Page 2671 - Week 10 - Thursday, 15 October 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
I turn now to ILO recommendation 165, which is associated with the convention. It refers directly to parental leave, as follows:
Either parent should have the possibility, with a period immediately following maternity leave, of obtaining leave of absence (parental leave) without relinquishing employment and with rights resulting from employment being safeguarded.
What we also have to bear in mind when things are tough out in the work force is that it is in these times that people are most affected by loss of employment. Family responsibilities are not suspended during a recession, and this legislation aims to ensure that workers who need protection get it; that is to say, about twelve-and-a-half per cent of the work force perceive themselves to be award free and would be covered by this legislation. So, it is a very important and positive move to look after these people, to create a level playing field for workers who are not protected to the extent that this legislation sets out to provide.
Mr De Domenico carps about people coming to agreed positions in relation to what their conditions might be. You will understand, I trust, although it did not seem so evident in your speech, that, if workers argue for and achieve an award condition in the Industrial Relations Commission, that award condition will override this Act.
Mr De Domenico: Then why legislate?
MR BERRY: Because they are not covered now. They do not have the provisions that will apply when this law comes into operation. If people who are award free become covered by an award and that award later on contains provisions that relate to parental leave, it will override this Act. So, it is a very clear opportunity for employers and employees to get together and gain coverage where they are not covered at the moment, and it will override these provisions that we have set out to put in place.
One most important thing that I need to point out to members of the Assembly is the differing positions we have amongst the Liberals. The Liberal-led Alliance Government - Trevor Kaine's Government - supported parental leave. They said in the Industrial Relations Commission on 19 March 1990:
If the Commission pleases, the Government of the Australian Capital Territory supports the ACTU claim for parental leave.
That is the very claim that led to the decision in the parental leave case which was tabled in this Assembly when I introduced the Bill. They went on to say:
This leave would, of course, be unpaid, as is provided for in the Act, and would be available for up to 12 months for those male workers with not less than 12 months' continuous service with their employer. Such leave would be available in the period between the child's birth and its second birthday.
The Liberals supported it once, but do not support it now.
Ms Follett: That was before.
MR BERRY: That was before.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .