Andrew Hastie (Canning, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That this House notes:

(1) recognises the industrial action undertaken by Alcoa workers since 8 August 2018;

(2) acknowledges the cost this action has had on both Alcoa and its workforce, including families and

communities in the Peel region;

(3) notes the impact the high cost of energy has had on working families and Australian industry,

particularly aluminium refinement;

(4) recognises the resolve of the Government to get power prices down; and

(5) calls on Alcoa and the Australian Workers' Union to reach an agreement that protects the job

security of their workers.

Kevin Hogan (Page, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Is the motion seconded?

Matt Keogh (Burt, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.

Andrew Hastie (Canning, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We have an energy crisis in this country and it is hurting Australian industry, our workers and our competitiveness in the global economy. That is the backdrop to the industrial action taken by 1,600 Alcoa workers who have now been on strike for 40 days in the Peel region. This strike is the result of over 18 months of failed negotiations with Alcoa over a new EBA. But the EBA dispute is only a symptom of the absurdly high costs of power in Australia.

Alcoa want their Australian operations to remain globally competitive. Alcoa workers want job security. Both are worthy objectives and both are necessary for our long-term prosperity and security. But a decade of failed energy policy at a national and state level, driven by green ideologues committed to deindustrialisation, now threatens Alcoa and its workers. Put simply, the high cost of energy in Australia is making us less productive and less competitive. It is killing industry and Australian jobs.

I think of the Alcan smelter in Kurri Kurri that closed in 2012: 500 jobs, gone. I think of the Alcoa Port Henry smelter in Geelong closed in 2014: 800 jobs, gone. The local green group leader, Dr Jacinta Morahan, called it a win. The AWU secretary at the time, Ben Davis, said workers were gutted, and rightly so. The Rio Tinto Gove alumina refinery permanently closed in 2017: 1,100 jobs, gone. And the Alcoa Portland smelter is only open because of state and federal government subsidies: 800 jobs at stake. Now we are feeling the heat in WA, as workers out west are forced to pay for the reckless mistakes made by governments in the eastern energy market. Alcoa has operated in the Peel region for over 40 years. Their mines at Huntly and Willowdale produce bauxite for over 45 per cent of Australia's alumina. Their refineries at Wagerup and Pinjarra are two of only six in the country. You can't imagine the Peel region without Alcoa.

Alcoa's investment in the Peel region has given people the dignity of work and provided a living for many families. The average Alcoa worker in the Peel region stays with the company for about 20 years. Alcoa pays a good salary to employees and has a longstanding tradition of generously supporting local community projects. This is why this strike is so significant to our region. Alcoa want to remain competitive and profitable, and Alcoa workers rightly want security. One does not need to win at the expense of the other. Workers don't want forced redundancies, labour hire and contract work, not for their families or their communities. And I hear their concerns.

Its 1,600 workers are members of our local footy clubs. They're volunteer surf lifesavers. Their kids attend local schools and spend their money supporting local businesses. Without secure work it is far more difficult to put down roots. It's harder to take out a mortgage, it's harder to make investments and it's harder to pay school fees and to pay for health care. This strike has come at a huge cost. Families are doing it tough, and I know many partners are working extra hours to make ends meet.

My message to Australian workers in the Peel and beyond is simply this: Australian industry and Australian workers must come first. When it comes to energy, we must put the Australian people before Paris. That is why the Morrison government is committed to getting power prices down for Australian working families, seniors and industry. Without cheap power this country will suffer a loss in living standards and in its competitiveness. This will hurt business, particularly energy-intensive industries like Alcoa's alumina refinement.

So we need Alcoa and the AWU and associated unions to sit down and land this agreement. We need both Alcoa and the workers to win. We need Labor to look workers in the eye and tell them the truth about their energy plans: their commitment to a 45 per cent emissions reduction target and a 50 per cent renewables target will destroy industry and Aussie jobs. We need an energy policy that provides a secure future for working families, seniors and industry before it's too late, because, as industry collapses here, it expands in China, fuelled by Australian coal and gas. Our workers deserve better. The Morrison government's No. 1 priority, therefore, is cheaper energy and Australian jobs.

Matt Keogh (Burt, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Sixteen hundred workers from mines and refineries across Kwinana, Pinjarra, Waroona and Wagerup continue to strike indefinitely, waiting for Alcoa to come to the table and finalise negotiations for a new enterprise agreement. These workers are not fighting for more money; rather, they've actually accepted pay freezes. They're merely fighting for some job security in the unpredictable job market in which they operate. They are dedicated and reliable workers, many of whom have worked for Alcoa for longer than I or the member for Canning have even been alive. Alcoa want to be able to force redundancies whilst maintaining there won't be any, all while the workers are mining and refining bauxite for the benefit of an American company.

These workers are ordinary men and women who live in our suburbs, and Alcoa is treating them in a disgraceful way. These mums and dads have been effectively negotiating with a gun to their heads, as Alcoa has applied for the workers' existing enterprise bargaining agreement to be cancelled. The hearing for that case started in Perth today. Alcoa did not always treat its workers this way, but now Alcoa is taking advantage of a federal government that favours the big end of town, a government that champions big business, a government that is intent on attacking workers and their unions, a government that is about putting people last, not first.

This motion from the member for Canning has some points to commend it. It recognises that there is industrial action going on in his electorate. That action has been ongoing for over 40 days, but better later than never. It acknowledges the cost that this action has had for both Alcoa and its workforce, as well as their families and the regional community. Well, yes, with Alcoa one of the largest employers in the Peel region, with many employees also from the Rockingham, Kwinana and Armadale areas, the region has been knocked about. But it's a little disingenuous, isn't it, to equate the financial 'hardship' faced by a company with a profit of over $1 billion with that faced by the 1,600 workers, their families and regional towns like Dwellingup, Pinjarra and Waroona when they have not been working for over a month and are fighting for job security. This is partly why there has been so much local support for these workers.

However, the motion notes the impact of energy prices and the work—the member says—that the federal government is doing to bring them down. Newsflash, Member for Canning: Alcoa has its own power plant for some refineries and is effectively a price maker, as it's the largest industrial consumer of WA's reserves of domestic gas. In any event, none of the government's energy policies—when it's had one, two, three, four, five of them—relates to Western Australia, which is not part of the National Energy Market.

Finally, the motion calls on Alcoa and the AWU to reach an agreement. Despite Alcoa's claims that they are happy to talk, they are actually unavailable to talk until at least next week, having thrown up worker votes and commission hearings to get in the way of actually working together with their workers and the AWU to conclude these protracted and stalled negotiations. I implore Alcoa to sit down again with the AWU to hear what they and the workers have to say. They only want what is in the best interests of themselves and their families and are more than willing to talk.

Ten days ago, Alcoa workers met with the member for Canning. They had a simple request that he put a motion in parliament that an EBA remain in place until both parties agree to a new EBA—essentially, that employers not be able to unilaterally terminate an agreement as Alcoa is seeking to do. Yet that is the one thing that this motion from the member Canning doesn't do. He can't bring himself to join these workers—like I and the Leader of the Opposition, the Premier of Western Australia, the member for Brand, Senator Pratt, Senator Sterle and the Labor candidate for Canning, Mellisa Teede, have done—in calling for and supporting a change to the rules.

A Shorten Labor government, if elected, will stop employers from being able to terminate agreements without the agreement of workers and their unions. A Shorten Labor government, if elected, will also implement a very simple policy—same job, same pay. No longer will employers be able to get away with dressing labour hire workers in the same uniforms, in the same company logo, doing the same work but for less money. These changes are about getting our AWU Alcoa workers and all Australian workers a fair go. We must, for their sake and the sake of many others, change the rules of industrial relations in this country. We have a chance to turn the pages over. We can write laws we want to write. Workers gotta make ends meet before we get much older. Australian workers are all someone's daughters; they're all someone's sons. How long can we allow negotiations down the barrel of a gun?

Josh Wilson (Fremantle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm very glad to speak on this motion, because the unacceptable situation being endured by 1,600 Alcoa workers in Western Australia is a big issue in my part of the world. It speaks to an issue of national importance, and it speaks to the need to change the rules. Make no mistake: as they stand, the rules of our industrial system are seriously out of whack with our values, and, what's more, the poor function of those rules is contributing to the broad economic malaise caused by stagnant real wages in this country.

We cannot have a situation where a workforce has their existing agreement pulled out from under them. We cannot have a situation where employers can unilaterally cancel an existing enterprise bargaining agreement, threaten their workforce with a loss of pay and conditions, which is inherent in being dropped back to the underlying award, and then force them to bargain all over again, under threat, for terms that have been won in the past. That is simply wrong, and yet that is what is occurring at Alcoa. It's what occurred at Griffin Coal in Collie in WA, resulting in a protracted and damaging dispute that was ultimately won by the workers and their representatives, the AMWU. It was in prospect at Murdoch University, involving, again, a stressful and unseemly dispute, in which the staff and NTEU ultimately prevailed.

We cannot allow this practice to continue. It's a denial of the basic principles of fair and good faith bargaining and it's contributing to a nationwide problem in the form of falling real wages—wages that have become completely disconnected from productivity and profits. It will only get worse if companies are allowed to callously scupper existing agreements and send workers back to ground zero, it will only get worse if new agreements continue the trend towards more insecure work, and it will only get worse if our system doesn't regulate out the pernicious use of labour hire and false casuals.

The Alcoa strike that began on 8 August is action being taken to preserve existing pay and conditions, especially in relation to job security. Alcoa wants to impose worse conditions on its workforce, especially in relation to the security of their jobs. The workers and their union want to maintain their position. In the ballot on Alcoa's proposal to reduce job security and provide a less than one per cent pay increase, 80 per cent of the workforce voted no—no surprises. In response, this motion, unfortunately, is big on platitudes and short on clarity and commitment. It calls on Alcoa and the Australian Workers' Union to reach an agreement. Wow, really! What further advice could the member for Canning have for both sides? Should the AWU roll over and see the workers they represent cop a manifestly worse deal at a time of rising non-discretionary costs and record household debt?

What this motion should say is: such action is wrong. It goes against the principles of fair bargaining and common sense. No company should seek to reach a new agreement by such tactics, and the law needs to be changed to prevent it in future. Instead, this motion makes reference to electricity prices as if Alcoa were under some new cost pressure that justifies this action. Yet nothing in particular has changed for Alcoa on that front. As the member for Perth pointed out, Alcoa essentially has its own power arrangements and its own gas reserves in place. The company itself has made no reference to the issue. Indeed, while the workers in WA face stagnant wages and record underemployment, Alcoa, last year, made a record $1.6 billion profit. So the reference to electricity prices is a complete red herring. It is a nonsense.

The reality is that Alcoa workers in WA are fighting for a fair go. It's no small thing to go off the job. It's no small thing to go weeks without pay. Alcoa workers and their families are enduring significant financial pain in order to protect their livelihood. Some of those families will be struggling to keep on an even keel to pay their mortgages and to meet other commitments. Some of those families will, right now, be cancelling their school holiday plans, or borrowing money, or having to explain difficult financial circumstances to friends and colleagues when, understandably, they might prefer to keep that kind of private matter to themselves.

In the great tradition of the labour movement, the struggle of Alcoa workers and AWU members is not only about their livelihood and the wellbeing of their families and communities; it is also about the future wellbeing of all workers and all Australians. The men and women in the Alcoa workforce know that the jobs they occupy will be jobs for other workers in the future. They're not prepared to see those jobs become fundamentally less secure for the next worker who holds that job and for the next family that relies on it for their sustenance and their dignity.

This motion should acknowledge and pay tribute to their commitment. I, and we, honour and pay tribute to that resolve and that commitment. If the member for Canning is serious about the plight of the Alcoa workers, he should be clear in calling out the practice of unilaterally terminating EBAs. He should be clear in calling on Alcoa to abandon that approach, guarantee the existing pay and conditions and bargain from that foundation of fairness with workers and their union on a good-faith basis.

Madeleine King (Brand, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Consumer Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I, too, am very pleased to rise in this place today to speak on this motion. In particular, I want to highlight point 5 of the member for Canning's motion, which:

… calls on Alcoa and the Australian Workers' Union to reach an agreement that protects the job security of their workers—

except that it's virtually impossible for Alcoa and the AWU to reach an agreement that protects the job security of workers when Alcoa is, today, in the Fair Work Commission, seeking to have the enterprise agreement cancelled and workers' conditions revert to the award. That's not bargaining. It's theft—theft of the working conditions of a long-serving and loyal workforce across Western Australia.

I'm really happy, today—and I've heard before in the media—that the member for Canning is supporting the workers. I call on him to move amendments to the Fair Work Act to protect the job security of the Alcoa workers in his electorate, and in mine, and in the member for Burt's, and in all the electorates around Western Australia where Alcoa workers reside. We can work together on this. I'm very happy to talk with the member for Canning to suggest amendments to the Fair Work Act. We can legislate, for instance, to protect collective bargaining. Everyone knows Labor's policy is to ensure that collective bargaining is not undermined by corporate gaming of industrial relations laws, including preventing the use of sham enterprise agreements—and what we have seen here—by preventing the likes of Alcoa from seeking to terminate enterprise bargaining agreements so that they can save a bit of cash and turf out a whole workforce.

There are other things we might work together on—if you are in support of the workers, as you say you are, Member for Canning. We can look at the same job, same pay policy, where we will protect workers and ensure they get a fair deal by tackling unfair labour hire and making sure that people who work alongside each other get paid the same amount of money for exactly the same work. Those are just a couple of ideas. There are a few more. As to fair work, we could redefine the definition of 'casual' so that it's used for the purpose for which it was originally intended, not how it is used now. We would seek to prevent employers from forcing their workers into sham contracting. So there are a few ways in which we can work together, Member for Canning, to actually do something about protecting the workers of Alcoa. This is how you can work to protect their job security. Unless you move amendments to the Fair Work Act, this is just another bit of hot air. It's all talk and no action.

But I know you've been busy. There's a lot to do in the Liberal Party at the moment. There were reports in the paper from a couple of Thursdays ago that the member for Canning sent a staffer down to Officeworks to buy an overhead projector and HDMI cable to set up in the room to do the numbers.

Kevin Andrews (Menzies, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The honourable member is straying right away from the subject of this motion now.

Madeleine King (Brand, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Consumer Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It's about job security.

Kevin Andrews (Menzies, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I invite you to bring her back to the point of the motion.

Craig Laundy (Reid, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Menzies, and the member for Brand might—

Madeleine King (Brand, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Consumer Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you very much, Mr Deputy Speaker. It is about job security. And just a little tip: you can actually go to 2020 and get that equipment, so you don't have to send a staffer off to do it if you don't want to in future, if you have to do the numbers.

I stand here in this place in solidarity with the workers of Alcoa, with my colleagues on this side of the House the member for Fremantle and the member for Burt. We present policies to benefit the many, not the few, and we work in solidarity with the working women and men of Australia.

Over the last several weeks and the 41 days that these working women and men have been on strike and on their picket lines, I have visited them in Kwinana, in my electorate, and in Pinjarra. I didn't have a ute to stand on, I'll admit. I didn't have a megaphone. I went and spoke to a lot of members personally. I delivered lamingtons—I did not cook them, and I apologise for that, but I think the workers enjoyed them. I delivered some quiche. I went to two mass meetings, both in Pinjarra, one in the pouring rain. I went to two picket lines, one in Pinjarra and one in Kwinana in my electorate. I spoke to people I went to high school with. Hello to Jarrod Draper, for instance. We went to Safety Bay Senior High School together. I spoke to Alcoa workers that my brothers went to school with—Frank Mooney; they went to Rockingham Senior High.

I was really pleased to welcome Bill Shorten down to the Pinjarra mass meeting to listen to the workers. He spoke to the workers about his promises, Labor's promises, to deliver a fair go for workers, to change the rules so that companies like Alcoa cannot just walk on in and terminate an agreement. That's the kind of action this parliament needs to take to protect the job security of workers. Bill Shorten, like me, hates it when companies like Alcoa take advantage of decent, cooperative workers who just want the best thing for their own workforce—as well they should—for their own families and for the state of Western Australia. If this motion were worth a hill of beans, we'd work to legislate and change the Fair Work Act to give a fair go to workers in this country. (Time expired)

Kevin Hogan (Page, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.