House debates
Wednesday, 8 April 2020
Questions without Notice
JobKeeper Payment
2:33 pm
Christian Porter (Pearce, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Hansard source
I thank the member for Forde for his question. As the member points out, the changes are temporary but they are also substantial, critical and very important. The changes that are being made to the Fair Work Act are being made to make certain that it is possible for the $1,500 JobKeeper payments to be made and to maximise the effect of the $1,500 JobKeeper payments, of which, of course, there will be $130 billion worth. They're changes that will only apply to employees and employers who are eligible for and receive the payment and they will only apply for the six months that the system remains in effect. These are absolutely necessary, given the nature of section 45 of the Fair Work Act and the construction of awards and enterprise agreements, to make sure that the $1,500 payments, when they are applied without further wages, are actually able to be applied. Without these changes, that would not be possible. The changes that go to issues such as employees' duties and location will also have the effect of maximising the effectiveness of the $1,500 payments. Again, they are temporary, so these changes will cease to operate in September 2020.
I want to thank the ACTU and employer organisations for helping with the design features of some of the matters that are being addressed in the Fair Work Act. The central change is what is called in the act a 'JobKeeper-enabling stand down' direction. That will facilitate an employer reducing, by direction, the number of hours that an employee would work according to this very important test: where the employee cannot be usefully employed because of changes to their business attributed to the COVID-19 pandemic or government initiatives to slow the transmission of the virus. The ultimate safeguard here is that the Fair Work Commission will be able to determine that very well known test of whether an employee cannot be usefully employed because of changes to the relevant business. The Fair Work Commission will adjudicate as to whether or not that test has been met. That critical change makes the system work.
Also critical is the fact that, as all members will be aware, the employer must pay the greater of the $1,500 JobKeeper payment or the lawful amount owing to the employee in accordance with their normal hourly rate, including applicable penalties and overtime. The changes in flexibility around things like duties and location could mean, for instance, that, where a cafe owner is now only able to serve coffees and is not serving food anymore, they can work with the chef and direct the chef, subject to the safeguards of the Fair Work Commission, to take coffees to customers, even though that's not what the chef usually did. Something like that can keep a business afloat. I just note, finally, that the Business Council of Australia noted that those flexibilities about duties and locations won't apply to people who aren't in the system, but there is still the ability to change the awards, and that is a process that's been cooperative and should be ongoing.
No comments