Anne Stanley (Werriwa, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations. How are the Albanese Labor government's reforms to enterprise bargaining helping Australians to earn more and keep more of what they earn? How accurate have predictions about the policy been?

Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I want to thank the member for the question. She's a tireless worker in south-western Sydney and a defender of making sure that people earn more and keep more of what they earn.

There was a debate in the first year of this term on the secure jobs, better pay bill, about multi-employer bargaining, and different predictions were made. We said that it would improve wages, that it would improve conditions, that it would improve job security and that it would improve productivity. But those opposite made predictions as well, about multi-employer bargaining. They said, modestly, it would close down Australia, it would 'burn down' Australia, it would result in coast-to-coast strikes and it would smash productivity.

Well, we now have the first of the multi-employer bargains—being reported by Ewin Hannan in the Australian today—in the air-conditioning manufacturing industry. And what we find there is the following: six per cent pay rises each year for four years for those workers; job security and casual conversion; productivity improvements, including skills development and span of working hours; and better apprentice pay rates. The full-time pay rate will go from $102,000 to $133,000 over the course of four years, and those same workers will get a tax cut of more than $2,200 now and more than $3,500 by the final year of the agreement. It's worth having a listen and comparing what those opposite said multi-employer bargaining would result in with what the employer organisation has said about this agreement, which is only possible because we changed the law. From HVAC's president, Mimmo Scavera:

… some wins, some losses on both sides, and we came up with a happy medium we're all satisfied with.

A better skilled workforce and an organised workforce is always a better productive workforce … For us, it's a move to improve our industry, to make it a safer, more skilled industry.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Groom is now warned.

Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

He went on:

It's a big leap forward by both sides. Working together means it's going to improve productivity. There's no use doing it any other way. It doesn't work.

Those opposite might be determined to send people into their corners in a world of conflict. With these new laws we have brought together parties that have not previously been able to reach agreement. What happened in the past? You'd get one employer reaching an agreement, and then a dodgy operator would be able to come in and undercut the rates of pay, and there was a race to the bottom. What we have now is a race to best practice standards. What we have now is a race to improve job security. What we have now means the best employers don't get punished for being the best employers. Those opposite might be determined that people will work longer for less, but the Albanese Labor government is making sure people earn more and keep more of what they earn.

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I ask that further questions be placed on the Notice Paper, given that it's the last day before the budget and there's been not a single question from the opposition on the economy—not one.