Barnaby Joyce (New England, National Party, Shadow Minister for Veterans' Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy Speaker Freelander, I know that, amongst other things, you'd be very much enthralled by what's going on in France at the moment.

Mike Freelander (Macarthur, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Indeed.

Barnaby Joyce (New England, National Party, Shadow Minister for Veterans' Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Closing Loopholes) Bill 2023. As soon as you even hear that title 'closing the loopholes bill' you know you have to start looking through the keyholes as to exactly what the wider implications of this are. The electorate of New England is home to many agricultural manufacturing businesses. In fact we actually have manufacturing in New England. BOSS Engineering manufactures the biggest farm machinery implements pulled by a tractor in the world. It's growing flat out, and we want it to keep growing. We have other manufacturing businesses in the blue-collar areas of Tamworth, and obviously mining is another big employer in our area—not so much the mines in the electorate but the mines right next to the electorate. The biggest thing we want to do is keep businesses profitable. You can have all the laws you like, but if the business stops employing people, if it doesn't work, then everybody loses out.

One of the issues we've seen where this is especially pronounced is in the motel industry, and without naming them, we have real issues in the motel industry with people saying, 'I just can't do it anymore. It just doesn't work.' They have issues because they can't get access to foreign workers, they have issues because their power bills are through the roof, they have issues because their gas bills are through the roof and they have issues because of the pressure coming onto them, and now they have this IR legislation that comes in over the top.

From a distance what we see, unfortunately, with government is there's no holistic view of how you deal with this. We're seeing this in so many parts, and this is yet another example. In their power policy the ultimate result is power prices going through the roof and reliability going through the floor. They're overseas companies. The money is going overseas. We just finished a water debate—sounds great. But a whole lot of people who've got five showers and three toilets are developing policy for people who live on the other side of the range and will go broke.

Now we have got this legislation, the Fair Work legislation amendment. It's coming from a party who are decent people—there are no problems about that. But they don't know how to run businesses. Running a business is a precarious thing. I've done it myself. I still do it now for the family business. It's a precarious thing. Nothing is certain. One of the great fears you have when you're starting a business is called Friday, because that's when you have to pay the wages, and if it's not quite there, if the people who owe you money have not quite paid up as they should, then you're balancing the issues with the overdraft. Every week is clawing ahead. What you've got to try and do is work with people who employ people, because the overwhelming employment, where the money is generated, is from private enterprise. Governments spend money, and government services rely on the taxpayer who's in private enterprise, the wages from private enterprise and the PAYG to actually support the government.

What's proposed is this bill adds yet another layer of complexity for the person trying to administer the payroll to go home and say, 'Well, I don't know about this family business. I don't know why we do it. It uses all our time. It stresses us out. There's always this belief that we're ripping people off. We're not. We're just trying to get by.' It doesn't enhance competition, and most likely some of these people who have been under the pump now will just say, 'I've had enough. I'm out. I'm over it. I'm going to find myself another way to earn the money.'

The other problem we've got goes back to motel businesses. Once these businesses are so under the pump because of power prices, gas prices, overheads and obviously wages, when they go to sell their business, they've got no-one to sell it to—not if the prospective buyer has a decent accountant, because they'll go through the books and say, 'Why on earth would you buy this? It just doesn't make any money.' If you think that doesn't happen, I can assure you, in my experience as an accountant, it has. I remember a motel—I won't say where—as their accountant, we sold it for $1, because there was no point in owning it. All it was was a bad risk. It made no money, and you just had to find some poor unfortunate person to take over this person's problems. In the end that was an incredibly good move for them, because they went on and made money in another area, to come to that decision to say, 'Just flip it.'

Why I bring that story up is that with this legislation you think of BHP or you think of Coles or you think of Woolies, but that's a small section of business. The largest section are tomato growers in the Bowen—like the member who has just walked in—

Keith Pitt (Hinkler, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Dawson.

Barnaby Joyce (New England, National Party, Shadow Minister for Veterans' Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Dawson! Tomato growers from Bowen—he's now wandered off. These are the sorts of businesses that I'm sure you'll get a real insight into in very short order.

The member for Flynn was a boilermaker and he's also got cattle, so he's had businesses. Then you have the member for Hinkler. I'm going up to his electorate, up to Bundaberg, in a couple of days time. He was an electrical engineer. I remember when I first met him, he was making the struts for the power poles or something, wasn't it? Something like that.

Keith Pitt (Hinkler, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Making sugar!

Barnaby Joyce (New England, National Party, Shadow Minister for Veterans' Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Making sugar, yes. I was an accountant and I'm still in the cattle game as we speak.

Our side understands business. The last thing we ever want to do is lose our employees. They're the key people. Your greatest fear is your key employees going. If your key employees go, your business goes. This change that has been brought forward—I know you have to square up with people. Everybody has distinct interest groups, and I completely understand the unions are a distinct interest group of the Labor Party. I've got that. But this is overkill. This is going way over the top, because it is going to have an effect beyond what you perceive.

In so many areas businesses are also multigenerational, and the impost that comes onto them has to be understood. Family businesses—we're also pushed around a lot by big businesses because we have to compete in their marketplace. They can go out and put on their overheads to cover their expenses and force their price onto the market. We're price takers, and the decisions they make are basically offloaded onto us. Ultimately, we always say, 'Oh, yes, it's offloaded to the consumer.' Sometimes, yes, but usually it's just a price cut to the small business. They just take the hit.

The classic one right now, for instance—I don't know what you're paying for meat in the supermarkets, but it's a lot. The other day there were people selling sheep up in Armidale for five bucks a head. Someone's making a bucketload, and it's not the farmers. This goes to show that the people who will be able to deal with this legislation are the people who are just going to force the price onto the consumer. That's where it's going to end up. And there hasn't been a big enough carve out by the government to properly understand the smaller businesses, to properly understand the people who this is going to hurt. For our part, we'll plead to the government to re-engage, especially with the smaller businesses, in such a way as those smaller businesses stay in the marketplace because that gives you market dynamism, it gives your economy dynamism, and it gives the capacity for people to grow.

I was talking to a big business the other day, but a big business that started many, many years ago as a small business—we've got a few of them. What I always find frustrating when I talk to them—they say, 'It'll be very unlikely that this will happen again, like we did it.' These people employ, to be honest, thousands. They said, 'The reason is the government now has so much regulation in place that any approval, anything we need to do would just be confounded by the bureaucracy that a start-up would have to deal with.'

Let's go back to the member for Flynn. If someone found coal and wanted to start a mine, it would be near impossible because all the approvals they would need to have to get that thing started is not possible. So what you're actually doing, when you come up with new regulations like we have here today, is you're saying, 'The only people who will be in the marketplace are the established players, the people who can cover those overheads.' The mums and dads and the boilermaker and the fitter and turner and the diesel mechanic—they're the ones most likely to go out and have a crack at it. It's the tradespeople who actually go on to grow businesses, but you're making it incredibly tough for them to be their own boss because, apart from being a sole trader, as soon as they start employing people, although they understand they have got to be decent, fair and safe, but if the legal requirements become excessive, the motivation to do so is completely lost.

What will happen with this legislation as it filters through is that people who are near the tipping point will be very present in smaller towns, in the pub that is just making it, in the motel that is just making it or in the corner store that is just making it. Even though they might not be directly affected this legislation, they will be indirectly affected because it flows through the economy. They're the ones that will get tipped over. How does it flow through? It flows through because the cost they cannot get out of ends up on their P and L, and often the P and L goes from just being in profit to just being in loss, and the loss is just before you go out of business. The people who can wear this cost, the bigger businesses, will shift it straight down the line to the smaller businesses. You say the small businesses are not covered because they only have a couple of workers. Well, they are affected because they have to pick up that margin, and so they pick up that margin on their P and L, which forces them out the door.

You need to think about what you are doing in a holistic way—just sit back and think about it. Power prices are an abomination. You have power prices going through the roof because you have a massive investment in so-called renewables. They are not renewables because they're going to end up in landfill. That investment demands a return, and the return it demands is seen in the power bill, which is a massive cost for small business. For gas, it's the same thing—more restrictions, you don't open up more areas, restrictions apply, price goes up, cost goes back to the small business. You're going to buy back water licences, which takes the cash out of the economy, and that cost goes back to small business. And now you have this legislation coming through. You might say small business is not covered, but the big businesses are, and they will put it on their bill, which goes back to small business. In the end, the small businesses cop it.

In New England, where small business is incredibly important, especially in a place such as the biggest city in my electorate, Tamworth, the motto is industry, and we're very proud of it. They say about New York, if you can make it there, you can make it anywhere. In Tamworth, we say if you can't make it here, you'll make it nowhere. We love the idea that, if you have a go, you take the trade you have learnt in life and set up in Taminda or in Nemingha, you should have an opportunity to be your own boss. That's what people want, to be their own boss, the master of their own ship. They want to have their own corporate manual and to wear their own uniform or their own type of hi-vis. This is what people want because the ultimate freedom is to be master of your own ship. That is the philosophical attraction to small business. Even though you might make more money in the big corporate world, you love the idea of being your own boss. But to do that, you need a government that understands that to make that available to people who want the fundamental freedom to be master of their own ship, to chart their own course, they need to be as free as possible. The core thing is that the job we have here as members of the Nationals, regardless of your education or the luck of your family or the wealth that they might have attained, you will transcend through the economic and social stratification of life to your highest level, limited only by your innate ability. If you can do that, you'll be free, and freedom is what drives us. All my colleagues have said so much about this fair work legislation. But on a philosophical basis I say the more regulations you place on people trying to get on in business, the more you restrict their freedom.

Anika Wells (Lilley, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Aged Care) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The election of the Albanese Labor government was a watershed moment for Australian workers. We promised to build a better, fairer future and we are delivering. Just over one year into an Albanese government, wages are growing at their fastest rate in a decade, with the average full-time worker approximately $3,700 better off than they were 12 months ago. We've created half a million jobs, 85 percent of which are full-time, the strongest jobs growth for the first year of any Australian government. We increased the minimum award wage for aged-care workers by 15 per cent, the largest increase in history. We introduced 10 days paid domestic violence leave so that no-one is forced to choose between being safe and being paid. The gender pay gap has fallen to 13 per cent, the lowest ever level in Australia.

This progress is great news for most Australians who need secure work and strong wages to combat the cost-of-living pressures. But too many people are not receiving the full benefit of these changes because of unfair loopholes that allow their pay and conditions to be undercut by their employer. Over one-third of workers are stuck in insecure or non-standard forms of work, directly impacting their ability to provide for their families or to plan for the future. That changes with the Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Closing Loopholes) Bill 2023. This bill closes the loopholes and provides certainty, fairness and a level playing field for workers and businesses. It delivers on our promise to get wages moving with four key elements: (1) cracking down on the labour hire loophole that's used to undercut pay and conditions; (2) criminalising wage theft; (3) properly defining casual work so that casual workers are not being exploited; and (4) making sure gig workers are not getting ripped off.

In my electorate of Lilley, we saw the life shattering impact of insecure work firsthand during COVID. Northsiders who were casuals, contract workers, gig economy workers and labour hire workers suddenly saw their hours slashed or taken away altogether overnight. They instantly fell through the trap door with no annual leave, no sick leave, no holiday pay and no family leave. As a result, the line outside of Centrelink in Nundah and in Chermside went around the block. Today, the Albanese government is standing up for those workers who are stuck being defined as 'casual' but are working regular hours and want to become permanent employees. This bill introduces a fair and objective definition to determine when an employee can be classified as casual. Casual employees will be able to seek permanent employment through two pathways: through the new employee choice pathway or through the existing casual conversion pathway. This choice could help 850,000 workers, who will have the option to become permanent workers and receive greater access to leave entitlements and more financial security. This choice also empowers workers to remain casual if it suits their needs or lifestyle.

This bill also delivers on our commitment to make sure workers with the same job get the same pay. Labour hire has legitimate uses in providing surge and specialist workforces. In aged care, the Australian government provides temporary surge staffing to assist providers that are unable to fill the critical skills because of staff testing positive to COVID-19. But, unfortunately, some employers are deliberately exploiting labour hire loopholes to undercut their workers, bringing in a labour hire workforce with fewer rights and lower pay. The most egregious example of this in recent memory happened under the Morrison government's watch. In 2020, Qantas outsourced the jobs of 2,000 ground crew, many of whom lived in my electorate of Lilley and worked at the Brisbane Airport. In a bitter blow, the workers who were let go were told that they could reapply for their jobs as contractors but, of course, for less pay. Chris, a father of three living in my electorate, was one of the 2,000 Qantas ground crew who was made redundant by Qantas. He had worked for Qantas for 17 years. His dad worked for Qantas for 10 years. Aviation was in Chris's blood. But, because of these unfair loopholes, Chris was made redundant and ended up stacking supermarket shelves in order to support his family.

Today, the High Court has delivered justice for Chris and the thousands who have been put through hell over the past three years. Now, the High Court has unanimously dismissed Qantas's appeal, clearing the way for workers who had adverse action taken against them to seek compensation. While this is a sweet moment of vindication, and one long awaited for those workers and the unions who fought for them, now is the time to legislate to stop the race to the bottom that has been waved through by the coalition over the past nine years.

This bill amends the Fair Work Act to protect workers like Chris and to take away some of the incentive to outsource jobs. It gives powers to the Fair Work Commission to make orders that labour hire employees be paid at least the wages in a host enterprise agreement, unless it is not fair and reasonable in the circumstances. Sensible exemptions will apply for small-business employers, and a default three-month exemption will apply to avoid impacting labour hire arrangements for surge work, like we have in aged care, or temporary replacements.

Australians have seen countless examples of dodgy bosses ripping off their workers, emboldened by the deliberate policy decisions made by consecutive Liberal-National governments. Under the previous coalition government's watch, the suburb of Nundah, in my electorate of Lilley, had the highest reported number of wage-theft complaints to the Fair Work Ombudsman. Chermside workers were being ripped off and forced to forfeit part of their wages for food and drinks.

In 2019, the now Prime Minister and I met with workers in my electorate of Lilley who had been victims of wage theft, Sulu and Kulwinder. We listened and learned about how wage theft disproportionately affects vulnerable workers—especially migrant workers, young people and women. I came back to this place and called on the government to criminalise wage theft. But, instead of helping these vulnerable workers, the coalition saw a house on fire—and took out the fire alarm, with their Work Choices 2.0 bill.

The underpayment of wages continues in workplaces across Australia, from small businesses to billion-dollar companies, leaving workers out of pocket. In Queensland, we got sick of waiting for the slew of federal coalition governments to act, and our state government criminalised wage theft in 2020. But those who aren't blessed to live in the glorious kingdom of Queensland do deserve protection as well. They need a national wage-theft system to end the rip-offs.

If a worker steals cash from the till or if a worker steals stock, it is a criminal offence, and fair enough. But, in many parts of Australia, if a boss steals from their worker's pay packet, it is not. That stops with this bill. This bill delivers on the promise the now Prime Minister and I made to Sulu and Kulwinder—to criminalise wage-theft across the country.

Now, there's been a lot of public discourse about the consequences of this bill, with the coalition accusing us of 'making a bad situation worse'. They have called the legislation 'radical'. But, as the Minister for Aged Care, I have seen firsthand the profound impact that improving the pay and conditions of your workers can have on an industry that is in a bad situation. Requiring 24/7 nursing in aged care, and supporting pay rises for aged-care workers—policies which sought to lift the standard of care and improve the pay and conditions of aged-care workers—were also ridiculed by the coalition, for 'making a bad situation worse'. But, in the past year, there has been a reduction in the numbers of pressure injuries, a reduction in the numbers of physical restraints, a reduction in the numbers of significant unplanned weight losses, a reduction in the numbers of falls, a reduction in polypharmacy and a reduction in the use of antipsychotics in aged care.

This week I spoke to the service manager, Sharon, at UnitingCare in Weston Creek, who said that her staff-satisfaction surveys are skyrocketing, and she has workers coming back to the aged-care sector. That is what happens when you value and respect a workforce.

At the election, voters elected a government who would work for them—who would stop the race to the bottom on wages and conditions and make sure they got a fair day's pay for a fair day's work. This bill delivers on that commitment and will help create a better, fairer future for workers. I thank the House.

Andrew Willcox (Dawson, Liberal National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise today to speak on the Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Closing Loopholes) Bill 2023. But first I would like to talk about a Swiss cheese paradox. Swiss cheese, as we all know, has a lot of holes. The more holes you have, the less cheese you have. And the more cheese you have, the more holes you have. Therefore, the more cheese you think you have, the less cheese you actually have. You might think, 'Willcox has gone mad. Why is he talking about cheese in parliament?' Well, this new bill, under Labor, is Swiss cheese, and brings with it its own Swiss cheese paradox. It's not only confusing, it's complex. Labor reckon they are closing the loopholes when in fact they are adding more holes. Frustratingly, I have been asking the House a lot recently: what is Labor actually doing for the Australian public? It seems the answer is: not much, because here I am asking the same question again. So let me explain it to you. Then let me tell you what this is going to mean for the people in my electorate of Dawson.

The Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations, Mr Burke, announced a 280-page bill to amend the fair work legislation. Along with it came a 521-page explanatory memorandum. That's 801 pages in total. Unbelievable! We are being told that it's good for the Australian public. However, in reality, the only people that are going to benefit from these amendments are the unions. How typical. Here are the facts. The fair work legislation amendments are impossibly complex. The fair work legislation amendments are going to cost business billions in wages. The fair work legislation amendments are going to cost consumers more, and this is the last thing that Australians need in a time of a Labor created cost-of-living crisis. And Minister Burke has openly admitted to all of these things. What I don't understand is that he doesn't seem to care, when in reality caring about legislation he creates is his job. What has he done instead of caring? He has developed fair work legislation amendments that are anything but fair. All they will result in is job losses at a time of a Labor created cost-of-living crisis.

This is another rushed decision made by the Albanese Labor government without consultation, without speaking to peak representative bodies, without speaking to businesses and without consulting the people that this bill is going to directly impact. The public outrage over these amendments has been staggering. Jennifer Westacott, the chief executive of the Business Council of Australia, said:

Australians should have safe jobs, well paid jobs and rewarding jobs, but the government's radical shake-up of the industrial relations system will not deliver that …

These changes will create confusion and extra costs for consumers, make it harder to hire casual workers and create uncertainty for employing anybody.

Any government that's serious about cost of living would not do this.

What a statement—any government that's serious about cost of living would not do this. But that's exactly what the Labor government is doing.

The 'same job, same pay' changes in this bill are going to be the bill that all Australians are going to have to pay. With this one policy, the nation's economic security is under assault, and this couldn't have come at a worse time. Speaking to one business owner in my electorate, I heard that his staff costs have already gone up 11.4 per cent since February alone. So why is the Albanese Labor government intent on crippling business further? 'Same job, same pay' will mean a labour hire worker who is brand-new to the business will, by law, have to be paid the same as the employee with decades of experience. But don't worry: Minister Burke says business can just pass these increased costs onto the already struggling consumer! Sounds fair, right? That's as long as the unions still get their cheques.

But that's not all. These amendments will mean that Fair Work will have the power to dictate the hours of work and the pay rates for independent contractors. These hardworking Australians became independent contractors because they wanted to. They want to be able to choose their own hours, choose where they work and choose how they work. These Aussie workers chose their lifestyle because it suits them. Who do the Albanese government think they are to take that choice away from our hardworking Australian public?

What does this industry think of the policy? Well, Tania Constable of the Minerals Council of Australia has said:

The Albanese Government's latest industrial relations legislation changes are some of the most extreme, interventionist workplace changes that have ever been proposed in Australia.

The changes will inflict immense harm to the economy, the weight of which will fall on the shoulders of the most vulnerable Australians who will pay more for groceries, housing, and energy.

Andrew McKellar, the chief executive of the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, has said the legislation:

… will be bad for productivity, those wanting to be their own boss, and consumers struggling with the cost-of-living crisis. The only winners in this are union chiefs. The only loophole this bad legislation is looking to close is that of plummeting union membership … This is a continuation of a radical industrial relations agenda, and we are again bracing ourselves for further risky changes to our workplace system.

Speaking of crippling businesses, this next one, in my opinion, is a direct attack on small business. Minister Burke has publicly admitted that this bill will add complexity to an already unduly complex system—801 pages of complexity, to be exact. The small businesses in my electorate do not have the IR teams or the HR teams to go through this bill with a fine-tooth comb just to understand it. Instead small-business owners, who are already struggling to pay the bills, working in their business day in, day out, will now be forced to spend a ridiculous amount of their own time or a ridiculous amount of money with solicitors in order to understand these new obligations. Matthew Addison from the Council of Small Business Organisations Australia agrees, saying:

The issues of confusion and complexity remain, combined with an increased requirement of every business, small or large, to dedicate resources, time and money towards trying to understand and implement these onerous new obligations.

…   …   …

At a time when small businesses are managing increased costs of supply, of rent, of power, of wages; we don't need changes that detract business from their sales and service delivery. Small business seek to employ and properly reward their workers. They seek to innovate and adopt new technology.

What have businesses in my electorate been saying? They're scared. These impassioned and infuriated business owners are certainly disheartened. One business owner said he's questioning why he's even doing this anymore and is considering walking away entirely. The impact of that? The 30 to 35 staff he employees will be out of a job, and that's just one business. Imagine if all the businesses in my electorate close their doors right now. Under the Labor government, his rent has increased, the cost of supplies has skyrocketed and workforce shortages are a constant and a never-ending battle. Now the Labor government has given him 801 pages of homework to do. These are the costs that business must either absorb, which is unsustainable for business, or pass on to consumers, who can't afford to pay any more. Another business owner said: 'It's all well and good for Minister Burke to say, "The business owners will be able to pass the cost on to consumers." In his words, it's only a little bit more, but a little bit more for one consumer, who is already struggling to make ends meet, turns into one less sale for that business. Multiply that by 26 million people in Australia, and that's a lot less sales for businesses.' The consequences of these amendments will be increased inflation, an increase in the cost of living, decreasing profits for businesses, business closures and job losses on a potentially exponential scale, resulting in increased pressure on government funded welfare systems. This is textbook Labor, and we can see it play out over and over again.

For anyone who does not know, if you do a quick Google search on what causes a recession, you will find the following:

As corporations and households get overextended and face difficulties in meeting their debt obligations, they reduce investment and consumption, which in turn leads to a decrease in economic activity.

According to the businesses that I have spoken to on this topic, the writing is already on the wall. The last time Australia entered into a recession was in the early nineties, after Labor had been in government for seven years. In mid-2007 Australia watched the global financial crisis cripple the world. While we did experience some hardships as a nation, thankfully we did not experience the widespread devastation that the rest of the world did. Who was in government at the time of the GFC, and who had been in government ensuring Australia had a strong economic foundation for years before the GFC? You guessed it—the coalition, the Liberal and National parties. Now, in 2023, under another Labor government, we are facing the serious threat of yet another recession. And what is the Labor government doing about it? Nothing, but making it worse.

Labor has spruiked about being the party of the people. But if that is so, why are you subjecting Australia to such devastating consequences? If the Labor government don't start realising the consequences of their actions, they are going to grind this economy to a halt. Just like the Swiss cheese paradox, welcome to the Labor government paradox, where they say and promise one thing, all wrapped up in fancy packaging of hopeful and promising-sounding names, but the reality is they are making an economic situation in this country worse.

It seems to be a theme that I am standing here again calling on the Albanese Labor government and calling on Minister Burke to reverse their decisions. I am calling on the Albanese Labor government to think about what this legislation is doing to the people of Australia and to the good people in my electorate of Dawson. Don't condemn us to more cost-of-living pressures. Don't condemn us to business closures. Don't condemn us to job losses. Don't condemn us to bankruptcy, and don't condemn us to even more homelessness. The time to do the right thing is now. In this Labor created cost-of-living crisis, do not make the situation worse with radical, ill-conceived industrial relations laws.

Alicia Payne (Canberra, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What an honour it is to rise today in support of the Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Closing Loopholes) Bill 2023. This is a bill which will fundamentally make our economy and our workplaces fairer for Australian workers, and I want to commend the minister, his office and the public servants at the Department of Employment and Workplace Relations for all their work in getting this bill together. I also want to thank the Australian Council of Trade Unions, all the unions who have been campaigning for these reforms, their delegates and organisers and the workers who have shared their stories and really created the momentum for change. It really isn't a surprise that it is a Labor government bringing forward these reforms because Labor governments are the only governments that stand up for workers in this country. It was a Labor government that fought for and achieved the eight-hour work day. It was a Labor government that introduced compulsory superannuation. It was a Labor government that brought in enterprise bargaining. It was a Labor government that legislated for paid parental leave and a Labor government that dismantled the antiworker WorkChoices reforms. It was a Labor government that established the Fair Work Commission, and it was a Labor government that abolished the Australian Building and Construction Commission—twice. It was this Labor government that implemented paid domestic violence leave. It was this Labor government that last year legislated for secure jobs and better pay. It is this Labor government that is now closing the loopholes that undermine the wages and conditions of Australian workers. We are today continuing and building on our party's proud history here in the 47th Parliament.

This bill contains four main elements. It cracks down on the labour hire loophole, it criminalises wage theft, it properly defines casual work and it makes sure that gig economy workers aren't being ripped off. All of these policies were taken to the 2022 federal election, and so our mandate to legislate this bill is very clear.

I want to raise a few examples of why this bill is so vitally important. Earlier this year I met Peter, a member of the Australian Manufacturing Workers Union from Devonport in Tasmania. Peter is a forklift driver who has worked for Simplot for the past 15 years. Peter is a casual worker. Peter has been a casual worker for his entire 15 years at Simplot. In fact, almost all of Peter's coworkers are casual. But there is nothing casual about Peter's work. There is nothing casual about his colleagues' work. Peter and his colleagues are desperate for permanency. In fact, they have been fighting to be converted to permanent positions with no luck. With the support of his union, Peter and his colleagues have tried to dispute the company's violations of their agreements at the Fair Work Commission twice, but have had no success. This bill will help Peter because this bill will properly define casual work.

This government is standing up for casual workers who want to become permanent employees. When an employee works permanent, regular hours but remains casual, they miss out on job security, they miss out on long service leave, and they miss out on sick leave and annual leave. They miss out. The measures contained in this bill will help more than 850,000 casuals who are working as though they are permanent employees. Fundamentally, it is recognition that rent isn't casual, utility bills aren't casual and car registration isn't casual. All these things are certainties, and these workers deserve certainty when it comes to their income. To address the fearmongering we have heard from those opposite, the government understands that casual work does suit some people, so we aren't mandating that casuals get converted to permanency against their will, but if they want to, they should be able to convert.

As a result of this bill, casual employees will be able to seek permanent employment through two pathways. The first is through the new employee choice pathway, recognising the objective status of the employee, and it applies where their working arrangements have changed so they no longer meet the definition. This pathway is entirely employee driven and available after six months of service in a medium or large business, or 12 months in a small business. The second pathway, which is the existing pathway of casual conversion, is where large and medium employers undertake the once-off obligation to proactively assess all their casuals after 12 months service and, if they have a regular pattern of work, offer them conversion.

This bill also introduces minimum standards for employee-like workers in the gig economy. Viralkumar is a constituent of mine here in Canberra and has been a delivery driver since 2018. In that time he has logged more than 25,000 deliveries. Viralkumar works on multiple platforms, including Uber, DoorDash, Menulog, Jimmy Brings and Yello. In all of these cases he's classified as an independent contractor. Some of the platforms are better than others, but what is consistent is low pay, no entitlements and workers being ripped off. Viralkumar says that on average he gets paid around $5 per delivery. He estimates that he would complete around three deliveries per hour, so that's about $15 an hour. There's no extra pay for waiting at the restaurant for an order to be completed. There's no extra pay for finding a car park. There's no extra pay for being stuck in traffic. There's no extra pay for working on public holidays. There's no extra pay for working through the night or for taking long shifts. Five dollars. No superannuation, no leave, no entitlements—$5. No money for fuel, for registration or for any other vehicle expenses—$5.

Viralkumar says app ratings hang over his head like a threat and gave the example of a time when he picked up an order for someone named Sara. Halfway to Sara's house, he got a call from the restaurant saying that they gave him the wrong Sara's order. So he turned around, went back and swapped the order for the correct one. The restaurant then gave him a negative rating, even though the mix-up was their mistake. He called the restaurant, who at first denied that they had done this. Then they admitted that they had but couldn't reverse the rating. Viralkumar called the platform, who advised him that it was an automated system and that there was nothing they could do but not to worry because, after 100 positive reviews, that negative one would disappear! The consequences of these mistakes can be serious for delivery drivers, including removal from the platform.

Viralkumar also spoke of how on one platform he was mysteriously deactivated, seemingly for no reason at all. When he tried to get through to the platform, they gave him no assistance or reason for the deactivation. It wasn't until he spoke his union organiser, Jack, at the Transport Workers Union, that he was able to start delivering again. Viralkumar's is the story of gig workers all around this country. For too long, they have been allowed to be exploited. For too long under the former government, this parliament was frozen in inaction as this new industry took off in a way which left workers as collateral damage.

This bill allows the Fair Work Commission to set minimum standards for workers like Viralkumar. Minimum standards orders can include things like payment terms, deductions, insurance and cost-recovery. The bill also introduces new protections for these workers from unfair deactivation if they've been working for a digital platform for more than six months. It is time those in the gig economy are given the protections they deserve.

This bill closes the labour hire loopholes that have allowed companies to undercut the pay and conditions they have agreed to with their workers. ABS statistics show that growth in labour hire jobs is now outpacing employment growth by a large margin. At least 600,000 people, or around 3½ to 4½ per cent of the workforce, are employed through labour hire. About 84 per cent of labour hire workers don't have access to paid leave entitlements. Labour hire workers earn on average about $4,700 a year less than ordinarily employed workers. Labour hire workers often earn even less than their directly employed colleagues at the same worksite. For example, mining workers earn up to 30 per cent less than their colleagues due to being employed through labour hire. What has become clear over the past few years is that this is a practice of outsourcing as undercutting, avoidance of obligations by design.

One of the worst examples we've seen recently is that of Qantas. Research from the ACTU mapped the extensive use of labour hire companies by Qantas to drive down wages. Qantas has split its cabin crew workforce across 14 labour hire companies. In fact, no cabin crew on Qantas aircraft have been hired directly by the airline since 2008. Some of these labour hire cabin crew are earning half the rate of their colleagues at the same job. In fact, on some domestic Qantas flights you can see five different rates of pay on the same plane. The mind boggles. They miss out on penalty rates and job security and sometimes have only two hours notice before their next shift. This year Qantas posted billions of dollars in profits, so it can only be described as the worst kind of greed that this once-great Australian business is treating the people that keep its planes in the sky the way that it does.

This bill will make sure that these practices cannot continue as they have. It will give the Fair Work Commission the power to make orders that labour hire employees are paid at least the wages in the host employer's already established enterprise agreement. Employees and unions can apply to the Fair Work Commission for an order to that effect. The commission is not required to make an order if it is not fair and reasonable in the circumstances. Businesses will be prohibited from taking action to avoid their obligations or prevent a commission order from being made.

This bill also criminalises wage theft. It is inconceivable to me that this is not yet a crime. If a worker steals from the till they have broken the law. That's fair. That's the law. But it cannot and should not be the case that the opposite is okay. When we see the egregious examples at places like 7-Eleven, where employees were marched across the road to an ATM and forced to hand back their wages, we know there is a problem. Employers who intentionally steal their employees' wages should face criminal penalties, and now employers who engage in these practices will. It will be a crime to steal your employees' wages, punishable by up to 10 years imprisonment and hefty fines.

This bill is transformative. It will make our industrial relations framework fairer. It is important that this bill passes the parliament. Those opposite will moan about unions and whine about processes, but just remember what they're really worried about. They're really concerned about workers getting a fair go. They're really concerned that workers are going to get a pay rise. They're concerned that workers' conditions will improve, because they're a party that deliberately kept wages low. As the minister has said, I would encourage anyone who supports this to actually come into this place and defend these loopholes, explain why they should remain and explain why these things, which lead to the mistreatment of Australian workers, should continue in our system. Those opposite are not on the side of workers, and they never will be. But this government is on your side. I commend this bill to the House.

Jenny Ware (Hughes, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Closing Loopholes) Bill 2023, which I oppose in its entirety. At the outset, before I get into the detail of this bill, it's a further demonstration of the Labor government's commitment to unwinding the flexibility that did exist within our industrial relations system. It is also a shout-out to the union movement. I was here in the House when I heard the member for Canberra, who I have a lot of respect for, speak. I just want to point out, before I get to the union involvement in this legislation, the specific thank you that was given to the ACTU and the gratitude that has been expressed by many opposite me to the unions for this legislation.

In 2023, when we have so many challenges to our economy, now is the time for the government to be boosting productivity, encouraging businesses and not making things harder for them—because that is what this is doing. This is making things harder as well for many people in the gig economy and casual workers who choose this as a way of working. They may only do it for a short period of time in their working life, but they do it for reasons of choice and they do it because it suits their particular lifestyle. It also helps employers. It helps our businesses. It helps productivity. I'm referring particularly to the building and construction industry. In the electorate of Hughes, I have many building and construction companies. We have close to 2,000 in my electorate alone. I have nearly 7,000 constituents who work in the building and construction industry within my electorate. At many times in the building and construction industry, a company may suddenly say, 'I've just got an extra job, so now I need some extra plumbers, roofers or painters.' So it may be the case that there are people they can call upon—labour hire, casual workers—that will come in and help that business to get that job done. That is where there is real benefit with keeping casual workers within our economy. There is no reason why casual workers should not be able to retain that choice. They should not be forced to become permanent workers. The Labor Party claim to be the friend of the workers, but in this case they have this wrong.

When the responsible minister, Mr Burke, introduced this bill overall, he said this bill will 'clarify' and 'simplify' aspects of our industrial relation system. This legislation is 161 pages, with an explanatory memorandum of over 300 pages. I do not know how, by any definition, that is simplifying this system. If we look at what we have now and what the government is attempting to do with simplifying how we define 'casual employment', first of all, the permanent casual loophole has already been closed under earlier legislation, but this new definition of 'casual employment' in this bill is three pages long and includes 15 factors to determine if an employee is in fact a casual. Again, I fail to understand how this is simplifying our industrial relations system and making it easier in any way for businesses and employees to work together, which they have been able to do. In that regard, this government, as all federal governments should be doing, should be providing an environment to facilitate our industrial relations system. It should be driving productivity. That is what makes Australians stronger, not micromanaging every tiny detail of the relationship between employers and employees and between businesses and workers.

This bill is well and truly taking Australia down the wrong path. This bill is intended to be a distraction from the real issue that is facing Australians at the moment, which is the cost of living. This bill is doing nothing to address what people in my electorate are telling me are the real issues that are facing them.

This bill has three main problems: it is impossibly complex, it is going to add significant cost to businesses and to consumers and it is impossibly confusing. I have just spoken about how we are now going to define a casual worker, for example. The minister for employment, at his recent National Press Club address, said: 'This bill will, indeed, add complexity to an already unduly complex system and, in addition, consumer costs will go up.' When we are facing a cost-of-living crisis in this country, exactly what we want to hear from the employment relations minister is, 'By the way, I am now introducing legislation which I guarantee will increase the costs of a whole lot of consumer goods'!

So to say that this new workplace relations system is going to improve things for our country is completely disingenuous. This is about eroding the choice and flexibility of individuals who want to work in their own time and on their own terms, and those workers are not members of unions. We have just heard a big thankyou given out to the ACTU for its involvement in this legislation.

This legislation is going to put significant constraints on businesses and employers who want to expand, construct new products and infrastructure or simply manage their operations in their own way. Small businesses, medium businesses and large businesses should be able to do that within a flexible industrial relations system. On this aside, we are not going to support reforms which will weaken our economy and continue to make a bad situation worse for Australian small businesses, Australian farmers and Australian families.

This law and the earlier fair work legislation that has already gone through this House is a radical reordering of Australian workplace law which every business organisation in this country has pleaded with the government to not go ahead with, from very large business down to much smaller businesses. Organisations that have supported it include, of course, unions. The unions will now have unprecedented rights of entry into many businesses, and I will turn to that in a moment.

We all want Australians to have safe, high-wage, sustainable jobs and to be rewarded for their hard work and experience. Driving productivity and ensuring that Australian companies and Australian employers do well is exactly what we need to get this country moving again. But an attack on gig workers, labour hire companies, tradies and other independent contractors, which is what is at the heart of this closing loopholes bill, is what we are seeing instead.

These are simply people who want to work in their own time and on their own terms. They should be allowed to do that. What industrial relations in this country should be focusing on is making us more productive and creating more jobs. This is de-incentivising companies, particularly small businesses, to put on new employees and to employ casual worker. It's quite patronising, I think overall, to say to workers who have chosen to work in these areas or who have chosen casual work, 'Well, we're the government, and we say that what you are doing is actually not the right path.' We should be able to trust an industrial relations system where employers and employees can make their own decisions and where employers, particularly small businesses, can choose when they may need extra resources to power their businesses. I refer particularly to the words of Jennifer Westacott, Chief Executive of the Business Council of Australia. She has said this is a 'radical shakeup of the industrial relations system' in this country. She spoke about it creating confusion and extra cost for consumers, which was backed up by the minister, and it will make it harder to hire casual workers, creating uncertainty for employing anybody. She said:

Any government that's serious about cost of living would not do this.

And those words are supported.

Turning to unions, this bill will expand union powers in workplaces. It is going to enable unions to exercise right-of-entry powers without any notice whenever it relates to wage underpayment. All they have to do to gain immediate entry is to assert to the Fair Work Commission that they suspect a case of wage underpayment. No evidence is needed at that point. They will simply then be able to enter the workplace. Labor talks about closing labour-hire loopholes, but the truth is that this policy goes much further than labour hire. It can be seen as hugely disruptive. It stops businesses from being able to access the service they need to address what are often short-term problems within their production lines. This is nothing but an unjustified attack on labour-hire employers as well as the businesses and workers that depend upon this sector. This is a sector that has played an important role in our economy and should continue to play an important role in our economy.

Labor often talk about diversity and how much they like diversity, but they don't like a diverse labour market in this country. They don't like the fact that gig workers in the casual workforce undertake various forms of work and largely do not join unions. The Albanese government in this respect does not respect diversity. They do not respect diversity of the labour market. The opposition, on the other hand, recognises that our labour market is diverse and that those who choose these forms of work represent legitimate and important aspects of Australia's labour market.

I just want to turn briefly to what a couple of other stakeholders said when this legislation was sent out to them for comment. We had the Minerals Council of Australia say:

The Albanese Government's latest industrial relations legislation changes are some of the most extreme, interventionist workplace changes that have ever been proposed in Australia.

The changes will inflict immense harm to the economy, the weight of which will fall on the shoulders of the most vulnerable Australians who will pay more for groceries, housing, and energy.

Tania Constable went on to say:

For Australian mining, this excessive burden and workforce rigidity will put the industry's ability to deliver the full economic and social benefit from the emerging clean energy mining boom, under serious threat.

We hear almost every day in this place about the push to clean energy, and this is not going to help the government achieve those targets.

In closing, this is not good legislation. This is not a good way to reinvent industrial relations within this country. We have long moved away from this sort of centralised wage fixing. We have long moved towards flexibility between employers and employees. The coalition government respected that business owners—small, medium and large businesses—could make the decisions for their own workforce, and it respected the right of casuals and those in the gig economy to have the choice as to when they worked and whether they wanted to remain as casuals. This is not good legislation. For all the reasons outlined, I oppose it.

Pat Conroy (Shortland, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Defence Industry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to make a contribution to the Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Closing Loopholes) Bill 2023. I want to begin by reflecting on a couple of remarks from the previous speaker, the member for Hughes. The member for Hughes talked a lot about choice—about respecting the choice of casuals to be casual and the choice of gig workers to be gig workers. I accept that, for some casuals and some gig workers, it is a choice. They choose when to work. But I would submit that they are the minority.

When you're applying for a job and an employer says, 'You can accept it as a casual or you don't get the job,' and the choice is between accepting that job on the conditions imposed upon you by the employer and starving or not being able to pay your rent, you have no power. You have absolutely zero power. When an employer says to you, 'I expect you to turn up on every shift I roster you on, even though you're a casual, but I won't give you any employment security. I won't give you leave entitlements, but I expect you to turn up on call when I need you and to be sent home when I send you home without pay,' there is no choice in that for a lot of workers.

This is what this legislation is about. It is about addressing fundamental inequalities that mean hundreds of thousands of Australian workers have no security. They have no ability to predict when they'll work, to predict what they'll get paid, or to pay their rent or pay a mortgage or take a holiday with their family. This is fundamentally what this legislation does. It also addresses a huge structural inequality in labour hire that is crippling families in my region of the Hunter and the Central Coast, which I'll turn to in a minute. I wanted to put those remarks on the record initially.

As we've heard, this bill contains four key elements: first, cracking down on certain labour hire firms that undercut pay and conditions; second, criminalising both wage theft and industrial manslaughter; third, legislating a fair and objective definition of casual work so casuals aren't being exploited and introducing a new pathway for eligible employees to change to permanent employment if they wish to do so; and, fourth, making sure gig workers aren't being ripped off.

I'd like to say at the outset of my contribution that the Albanese Labor government was elected to get wages moving, unlike the Liberal Party and the former finance minister, former senator Mathias Cormann, who said the quiet bit out loud when he explained that low wages were 'a deliberate design feature of our economic architecture'. We know that getting wages moving for workers is not only good for the hip pockets of families; it is good for the economy. This is what this set of reforms is all about: closing down the loopholes that are undermining wages and conditions to help get wages moving again.

We've heard a few furphies about this bill, not only from those opposite but also from stories circling in the media, so I'd like to outline what is being proposed in this bill. These are not radical changes. All we're doing is making the current law work more effectively and providing certainty, fairness and a level playing field for both businesses and workers.

The first key element is cracking down on certain labour hire firms that undercut pay and conditions. The government recognises that labour hire does have a legitimate use in providing surge and specialist workforces. Nothing in this set of reforms changes that. What we are concerned about and what these reforms address is when companies are using labour hire loopholes to deliberately undercut the agreements that have already been made with workers. Currently, businesses are allowed to pay labour hire workers less than directly employed permanent workers doing the same tasks on the exact same roster. We need to close this loophole, and this bill will amend the Fair Work Act 2009 to give the Fair Work Commission the power to make orders that labour hire employees be paid at least what they would be paid under the employer's enterprise agreement. This is delivering on our election commitment for 'same job, same pay'.

Many constituents in my electorate would be very familiar with this election commitment. Whilst we know this is happening across the entire economy, it is becoming increasingly widespread in the mining sector, particularly in coalmining. I'm proud to represent an electorate that covers the beautiful Lake Macquarie and Central Coast, which has long been home to mineworkers and their families. In my electorate of Shortland, there are more than 1,000 workers directly employed in the coalmining industry, and I'm incredibly proud of that. This bill will mean these workers in my electorate can have certainty that they will be getting the same pay for the same job with the work they do.

This is a critical feature, because the cancer of misused labour hire has infected my region most grossly. I have coalminers working in coalmines in the Hunter Valley, where, if you're directly employed by the company, you've negotiated an enterprise agreement and you will be on good wages and conditions. You have to work very hard to earn that pay, usually rotating 24/7 shifts, and I've seen many coalminers not have a Christmas with their family for a long time. But they're fairly remunerated for that. But working alongside them, doing the same jobs, are coalminers employed by a labour hire company, being paid as little as one-third as much as that coalminer directly employed. Those workers on labour hire aren't brought in as a surge workforce. They're not brought in for temporary, specialised, technical jobs. They are brought in to be production workers, employed by a labour hire company, with a sole purpose: undermining the enterprise agreement. That is what that does. That is not what labour hire should be for. It is destroying wages and conditions in the mining industry. It is meaning workers in my electorate can't take holidays, can't pay their mortgages, can't give their kids the best start in life. That's what this does. This bill deals with preventing those labour hire loopholes that are there to destroy wages and conditions. I think every fair-minded Australian would agree that, if workers do the same job, they should get the same pay. That is a critical element of the bill, and that's why I'm so proud of this legislation.

Another element of the legislation I'm so proud of is the parts of the bill that criminalise industrial manslaughter. Many people across the Hunter region will know of the tragic death of Charlestown resident Mmalerato 'Mallis' Harrison at Woolworths Jesmond in November last year. Mallis was employed by a contracted cleaning company at the Woolworths store and was crushed against a wall by the floor-cleaning machine. On a Saturday recently, it was revealed by the Newcastle Herald that Mallis and other employees had consistently raised safety concerns about the equipment and were even told by the employer at the cleaning company that they 'should practise it more'. SafeWork NSW is quite rightly still investigating this tragic incident, but, as Mallis's husband, Glenn Harrison, told the Newcastle Herald:

Every single worker in the country deserves to feel safe at work, and to go home to be with their family at the end of every shift.

Mr Harrison is absolutely right. This is a tragic incident that should never have occurred. To Mr Harrison, I'm so sorry, and, to Mallis's family and friends, I pass on my condolences.

Safety at work is a fundamental right, and we should have penalties for employers who breach work health and safety that are serious and proportionate to act as a deterrent and to keep workers safe. The government stands with Glenn and with every family that has had the tragic news that a loved one won't be coming home from a shift. While this bill cannot bring back those loved ones, it will help to ensure this doesn't happen to more families. On Sunday I was at the miners memorial in Cessnock, which records the almost 2,000 names of coalminers who have died at work, with ages ranging from as young as 11 to ages in the 80s. Every worker has the right to go to work and return home safely.

In addition to promoting workplace safety, the bill will also criminalise wage theft. As we know, if a worker steals from the till, it is a criminal offence. Yet in many parts of Australia, if an employer steals from your pay packet, it's not a crime. This isn't just bad for workers; it's bad for businesses, because good businesses that follow the law and pay their workers are having to compete with dodgy businesses that have an unfair advantage by deliberately underpaying workers. Theft is theft. If an employer intentionally steals from their workers, they should face criminal penalties.

Those opposite spent a decade in government and did nothing to stop the epidemic that is wage theft. The Liberals and Nationals had to be dragged kicking and screaming to even acknowledge that wage theft is a problem. Eventually the Liberals and Nationals introduced some half-hearted legislation, but then they voted against it in the Senate. They voted against their own legislation. It beggars belief that this is the same tired, old Liberal Party tearing up their own draft legislation because they couldn't get enough support to sneak in more cuts to workers' pay and conditions in other ways. Workers cannot trust the Liberal Party to look after their pay and conditions, and nothing demonstrates that more than this incident. They had stagnant wages as a deliberate design feature of their economic policy and failed to crack down on wage theft because they couldn't sneak through measures to cut workers' pay and conditions in other ways. Workers know that only the Labor Party can be trusted to get on with the job of getting wages moving again and cracking down on wage thieves.

The third key element of this bill seeks to close the loophole that leaves people classified as casuals when they are actually working permanent, regular hours. These workers are usually working similar hours to permanent workers but not getting any of the benefits of job security. This bill aims to strengthen the pathway to permanent work for casuals who want it. Importantly, this bill doesn't force anybody to convert to permanent work. With this change, it is expected that around 263,900 casual workers in New South Wales alone will be eligible for greater access to leave entitlements and more financial security should they wish to be. Further, following extensive consultation with the business community and unions, small businesses will continue to be exempt from the obligation and employees will retain the residual right to request conversion that is available to all employees. This is in line with what unions and businesses advocated for. By implementing this change the Albanese government is standing up for casual workers who want to become permanent employees.

The last key element of this suite of reforms is changing the power of the Fair Work Commission to allow it to better protect people in new forms of work, often called the 'gig economy', from exploitation. I want to be clear: this bill is not about turning people into employees when they don't want to be. Many gig workers I speak to across the Shortland electorate prefer the flexibility offered by app technology. But what we need to do is ensure that 21st technologies of the gig economy don't have 19th century working conditions. Currently employee-like workers performing through digital platforms are often engaged as independent contractors, meaning they are not able to receive rights and entitlements under the Fair Work Act. Inquiry after inquiry has demonstrated that some of these workers are receiving less pay than they otherwise would if paid under the award safety net and don't have any protection should they lose their work unfairly. This measure will give the Fair Work Commission a new power to set minimum standards for employee-like workers performing through digital platforms. These new minimum standards are expected to impact an estimated 231,700 digital platform workers in New South Wales alone. Just because you are engaged in the gig economy does not mean you should be paid less than if you are an employee, nor should we become a nation where workers have to rely on a tip just to get by.

In summary, the changes set out in this bill will strengthen the current workplace relations framework. Australians can breathe a sigh of relief that they no longer have a government that keeps wages low deliberately and fails to act to protect their rights at work. The Albanese Labor government was elected to get wages moving again and to ensure that workers aren't being exploited. By closing down the loopholes that are undermining workers' wages and conditions, we are doing just that. I thank the minister for introducing this bill. I am proud to be supporting it in this place.

Russell Broadbent (Monash, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As I begin my remarks on the Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Closing Loopholes) Bill 2023 I will say to the member for Shortland, Mr Conroy, that he said the employer said, 'I don't want to give you the leave entitlement.' That's actually not true, because, when you're casual, you get paid all of your entitlements as part of your agreement, which you know very well. So please don't make remarks to the parliament that leave people in a place where they believe something that is not true.

Even under a Labor government, our own Commonwealth car drivers moved from being full-time drivers to casual drivers. Why? Because it suits them to be casual drivers. It means they can say at any time, 'I'm not available in the next two weeks. I'm off with my partner'—or 'my wife'—'to do something else.' There are people that choose to be paid as casuals.

When as an employer I had casual employees, they were paid at least a third more than my permanent employees because all the entitlements that are due to them are paid in their hourly rate. For their hourly rate, I had the federal award when I dealt with my staff, but we always paid over the federal award. Why did we pay over the federal award? Because we had good staff and we wanted to keep them. And I never wanted to be in a position where someone said, 'You underpaid me.' So the casual employees always received at least a third, if not more, more than the full-time employees.

Then the minister mentioned wage theft. Most of the wages infringements that have been found—big organisations like banks had underpaid and other organisations had underpaid—weren't by intention; it was by misreading the law of the land at the time in regard to industrial relations. It wasn't at any stage their intention. Now, there are unscrupulous employers and there are unscrupulous employees. This is the world we live in. However, for all of the employers that I remember dealing with, their most precious commodity was their employees. Not only would they pay them correctly but they would also be generous with bonuses around Christmas time.

In my industry, which was a small business, under the federal award when an employee went on holidays they got a 17½ per cent loading—to go on holidays. You get paid 17½ per cent more for your four weeks of holiday a year. I don't think that happens to you, Mr Deputy Speaker Vasta, because I know you don't get a holiday.

I'd say closing loopholes and digging potholes would be my framework for this bill. The Fair Work legislation Amendment (Closing Loopholes) Bill 2023 is a perplexing, complex and unwieldy document that will not improve the common good. I repeat that: it will not improve the common good. On the contrary, it will reduce productivity and thereby cause hardship to many small-business owners and workers in the community; and it will shift power to unions who seek to control those who are part of the gig economy, which they have no claim on today. The bill might more accurately be called the 'Fair work legislation amendment (digging potholes) bill'.

Writing in the Australian this week, Robert Gottliebsen, who I've got a lot of time for, talks about the practical effects of the bill. He writes:

The operations of every enterprise in Australia ranging from the local gardener or plumber to BHP and the Commonwealth Bank will be caught in the incredible ramifications of the 784-page industrial relations legislation including the 500 pages of explanatory memorandum.

Given the complexity and the total powers being awarded to the minister and Fair Work Australia, no enterprise whether they be big or small will have any certainty as to whether they are obeying or breaking the law.

He also said:

And if they find that, unintentionally, they have broken these incredibly complex laws, they may suffer enormous penalties.

An accurate analogy can be applied to the roads. Imagine if, the road regulators quadruple penalties for speeding and then erect multiple speed restriction signs along those roads and cover each one with a hessian bag.

You drive along the road completely unaware as to whether you have broken the law, but still facing huge penalties.

They were his words.

The bill is anti productivity at a time when we need a productivity boost in this nation. In an address to the parliament yesterday, the member for Mitchell said:

When we look through the schedules of this bill and the explanatory memorandum of 500 pages, we learn even more about what the minister and the government are proposing, and it is perhaps the single greatest anti-productivity industrial relations bill in our nation's history. It is the word that cannot be mentioned by the Labor Party, productivity, and while they talk about pushing up wages, wages have to come with productivity or they are simply cost increases for consumers. That's what we're seeing in our economy, and that's what we see with this legislation …

I wholeheartedly agree with the member for Mitchell in his conclusion that, if this bill becomes law, there will be an increase in the cost of labour without even a thought about the anti-productivity measures that are contained within the bill.

Let's turn to the gig economy and the $9 billion cost. This bill is against those who work in the gig economy. I'll quote the member for Mitchell again—it was quite an impressive speech, I thought. He said:

… gig platforms mean people can create their own businesses faster, can do their own types of work faster and can provide their own benefits and set their own terms and conditions—

Not a bad job—

They're doing it without the need for the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations to be involved. They don't need the government to be involved in this part. We have a huge industrial relations framework in this country that provides all the minimum protections—

That's true—

We are one of the most regulated industrial markets in the world. We are the highest wage jurisdiction in the world, and yet the government says they want to artificially put up the prices. That's the reason in this legislation when we see the attached costs at $9 billion in the government's own costings. I don't believe that's correct—

That's the $9 billion—

and industry is telling us that these costs are conservative because they don't model the changes to independent contractors and other forms of work that the government is proposing in the bill.

The minister should be acutely aware that we are in the midst of a cost-of-living crisis. I think there is consensus that our common good depends on productivity improving, and yet we have zero productivity growth.

What does the additional $9 billion in cost due to the bill mean for the community? What does it mean for those struggling with mortgages and high rents? It means an additional, unnecessary cost that will be passed on to consumers. Goods and services will become more expensive. Productivity will not increase; rather, it will decline. You could not think of a worse thing to do at a worse time for the Australian economy for our future productivity and employment. Not one in the electorate of Monash will thank you for this legislation. The minister has said that the bill will result in only $9 billion in costs—his own words—but the truth is that this could be twice or three times that amount. Astonishingly, the government did not even model the cost of changes in many parts of the bill. Why not do this? Perhaps the government just doesn't care about independent contractors, who are so important to our economy.

Casuals are a good thing for people who like to take them on. People want to be casual because it's a means of increasing their income. On that subject, the member for Mitchell said:

That's the truth, and the minister has to acknowledge that. He says, 'I know most people won't take up these things, so there is no problem.' But why change it if it isn't a big problem? Why at six months should you factor in 11 factors—four sections and seven subsections in this legislation—for something that isn't a big problem for most of the workforce? People are going to benefit. They want to be casuals because they want higher rates of pay—

Correct—

The minister knows this, but he acts as if it is a major loophole. He knows it isn't a major loophole. He knows that a fraction of the problem here doesn't warrant the solution he has provided. Again, the agenda is very different.

Big business organisations and small business organisations are sounding a warning to the minister and the government, who claim that small business is exempt from the bill, but this is not accurate. Many of the provisions in this bill are against increasing productivity. The bill won't close loopholes. It will dig potholes on the road. It won't improve the common good.

Yesterday the member for Mitchell said:

The truth of this bill is that unions are under threat by modern workplaces, and they're unable to gain the cachet they need in the workplaces, and therefore the government, in a whole range of sectors, are going to smash through what they describe as loopholes …

He also said:

There is a real sense here that the Labor Party is actually being the conservative party. They want to take our industrial relations framework back to the 19th and 18th centuries. They want to have the contest between capital and labour that Karl Marx spoke about.

Of course, it was another famous Marx—Groucho Marx—who said, 'Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.' This is perhaps a good analysis of what is happening with the proponents of the closing loopholes bill. The member for Mitchell continues:

We have new emerging forms of employment, labour and industrial relations that need new frameworks—frameworks that recognise productivity, frameworks that take the opportunity of these new innovations and don't try to shut them down or feel threatened by them because of power based erosion in the union movement but actually recognise that new generations want new and different ways of working and that they should be available for people in new and different contracts.

In the Australian article yesterday, Robert Gottliebsen observed:

To their great credit, the independents have refused to rush the legislation through the upper house and have delegated it to a parliamentary committee which means there will be more time to expose the damage it will create.

The Senate Education and Employment Legislation Committee will conduct a public inquiry and will report on February 1 2024. I note that Paul Karp in the Guardian says Senator Pocock has already suggested some views about breaking up the bill so some parts could be passed this year.

Pocock wants to deal with several parts this year, including: banning discrimination against employees experiencing family and domestic violence; the workers' compensation change; and provisions criminalising wage theft.

While employers may not agree with every item on the list, the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (Acci), AiGroup, Minerals Council and Master Builders agree in principle with splitting the bill, allowing the discrimination and workers compensation law changes to be dealt with immediately.

I end with a paraphrase of Robert Gottliebsen's article in the Australian yesterday. He says the Treasurer keeps expressing optimism about productivity and the future of the nation and continues:

But he has been completely gazumped by the Employment Minister who masks his massive legislative agenda with irrelevancies like paying a little more for pizzas.

I invite the Treasurer to take a day off and sit down with those 784 pages and try and understand what on earth it all means for someone trying to conduct an enterprise.

Maybe all ALP politicians should circulate the 784 pages among the small enterprises in their electorate so they "understand" the new rules that are to govern them.

This is 784 pages of new rules that will only offend the running of your business. We oppose this legislation for very good reason.

Tracey Roberts (Pearce, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It gives me a great deal of pleasure to rise and speak on this important legislation, the Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Closing Loopholes) Bill 2023. The bill would amend the Fair Work Act 2009 and related legislation to close loopholes to protect Australian workers and strengthen the work health and safety framework. It is also important to know that the Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Closing Loopholes) Bill is compatible with the human rights and freedoms recognised or declared in the international instruments listed in section 3 of the Human Rights (Parliamentary Scrutiny) Act 2011.

This bill delivers on key commitments made in the lead-up to the last federal election to deliver fairer, safer workplaces while also providing employers with clarity when it comes to the treatment of workers and contractors. This bill represents a significant step towards creating a fair and equitable working environment for all Australians. It addresses several critical issues in our labour laws and closes the loopholes that have long undermined the rights and wellbeing of too many workers.

Firstly, let us acknowledge that the Australian workforce is the backbone of our nation. It is imperative that our labour laws reflect the values of fairness, safety and honesty. However, unfortunately, various loopholes have emerged over time, creating opportunities for exploitation and injustice. The Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Closing Loopholes) Bill 2023 aims to rectify these issues and strengthen the rights and protections for workers, improving job security by replacing the existing definition of 'casual employee' with a fair and objective definition and by introducing a new employee pathway of choice for eligible employees to change to permanent employment if they wish to do so, which is a step in the right direction.

One of the primary concerns addressed by this bill is the exploitation of workers employed in the gig economy and the misclassification of workers as independent contractors rather than employees. This misclassification has allowed many employers to avoid providing benefits such as minimum wage, superannuation and paid leave. This bill clarifies and tightens the definition of an employee, ensuring that those entitled to these benefits receive them regardless of their job arrangement. Closing this particular loophole will provide many families in my electorate of Pearce with the employment certainty that they deserve and that they need.

As of August 2022, almost 19 per cent of workers within Pearce were working in insecure, casual work with no sick leave and no minimum wage. Those workers are some of the most vulnerable in our economy, often working in the care sector or the gig economy, feeding their families from the money they earn from platforms like Mable and Uber Eats. To reiterate: part 1 of schedule 1 of the bill would amend existing section 15A of the Fair Work Act to implement an objective definition of 'casual employee' to determine when an employee can be classified as a casual employee. The new definition would be considered by the presence or absence of a firm advanced commitment to continuing and indefinite work to be assessed against several factors, and the practical reality and true nature of the employment relationship.

The bill would also amend the National Employment Standards at part 2-2 of the Fair Work Act to provide casual employees with two pathways to change their employment status: by exercising a choice via a new notification procedure or through the existing casual conversion procedure. The amendments would also establish a new framework for dealing with disputes about employment status.

The bill also responds to the findings of the review of the Fair Work Amendment (Supporting Australia's Jobs and Economic Recovery) Act 2021 statutory review by: strengthening the existing dispute resolution framework in the Fair Work Act, including by allowing the Fair Work Commission to determine, by mandatory arbitration, whether an employer had reasonable grounds to refuse to make an offer or decline a request for casual conversion; introducing new civil remedy provisions prohibiting employers from misrepresenting employment as casual employment; making misrepresentations to engage an employee as a casual employee and dismissing an employee to re-engage them as a casual employee in certain circumstances; and requiring employers to provide the casual employment information statement to casual employees at the start of their employment under 12 months.