Page 2694 - Week 10 - Thursday, 15 October 1992

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .

There is no doubt about that. The provisions for part-time employment must be negotiated between the individual employer and the employee, and not subject to legislation. Under this legislation, if I were to work for Mr Westende and my wife decided to have another child, instead of using parental leave provisions and taking leave, I can say to Mr Westende, "I will work part time for you". That might not satisfy Mr Westende, who is my employer; but under the provisions of this legislation, as I understand it, that is what can be done.

MR BERRY (Minister for Health, Minister for Industrial Relations and Minister for Sport) (3.42): It seems to me that the intention is to exclude part-time employees from the proposed parental leave, when the legislation does not do this. The relevant definition states:

"parental leave" means an entitlement in respect of maternity leave, paternity leave or adoption leave, as the case requires, including an entitlement to engage in part-time employment in connection with the birth or adoption of a child, being an entitlement of the kind provided for in the Parental Leave Case decision;

You are seeking to undermine parts of the parental leave case decision, and that is just outrageous.

Mr De Domenico: You read the words: "... including an entitlement to engage in part-time employment in connection with the birth or adoption of a child". That means that a full-time employee can opt to do part-time employment, whether the employer agrees and is satisfied with that or not.

MR BERRY: I have read the words. It is in relation to an entitlement of the kind provided for in the parental leave case decision, and the Government will oppose any attempts to undermine that, including this amendment.

MR STEVENSON (3.44): Madam Speaker, Mr De Domenico brings up a question that has not yet been answered. I ask the Minister to be good enough to answer it. What Mr De Domenico was suggesting is that the Bill as it exists, without amendment, would require a business owner to put on part-time work a person who was previously on full-time work. We still have not had an explanation as to whether or not - - -

Mr De Domenico: By law.

MR STEVENSON: Yes, by law.

MR BERRY (Minister for Health, Minister for Industrial Relations and Minister for Sport) (3.45): No. I will read it again:

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .