Page 3873 - Week 12 - Wednesday, 19 October 2005
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
the thought of bargaining individually with their employers. To date, most young people have not had to participate in such a process. They have been able to rely on pay rises that are collectively bargained or granted through the award system.
It is unlikely that young people, with their high rates of casualisation, low rates of specific skills and generally low levels of bargaining experience will be able to achieve substantial increases in pay or conditions under a system that relies more heavily on industrial bargaining. I see that the workplace relations minister recently dismissed concerns that young people will not have equal bargaining power with their employer as being patronising to young people. Apparently it is not patronising to confine them to the lowest paid echelons of our workforce and to deride them and make it difficult for them to join unions.
While there is no doubt that some young people will have the skills to negotiate on their own behalf, it is important to highlight that there are a few constraints to those individuals bargaining for better conditions under the current system. That being said, it would appear that the majority of young people are more concerned than excited about the prospect of negotiating one-on-one with their employers. Rather than being patronising, it would appear the concerns about the ability of the majority of young people to bargain from a position of strength with their employers is well-founded, given the available research.
MR CORBELL (Molonglo—Minister for Health and Minister for Planning) (4.10): I am pleased to join in this debate today on the motion moved by Ms MacDonald. There have been some interesting comments made in this debate and in previous debates that have touched on similar issues. I would like to make my own contribution on the issues that I think are particularly pertinent to the motion that Ms MacDonald has moved today.
The first of those relates to unfair dismissal laws. Unfair dismissal will disproportionately impact on those young people, low-income earners and casual workers who work in industries where traditionally there are fewer than 100 employees. The federal government has made clear its intention to get rid of unfair dismissal laws. It was interesting to hear on Radio National this morning the workplace relations minister, Mr Andrews, questioned on the federal government’s claim that there would be an increase in employment because of the abolition of unfair dismissal.
He was asked, “How is this going to happen?” He referred to a report that had been commissioned, which indicated that 77,000 new jobs were going to be created. He was then asked, “Well, how exactly are these jobs going to be created?” He said, “Well that is a report that said there were going to be 77,000.” The reporter asked, “Yes, but how are these jobs going to be created?” He walked away from the report. He walked away from the assertion that 77,000 jobs were going to be created. So the suggestion that the abolition of unfair dismissal laws for firms and businesses with fewer than 100 employees would create jobs was effectively publicly disavowed this morning by the workplace relations minister. That, unfortunately, will not have any impact on whether or not it is used in federal government advertising, I am sure they will continue to make the claim, even though it is a claim that Mr Andrews is unprepared to back up when questioned on it.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .