Sarah Henderson (Corangamite, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak in this debate on this second reading amendment to the Fair Work Amendment Bill 2014. The bill makes amendments to the Fair Work Act 2009 to implement elements of the coalition's policy to improve the Fair Work laws which were announced prior to the 2013 elections.

The bill will amend the act in a number of ways which will boost productivity and encourage economic growth. The measures in the bill will provide a more balanced workplace relations system and safeguard workers' conditions. The bill will stop unions from vetoing greenfield agreements, which will help to further open up the economy and stop the unions railroading projects that create jobs and prosperity. Expensive industrial action will be addressed by ensuring that bargaining must have commenced before strike action can be taken. Improvements to individual flexibility arrangements will give workers greater scope to negotiate arrangements with their employers to meet their individual needs.

The bill will implement fairer and more effective right-of-entry laws that mean businesses can carry on without unnecessary disruption. Most importantly, the amendments in this bill will help build a more prosperous future for all Australians. It is all about prosperity and jobs growth; that is the focus of our government.

In the contribution by the member for Gorton, he claimed that the bill will be opposed by those opposite and is being opposed, because it is a continuation of this government's crusade against the employment conditions of workers across Australia. Nothing could be further from the truth. In light of the incredible U-turn we have seen from the Labor Party on so many of the amendments that they actually proposed when they were in government, it is disappointing that members opposite are now seeking to protect militant union behaviour which damages jobs and ordinary good men and women who are members of unions. I want to make one thing very clear in relation to this bill: this is not about any sort of slight on good men and women who are members of unions. I was once a member of a union, and the member that I was a member of did some very good work. But we must have a balanced economy. We must have unions that do the right thing by their workers but also do the right thing by the economy.

In my home state of Victoria and in the Geelong region—part of which I am honoured to represent as the member for Corangamite—there have been some clear issues with improper behaviour by trade union representatives which underscore why these amendments are required. Militant, unlawful behaviour by unions such as the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union, the CFMEU, is bad for business and it is bad for jobs. We have seen this time and time again across Australia, particularly in Victoria, where construction costs are, on average, 25 per cent to 30 per cent higher than anywhere else in Australia. This is damaging our economy in Victoria. This is damaging the prospects of ordinary men and women to do the best that they can do in the workplace.

In May last year the Supreme Court of Victoria found the CFMEU in contempt of court after it blockaded the Myer site in Melbourne despite an injunction preventing union members from going within 50 metres of the Grocon construction site. Militant union behaviour has also slowed progress on a very important development in Geelong. The Little Creatures brewery in Geelong, which finally opened late last year, was delayed significantly when protestors illegally blockaded the site. The Supreme Court ordered against unlawful protesting at the site by the CFMEU and the Australian Manufacturing Workers Union. Instead of holding the brewery to ransom, the unions should have been fighting for local jobs. They were stopping local jobs. They were stopping the good men and women of Geelong from working on this site. This sort of behaviour shows by unions must be held more accountable. They must operate within the law. What was so amazing was that at the time that this was happening to this wonderful new development delivering so many jobs for the people of Geelong, the Labor Party and local Labor members in the Geelong region stood by and said nothing.

Also in the region I represent Boral has endured a terrible time working on a very important project in Victoria—the multibillion dollar regional rail link. This is a project that the Commonwealth is contributing in excess of $3 billion to. It is a very important project for Geelong, for Ballarat and for Bendigo in connecting the people of those cities to Melbourne and giving greater certainty in terms of their commute into Melbourne. The CFMEU ran an orchestrated costly and illegal campaign against Boral, because Boral refused to give in to demands by the union to stop doing business with the Grocon group. Of course, this was very illegal—but, despite that, there was chaos on this site. There was chaos on the regional rail link project. Boral drivers were harassed and threatened and many of its clients were warned by union officials against doing business with Boral. This unlawful and damaging campaign cost Boral more than $10 million in lost sales and legal fees. And it is a very good reason why the royal commission into trade union conduct, currently being undertaken, is so vital and why it is so vital that the Australian Building and Construction Commissioner be re-introduced by our government—of course, another initiative that has been blocked by members opposite.

The Fair Work Amendment Bill will address the current imbalance in union workplace access rules. These changes will balance the right of employees to be represented in the workplace if they wish to be with the right of employers to conduct their business free from unnecessary disruption. The government sees right of entry as a specific statutory privilege to which conditions ought to apply; regrettably, some union bosses do not. In 2007, the Labor Party promised that there would be no changes to the union right-of-entry laws. Back then, the previous government, despite the many mistakes that the previous government made, actually recognised that this was bad for jobs and bad for business.

As we have heard from the member for Herbert, and I will repeat it again, deputy opposition leader Julia Gillard at the time actually said: 'We will make sure the current right-of-entry provisions stay. We understand that entering on the premises of an employer needs to happen in an orderly way. We will keep the right-of-entry provisions.' Here is another broken promise by former Prime Minister Julia Gillard. Labor, instead, gave unions much easier access to workplaces under the Fair Work Act, which of course were exploited. It did not do what it said it would do. It did not take the action that it said it would take. It recognised that this sort of conduct was disruptive, bad for productivity and bad for jobs, and breaking down important relations between employers and employees. And now we see another fabulous U-turn by members opposite, who only need to know how to say 'no'. Nearly every initiative we bring into this parliament, we see members opposite saying 'no'. They are even blocking their own savings measures. This is an opposition that say 'no' whenever it has an opportunity and now we see blatant hypocrisy at work here again. Our amendments will legislate Labor's promise which was never enacted. Given that the Labor Party in opposition, with the strong support of the union movement, supported this policy back in 2007, it is absolutely ludicrous for members opposite to be taking the stand that they are now taking.

Currently, right of entry for discussion purposes can occur when the relevant union is entitled to represent the industrial interests of the employees at the workplace. This means unions can enter and hold discussions even if they have no actual members at the workplace and no-one sought their presence. This is completely illogical. The bill will amend the provisions so that the ability for unions to enter a workplace is either tied to a union's recognised representative role at the workplace or employees at the workplace have requested the union's presence. A union will only be entitled to enter a workplace for discussion purposes if they are covered by an enterprise agreement or if they have been invited by a member or an employee they are entitled to represent.

The bill will also provide a mechanism for the Fair Work Commission to deal with disputes about excessive right-of-entry visits for discussion purposes. The previous government's amendments to the Fair Work Act in this area were drafted in a way that renders them largely ineffective—only able to be used in extreme circumstances. Our amendments will remove this restriction, ensuring the commission has the power to properly deal with excessive right-of-entry visits. The bill will also repeal the previous government's amendments that expanded right-of-entry rights even further by allowing for uninvited lunch room visits and requiring employers to pay for the cost of union boss visits to remote work sites. Those amendments give unions the right to insist on addressing workers in their lunchroom, even when the workers have not requested their presence and are not union members. This is unfair to the 87 per cent of private sector workers who are not union members and for all workers who just want to enjoy their lunchbreak uninterrupted by union games and union disruption. In many cases, that is what was going on in workplaces right around Australia. This is about restoring the balance; this is about restoring fairness.

See this speech in context