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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 9 Hansard (4 September) . . Page.. 2882 ..

MR KAINE (continuing):

The Bill clarifies the basis on which a casual employee may be entitled to an annual holiday. This is not a new provision, but it is expressed more clearly in the amending Bill. Importantly, the new provision clarifies that it will be the employer records which are required to be kept as a consequence of the legislation which will provide the basis on which a determination will be made on whether the employee is being paid in substitution for an annual holiday.

I take this opportunity to stress to employers the importance of good record-keeping and, in particular, of setting out the conditions of service of employees in written form. This could take the form of an appointment letter, an employment agreement or a business policy statement. If employers do not keep good records and document the basis on which employees are engaged and paid, then they are leaving themselves open to breaches of the legislation, and in the case of casual employees this can mean payment of holiday pay where it might otherwise not be due.

The forfeiture provisions are amended so that it is clear that, unless the employer has given written notice to an employee that an annual holiday entitlement has accrued and should be taken within a specified period, the employee does not forfeit access to the holiday within the currently specified six-month period. The experience is that, in many small businesses, employees are more than happy to take leave when it suits the business; but this often means that the full four weeks' annual entitlement cannot be taken within each 12-month period. Where the employee has been flexible to meet the needs of the business, this should not ultimately work to the detriment of the employee through a forfeiture provision.

The Bill also provides for a more relevant set of records to be kept by an employer so that the employee, or an authorised officer if the matter results in a disagreement between an employee and employer, has a reasonable opportunity to check on entitlements. Similarly, it provides for a more complete set of grievance management and enforcement procedures which are aimed at resolving disagreements through conciliation rather than through the court system. The procedures establish a conciliation process and then a power for directions to be issued, should conciliation fail. Of course, there are appeals processes in place. Finally, a regulation-making power is introduced by the Bill.

Mr Speaker, I believe that the amendments I have outlined are a sensible set of streamlining proposals that will provide benefits to clients of the legislation as well as to those required to administer and interpret it. The end result is more user-friendly legislation that will lessen the opportunity for ambiguity in interpretation and so minimise disagreements about entitlements and access to entitlements. The end result will be less need for time-consuming disputation and less need for costly litigation. I am sure that both employers and employees will welcome these important changes. I commend the Bill to the house.

Debate (on motion by Ms McRae) adjourned.

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