Natasha Griggs (Solomon, Country Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

The ideological divide that separates the two sides of this House are pretty clearly defined on most issues, no more though than in the area of industrial relations. While the Labor Party does not stand for much, one group that it does advocate for robustly and steadfastly is its union mates. In other words, it can never ever be accused of putting the interest of its union mates last. While that is not necessarily a good thing; at least, I suppose, it is something. A lot of those on the other side posture around making a show for the nightly bulletins without any real conviction behind what they say. That is not surprising given the lack of consistency that the Leader of the Opposition has shown over the years. The movable feast that was his position on the party leadership in previous governments is a case in point.

By contrast, this is a government that is prepared to actually stand for something, to stick to its guns and not shift its position to suit the prevailing fashions of the day. This government was determined to stop the deaths of asylum seekers trying to arrive here by boat, so we can tick that off. This government promised it would scrap the carbon tax, so we can tick that one off. This government made it clear that it will roll back Labor's debt, which is still a work in progress.

It is with genuine pleasure that I am part of a government that is prepared to make reforms to fix the problems that hold back this country. Australia as a nation and the Northern Territory as a future state have enormous potential but under Labor this was frittered away in the interests of political opportunism, glad handling and carpet bagging. The coalition is introducing a new way focused on sound economic management and a big-picture government.

I spoke in this chamber during the last parliamentary sittings about the predominant role that Labor handed trade unions in this country and how instead of representing the interests of fee-paying members, the power was vested in dodgy union bosses. Today I rise to speak on the Fair Work amendment Bill 2014, legislation designed, again, to chip away at the union monolith bequeathed to this country by Kevin Rudd, Julia Gillard and Bill Shorten. The bill is structured to deliver on our election commitments regarding union workplace access, individual flexibility arrangements and the removal of the ability to strike first and talk later. I should point out that these were all commitments made by Labor prior to the 2007 election but were killed stone dead by the removal of Kevin Rudd. Union ideologues like Bill Shorten were not having a bar of these reforms and Kevin Rudd was a victim of the current Labor leader-at-all-costs protection of the union movement and the mates who backed him through his political rise.

This legislation has five main points that combine to restore balance to the workplace. Firstly, it will improve the process for the negotiation of greenfield agreements which will ensure that unions will no longer have the capacity to frustrate bargaining during negotiations of these agreements through unsustainable claims and delays. These can threaten investment and stymie the commencement of major new projects, reduce incentives and come at a considerable cost to entrepreneurs and to the workers. This legislation will remove the effective union veto power over greenfields which have enabled them to frustrate the making of these agreements by seeking exorbitant wages and conditions or refusing to agree at all. This right of veto has already delayed major resource projects worth billions and billions of dollars.

This legislation intends to improve standards for bargaining conduct which means that employers and unions will, for example, be required to attend and participate in meeting with each other and consider and respond to proposals in a timely manner. To do this, this legislation establishes a three-month negotiation time frame which will apply where appropriate notice is provided by an employer to the relevant union or unions. At the end of the three months if there is no agreement reached then the employer will be able to take its proposed agreement to the Fair Work Commission for approval. The agreement will have to satisfy a new requirement that it provides for pay and conditions that are consistent with standards within the relevant industry for equivalent work. In line with this, the Fair Work Commission must also be satisfied that the union or unions to be covered by the agreement are able to represent the majority of future employees.

Secondly, it will establish union workplace access rules which restore the balance between workplaces and unions. Under Labor, union bosses had carte blanche to do what they wanted in the workplaces. As I said, this balance needs to be restored. This bill will improve workplace productivity and flexibility by enhancing the scope for employees to make individual flexibility arrangements that meet their genuine need as determined by those employees. No longer will unions be able to stand in the way of decision making by individuals. The amendments will provide clarity for employees around the use of individual flexibility arrangements which are an important tool to enable workers and employers to agree on conditions while ensuring workers are actually better off. These amendments are designed to promote flexibility for workers and employers in a range of different areas. For example, if a worker is also a carer for an elderly parent or another loved one, then time away from the workplace can be built into the agreement—likewise with childcare arrangements or other unrelated but important commitments that an employee may have. This will be of particular use in the Northern Territory and in my electorate of Solomon, where a lack of family support can present challenges for workers who do not have understanding employers or are reluctant to take time off from paid employment to care for sick children.

Two further amendments recommended by the Fair Work Act Review panel will be made to provide clarity and certainty to both parties. First, the unilateral termination period for IFAs made under enterprise agreements will be extended from 28 days to 13 weeks, consistent with the position for awards. To buttress this, the 13-week unilateral termination period for both modern awards and enterprise agreements will be placed in the legislation. The second amendment will confirm the existing position that the better-off, overall test for IFAs can be satisfied by exchanging monetary benefits for non-monetary benefits. This, along with the government's new requirement for a statement in writing from the employee, will provide greater protection and certainty for all parties.

All other rules relating to an IFA will be retained, including that they cannot be made a condition of employment, that they must leave the employee better off overall and that they must genuinely be agreed to. Under our amendments, an employer cannot force an employee to sign an individual flexibility arrangement or make it a condition of employment. An employee must be better off overall than they would have been under a modern award or an enterprise agreement. It will also close the strike-first, talk-later loophole in the good-faith bargaining rules and will also maintain the value of unclaimed wages recovered for workers by the Commonwealth. It will do this by amending the Fair Work Act to provide that protected industrial action can only be taken if bargaining for a proposed agreement has commenced. This amendment will mean that industrial action cannot be the first step in the bargaining process and in doing so it removes the whip-hand that unions currently hold.

I have been referencing to the Fair Work Act Review panel during this speech; it is a body initiated by the now Leader of the Opposition back in 2012 but never implemented by the Labor government. The panel made a number of recommendations that this government will implement, not because they are courageous or because we are going out on a limb, but because we are not beholden to the union movement for our daily bread. These are sensible measures that any sensible government can see are overdue for delivery. This legislation will clarify the interaction between leave and workers compensation by removing an exception that allows employees to accrue or take leave while absent from work receiving workers compensation. It will also clarify the circumstances where annual leave loading is payable when a person leaves their job. This is intended to restore the long-understood but sometimes confused position that workers are only entitled leave loading when they leave a job if it is expressly provided for in their award or workplace agreement. The government will introduce a requirement that an employer must give an employee a reasonable opportunity to discuss their request of extending their unpaid parental leave, unless the employer has already agreed to the request. It cuts red tape around the transfer of business rules to assist employees who wish to move between associated entities.

It also gives the Fair Work Commission clearer powers to dismiss unfair dismissal proceedings without conducting a conference or hearing in circumstances where there has been a clear breach by either party of an order or direction. It is also important that this substantial package of measures passes through this parliament to restore procedural fairness for employees and employers. The key words that I have identified in the reading of this legislation are 'clarity', 'flexibility', 'consistency', 'certainty' and, most important of all, 'fairness'.

Under the Labor government these concepts were ignored in place of political expediency and solidarity with their union mates. It is beyond me why Labor, time and time again, are on the wrong side of the argument when it comes to industrial relations reform. It even lacked the bottle to implement the recommendations made by its own Fair Work Review panel from 2012. It was symptomatic of a government paralysed by division and rancour that had followed it across to the opposition benches over the past 12 months. This legislation gives the Labor Party the chance to show to the Australian people that it has seriously changed direction and is committed to supporting the greater good, rather than reacting on the basis of ideological belief. It would be retrograde and absurd but hardly surprising if the Labor Party tries to block these amendments. I appeal to the crossbenchers in the other chamber to have a very close look at the sensible proposals outlined in this legislation and support its passage in the interests of employers, employees and the economy. We have to stop listening to Labor's scaremongering about WorkChoices; this has nothing to do with WorkChoices.

See this speech in context