Page 1062 - Week 04 - Tuesday, 2 May 2006
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Research shows that women on AWAs are paid 20 per cent less than men on AWAs and women on AWAs are paid 11 per cent less than women on collective agreements. This is a startling statistic and I find it appalling that in 2006 this is the case. This is yet another example of the Howard government wanting to take us back to the 1950s when women were not treated equally. I do not want to go back there and I do not think any female workers who work and raise their family want to go back there either.
But the Howard government has not stopped here. The WorkChoices provisions covering parental leave do not include the outcomes of the family provisions test case, which include the arbitration of a new provision giving employees a right to request a return to work on a part-time basis after parental leave at least until a child reaches school age. This is a particular issue in the ACT where the percentage of women with children under the age of four is 10 per cent higher than the national average. This is a missed opportunity and, in tandem with the changes to allowable matters, could make it even more difficult for women with family responsibilities to participate in the work force.
Of particular concern is the impact of the WorkChoices changes when they are combined with the Howard government’s changes to the welfare system. These changes will result in the recipient of a parenting payment being forced to accept a job that only provides for the minimum conditions of the Australian Fair Pay and Conditions Standard. There will be nothing to improve the quality of life for those families, forcing already vulnerable parents to become a cheap source of labour for big business. This is a disgrace. These changes have the potential to have a devastating effect on ACT families.
This legislation will also have an adverse effect on award workers. Although the government often trumpets that a small number of workers are award reliant, the reality is that most workers who have an agreement in their workplace still have an award that underpins their agreement. In some cases the collective agreement only covers matters that the award does not.
Although only 15.7 per cent of men are exclusively award reliant, 24.4 per cent of women are in that category. Again, we see the potential for women to be adversely impacted. The 2004 ABS earnings data shows that the lowest weekly average earnings in Australia were in award-reliant industries. Of these lowest paid workers, three-quarters were women and many were from non-English speaking backgrounds. As a package, the WorkChoices legislation will render women more isolated and precariously placed than ever before. Awards are the primary mechanism for establishing pay for over 24 per cent of all female employees.
The AIRC has been able to increase wages annually for these workers and deliver improved conditions through test cases. The Australian Fair Pay Commission has stated that wages could fall in real terms as a result of its terms of reference. The AFPC cannot be considered a better outcome for working families as it does not have the capacity to deliver the beneficial outcomes that the AIRC has been able to deliver in the past century.
As I stated this morning, government has a role in protecting workers and ensuring that there is an independent umpire to deal with industrial disputes. The introduction of the
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .