Page 3106 - Week 10 - Wednesday, 24 September 2014
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
In the mind of the coalition government I am sure this scenario fits together very neatly with the idea of individual flexibility arrangements. What does a young person do as they desperately seek to avoid six months with no welfare payments? They are more likely to accept the kinds of situations I have described—one where they accept alternative payments and where they are ultimately disempowered. Associate Professor Rae Cooper from the University of Sydney’s Business School raises the same issue for other members of society who might not be in the best position to negotiate. She says:
Frankly, how will a mother seeking flexibility to fit with care arrangements and who is desperate for her job manage to genuinely negotiate on an individual basis? The disparity of power regardless of signatures on contracts is still significant.
This type of change also ultimately affects the wages and conditions for everyone, because why will an employer take on an older worker when they can take on a younger, disempowered and cheaper one who will work under duress?
There are other objectionable parts of the proposed amendments in the Fair Work Amendment Bill which I will not go into in detail. I think generally the winding back of provisions which allow for union support to be available to workers negotiating their conditions and the union right of entry to enter workplaces are problematic. These are important services for many workers in ensuring that workers are treated fairly and get an equal footing in negotiations.
MR GENTLEMAN (Brindabella—Minister for Planning, Minister for Community Services, Minister for Workplace Safety and Industrial Relations, Minister for Children and Young People and Minister for Ageing) (12.03): I rise today to speak in support of Ms Berry’s motion. The Fair Work Amendment Bill 2014 was introduced into the Senate in August this year. The possibility of this bill passing the Senate in federal parliament is something that, from a personal perspective as Minister for Workplace Safety and Industrial Relations, I find deeply worrying and something I believe will potentially reduce rights and working conditions, particularly for our most vulnerable workers who reside in the territory. This appears to be a move back towards the discredited Work Choices system of the Howard era. It is the resurrection of the policy which sought to attack workers’ pay and conditions in a new form but with similar goals and effects. The bill attempts to make detrimental changes to the process of negotiating greenfields agreements to the individual flexibility arrangements.
This motion notes these changes and the way that the ACT government continues to work to ameliorate the economy and the prospects of all Canberrans. The changes proposed by the federal government in this bill will essentially take away the rights of workers to negotiate an EBA if a transfer of business occurs and employees no longer work for one company and are given the opportunity to transfer to another. Under this proposed legislation there will be a three-month negotiating period for greenfields agreements with the new company. From the day that the employer tells the employees that negotiations have started, the negotiation period will not exceed three months.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video