Page 2660 - Week 10 - Thursday, 15 October 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
PARENTAL LEAVE (PRIVATE SECTOR EMPLOYEES) BILL 1992
Debate resumed from 20 August 1992, on motion by Mr Berry:
That this Bill be agreed to in principle.
MR DE DOMENICO (11.22): Mr Deputy Speaker, "parental leave" is a composite term used to describe maternity leave, paternity leave and adoption leave, and now has been extended to include part-time work. The draft parental leave clause allows employees of both sexes to take unpaid leave to care for their newborn or newly adopted child. The maximum period of leave is 52 weeks, which may not extend beyond the first anniversary of the child's birth or placement with its adoptive parents. The draft clause also makes provision for part-time work to the second anniversary of the birth or the adoption. There is also an important interaction between maternity leave and paternity leave, as the taking of one depends on whether the spouse is taking the other.
Whilst acknowledging the general community benefits of universal parental leave, the way it is being adopted in the ACT not only is inappropriate but also restricts the individual freedoms of the employer and employee in sitting down together and determining an outcome that best meets the needs of the business and the individual circumstances of the employee. To prove this point let us look at how it is being applied in both Federal and State jurisdictions. The draft parental leave clause is being inserted into the Federal and State, in particular Queensland and Victoria, award systems via individual award variations. New South Wales is the exception that has legislated provisions.
The principal rationale of the Full Bench of the Australian Industrial Relations Commission in introducing parental leave as a draft clause was that it was to provide scope to meet the individual circumstances of the parties to industrial awards and agreements. Thus, negotiated variations to the draft clause were to be encouraged. The Bill introduced into the ACT Assembly, however, does not encourage variations, but instead includes a superseded draft clause - in other words, regulation with no purpose - with no latitude to meet enterprise needs. The Full Bench of the Queensland Industrial Relations Commission refused a general ruling so as to allow individual modifications to be effective. As part of its argument it stated that a general ruling precludes a close examination of specific circumstances which may need to be addressed in particular awards and agreements, and prohibitive costs were also said to be involved in giving effect to general rulings.
Prior to the incredible and fantastic victory of the Kennett Government, the Industrial Relations Commission of Victoria in full session also argued that the flow-on of the Federal draft parental leave clause should be instituted by individual award variations to meet special circumstances. This does not occur in the Bill before the ACT Assembly. Rather than legislate for approximately 70 per cent of the ACT work force - the private sector and award free part - and note that this figure is at best an estimate, for parental leave via Mr Berry's Bill, which has proven to be not only technically flawed but also restrictive in limiting choice in the way parental leave is to be taken, would it not be best to introduce a draft code of practice?
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .