Justine Keay (Braddon, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

It is with great pleasure that I stand today to support the Fair Work Amendment (Protecting Take Home Pay) Bill. The bill preserves the independence of the Fair Work Commission but appropriately guides the exercise of its discretion to ensure wages are not cut. Last week the McKell Institute released a report into the impacts of cutting workers' take-home pay on regional and rural Australia by reducing Sunday penalty rates. The McKell Institute confirms what Labor has long been arguing—that cutting the wages of workers in regional communities will rip money out of these economies and workers will lose up to a staggering $667 million each year, and $289 million each year will be lost to those regions entirely.

The latest data suggests 7,585 workers in my regional electorate of Braddon are set to lose $9.9 million each year when penalty rates are cut—a devastating hit to local workers and the local economy. My region is set to lose at least $3.2 million as businesses that are not locally owned take money out of the local economy. This means any savings that businesses claim they will make from cuts in penalty rates will not feed back into the local economy as they shift their savings from labour costs elsewhere. There are 2,009 workers in the retail industry in my electorate who stand to lose almost $6.6 million each year in disposable income.

The McKell Institute's report's findings:

… reinforce the notion that penalty rate pay is central to the livelihoods of significant portions of the Australian workforce, and is vitally important to local economies around the country.

I note some of the other electorates that have been mentioned in this report. It only takes one Liberal or National Party MP to cross the floor and vote with Labor to ensure that their local economies are not hit. The McKell Institute report mentions a number of these Nationals and Liberal MPs' electorates. The electorate of Dawson—and the member for Dawson was just in this chamber—is set to be hit, with $18.7 million to be taken out of that economy. The member for Fairfax is sitting opposite here at the moment, and his electorate will lose $16.8 million from its economy. The electorate of Leichhardt, extraordinarily, will lose $21 million out of its economy. If you are standing up for local businesses, if you are standing up for the local economies in your electorates, then you will vote for this bill.

With the increase in casualisation and insecure work, the regions will feel the impact of reduced disposable income more than elsewhere. Cuts to penalty rates will hurt local workers, with some employees losing close to $77 a week. And if you are struggling to make ends meet, that will be a huge hit to your weekly budget.

I say to those members on the other side: just go and speak to these workers. Have a conversation. Ask them what it means to them to have their penalty rates cut—what it means to them to have less money to take home each week—and I am sure you will be more inclined to vote with Labor on this bill.

In my role as the secretary of Labor's Australian jobs task force, I have heard many of these stories. For us, it may not be a lot of money—we are MPs on MPs' salaries. But, when you are talking to those people on low and middle incomes, you can hear that a small reduction for us is a huge hit for them. I met a young girl who was in unstable accommodation. She worked in retail. She worked a few hours on a Sunday. The amount of money that she will lose from this change to her take-home pay may mean a couple of coffees for us each week at Aussies—seriously, for us, it may not seem a lot of money—but, for her, every dollar counts. She is saving to fund a bond and up-front rent and for other items, so that she can go and live in accommodation where she feels stable. So those hits are extraordinary.

Last week, I was very pleased to host the member for Sydney at an event at the Beach Hotel in Burnie. The proprietor has said that he will not pass on the cuts to penalty rates to his employees because he understands the importance of that disposable income—not just for his business, and not just for those people who come in there and buy a beer at the end of the week because they can afford to, but for his employees. Because he values his employees, he knows the difference that will make to them, and he wants to be an employer of choice. I commend any other business in my electorate to take heed of that and to ensure that they protect their workers as well.

See this speech in context