Page 2668 - Week 10 - Thursday, 15 October 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
It is absolute nonsense and piffle for anybody to suggest in this Assembly that this Government is going out to create an impost on private employers which will send them out the door backwards, when it already applies to the overwhelming majority of employers in the ACT. Some could say, if they were unkind, that there may be some - a very few, but some - employers who deliberately attempt to stay out of the award system to absolve themselves from the proper responsibility of award wages and conditions. I note that you look at me askance, Mr Cornwell, and in general I would have to say to you that the majority of employers in Canberra are honourable employers.
Mr De Domenico: Through the Speaker, please, Mr Lamont.
MR LAMONT: Madam Speaker, thank you for allowing me to address my remarks directly to Mr Cornwell on that matter. The majority of employers in the ACT are good employers. Yesterday when we were debating the Occupational Health and Safety Bill and the reduction of numbers for the designated work groups, Mr Westende indicated the history of the company with which he is associated. Mr Westende has a right to be proud of the health and safety record of Instant Office Furniture and its associated companies. Members of the Transport Workers Union whom he employs are also proud of their record at Instant Office Furniture.
Mr Westende's company is also a respondent to the Transport Workers Award 1982. That award has parental leave provisions contained within it, and Mr Westende's companies and associated organisations have since 1986 been respondents to that award. But what happens if one of his associated companies is in direct competition with somebody around the corner who has slipped through the net and does not have to pick up those entitlements? It may be small, but there is a commercial advantage against Mr Westende and to his competitors in that circumstance. That is another matter that should be taken into account.
The parental leave provision and similar provisions have been supported over a number of years for exactly the reason Mr Westende has been able to say that he has a very stable work force over very many years. Mr Westende, through Instant Office Furniture and its associated companies, has a highly expert work force who have been trained over an extensive period in the nature of Mr Westende's business. He has about seven employees directly in Instant Office Furniture, as I understand it.
Mr Kaine: Are you telling him that or are you telling us that?
MR LAMONT: I am telling you that.
Mr Westende: I thought I had 32.
MR LAMONT: I thought you had seven in the transport industry, Mr Westende. The TWU may check that information. I draw no further conclusion from that. What has happened is that Mr Westende in his company has been able to build a highly efficient work force, as he has indicated, with a great deal of expertise built up over a long period. Mr Westende, on a permanent basis, could have had that pool of expertise denied to him. Under previous provisions, if one of his workers became pregnant it was, "Bang, you are out the door. See you later". That is it. You have lost them.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .