Matt Burnell (Spence, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak in favour of the motion moved by the member for Lalor. This should come as no surprise, given the side of the chamber I'm standing on. Standing up for the rights and conditions of workers isn't just something that's in our DNA; it is something that we should be fighting for in opposition and it is something we should be legislating for when in government. As the motion suggests, this means casual workers too—a part of the workforce that accounts for one-quarter of Australia's employees. This, of course, fluctuates over time.

During the COVID-19 pandemic many casual workers were not eligible for JobKeeper. For employees engaged on a casual basis this was cold comfort to many trying to do the right thing as they tested positive for COVID, meaning the government had to step in to cover for them while they recovered from a virus that many of them contracted whilst at work.

We find casual workers forgoing entitlements, such as personal leave and annual leave, for an additional loading on their wages—whether it be 15 per cent or 20 per cent—although forgoing workplace entitlements is only a small part of the overall story. We often find casual employees in situations of underemployment, whether that be working fewer hours than they would like to or working that particular job or another job to supplement those hours in a position or industry that is lower than their levels of qualification or experience.

Casual engagements can be as short as the balance of the day's shift. This is what the state of play currently is given that the current definition within the Fair Work Act only concerns itself with the original offer of employment made to an employee. That definition considers the fact that for many casual employees this type of employment can be in a pattern that lasts months or, for that matter, years—or sometimes for just a shift at a time. After a certain number of rockstar shifts, there comes a time for all involved when a worker begins to feel part of the team for all intents and purposes—other than for the provisions of the Fair Work Act that is.

Business groups use the word 'flexibility' as a good thing, but, as soon we consider whether an employee would like to trade in loading for the entitlements and job security of someone who has filled the same work pattern for many moons, somehow flexibility is bad. It would appear that business groups are inflexible with their definition of what constitutes the good kind of flexibility. There is indeed a place for casual employment. Many use it to work in sporadic patterns in line with their university timetables. Some use it as a way to gradually return to work. But some employees would choose to jettison 20 or 25 per cent of loading on their wages for the ability to call in sick when they are sick, take a period of annual leave to recharge their batteries without worrying about the loss of income or even be able to rest up during a public holiday that they are being paid for.

As we can all understand, being told that you will be engaged casually on a continuous basis by an employer offers zero guarantees that will eventuate beyond what the employee is engaged to do at the time. This precariousness hurts. It hurts on the job, seeing fellow co-workers take leave and holidays with their families. It can hurt at home, too, even in the process of trying to purchase a home. They can come to a lender, with their employer offering a pattern of casual employment dating back to kingdom come, but, ultimately, this means very little when they are employed casually.

To address these issues faced by many casual workers in our labour force, the Albanese Labor government is introducing an objective definition of a casual employee to provide a clearer pathway to permanent and secure work, a clearer way for employees to discuss situations where their employment ventures across what is considered casually engaged and provisions where an employee can engage with their employer to work through a process of casual conversion, with the existing framework remaining in effect. For the vast majority of casuals, this won't necessarily have any great impact. But, for the estimated 850,000 who are engaged in casual employment on a regular pattern of work, this can mean they have a path forward toward more stable and secure working conditions with their employer.

If employers continue to relent against this added level of flexibility into the working arrangements between themselves and any casual employees who have worked regularly over a large period of time, it means that, every time they use that word flexibility, it just rings hollow. I am sure that this is not actually the case, and that is why the Albanese government wants to open up and allow for a type of flexibility that appears to be craved by many industry groups. On that front, the Albanese Labor government is more than happy to oblige.

See this speech in context