Maria Vamvakinou (Calwell, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise in support of the Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Closing Loopholes) Bill 2023. The reforms contained in this bill are an important set of responses to the loopholes in our employment system that have increased injustice for many workers. That injustice has arisen with the balance of power and income tilting against those trying to make a living in an increasingly precarious economy and labour market. Globalisation, the gig economy and the undermining of institutions have fundamentally changed many of our economic and social relationships. In turn, we have seen income inequality grow dramatically.

The key themes of this bill are criminalising wage theft; properly defining what genuine casual work is; and removing loopholes in labour hire arrangements that undermine wages and conditions. The reforms encapsulated in this bill are not just necessary but long overdue. These are the sorts of measures that the Australian people expect from a Labor government. This is the historical and enduring responsibility of what Labor governments should be doing—to make and unmake social conditions in favour of the least powerful and, often, the most poorly paid workers, many of whom are in my electorate of Calwell.

The Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations is to be congratulated for his stand on behalf of the government against the, at times, hysterical campaigns by powerful employer groups and sections of the media. These are, indeed, modest, yet important, social justice measures. However, the vehemence of the opposition to them—while perhaps unsurprising—is disappointing. It fits well into the predictable pattern of opposition to every measure designed to improve the pay, conditions, security and health and safety of working people. Again, many of them are in my electorate.

This bill seeks to provide guidelines for the Fair Work Commission in determining basic fairness and to provide minimum standards for employee-like wages and conditions. If somebody works like an employee or as an employee, is expected to be on call whenever needed, has been doing so consistently and would actually prefer to be an employee, then let's treat them like an employee, not call them a casual and think there are no further obligations to them.

This bill also strengthens the commission's capacity to deal with disputes in regard to sham arrangements for independent contractors. 'Casual independent contractor' is often a convenient label that can be used to avoid the proper responsibility to provide fair conditions, pay and security for workers. Further, the bill strengthens the workplace ombudsman's powers to examine underpayments.

Most significantly, however, the bill criminalises wage theft at a national level. This is another long overdue measure. The deliberate underpayment of workers should be criminalised as a basic fairness measure. We've seen the regular reports of many large companies suddenly discovering that they have underpaid their workers, in some cases for years. This needs to stop. On this side of the House, job fairness and job security are not just empty slogans. They are at the heart of Labor's policies and our commitment to standing up for the interests of working people, which is why I'm very proud of the fact that the Albanese Labor government will legislate to criminalise wage theft.

The figures reflected in recent reports show that the scope and scale of wage theft in Australia is rampant across the board. There is $1.35 billion in underpayment of Australian workers' entitlements every year. I'm particularly concerned about its impact on migrants, who are disproportionately affected, who are likely not to know their rights and who are likely not to be aware of what they are actually entitled to. Again, many of those people are my constituents.

Rather than ignoring this problem and playing political games, the opposition needs to support passing this legislation that establishes criminal penalties for employers deliberately involved in wage theft. This is about compliance and enforcement for intentional underpayments, not honest mistakes. There will be pathways to safe havens for small businesses who have tried to correct mistakes while paying their workers. There will also be avenues to show compliance with the new Voluntary Small Business Wage Compliance Code, to be developed by government in partnership with employer and employee groups.

An opposition that claims to want to gain the confidence of the Australian people, to govern for all Australians, an opposition that wants to claim it speaks for the true believers, cannot oppose policies that defend working people against systemic wage theft. This undercutting of everyday workers, who make the systems we rely on function, seems to prevail across nearly every sector of our economy. Labor hasn't forgotten its core promise to Australians: the promise of job security, better pay and a fairer industrial relations system that is central to Labor's job security plan.

The bill also provides additional protection for first responders—this includes firefighters, police and ambulance workers—from the effects of sustained post-traumatic stress disorder, an increasingly serious and life-changing impact directly attributable to work.

The bill provides a measure of protection for building workers from cancer-causing silica diseases. The people doing these difficult and often dangerous jobs are vital to our economic growth, our health, our safety and our functioning as a society. They absolutely deserve legislated protection from the harm, to as great a degree as we can realistically offer them.

Some employers will, and have already begun to, criticise the bill on the basis of too much complexity and expense. We do not accept that the country can't afford fairness. We can't afford to do nothing to ensure that fairness. We do not accept, on this side of the chamber, that so-called complexities in awards are a valid excuse for underpayments or for denying proper safety and security in employment. Ironically, it would seem that neither complexity nor expense are any problem when it comes to paying huge executive bonuses.

I always consult with my electorate constituents when speaking on bills that I know have a major impact on them and their daily lives and their families. I had an opportunity to talk to Aruna Wijetunga, who is a rideshare driver. He's been a rideshare driver for over 7½ years. Aruna, in particular, spoke about his experiences on the digital platform. He said:

I've done 17,800 trips and my only recognition is a photo of a cake, delivered as an emoji, in the app. Things are getting worse because of the cost of living and fuel prices. We don't have any rights, no access to any claim beyond what's in the app. It's like we are removed from the concept of being a worker.

Another constituent, Chandra, who is also a rideshare driver, shared his experiences with me. He said:

The situation is that with regards to working conditions, we're creating a two-track economy when it comes to workers' rights, and this will have an impact on the entire industrial legislations system. We are second class employees. Everyone knows that we're not really a business, but conveniently hide behind notions of contract work. In any other industry, it wouldn't be accepted. We are letting technology drive us, without understanding its impact on workers and working conditions.

When asked to respond to claims of how they are different to a tradesperson with an ABN, Chandra and Aruna put it quite simply:

An independent contractor can set their own price; they can factor in things such as superannuation contributions and other aspects into their consumer-facing pricing. We don't have any of that capacity at all.

Chandra and Aruna explained that surge pricing is not based on the overall demand on the network; it's defined by location. So, if a driver is in a different location, the idea of penalty rates being substituted through surge pricing isn't the reality. Furthermore, time and kilometre ratios don't apply to rideshare workers. So, example, if they're stuck in traffic, they could be getting only a few cents per minute. Only distance is looked at and not the time that it took to get there. So they could, in effect, be earning less— (Quorum formed)

I was talking about rideshares and the digital platforms. We've seen the recent announcement relating to rideshare companies, Uber and Lyft, who have agreed to a historic settlement totalling $328 million after being accused of withholding wages and benefits, such as mandatory paid sick leave, from their drivers. In a statement announcing the settlement, the New York State Attorney General said:

For years, Uber and Lyft systematically cheated their drivers out of hundreds of millions of dollars in pay and benefits while they worked long hours in challenging conditions. These drivers overwhelmingly come from immigrant communities and rely on these jobs to provide for their families. These settlements will ensure they finally get what they have rightfully earned and are owed under the law.

As our own Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations said in the House the other day:

This government will not say to workers who are being underpaid that their concern is somehow not so controversial, that it's a second-rate concern and something that we would vote to delay. We're not going to say to gig workers, 'You can just wait as long as possible before you have any minimum rates.' We're not going to say to the families of people who have died at work, 'Oh, we'll just delay industrial manslaughter into the never-never.' We're not going to say to people who have their wages stolen deliberately by their employers that it's somehow not urgent or that it's too controversial to make wage theft a crime …

The Fair Work Commissioner will be able to make a decision on fair and enforceable minimum standards, where there is a case put forward, with reference to defined characteristics. And again, as the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations pointed out:

The idea of this reform is effectively to give the Fair Work Commission the same level of flexibility that the platforms have …

It's worth pointing out, considering some of the misinformation out there, that this legislation impacts employee-like workers only, which the commission can make a determination on. What it does not do is impact independent contractors who are not employee-like and/or do not perform work for a digital labour platform.

The growth in the gig economy has provided flexibility and convenience for many of us, but it has also contributed to an undermining of employment conditions, proper remuneration, job security and workplace health and safety for many. As a society, we need to find a balance to ensure that those delivering our goods and services are not exploited due to a complete erosion of conditions, rights and bargaining power. For those who suffer gross job insecurity, there is no bargaining power. And, to many people in my electorate who are members of the gig economy and who rely on the gig economy to make a living for themselves and their families, this legislation will bring them the relief, the justice and the rights that they deserve.

See this speech in context