Page 2692 - Week 10 - Thursday, 15 October 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR BERRY (Minister for Health, Minister for Industrial Relations and Minister for Sport) (3.33): The Government will be opposing this proposal. What Mr Stevenson sets out to do is to destroy substantially the effect of the legislation. Employers with more than 100 employees have employees who are usually working under awards and to whom the legislation would probably not apply anyway because of the effect of the Industrial Relations Commission. The change would leave the small-scale employers with non-award, covered employees untouched. Essentially, what he is trying to do is to make the legislation ineffective.
Mr Stevenson: Less onerous for small business.
MR BERRY: No, ineffective by sleight of hand is the way I would describe it. Why should not people working for small employers have this entitlement? Is it not the case that they also have families? That is the question that has to be answered, and Mr Stevenson made his position clear this morning. He would be prepared to sack pregnant women.
Question put:
That the amendment (Mr Stevenson's) be agreed to.
The Assembly voted -
AYES, 1 NOES, 13
Mr Stevenson Mr Berry
Mrs Carnell
Mr Connolly
Mr Cornwell
Mr De Domenico
Ms Ellis
Ms Follett
Mr Kaine
Mr Lamont
Ms McRae
Ms Szuty
Mr Westende
Mr Wood
Question so resolved in the negative.
MR DE DOMENICO (3.37), by leave: I move:
Page 2, definition of "employee", line 22, omit paragraph (b).
Clause 3 broadens the definition of "employee" beyond the one that exists within an employment relationship; that is, an employee can now be taken to be a person who is employed under a contract for services. This is outside the legal bounds of what constitutes an employment relationship between an employer and an employee. I cited this morning a ridiculous example where a builder who is contracted to do extensions which take over 12 months is now automatically entitled to parental leave. That is not an employee-employer relationship; it is on a contract basis, which is different.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .