Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Corporate Governance and Responsibility) Share this | Hansard source

I understand that Senator Siewert will want to make a contribution as well, but there are some comments I want to make in relation to the substance of this tranche of amendments. Senator Murray has laid out some of the background in relation to redundancy, and the government has been embarrassed by the Radio Rentals and the Tristar circumstances, which have had a significant amount of media and public attention. As I understand from the minister’s contribution and from the supplementary explanatory memorandum, amendment (10) tries to improve the situation for employees. Labor has a range of issues and concerns with these provisions, as with the Work Choices effect on redundancy entitlements which have been hard-earned and often negotiated in good faith by employees.

I think this has been demonstrated by the Tristar situation. I understand both from advice I have received and from the public discussion that with Tristar you have an agreement that has been in place for a number of years, negotiated by the employees and their union with the employer and relied on in good faith. The profile of the workforce is that you have quite a lot of people from non-English-speaking backgrounds and a number of employees with very long years of service. As I understand it, the employer has sacked the employees who have been at the workplace for only a short period of time, while the long-serving employees, as Senator Murray pointed out, continue to be in employment, despite the fact that there is little or no work being conducted, and the employer has applied to terminate the agreement.

The first question—and I wonder whether after I sit down the minister could address this—is whether it is the government’s intention by moving this amendment to avoid the Tristar situation. Does the government have any advice as to whether or not this amendment will protect Tristar workers? I would appreciate it if, in answering that, the minister could give the government’s view on the fact that the insurance bond protecting employee entitlements at Tristar expires on 30 December and our understanding is that there will then be no money to pay the employees. Does the government intend this amendment to deal with circumstances such as Tristar? Does the government consider that this amendment will protect those long-serving employees at Tristar who continue to be engaged apparently to avoid reasonably generous redundancy entitlements? It appears the minister is getting some advice on that, so perhaps while he does that I will deal with the stand-down provisions, unless Senator Siewert wants to intervene at this point.