Full Employment

Policy Approach

The goal of full employment is specifically mentioned in the charter of the Reserve Bank of Australia. A second charter goal also states that the Bank should aim to improve the general prosperity of Australians. That is, the Bank should make policy to maximise the standard of living of Australian consumers.

As such, monetary policy is now the main weapon used to tackle the problem of unemployment. The impact of changing interest rates is relatively direct. When interest rates fall, consumers and businesses will need less funds to repay existing loans, they will be more likely to take out new loans, and they are also less likely to save (due to the lower rate of return). As such, it is likely that we will see higher levels of consumption spending (C) and investment spending (I). This will lead to higher levels of aggregate demand. To satisfy this demand, suppliers may need to employ extra staff. If this occurs then the unemployment rate will fall.

The supply side impact of a change in interest rates will also assist in the pursuit of full employment. As interest on loans and overdrafts represents a significant cost of production to businesses, any fall in the cash rate will eventually flow through to mean lower costs overall. As such, when demand for the goods and services produced by the business increases, lower overall running costs will mean that the manager is more likely to consider taking on new staff.

The impact of monetary policy in this way can be seen clearly during the 1990s. In the very early part of the decade, interest rates were very high. At the same time, the unemployment rate was at the highest point for the period. Remembering that there is an 18 month impact lag associated with monetary policy, as interest rates fell the ultimate impact was a fall in the rate of unemployment. Ongoing low rates since that time have helped to maintain a generally falling rate of unemployment.

Fiscal policy is now used to achieve other goals, however in the early to mid 1990s the Keating government used this policy aggressively to pursue the goal of full employment. Large budget deficits prior to the 1996 election did help to lower the unemployment rate.

The impact of microeconomic reforms on the unemployment rate should be considered in two ways. In the short term, the unemployment rate may increase. This is because in striving to become more efficient businesses may well increase the productivity of some workers while others lose the positions. This is certainly true of Telstra during the early part of the reform process in the telecommunications industry.

However, in the long term the government believes that structural reform of the Australian economy is necessary to ensure that the international competitiveness of Australian goods and services can be improved. If this is the result, then improved international competitiveness should lead to growth in the Australian economy due to the demand for exports. As such, the short term problems associated with the microeconomic reform process may be necessary to improve the long term outlook for employment.

If we return to the example of Telstra, the telecommunications industry now employs far more people than was possible in 1990. Due to the fact that the industry was deregulated, more companies have entered the market. Although jobs were lost at Telstra, the overall impact in the medium term was an increase in the number of people employed in the sector.

Current Page: Policy Approach