Connect with us

Spread & Containment

Should we import cheap foreign workers, or pay locals more?

The reliance of many Australian industries on cheap imported labour is highlighted by a recruitment drive currently underway in the UK to entice 500 hospitality workers with the promise of free flights, drinking and dining vouchers, and paid hotel quarant

Published

on

The reliance of many Australian industries on cheap imported labour is highlighted by a recruitment drive currently underway in the UK to entice 500 hospitality workers with the promise of free flights, drinking and dining vouchers, and paid hotel quarantine. But is this reliance on foreign workers in the national interest? Or, given the high unemployment rate, would it be better to attract local workers by paying them more?

The hospitality industry has been particularly hard hit by the last 19 months’ travel restrictions and lockdowns with no inbound tourism and regular dips in domestic tourism and hospitality consumption as people have been confined to their homes and not able to go out to restaurants and pubs etc.

A lot of Australian hospitality workers are unemployed or severely under-employed and the important question for the industry is what will happen when the borders open up and we start to see inbound tourism again. Will there be enough workers to handle the increased volumes or will there be a staff shortage?

A big risk is workers who have seen themselves without work have retrained into other careers and will not go back to hospitality again once positions become available. The picture is further complicated by the fact that a large portion of workers in the past were temporary holiday makers working seasonal jobs, where needed, and we do not know if they will come back again to the same extent and at the same pace as general tourism returns.

The hospitality industry seems to think that this will be the case and it seems like at least one operator has started a recruitment drive in the UK to recruit 500 hospitality workers with the promise of a “$1,000 drinking and dining voucher” with free flights to Australia, paid hotel quarantine and two weeks free accommodation, as described in this article where they are even talking about potential charter planes to bring in UK workers.

This seems like an interesting strategy given the recent Roy Morgan Unemployment and Under-employment survey shows that 16.7 per cent of the working population are either unemployed or under-employed, which would, even though it is back down to pre-pandemic levels, indicate that there should be plenty of people to fill an increase in demand for hospitality jobs.

So why is the hospitality industry looking to import foreign labour at a high upfront cost when it seems like they should be able to attract local labour by instead using the money it would cost to entice the foreign labour to come here on higher salaries for locals?

The answer for this is the industry does not want to set a precedent and permanently lift the wages paid to workers. And is instead preferring to spend this one-off money and hope that the situation will go back to normal over time. After all, the hospitality industry is by quite a margin the lowest paying industry in Australia as the chart below from the ABS shows:

Screen Shot 2021-10-14 at 1.31.56 pm

Source: ABS

An industry that is so heavily reliant on cheap imported labour will continue to be very vulnerable to external events and is clearly not sustainable in its current form and needs some structural reforms. The same can also be said for quite a few other industries reliant on cheap imported labour – like agriculture in particular – as I have previously argued.

Here at Montgomery, we are staying away from investing in companies in this sector because we think the industry will have to reform itself and this will likely have unpredictable effects that can significantly impact profitability before the structural reforms are done.

You can read my previous articles on this below:

Is it time for companies relying on cheap foreign labour to rethink their business models?

Why our dependence on backpacker labour may need to change

Which businesses could lose out if migrant numbers are cut?

Read More

Continue Reading

Spread & Containment

Biden Suffers Worst Approval Ratings Plunge Of Any President Since World War II 

Biden Suffers Worst Approval Ratings Plunge Of Any President Since World War II 

President Biden’s job approval rating has fallen the most since the start of his term than any other president since World War II. 

A new Gallup poll was…

Published

on

Biden Suffers Worst Approval Ratings Plunge Of Any President Since World War II 

President Biden's job approval rating has fallen the most since the start of his term than any other president since World War II. 

A new Gallup poll was released Friday, polling Americans between Oct. 1-19 shows Biden's approval rating plunged from 56% in Q1 to 44.7% in Q3, a whopping 11.3 percentage points that any president hasn't seen in over 75 years. 

"Biden began his term with relatively solid approval ratings, ranging between 54% and 57% from January through June. His approval dropped to 50% in July and 49% in August as coronavirus infections surged in the U.S. The chaotic U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan in late August, which included the deaths of more than a dozen U.S. military personnel in a terrorist attack at the Kabul airport, was likely the reason Biden's September job approval rating fell further to 43%," Gallup said. 

We noted in June that Gallup data showed Biden's "honeymoon period" was over and said if the president cannot "tame inflation" could result in further rating declines. And, oh boy, were we right...

Biden also faces an increasing disillusionment among Americans that he can't fix the border crisis, snarled supply chains, high gas prices, soaring inflation, consumer goods shortages, and the coronavirus pandemic, among a whole list of other things. 

His ratings suggest no improvement in Democrat support, declining support among Independents, and only 4% of Republicans polled approve of the job he's done - that figure is likely to go to zero if things don't turn around for the president. 

The 88% partisan gap in job approval is extraordinarily high considering Biden campaigned on "unity." During his inauguration, he said: 

"We can join forces, stop the shouting and lower the temperature. For without unity there is no peace, only bitterness and fury. No progress, only exhausting outrage. No nation, only a state of chaos. This is our historic moment of crisis and challenge, and unity is the path forward."

While Democrats are desperately trying to salvage their $3.5 trillion Build Back Better infrastructure plan, Americans are increasingly becoming confused about what exactly that means and how that will affect them. Repbulicans have requested the president to fix broken supply chain before more social spending. 

Souring support suggests Democrats could be on track to lose big in next year's midterms. 

Tyler Durden Sat, 10/23/2021 - 14:00

Read More

Continue Reading

Government

Fauci Funded ‘Cruel’ Puppy Experiments Where Sand Flies ‘Eat Them Alive’; Vocal Cords Severed

Fauci Funded ‘Cruel’ Puppy Experiments Where Sand Flies ‘Eat Them Alive’; Vocal Cords Severed

While recent attention has been focused on Dr. Anthony Fauci’s National Institutes of Health funding the genetic manipulation of bat coronaviruses..

Published

on

Fauci Funded 'Cruel' Puppy Experiments Where Sand Flies 'Eat Them Alive'; Vocal Cords Severed

While recent attention has been focused on Dr. Anthony Fauci's National Institutes of Health funding the genetic manipulation of bat coronaviruses in the same town as the bat coronavirus pandemic emerged, a bipartisan group of lawmakers have demanded answers over 'sick' experiments on drugged puppies, according to The Hill.

"Our investigators show that Fauci’s NIH division shipped part of a $375,800 grant to a lab in Tunisia to drug beagles and lock their heads in mesh cages filled with hungry sand flies so that the insects could eat them alive," writes nonprofit organization the White Coat Waste Project. "They also locked beagles alone in cages in the desert overnight for nine consecutive nights to use them as bait to attract infectious sand flies."

As The Hill's Christian Spencer writes:

The White Coat Waste Project, the nonprofit organization that first pointed out that U.S. taxpayers were being used to fund the controversial Wuhan Institute of Virology, have now turned its sights on Anthony Fauci on another animal-testing-related matter — infecting dozens of beagles with disease-causing parasites to test an experimental drug on them.

House members, most of whom are Republicans, want Fauci to explain himself in response to allegations brought on by the White Coat Waste Project that involve drugging puppies.

According to the White Coat Waste Project, the Food and Drug Administration does not require drugs to be tested on dogs, so the group is asking why the need for such testing. 

White Coat Waste claims that 44 beagle puppies were used in a Tunisia, North Africa, laboratory, and some of the dogs had their vocal cords removed, allegedly so scientists could work without incessant barking. -The Hill

The concerned lawmakers are led by Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC), who said in a letter to the NIH that cordectomies are "cruel" and a "reprehensible misuse of taxpayer funds." Mace is joined by reps Cindy Axne (D-Iowa), Cliff Bentz (R-Ore.), Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.), Rick Crawford (R-Ark.), Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.), Scott Franklin (R-Fla.), Andrew Garbarino (R-N.Y.), Carlos Gimenez (R-Fla.), Jimmy Gomez (D-Calif.), Josh Gottheimer (D-N.J.), Fred Keller (R-Pa.), Ted Lieu (D-Calif.), Lisa McClain (R-Mich.), Nicole Malliotakis (R-N.Y.), Brian Mast (R-Fla.), Scott Perry (R-Pa.), Bill Posey (R-Fla.), Mike Quigley (D-Ill.), Lucille Roybal-Allard (D-Calif.), Maria E. Salazar (R-Fla.), Terri Sewell (D-Ala.), Daniel Webster (R-Fla.) and Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.) via The Hill.

How will Fauci spin this?

Tyler Durden Sat, 10/23/2021 - 15:00

Read More

Continue Reading

Government

COVID-19 pandemic shifted patient attitudes about colorectal cancer screening

Key takeaways Credit: American College of Surgeons Key takeaways A survey of adults eligible for colorectal cancer screening patterns found a preference for at-home fecal occult blood testing (FOBT) versus colonoscopy during the COVID-19 pandemic. Survey.

Published

on

Key takeaways

Credit: American College of Surgeons

Key takeaways

  • A survey of adults eligible for colorectal cancer screening patterns found a preference for at-home fecal occult blood testing (FOBT) versus colonoscopy during the COVID-19 pandemic.
  • Survey respondents reported less use of colonoscopy during the pandemic compared to pre-pandemic levels, with factors related to both COVID-19 infection concerns and the financial strain of having copays.
  • FOBT shows potential as an alternative to screening colonoscopy to improve access to colorectal cancer screening in the context of COVID-19 safety and economic concerns.

CHICAGO: The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on patients’ willingness to keep appointments for non-COVID-19 illnesses has been well documented, but a team of researchers at Virginia Commonwealth University report that for people hesitant to come into the hospital or an outpatient center to get a colonoscopy, home-administered fecal occult blood tests (FOBT) may provide a useful workaround tool. About 30 percent more survey respondents completed home-based test during the pandemic than before.

Kristine Kenning, MD, MS, presented findings from a survey of adults age-eligible for screening at the virtual American College of Surgeons (ACS) Clinical Congress 2021. “The key message from our findings is that barriers to screening have increased during the pandemic, and we have to find a way to work with the community to increase those rates,” said Dr. Kenning, chief general surgery resident at Virginia Commonwealth University (VCU) School of Medicine, Richmond. “Our study found that people are compliant with, and willing to do, home-based fecal occult blood testing. This test provides a very important way for us to increase screening for colorectal cancer.”

The American College of Gastroenterology clinical guidelines recommend colonoscopy for colorectal cancer evaluation and following a positive FOBT with a colonoscopy.1 About 148,000 cases of colorectal cancers are newly diagnosed in the United States each year, the American Cancer Society reports, and they account for 53,000 deaths.2

About the survey

The cross-sectional survey involved 765 people age 50 years and older. Dr. Kenning and colleagues found that their respondents reported a higher completion of stool tests pre-COVID than the American Cancer Society reported,2 32 percent vs. 11 percent. During the pandemic, 50 percent of respondents said they completed the FOBT. By contrast, 44 percent of survey respondents who said they had colon screening during the pandemic underwent a colonoscopy. This practice appears to demonstrate substitution of stool-based testing for colonoscopy, Dr. Kenning noted. 

“Our study looked at attitudes toward colorectal cancer screening and how they were impacted during the pandemic, both related to concerns about the pandemic as well as to economic impacts,” senior author Emily B. Rivet, MD, MBA, FACS, said. “What we learned is that fecal occult blood testing was seen by patients as a viable alternative to conventional screening colonoscopy.” Dr. Rivet is an associate professor in the department of surgery, division of colorectal surgery, and an affiliated professor of internal medicine at VCU School of Medicine.

Patient concerns about copays

Notably, a greater percentage of respondents indicated being unemployed during the pandemic than the year prior: 7.4 vs. 2.6 percent. In addition, 41 percent of respondents expressed concerns about copays; 57.6 percent of those respondents said this was a factor for delaying screening. Dr. Kenning noted that she is working with Carrie Miller, PhD, MPH, the principal investigator of the larger survey, on a follow-up assessment of the pandemic-related impact on attitudes toward colorectal cancer screening. Dr. Miller is post-doctoral fellow with VCU’s department of health behavior and policy.

Other screening delays

Copays were not the only deterrent to getting scheduled colorectal screenings during the pandemic, the study found. Almost two-thirds of respondents—65.9 percent—confirmed concerns about COVID-19 exposure when scheduling colonoscopies; and 59 percent of them said this caused them to delay their screening. 

To address those concerns, respondents endorsed that being offered protective equipment (gloves and masks), visits to smaller offices, or weekend screening appointments would increase their likelihood of following through with the colonoscopy; respectively, 30.7 percent for each of the two former factors and 19.7 percent for weekend screening. However, 48.1 percent of respondents said they were willing to do an at-home FOBT as an alternative to colonoscopy, among whom 93 percent indicated they would be willing to undergo a follow-up colonoscopy if the FOBT was positive. 

Lessons learned from the pandemic

“Even pre-pandemic, the rates for colorectal screening in the United States were very far from 100 percent, so I think the lessons that we are learning from this pandemic and working with patients to find alternatives to what the conventional approaches have been in the past are going to be applicable to care moving forward. This approach applies even if we do eventually enter a post-pandemic state, which is, of course, what we are all hoping for,” Dr. Rivet said.

Dr. Kenning said the survey results show that there is still much work to do to improve colorectal screening. “Colorectal cancer screening has decreased significantly during the pandemic and still hasn’t improved to the rate that it was before,” Dr. Kenning said. “Making sure that we’re offering all of the options to patients is very important so that, whatever form of screening they’re comfortable with, they’ll start down that pathway in order to get the screening they need.”

The survey results also underscore the need to tailor colorectal cancer screening to each patient’s concerns and needs, Dr. Rivet said. “It’s important to have a conversation about all of these different alternatives and what the different positives and negatives are,” she said.

Study coauthors are Dr. Miller and Bernard F. Fuemmeler, PhD, MPH, also with the department of health behavior and policy at VCU; and Jaime L. Bohl, MD, FACS, with the department of surgery at VCU.

“FACS” designates that a surgeon is a Fellow of the American College of Surgeons.

The study authors have no relevant financial relationships to disclose. The survey was funded as part of a larger survey led by Dr. Miller on colorectal cancer and funded, in part, through support of an institutional training grant awarded by the National Cancer Institute (T32CA093423).

Citation: Kenning K. et al, COVID-19 Pandemic Impact on Colorectal Cancer Screening. Scientific Forum Presentation. American College of Surgeons Clinical Congress 2021.

______________ 

  1. Shaukat A, Kahi C, Burke CA, Rabeneck L, Sauer BG, Rex DK. ACG Clinical Guidelines: Colorectal Cancer Screening 2021. Amerc J Gastroenterol. 2021;116(3):458-479. doi: 10.14309/ajg.0000000000001122
  2. American Cancer Society. Colorectal Cancer Facts & Figures 2020-2022. Atlanta: American Cancer Society; 2020:22. Available at: https://www.cancer.org/content/dam/cancer-org/research/cancer-facts-and-statistics/colorectal-cancer-facts-and-figures/colorectal-cancer-facts-and-figures-2020-2022.pdf 

# # #

About the American College of Surgeons
The American College of Surgeons is a scientific and educational organization of surgeons that was founded in 1913 to raise the standards of surgical practice and improve the quality of care for all surgical patients. The College is dedicated to the ethical and competent practice of surgery. Its achievements have significantly influenced the course of scientific surgery in America and have established it as an important advocate for all surgical patients. The College has more than 84,000 members and is the largest organization of surgeons in the world. For more information, visit www.facs.org.


Read More

Continue Reading

Trending