Chris Hayes (Werriwa, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

The central proposition of the Howard government’s extreme industrial relations laws is that every worker has the capacity to negotiate with their boss on the terms and conditions of their employment in a free and fair manner. This relies on the false assumption that employers and employees have equal bargaining power.

Last night on The 7.30 Report the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations, Joe Hockey, indicated his unwavering belief that employers and employees come to the bargaining table on equal terms. He said:

So I think if people have the capacity to negotiate to buy a house, to buy a car, if people have the individual capacity to raise children, why don’t they have the individual capacity to be able to negotiate employment terms and conditions ...

To compare the purchase of a car or a house or the raising of children to negotiating with your boss shows a level of ignorance that quite frankly I was amazed this minister possesses. The comments surprised me as I was confident that the minister knew that, when you buy a house or a car or when you are raising your child, you are generally not doing it by yourself. I would also have thought that the minister would recognise the vastly different power relationships that exist in such transactions.

That is the basic assumption that underpins Work Choices. That is at the very heart of Work Choices. For instance, does the minister really believe that a teenager seeking their first job is equipped to negotiate their own terms and conditions with their boss on a fair basis? Does an unskilled worker who has been out of work for some time have the capacity to negotiate on a fair and equal basis? What about a mother returning to work after time spent raising a family? Does she really have the capacity to negotiate on a fair and equal basis? Does someone suffering financial stress who is facing the loss of their house have the reality of being able to negotiate on a fair and equal basis with their employer?

I doubt whether a new university graduate would have the ability to be able to sit down and negotiate on a fair and equal basis, let alone someone from a regional or rural area who has access to a limited number of employment opportunities. Do they really have the capacity to negotiate, as the minister says, on a fair and equal basis? Does someone with a disability, no matter how severe, really have the capacity to negotiate on a fair and equal basis? We should also spare a thought for the migrants that we are attracting to this country. What is fair and equal in presenting them with addressing their employer on a one-on-one basis? I suggest that is also not fair and equal in that relationship.

The answer to all of these questions, quite frankly, is that they do not have a fair and equal opportunity. Not everyone has the level of self-confidence, let alone economic confidence, needed to be able to negotiate for themselves, and why should they have to? It is about time that the minister took off his rose-coloured glasses and realised that, in most circumstances, individual employees do not want to negotiate one-on-one with their employer.

In all cases, without doubt, the power in the employment relationship is held by the employer. In the overwhelming number of cases, I have to say that bosses do not abuse their power. In the vast majority of cases they will work to actually ensure that employees are looked after. However, it only takes one employer—one competitor—to decide that they will use the full extent of the Work Choices legislation to gain a competitive advantage, to force someone facing the loss of their business unless they compete and go down the same path. It only takes one employer to do that to change the situation. The reality hits home, and this is the truth—employers hold all of the cards. For employees there is no real opportunity to negotiate. There is no real opportunity to say no. There is no real choice at all.

It might not be said out aloud, but everyone who is presented with a Work Choices AWA knows that they only really have one choice and that is to either take it or leave it. As I said, the vast majority of employers that I have dealt with are good people and care for their employees. Unfortunately, it only takes some unscrupulous operators to come in and use the full extent of the law to cut costs to change things markedly in the workforce. Work Choices condones the actions of unscrupulous employers and encourages good employers to act badly. (Time expired)

See this speech in context