways toameliorate them.

Case 2 – Employer hiring for skilled positions
Number of interviewees: 4Interviewees’ roles:• HR/Diversity & Inclusion (2)• Supervisory (2)Integration and retention: Interviewees in HR/Diversity & Inclusion roles mainly identified
mentorship and buddy systems as methods for facilitating refugee integration and retention.
Their focus was on social and cultural integration and workplace inclusion. On the other hand,interviewees in supervisory roles, who worked directly with the refugees, saw technical andcommunications skills to function in the job as the key to integration and retention, and paid
more attention to on-the-job performance.
Productivity: Interviewees in HR/Diversity & Inclusion roles expected refugee hires to be as
productive as other groups and attributed productivity issues to inadequate skill matching andlack of job readiness. Interviewees in supervisory roles had lower expectations around refugee
productivity. As in case 1, supervisors were more likely to directly face and manage on-the-job
challenges of refugee workplace integration.
42

Cost: Interviewees in HR/Diversity & Inclusion roles considered that the additional cost of hiring
refugees was minimal. At the same time, they anticipated the cost was likely to be more if theemployer dedicated more efforts into ongoing training to improve refugee retention. Theinterviewee in the senior supervisory role did not consider the cost of hiring refugees to behigher, while the interviewee in a supervisory role perceived a higher cost and linked it toinitial challenges in achieving optimal performance.

Case 3 – Employer hiring for customer-service positions
Number of interviewees: 3
Interviewees’ roles:• HR /Diversity & Inclusion (1)• Supervisory (2)Integration and retention: The interviewee in an HR/Diversity & Inclusion role spoke of theimportance of cultural training for supervisors and staff to better integrate and retain refugee
hires. The interviewees in supervisory roles found that setting realistic expectations about theinitial expected levels of productivity was important for integration and retention of refugees.
Cost: The interviewee in an HR/Diversity & Inclusion role, identified placement cost throughservice providers as additional cost. The interviewees in supervisory roles pointed to theadditional cost of extending the training period for those refugees that were not initially
proficient in their role.

Case 4 – Employer hiring for various positions in a retail environment
Number of interviewees: 3
Interviewees’ roles:• HR/Diversity & Inclusion (1)• Supervisory (2)Integration: The interviewee in an HR/Diversity & Inclusion role and the interviewee in a senior
supervisory role found that pre-employment training was important for successful integration.
Both interviewees with supervisory roles, who worked directly with refugees, spoke of theimportance of preparing and training other staff to help make refugees hires feel welcome
and included.
Productivity: Both interviewees in supervisory roles noted no difference in productivity
between refugees and other groups. The interviewee in an HR/Diversity & Inclusion rolecredited rigorous pre-employment training with helping refugee hires to start employment at
the same level as hires from other groups.

Case 5 – Employer hiring for low-skilled positions
Number of interviewees: 3
Interviewees’ roles:• HR/Diversity & Inclusion (2)• Supervisory (1)Integration and retention: Interviewees with HR/Diversity & Inclusion roles found integration
and retention success was dependent on whether refugees felt included in the workplace andin the community. The interviewee with a supervisory role who worked directly with refugees
found that cultural differences could be challenging to integration and retention.
Productivity: The interviewees with HR/Diversity & Inclusion roles saw no difference inproductivity between refugee hires and other groups, while the interviewee with a supervisoryrole found refugees were willing to work more hours than other workforce.
It should be noted that two of the individuals interviewed for the in-depth cases had a refugee
background. These individuals had a more intimate understanding of refugee challenges in theAustralian workplace, and tended to be more willing to provide extra support to refugee
hires.

43

6. Closing Words
Refugee integration in the workplace poses multiple challenges. However, the majority of
employers that have hired refugees would recommend that other employers do the same. By
following best practices in recruitment, integration and retention, and by leveraging the
support of service providers, many employers are successfully integrating refugees into theAustralian workforce.
Yet, with consistently high unemployment and underemployment rates among refugees, there isan opportunity for governments to take a leadership role in providing support and incentives
to help more employers hire more refugees successfully and sustainably to bolster refugee
employment and support their full social and economic inclusion in Australia.

44Author Biography
Dr Betina Szkudlarek
Betina Szkudlarek is Associate Professor in Management at The University of Sydney Business
School. Betina's core research interests lie at the intersection of cross-cultural management,international HRM, international business ethics, and management of diversity. Her work has
been published in top-tier international journals such as Organization Studies, Human Resource
Management and Journal of Business Ethics. Her recent research program focuses on refugee
workforce integration.
Betina is a regular contributor to public debate on topical issues linked to management ofdiversity, global mobility and cross-cultural management. Her opinion pieces have beenfeatured by the Wall Street Journal, Sydney Morning Herald and The Australian, among others.
Betina has extensive experience in training, coaching and mentoring in various areas linked to
management of diversity, global leadership development, human resources and interculturalcompetence. She has worked with numerous corporate and governmental clients, including theShell, T-Mobile, Westpac and Daimler. Beyond her academic commitments, Betina holds thepost of a Strategic, Sustainability, and Growth Consultant with the United National Alliance ofCivilizations (UNAOC).

45

Appendix 1 – Online Survey Questions
PART 1 of 3

Please answer the following questions to the best of your knowledge.
For the purposes of the following questions, the term 'refugee' refers to any person who, in
their dealings with your company, has self-identified as a refugee or whom you believe tohave entered Australia on a humanitarian visa or as any asylum seeker within the last 20
years.
1.1. Based on the definition above, to your knowledge has your company employed one
or more refugees in Australia in the last 5 years?
o
o

Yes
No

1.2. Has your company actively sought to employ refugees?
o
o

Yes
No

This Question is Conditionally Shown if: (1.1 = Yes)
1.3. To your knowledge, approximately how many refugees has your company employed(in Australia in the last 5 years)?
This Question is Conditionally Shown if: (1.1 = Yes)
1.4. Does it cost your company more to employ and retain refugees than other
employees?
o
o
o

Yes
No
UnsureThis Question is Conditionally Shown if: (1.4 = Yes)
1.5. What does the additional cost relate to (e.g. training, specialised staff etc.)? If
possible, please give an indication of the % increase in cost to employ a refugeecompared to other employees.
This Question is Conditionally Shown if: (1.1 = Yes)
1.6. Has your company tended to employ refugees of one gender more than the other? If
so, are you able to provide an estimate of the ratio split between genders for the refugees
your company has employed?
This Question is Conditionally Shown if: (1.1 = Yes)
1.7. What is ratio split between genders across all your company's employees?
This Question is Conditionally Shown if: (1.2 = Yes)
1.8. Over what period of time has your company specifically sought to employ refugees?
ooooLess than 1 year
1 - 3 years
3 - 5 years
More than 5 years

PART 2 of 3 – Company has not sought to employ refugees

2a.1. Why has your company not sought to recruit refugees? [select all that apply]
46

o
o
o
o
o
o
o

The idea simply hasn't come up
We are unsure how to access or recruit them
We feel that refugees are more difficult to recruit/retain (e.g. language barrier, morecostly, cultural differences)
We are concerned that hiring refugees could damage the business (e.g. poor customer
service, lower productivity)
Our shareholders or customers would not be supportive
We have not sought to recruit employees from any particular backgrounds
Other

2a.2. Can you provide further details on your answer above?
2a.3. How likely do you think the following types of support and incentives are to
motivate your company to employ refugees?
Unlikely

Slightly likely

Moderately
likelySignificantly
likelyAssistance in identifying
the right refugee job
seekers for particularroles (e.g. skill
matching)









Additional ‘know‐how’resources (e.g. refugee
employment guide)









Cultural awarenesssupport and training foryour company









Ongoing English
language training forrefugees









Ongoing support overthe first 6 months of
employment to answer
questions and identify
where further support isrequired









Pre-employment
traineeships & study forrefugees to ensure they
are 'work ready'









Recognition of foreign
qualifications byAustralian
government/industry
bodiesGovernment wage
subsidies for yourcompany









Government grants toenable your company
to establish in‐houseprograms









Government targets inpublic procurement









47

processes with respect
to refugees
Government funding tohelp refugees overcome
initial costs of
employment (e.g.
transport, clothing /footwear)









2a.4. Are there any types of support or incentives not listed above that would motivate
your company to seek to employ refugees?
2a.5. What challenges would you expect to encounter should your company seek torecruit/employ refugees?
Not challenging

Slightly
challenging

Moderately
challenge

Significantly
challenging

Level of English
language
proficiency









Culturaldifferences
between the
refugee and yourworkforce









Internal opposition
to recruiting
refugees









Additional time
and/or resources
required to bringrefugees up to
speed withworkplacedemands









Additional
vocational training
required









Recruiting/ finding
candidates









Lack of relevant
skills/experience









Absenteeism









Psychologicaland/or emotional
challenges









Uncertainty about
duration of stay inAustralia









Regulatory hurdles(i.e. visas, taxes,
uncertain legal
status)









48

2a.6. What other difficulties or challenges might you expect to encounter should yourcompany seek to recruit/employ refugees?
2a.7. Do you have any additional comments?

PART 2 of 3 – Company has sought to employ refugees

2b.1. To what extent have the following motivated your company to seek to employ
refugees?
Not a motivator Slight motivator

Moderate
motivator

Significant
motivator

Businesscase/commercial
needs (excluding
government
incentives)









Corporate social
responsibility









Customer demand









The views of an
influential staff
member or
director









Government
incentives (e.g.
social procurementtargets, wage
subsidies)









2b.2. Are there any other reasons why your company has sought to employ refugees?
2b.3. How important have the following types of support and incentives been in
facilitating refugee employment in your company?
Not important

Slightly
importantModerately
importantSignificantly
important









Additional ‘know‐how’ resources (e.g.
refugee employment
guide)



Cultural awarenesssupport and training
for your company









Ongoing English
language training forrefugees









Ongoing support overthe first 6 months of









Assistance in
identifying the right
refugee job seekers
for particular roles(e.g. skill matching)49

employment toanswer questions andidentify where further
support is required
Pre-employment
traineeships & study
for refugees to ensure
they are 'work ready'









Recognition of foreign
qualifications byAustralian
government/industry
bodiesGovernment wage
subsidies for yourcompany









Government grants toenable your company
to establish in‐houseprograms









Government targets
in public procurement
processes with respect
to refugees









Government funding
to help refugees
overcome initial costsof employment (e.g.
transport,
clothing/footwear)









2b.4. Are there any types of support or incentives not listed above that would motivate
your company to seek to employ refugees?
2b.5. Please specify any state, federal or local government incentives that are available toyour company to employ refugees
2b.6. Has your company used service providers in the process of employing refugees?
(e.g. Refugee Talent, Settlement Services International, Brotherhood of St. Laurence, AMES
Australia)
o
o

Yes
No

This Question is Conditionally Shown if: (2b.6 = Yes)
2b.7. Please name a service provider your company has used. (If you have used several,please name the most frequently engaged or the provider whose services you would
most like to give feedback on in the following two questions.)
This Question is Conditionally Shown if: (2b.6 = Yes)
2b.8. For the above service provider, how satisfied were you with the assistance they
provided your company across the following areas (where applicable)?
Verydissatisfied

Dissatisfied

50

NeutralSatisfiedVerysatisfiedIdentifying or
supplying the right
refugee job seekers
for particular roles(e.g. skill matching)











Responding toquestions andproviding adequate
information











Providing culturalawareness support
and training for yourcompany











Organisingongoing English
language training
for refugees











Providing ongoingsupport during thefirst months of
employment tofacilitate theintegration











Providing preemployment
traineeships & study
for refugees toensure they are'work ready'











Providinginformation on how
your company
can accessgovernment subsidies
and grants











This Question is Conditionally Shown if: (2b.6 = Yes)
2b.9. Do you have any additional comments on this service provider?
This Question is Conditionally Shown if: (2b.6 = Yes)
2b.10. Have you used any other service providers and how satisfied were you withassistance they provided?
2b.11. To what extent has your company found the following to be benefits of employing
refugees?
Not a benefit

Slight benefit

ModeratebenefitSignificant
benefit

Addresses
consumer/shareholder
demand for diversity inemployment







Makes our businessreflect the diversity of
the community









51

Provides financial
benefit throughgovernment incentives(e.g. social
procurement targets,wage subsidies)









Enhancesorganisational'purpose' and/or staff
moraleThey tend to be loyal
and/or well
performing employees









Provides access to a
new pool of recruits









2b.12. Please tell us about any other ways that employing refugees benefit yourcompany.
2b.13. How challenging have the following been for your company whenrecruiting/employing refugees?
Not challenging

Slightly
challenging

Moderately
challenge

Significantly
challenging

Level of English
language
proficiency









Culturaldifferences
between the
refugee and yourworkforce









Internal opposition
to recruiting
refugees









Additional time
and/or resources
required to bringrefugees up to
speed withworkplacedemands









Additional
vocational training
required









Recruiting/ finding
candidates









Lack of relevant
skills/experience









Absenteeism









Psychologicaland/or emotional
challenges









52

Uncertainty about
duration of stay









Regulatory hurdles(i.e. visas, taxes,
uncertain legal
status)









2b.14. What other difficulties or challenges has your company encountered whenrecruiting/employing refugees?
2b.15. What types of jobs have refugees been recruited into your company for? [select allthat apply]ooooEntry level - unskilled
Entry level - skilled or professional
Mid or senior level positions
Other

This Question is Conditionally Shown if: (2b.15 (Other) = Selected)
2b.16. Please elaborate on 'Other':2b.17. Does your company still seek to recruit refugees?
o
o
o

Yes
No
UnsureThis Question is Conditionally Shown if: (2b.17 = No)
2b.18. Why does your company no longer seek to recruit refugees?
2b.19. Does your company offer any programs that are pathways to employment for
refugees?
ooooPaid internship / work experience
Unpaid internship / volunteering opportunity
Traineeship / apprenticeship
Other

This Question is Conditionally Shown if: (2b.19 (Other) = Selected)
2b.20. Please elaborate on 'Other':2b.21. Does your company specifically seek to recruit refugees based on any of thefollowing characteristics? [select all that apply]
o
o
o
o
o

GenderAge
Language spoken or country of origin
Other
No preferenceThis Question is Conditionally Shown if: (2b.21 (Gender) = Not Selected)
2b.22. Please specify the refugee group(s) you preference and your reason(s) for
preferencing them:53

2b.23. Does your company specifically seek to recruit jobseekers from other groups insociety (e.g. youth, indigenous Australians etc.)?
o
o

Yes
No

This Question is Conditionally Shown if: (2b.23 = Yes)
2b.24. Please specify which other group(s) you preference and your reason(s) for
preferencing them:2b.25. How productive do you believe the refugees your company employed have been
overall compared to:Less

About the
same

More

Large
variation

Unknowna) your
expectations











b) yourbroader
workforce











2b.26. How likely are you, based on your experience, to recommend employing refugees
to others?
Very unlikely

Unlikely

Neutral

LikelyVery likely











2b.27. Based on your experience, what types of support do employers need in order toaccommodate and support refugees in employment?
2b.28. Do you have any additional comments?

PART 3 of 3

This survey will be used to better understand employers' views on and experiences inengaging refugees in their workplace.
In order to do so we would like to know more about the company and industry you work in.
Your responses will remain anonymous. Publications resulting from this survey will not refer tospecific employers or individuals.
3.1. Please tell us a bit about yourself and the company you representooooWhat is your name?
What is your role within your company?
What company do you work for?
Approximately how many people does your company employ?

3.2. Is there someone else in your organisation who you feel should also complete thissurvey? If so, please provide their details below:
o
o
o

Name:
Phone number:
Email address:
543.3. What industry does your company operate in?*
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o

Accommodation & Food Services
Administrative & Support Services
Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing
Arts & Recreation Services
Construction
Education & Training
Electricity, Gas, Water & Waste Services
Financial & Insurance Services
Health Care & Social Assistance
Information Media & Telecommunications
Manufacturing
MiningProfessional, Scientific & Technical Services
Public Administration & Safety
Rental, Hiring & Real Estate Services
Retail Trade
Transport, Postal & Warehousing
Wholesale Trade
Other

This Question is Conditionally Shown if: (3.3 = Other)
3.4. Please specify the industry:
3.5. What part(s) of Australia does your company operate in? Please stipulate state(s)and/or region(s) and/or postcode(s)3.6. Are you open to participating in a more in-depth interview with the University ofSydney in relation to your experience in this area?
oo

Yes (please provide your contact details below)
No

3.7. Organisations exist in Australia which provide employment brokerage services bymatching refugee job seekers with employers. These organisations focus on the employer
and on providing the employer with the support they need to successfully employ
refugees. Would you be interested in learning more about these refugee employment
brokerage services?
oo

Yes (please provide your contact details below)
No

3.8. Please enter your contact details below.
ooPhone number:
Email address:

55

Appendix 2 – In-depth Interview
QuestionsPART 1
Individual background
1) Please tell us about your role in the business.
a. Position in the business.
b. In what ways do you engage with refugees in your line of work?
Diversity2) How diverse is your workforce? How many refugees? How many migrants?
a. What are the positions held by your refugee employees?
b. What are the positions held by your migrant employees?
c. Do you see differences between your migrant and refugee employees? What
are they?
Motivation
3) Why do you recruit refugees? When did this approach emerge and why? Did thismotivation change over time?
4) Do you think this motivation is shared by other members of the organisation? Why(not)?
5) How do you engage various people within the organisation to support refugee
employment? What works and what doesn’t work?
Recruitment
6) Please tell us about the recruitment and selection process of refugees.
a. What positions do you offer refugees?
b. How do you seek refugee candidates?
c. If any, what were the difficulties in recruiting refugees (Should coverrecognition of qualifications and experiences, language skills, checking
references, etc)?
i. How was the recruitment process for refugee applicants, comparedwith recruiting local employees? Or other migrant applicants?
ii. How did you overcome difficulties/challenges (Should coverrecognition of qualifications and experiences, language skills, andchecking references, etc)?
iii. If applicable: Why did you recruit refugees, despite such difficulties?
d. What was easy about recruiting refugees?
e. If applicable, did support organisations partake in the recruitment andselection process at any stage?
i. Which organisations do/did you work with?
ii. How did you find their support? Why?
iii. Did you use the jobactive? What was your experience with thejobactive?
Integration
7) Please tell us about general integration of refugee employees in your workplace.
What initiatives do you undertake to facilitate the integration? (Should cover social,
cultural and technical aspects of the integration).
a. What are your best practices in regards to integration of refugee workforce?
b. What do you believe is the most important factor in helping new refugee
recruits settle in their new role?
c. To what extent individual attitudes/characteristics/background matter?
d. Based on your experience, can you share an example of a successful case56

regarding a newly recruited refugee in your business? And an unsuccessfulcase?
e. If applicable, did support organisations partake in the integration process atany stage? In what way?
f. Why does your organisation put so much effort in the process of preparing
the refugee and/or the work unit to integrate? (if applicable)
g. What do you think would happen if this support was not available?
Retention
8) Please tell us about your experiences retaining refugees? Are their retention rates
different from other groups of employees? If yes, why?
a. What are your best practices in regards to retention of refugee workforce?
General9) Based on your experience, why do you think refugees face challenges in finding andsustaining employment?
10) In your experience, what is the greatest obstacle for hiring and working with refugee
employees?
a. Can you share an example of challenges faced most often by newly recruited
refugees?
b. How do you support them to overcome those challenges?
11) What are the common (mis)understandings about hiring/working with refugees?
12) If you could share a message to the broader community about hiring refugees, what
would it be?
13) What do you think would engage other employers in your industry to hire morerefugees?
14) What do you think your company does really well when it comes to supporting
refugee employees, either in the short-term or long-term?
15) What do you think your company could do to improve the experience of refugee
employees, either in the short-term or long-term?
Companies who do NOT hire refugees16) Why haven’t you hired refugees so far?
17) What would need to change for you to hire refugees?
18) Which incentives and why would encourage you to hire refugees and which incentives
are of least relevance? Why?
PART 2.
Questions directly linked to the survey
1. Does it cost your company more to employ and retain refugees than other employees?
2. What is the approximate additional cost to hiring refugees and what are these costs
related to? (e.g. training, specialised staff etc.)•

How and why do you allocate resources?

3. Has your company specifically sought to employ refugees?
•

Why/ why not?

4. How likely do you think the following types of support and incentives are to motive yourcompany to employ refugees?
57

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Assistance in identifying the right refugee job seekers for particular roles (e.g.
skill matching)
Additional ‘know‐how’ resources (e.g. refugee employment guide)
Cultural awareness support and training for your company
Ongoing English language training for refugees
Pre-employment traineeships & study for refugees to ensure they are 'work
ready'
Recognition of foreign qualifications by Australian government/industry
bodiesGovernment wage subsidies for your company
Government grants to enable your company to establish in‐house programs
Government targets in public procurement processes with respect to refugees
Government funding to help refugees overcome initial costs of employment(e.g. transport, clothing/footwear)

Explore those of relevance
5. How important have the following types of support and incentives been in facilitatingrefugee employment in your company?
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Assistance in identifying the right refugee job seekers for particular roles (e.g. skill
matching)
Additional ‘know‐how’ resources (e.g. refugee employment guide)
Cultural awareness support and training for your company
Ongoing English language training for refugees
Pre-employment traineeships & study for refugees to ensure they are 'work ready'
Recognition of foreign qualifications by Australian government/industry bodies
Government wage subsidies for your company
Government grants to enable your company to establish in‐house programs
Government targets in public procurement processes with respect to refugees
Government funding to help refugees overcome initial costs of employment (e.g.
transport, clothing/footwear)

Explore those of relevance
6. Please specify any state, federal or local government incentives that are available to yourcompany to employ refugees•

What are the advantages and disadvantages of these incentive schemes?

7. What would you identify as the greatest advantages of hiring refugees?
8. What were the greatest challenges hiring refugees? How did you overcome them?
9. Please specify any regulatory hurdles you have encountered or might expect to encounter
when recruiting/employing refugees.
10. Does your company still seek to recruit refugees?*•

Why/ why not?

11. Does your company specifically seek to recruit refugees who are women, youth or othergroup?
•

Why/ why not?

12. Does your company preference recruiting refugees based on any particulardemographics?
•

Please elaborate on your reason for preferencing.

13. How productive do you believe the refugees your company employed have been
overall compared to••Your expectations
Your local workforce58•

If different, why?

14. How likely are you, based on your experience, to recommend employing refugees toothers?
•Why?

15. Based on your experience, what types of support do employers need in order toaccommodate and support refugees in employment?
•

Do you have any additional comments or questions?

59

Appendix 3 – Service Providers andOther Referral Organisations
Employers mentioned working with the numerous organisations to hire refugees. This list only
includes service providers named by employers and does not reflect the diversity oforganisations providing support in refugee employment across the country.
Service Providers and other
Support Organisations

Mentioned by
Survey Respondents

Mentioned byInterviewees

AMES Australia

X

ASRC (Asylum Seeker Resource Centre)

X

atWork Australia

X

Brotherhood of Saint Laurence

X

X

CareerSeeker

X

X

CMY (Centre for Multicultural Youth)

X

X

Community Corporate

X

Jesuit Refugee Service

X

Jobactive

X

Jobs Victoria

X

Max Employment

X

Melaleuca Refugee Centre

X

Melbourne Employment ForumX

Melbourne Polytechnic

X

MRCs (Migrant Resource Centres)

X

Refugee TalentX

SpectrumX

SSI (Settlement Solutions International)

X

X
X

St. Vincent de Paul Society

X

TAFE (Technical and Further Education)X

Wyndham Community Centre

X

60

Appendix 4 – References
Australian Government Department of Home Affairs (2019), Australia’s Migration Trends
2017–18 Highlights, p8.
Aycan, Z. and Berry, J. W. (1996). Impact of employment-related experiences on immigrants'
psychological well-being and adaptation to Canada. Canadian Journal of Behavioural
Science/Revue canadienne des sciences du comportement, 28, p 240-251.
Baic, A., Rentmeister, H., Strack, R., Fuchs, F., Kröger, A., and Peichl, S. (2017). Integrationskraft
Arbeit. Eine Zwischenbilanz: Erfahrungen von, 300 Unternehmen Mit Der
Arbeitsmarketintegration von 2500 Gefluchteten. Boston Consulting Group.
Baranik, L. E., Hurst, C. S. and Eby, L. T. (2018). The stigma of being a refugee: A mixedmethod study of refugees' experiences of vocational stress. Journal of Vocational Behavior,
105, pp. 116-130. Beiser, M. and Hou, F. (2001). Language acquisition, unemployment anddepressive disorder among Southeast Asian refugees: A 10-year study. Social Science &Medicine, 53, pp. 1321-1334.
Bloch, A. (2004). Making it work: Refugee employment in the UK (Vol. 2). Institute for Public
Policy Research. Bloch, A. (2008). Refugees in the UK labour market: The conflict between
economic integration and policy-led labour market restriction. Journal of Social Policy, 37, pp.
21-36.
Boese, M. (2015). The roles of employers in the regional settlement of recently arrived
migrants and refugees. Journal of Sociology, 51, pp. 401-416.
Brees, I. (2008). Refugee business: Strategies of work on the Thai–Burma border. Journal of
Refugee Studies, 21, pp. 380-397.
Broadbent, R., Cacciattolo, M. and Carpenter, C. (2007). A tale of two communities: Refugee
relocation in Australia. Australian Journal of Social Issues, 42, pp. 581-601.
Centre for Policy Development Settling Better: Reforming refugee employment and settlement

services (2017)

Centre for Policy Development, Seven Steps to Success: Enabling refugee entrepreneurs toflourish (2019)
Cheng, Z., Wang, B. Z. and Taksa, L. (2019). Labour Force Participation and Employment of
Humanitarian Migrants: Evidence from the Building a New Life in Australia Longitudinal Data.
Journal of Business Ethics. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-019- 04179-8
Colic‐Peisker, V., and Walker, I. (2003). Human capital, acculturation and social identity:
Bosnian refugees in Australia. Journal of community & applied social psychology, 13(5), pp.
337-360.
Crush, J., Skinner, C. and Stulgaitis, M. (2017). Benign neglect or active destruction? A criticalanalysis of refugee and informal sector policy and practice in South Africa. African Human
Mobility Review, 3, pp. 751-782.
D’Albis, H., Boubtane, E., and Coulibaly, D. (2018). Macroeconomic evidence suggests thatasylum seekers are not a “burden” for Western European countries. Science Advances, 4, pp.
1-6. De Vroome, T. and Van Tubergen, F. (2010). The employment experience of refugees in
the Netherlands. International Migration Review, 44, pp. 376-403.
Feeney, A. (2000). Refugee employment. Local Economy, 15, pp. 343-349.
Fozdar, F. and Torezani, S. (2008). Discrimination and well‐being: Perceptions of refugees inWestern Australia. International Migration Review, 42, pp. 30-63.
Gaillard, D. and Hughes, K. (2014). Key considerations for facilitating employment of female
Sudanese refugees in Australia. Journal of Management & Organization, 20, pp. 671-690.
Hugo, G. (2014). The economic contribution of humanitarian settlers in Australia. International
Migration, 52, pp. 31-52.
Ilaj, M. (2014). What are the obstacles to the integration of Iraqi Muslim Shiite refugees in
Sydney, Australia? PhD thesis, School of Education, University of Western Sydney.
61

Kenny, P. and Lockwood-Kenny, K. (2011). A mixed blessing: Karen resettlement to the UnitedStates. Journal of Refugee Studies, 24, pp. 217-238.
Knappert, L., Kornau, A. and Figengül, M. (2018). Refugees' exclusion at work and theintersection with gender: Insights from the Turkish-Syrian border. Journal of Vocational
Behavior, 105, pp. 62-82.
Krahn, H., Derwing, T., Mulder, M. and Wilkinson, L. (2000). Educated and underemployed:
Refugee integration into the Canadian labour market. Journal of International Migration andIntegration, 1, pp. 59-84.
Lamba, N. K. (2003). The employment experiences of Canadian refugees: Measuring theimpact of human and social capital on quality of employment. Canadian Review ofSociology/Revue canadienne de sociologie, 40, pp. 45-64.
Lee, E., Szkudlarek, B., Nguyen, D. and Nardon, L. (2018) Refugee workforce integration: An
interdisciplinary literature review, Academy of Management Meeting, Chicago, USA
Lundborg, P. and Skedinger, P. (2016). Employer attitudes towards refugee immigrants:
Findings from a Swedish survey. International Labour Review, 155, pp. 315-337.
Mahuteau, S. and Junankar, P. R. (2008). Do migrants get good jobs in Australia? The role ofethnic networks in job search. In P.R. Junankar (Ed.), Economics of immigration (pp. 273-300).
London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Miletic, B. (2014). Psycho-social, work, and marital adjustment of older middle aged refugees
from the Former Yugoslavia (Doctoral dissertation). University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada.
Nawyn, S. J. (2010). Institutional structures of opportunity in refugee resettlement: Gender,
race/ethnicity, and refugee NGOs. Journal of Sociology and Social Welfare, 37, pp. 149-167.
Newman, A., Nielsen, I., Smyth, R. and Hirst, G. (2018). Mediating role of psychological capitalin the relationship between social support and wellbeing of refugees. International Migration,
56, pp. 117-132.
Northcote, J., Hancock, P. and Casimiro, S. (2006). Breaking the isolation cycle: The experienceof Muslim refugee women in Australia. Asian and Pacific Migration Journal, 15, pp. 177-199.
Phillimore, J. and Goodson, L. (2006). Problem or opportunity? Asylum seekers, refugees,
employment and social exclusion in deprived urban areas. Urban Studies, 43, pp. 1715-1736.
Phillips, J. (2017), Australia’s Humanitarian Program: a quick guide to the statistics since 1947,
Parliamentary Library of Australia, p1.
Phythian, K., Walters, D. and Anisef, P. (2009). Entry class and the early employment
experience of immigrants in Canada. Canadian Studies in Population, 36, pp. 363-382.
Sheehan, M. and Anderson, V. (2015). Talent management and organizational diversity: A callfor research. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 26, pp. 349-358.
Stewart, E. (2003). A Bitter Pill to Swallow: Obstacles Facing Refugee and Overseas Doctors in
the UK. Geneva: UNHCR, Evaluation and Policy Analysis Unit.
Sweetman, A. and Warman, C. (2013). Canada’s immigration selection system and labour
market outcomes. Canadian Public Policy, 39, pp. S141-S164.
Syed, J. (2008). Employment prospects for skilled migrants: A relational perspective. Human
Resource Management Review, 18, pp. 28-45.
Thornton, P. (2006). Restless Souls: Rebels, Refugees, Medics, and Misfits on the Thai-Burma
Border. Asia Books Co.
Vinokurov, A., Trickett, E. J. and Birman, D. (2017). Community context matters: Acculturation
and underemployment of Russian-speaking refugees. International Journal of Intercultural
Relations, 57, pp. 42-56.
Yu, S., Ouellet, E. and Warmington, A. (2007). Refugee integration in Canada: A survey of
empirical evidence and existing services. Refuge: Canada's Journal on Refugees, 24, pp. 17-34.

62