Brendan O'Connor (Gorton, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Hansard source

I think it is important that I respond by firstly saying that the money is provided to an organisation that is supported by employers and unions. It is an industry body that not only protects the workers but also, as I said earlier, protects reputable companies that are under pressure, as they are trade exposed. They are also under pressure from those rogue bottom-feeders that quite often undercut the standards, breach health and safety laws and do not pay lawful minimum rates of pay. So, when I met with this industry, I did not meet with the union alone; I met with reputable companies and the union to talk about these measures. I think it would be remiss of the government, and indeed the minister, not to understand that this is a measure that has been supported in the past by employers and employee organisations and indeed will be supported in future, no doubt.

I turn to the Fair Entitlements Guarantee cut. The government is cutting the Fair Entitlements Guarantee. This, of course, was a recommendation from big business—the Business Council of Australia or the Commission of Audit, whichever you prefer. Since the government announced they would gut the FEG, we have had some MPs—including the member for Braddon and, more interestingly, the minister himself—backing the current Labor scheme. This continues the trend of government members saying one thing in their electorates and completely the opposite thing in Canberra. The government-proposed changes to the FEG would see a maximum penalty for redundancy pay under the scheme set at 16 weeks, and indexation of a maximum weekly wage used in calculating entitlements.

On the face of it, the changes to the FEG do not look drastic. However, like everything with this budget, there is a sinister, callous, unfair, hidden catch. The government has sought to hide how the change to the FEG intersects with cuts to the Automotive Transformation Scheme. If you combine the capping of the maximum benefit from a maximum of four weeks per year of service to a maximum of 16 weeks and the cuts to the Automotive Transformation Scheme, along with the government's dismantlement of the automotive sector in Australia, it spells—we would contend—disaster for workers, particularly in the automotive industry.

There are workers who have been in the automotive manufacturing and supply chain for many, many years. Under the current scheme, they would be entitled to the FEG based on their years of service—for example, 20. Under the government's scheme they will be entitled to 16 weeks maximum, irrespective of their service. We would contend that the government has overseen the death of the automotive manufacturing sector, which has dire consequences for the rest of the supply chain. And now, when workers will most need the assistance that the FEG offers, the government is seeking to rip that away. Everything that this government does, I would contend, has been to attack working conditions and workers. We therefore ask the minister—whichever minister at the table feels it is appropriate for them to answer—about this matter. This is going to have a very significant impact on thousands of workers who are soon to lose their jobs pursuant to the announcements that have been made by companies like Holden and Toyota and pursuant to subsequent cuts that will arise from decisions by other companies—and of course the consequential impacts to the automotive parts sector will lead to further redundancies.

I would ask the minister why this decision was made. What consultation was there with the companies, their work force and indeed unions—if there was any consultation—about the adverse impact of these measures? What explanation is the government providing to those workers who are to lose their jobs and now to lose a very significant level of support by cutting the threshold, or ceiling, to a maximum of 16 weeks?

See this speech in context