What is going on?

As a part of the transition from the Australia New Zealand Standard Classification of Occupations (ANZSCO) to the Occupation Standard Classification for Australia (OSCA), the ABS introduced a separate class for Electric Vehicle (EV) Technicians. This occupation class is meant to capture technicians who work on an EV (in varying capacities). Specifically, the EV Technician (which also includes Hybrid Technicians) would have different skills from the Automotive Technician (Table 1), particularly around electric isolation, depowering, and battery management. 

Table 1: Key skills differences between the EV and Automotive Technician 

Is this a good thing? 

EVs are a growing space for Australia; the number of EVs on the road has been increasing, as has the need for individuals with the skills to diagnose, service, maintain, and repair them. The qualification meant to train EV Technicians (AUR 32721) was introduced in 2022 and has limited enrolments. The industry has been servicing, maintaining, and repairing EVs in the absence of a training product.  

A separate class under the occupation classification system allows government and industry to track the number of technicians equipped with relevant skills and, by extension, determine the nature and extent of any relevant skills shortages.  

What is the problem? 

Apart from the power generation/storage systems and the cooling system, EVs and ICE vehicles are largely the same, and most skills will generally be transferable. As a result, when hiring apprentices, workers, and trainees, employers will not exclusively advertise or even look for skills specific to ICE or EVs (or occupation titles). Employers are likely to advertise for technicians or mechanics and upskill staff as needed. As such, any metrics that attempt to quantify skill levels or skills shortages by assessing internet vacancies, for example, will struggle to get an accurate picture. Added to the complexity is the fact that most smaller employers in the Automotive industry will be hiring using word-of-mouth or advertisements in the window approaches, rather than online advertisements. This becomes a particularly acute issue when considering that such quantified lists form a key input into various federal policy levers.  

Do we do away with occupation classes? 

Occupation classes are essential. An occupation is essentially a combination of various skills. When assessing skills shortages, federal policy maps skills to occupations and connects various policy levers to said occupations. These levers include the federal migration system and the associated Core Skills Occupation List (CSOL) or the Apprenticeship Priority List. Without such levers, the federal government would be limited in its ability to incentivise the uptake of certain skills and adapt to industry’s needs.  

What is the solution? 

While occupation classes are useful for mapping, tracking, and incentivising skills, the ability of an occupation system to support such outcomes in a timely and targeted manner is rather limited, because updating such lists can be a costly and time-consuming process. Yet, not many other options exist. Increasingly, the federal government and industry are focusing on skills; this is welcome news. However, the implementation stage will be an uphill climb.  

What’s next? 

We invite industry feedback on the OSCA occupation classes, their relevance to industry’s lived experience, and other optimal methods for tracking skills supply and shortages beyond occupation classes.