Last week, in a rush of blood to the head, Shadow Finance Minister Jane Hume announced that if elected, a Coalition government would require public sector workers to return to the office five days a week.
This announcement appeared to be part of a DOGE-style effort to suggest that public servants are attempting to rip off taxpayers. Ms Hume claimed that the public sector was showing a “lack of respect for the work that went into earning the taxes they spend."
It’s worth noting that Ms Hume has never worked in the public sector. She has no idea how many dedicated public servants go to work each day for below-market salaries because they believe in what they do. We do know, Lucy worked in the public service for two years before leaving to start this campaign.
It’s also important to highlight that Ms Hume had the privilege of taking several years off from the workforce to start a family and care for her young children before entering politics. This is not a privilege most Australians can afford.
Most Australians with children, particularly in two-parent households, must return to work. For those where both parents work full-time, or in single-parent households, managing care and work in our “always-on” lives can feel nearly impossible. It can seem like neither role - parent or employee - is succeeding.
The option to work from home, which became nearly ubiquitous during the pandemic, has been a godsend for modern Australians. Not just for families, but for all Australians who are struggling to balance lives that often lack enough hours in the day to complete all their tasks.
Working from home meant that suddenly, parents could drop their children off at school and still arrive at work on time, or squeeze in exercise for the first time in years. It meant being able to have dinner with parents once a week or actually maintaining friendships. It allowed us to be the human beings that ultimately make us better workers.
Moreover, there is no conclusive evidence that working from home has lowered or increased productivity. Essentially, good workers will perform well whether they are at home or in the office.
The government responded to the opposition’s announcement by focusing on women. Mr. Dutton claimed it was all good; women could just job-share. We addressed this ironic statement in an opinion piece in Women’s Agenda.
Later in the week, the Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) Survey was released. The HILDA Survey is a nationally representative longitudinal study of Australian households that provides insights into various aspects of Australians' lives over time.
Much of the commentary on the HILDA Survey focused on the fact that the number of hours men spent on housework had not changed at all from 2002 to 2022, and that it remained significantly less than the hours women spend on housework.
However, there was another noteworthy aspect to the HILDA Survey. It found that the time both women and men spend on care has increased. Men are now spending 30 minutes more caring for their children and disabled or elderly relatives (5.5 hours a week in 2022, up from 5 hours in 2002), but this is still only half the time women spend on care each week (11.8 hours).
Not just allowing but encouraging work-from-home arrangements can foster greater engagement by men in caregiving roles. It provides employees the opportunity to be active carers without sacrificing their work opportunities.
As the HILDA Survey shows, we’ll never achieve equality in the workplace without equality at home. How can women be expected to perform twice the work at home while also meeting the same expectations at work? This is an unrealistic demand that simply isn’t placed on men.
Removing flexible work options will not improve efficiency. It hasn’t worked out for Donald Trump and Elon Musk, and it won’t work out for Peter Dutton and Jane Hume either.