Daryl Melham (Banks, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Last week I met with representatives from the trucking industry at Revesby in my electorate. Not surprisingly, they are concerned and, indeed, angry over the new industrial relations laws. Further, I understand that the government is intending to propose an independent contractors bill. This would continue the government’s attack on individual unions and industries, which commenced with its outrageous harassment of the building industry.

In a media release on 30 March 2005, the minister called for submissions on proposals to protect independent contractors. My discussions with independent contractors in NSW indicate that the reverse is true. I have been advised that in New South Wales owner-drivers stand to lose their rights to an independent, cost-effective industrial relations system. This is a system that sets minimum standards through contract determinations, which protects owners’ goodwill and allows for effective dispute resolution.

Recently I tabled a petition which states that the impact of the proposed legislation will be as follows: no access to the Industrial Relations Commission to settle disputes, no contract determination to set rates and conditions, no contract or carriage tribunal to hear claims of goodwill, no ability to review unfair contracts and no ability to reinstate unfairly terminated contracts.

I was advised by these contractors that the proposed legislation would cause thousands of drivers to lose millions of dollars as well as undermine safety considerations. The vast majority of owner-drivers are single-vehicle operators who perform work exclusively for a single transport operator. For this reason, owner-drivers are highly dependent on those with whom they contract. This dependence leads to inequality of bargaining power and potential for exploitation. This situation can only get worse if the minister proceeds with the foreshadowed legislation.

Currently in New South Wales, there is regulatory protection for owner-drivers which minimises exploitation and at the same time does not hinder competition. This ensures that owner-drivers are at least able to cover their costs and maintain safety standards. While this interdependence has a positive side, there are downsides as well—for instance, the driver must be available for that operator, therefore rendering the driver unable to take on work for other operators. The drivers have little negotiating power in terms of price. They take the price they are given.

Owner-drivers are in a uniquely vulnerable position as independent contractors. In New South Wales that vulnerability has been acknowledged and addressed, resulting in a net positive result for both drivers and contractors. This was premised on the fact that, while owner-drivers were independent, they were in a position of potential vulnerability which occasioned at least minimum industrial protection. The protections were embedded as a result of a commission of inquiry set up by a Liberal government in 1970. It was determined that industrial regulation for owner-drivers was justified because:

... owner drivers have been in the past exploited as to rates and subjected to oppressive and unreasonable working conditions. The truth is that an owner driver with one vehicle (on which there is a heavy debt load) and no certainty of work is in a weak bargaining position and the transport industry is not lacking in operators prepared to take the fullest advantage of his vulnerability.

That quote is from paragraph 30.17 of a determination by the New South Wales Industrial Relations Commission in 1970. Were these protections removed, and that would appear to be the intention of the government, it would result in the disruption of more than 170 registered contract agreements. These agreements have been negotiated in good faith and strike a balance between fair risk, cost recovery systems of remuneration and other essential conditions and productivity goals.

This government remains committed to its ideological war on the industrial heart of this country: the unions. The government did not seek a mandate from the electorate on its massive program of industrial relations changes. An analogy I have used previously, and which I reiterate today, is that this is a cancer that will grow and grow and eat at the heart of this government over time. What the government is doing to this country, and specifically to the owner-drivers in New South Wales, is a scandal.