George Christensen (Dawson, National Party) Share this | Hansard source

I move:

That all the words after "That" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words:

"The House is of the opinion that the bill does not fully address the issue of penalty rates, and:

(1) notes that:

(a) when the Leader of the Opposition was Secretary of the Australian Workers' Union (AWU), his union negotiated enterprise agreements that reduced or removed Sunday penalty rates, including for:

i. around 780 workers at Big W in North Queensland, whose penalty rates were 50% under the award;

ii. around 129 workers at Target Country in North Queensland, whose penalty rates were 50% under the award;

iii. around 119 workers at Just Jeans in Queensland, whose penalty rates were 50% under the award;

iv. around 101 workers at Rydges Tradewinds in Cairns, who got no penalty rates at all;

v. around 480 workers at Cleanevent, who lost all their penalty rates;

(b) when the Labor Party was in Government, penalty rates were reduced in 2010 following its award modernisation process, including for many workers in the hospitality, restaurants, fast food and clubs sectors;

(c) presently, millions of workers – including staff at multinational and large businesses, such as Woolworths, Coles, Bunnings, McDonalds, KFC, Pizza Hut, Officeworks, Target, Kmart and the Langham Hotel – receive Sunday penalty rates that are below the award, thanks to enterprise agreements negotiated with large unions, including the AWU and the Shop, Distributive and Allied Employees' Association (SDA);

(d) the proposed Sunday rate of 150 per cent in the retail industry that has been determined by the Fair Work Commission is the same as the Sunday rate in a range of retail industry agreements negotiated by the AWU and the SDA;

(e) small businesses that compete with large retail and fast food chains, and wish to employ staff on a Sunday, must currently employ them at higher rates than those large chains; and

(2) agrees that any legislation to address cuts in penalty rates under awards must also address cuts in penalty rates under union negotiated enterprise agreements".

I have some sympathy for the stance being taken by the Leader of the Opposition. I do not like to hear of any workers taking a forced cut in pay, and that goes for those who work Sundays at Coles and Woolies as well as those who work at small businesses across the country.

The Leader of the Opposition claims that he wants to protect workers from the independent Fair Work Commission, but I must ask how he can turn a blind eye to the penalty rate cuts that he allowed big business to get away with when he was the Australian Workers Union boss. To turn a blind eye to such union approved penalty rate cuts would be unfair not only to workers but also to small businesses, who struggle to compete on Sundays.

In Mackay there is a Coles supermarket that is one block away from a family owned grocery store. Coles gets away with paying their workers 150 per cent of regular penalty rates because the unions allowed it, whereas the family owned store is required to pay 200 per cent. How can that be fair? If those opposite are against the independent Fair Work Commission eroding the take home pay of retail, hospitality, tourism and fast food workers who work on a Sunday, they should also be against the reduction of take home pay for the vast majority of workers in those industries who have had their penalty rates cut due to the collusion between big unions and big business.

It is not fair that a Coles worker or a Woolies worker takes home less pay on a Sunday than someone who works at a local independent grocery store. It is not fair that local small mum and dad businesses have to pay more on Sundays than major corporates. If you truly support fairness, you will reinstate the pay of workers who had their Sunday penalty rates cut.

See this speech in context