Andrew Murray (WA, Australian Democrats) Share this | Hansard source

Before I start, I will remark to the minister, through you, Chair, that I think that is a very good prayer. By leave—I move Democrats amendments (6), (7), (8), (9), (10) on sheet 5266 together:

(6)    Schedule 1, page 4 (after line 4), before item 1, insert:

1F  At the end of subsection 151(3)

Add:

   ; and (c)    the principle that men and women should receive equal remuneration for work of equal value.

(7)    Schedule 1, page 4 (after line 4), before item 1, insert:

1G  After Subdivision G of Division 2 of Part 7

Insert:

Subdivision GA—Indexation of minimum wage

200A  Indexation of minimum wage

        (1)    This Subdivision provides for the indexation of the minimum wage, in line with the Consumer Price Index, to start on commencement of this section.

        (2)    The indexation factor is to be worked out in accordance with section 1193 of the Social Security Act 1991.

        (3)    The rounding off of indexed amounts is to be worked out in accordance with section 1194 of the Social Security Act 1991.

(8)    Schedule 1, page 4 (after line 4), before item 1, insert:

1H  After subsection 226(4)

Insert:

Unreasonable hours

     (4A)    An employee must not be requested or required by an employer to work unreasonable hours, whether as additional hours or otherwise.

      (4B)    For the purpose of subsection (4A), the factors to be taken into account in determining whether hours are unreasonable include:

             (a)    any risk to the health and safety of the employee, other employees, customers or clients; and

Note:   For purposes of this paragraph, an example is where truck drivers or doctors in hospitals are given unreasonable hours that endanger the health and safety of others.

             (b)    the employee’s personal circumstances (including family responsibilities); and

             (c)    any notice given by the employer of the requirement or request to work the hours in question.

Note:   For example, hours may be unreasonable because the employee is asked to work excessively long hours, or an unreasonably short shift, or shifts broken by an unreasonably short period, or at unreasonably short notice.

(9)    Schedule 1, page 4 (after line 4), before item 1, insert:

1I  Subsection 337(4)

Repeal the subsection, substitute:

        (4)    The information statement mentioned in subsection (2) and paragraph (3)(a) must contain:

             (a)    information about the time at which and the manner in which the approval will be sought under section 340; and

             (b)    if the agreement is an AWA—information about the effect of section 334 (which deals with bargaining agents); and

             (c)    if the agreement is an employee collective agreement—information about the effect of section 335 (which deals with bargaining agents); and

             (d)    must be appropriate, having regard to the person’s particular circumstances and needs, especially if the employee(s) whose employment will be covered by the agreement are women, persons from a non-English speaking background or young persons; and

             (e)    any other information that the Employment Advocate requires by notice published in the Gazette.

(10)  Schedule 1, page 4 (after line 4), before item 1, insert:

1J  Subsection 400(6)

Repeal the subsection, substitute:

        (6)    To avoid doubt, an employer is considered to have applied duress to an employee for the purposes of subsection (5) if the employer requires the employee to make an AWA with the employer as a condition of engagement.

I will speak to the amendments, but I request that the question on each is put separately. Amendment (6) on sheet 5266 adds ‘and the principle that men and women should receive equal remuneration for work of equal value’. As you know, we put that into the AFPC’s wage parameters. We think that is a principle that should be in IR legislation, and therefore we seek to add it. In amendment (7) we argue for the indexation of the minimum wage. If you have an annual wage determination, indexation is not necessary. But if you do not have an annual wage determination, we think indexation of the minimum wage is necessary. So this amendment is moved in anticipation of us losing our annual wage amendment.

For amendment (8) I need to record that the coalition introduced quite an improvement on unreasonable hours from the previous legislation. Work Choices does say that an employer must not make an employee work unreasonable hours above 38 hours per week. That applies to all employees, including managers, and not just those who are paid overtime. Prior to Work Choices there was no general right of this kind, and this right cannot be reduced by agreement. The difficulty with these things is there is always a question of enforcement. And of course you do get very diligent and determined employees who voluntarily work unreasonable hours and sometimes employers are hard put to restrain such individuals. That might seem unusual, but in my experience it is not unusual. You do find willing horses that need restraining.

But I am less concerned about that—and I am pleased with the existing provision in Work Choices—than with a continuing problem with unreasonable hours with respect to categories where there is danger to public health and safety. I got onto this unreasonable hours issue as a result of the truck drivers’ campaigns over the years, to which we have all been subjected, where truck drivers are obliged or made to or feel they have to work unreasonable hours. The consequences can, of course, be road accidents, deaths and injury. The other problem I have is with doctors and medical staff in hospitals working unreasonable hours, particularly interns fresh out of training who have been known to work—it is well reported and well recorded—anywhere up to 100 hours a week. Of course the result is they make mistakes and again people’s lives and health are endangered. So the purpose of that unreasonable hours amendment of ours, and we have put in a specific note, is to actively legislate against that behaviour. So we have two notes which explain the unreasonable hours in there, which includes:

Note:   For purposes of this paragraph, an example is where truck drivers or doctors in hospitals are given unreasonable hours that endanger the health and safety of others.

We think the provisions are desirable.

Item (9) refers to the manner in which approvals will be given with respect to individual workplace agreements, employee collective agreements and so on. The purpose is that the information statement spelt out in the legislation—and we had a discussion about that earlier—must contain a number of matters with respect to bargaining agents, and a person’s particular circumstances must be taken into account. That is to address better provision of information and to improve genuine consent for vulnerable workers.

The last item on sheet 5266, which I will motivate now, is item (10). That refers to the requirement for an Australian workplace agreement as a condition of employment to be considered duress. That section repeals subsection 400(6). It says:

• (6)To avoid doubt, an employer is considered to have applied duress to an employee for the purposes of subsection (5) if the employer requires the employee to make an AWA with the employer as a condition of engagement.

That is an issue of great contention between the different sides. There are those who think they are entitled, and should be entitled, to do that and there are those, like me, who think that is prima facie making a workplace agreement a condition of employment of a particular kind in a particular manner, which means that the employee does not effectively have a choice. I happen to sign up to the small ‘l’ liberal view of choice—that people should have choice—which is why I support individual agreements as well as collective agreements. I also support, therefore, the right of people to reject an agreement, which may not be conceived to be in their interest.