Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Minister for Fisheries, Forestry and Conservation) Share this | Hansard source

The government opposes the amendment. It basically deals with two issues: redundancy and hours of work. The government considers that parties should be free to bargain the terms and conditions that best suit their circumstances, and adding redundancy provisions to the standard reduces their ability to do so. Most importantly from the government’s perspective, the amendment does not include any protection for small business. The government legislated to protect small business with fewer than 15 employees from redundancy pay obligations.

The amendment would undo that protection. It will result in a cost imposition that may be unaffordable for many small businesses and a disincentive to growth in the small business sector. However, the government is keenly aware of the importance that some employees may place on redundancy entitlements. It is for this reason that the government last year moved amendments to preserve redundancy arrangements for 12 months when agreements are unilaterally terminated by the employer. Having said that and considered the matter further, we will support Senator Fielding’s amendment to extend this period to 24 months.

In relation to the issue of hours of work, the government opposes this aspect as well on the basis that the proposed amendment is unnecessary and, in many cases, unworkable. It seeks to adopt the one-size-fits-all approach that would severely hinder enterprise level flexibility. It is important to note that rest breaks are a protected award condition. This means that an entitlement to a rest break cannot be excluded or modified without fair compensation. The act already provides employees who are instrument-free with a new entitlement to a meal break if they work more than five hours continuously. Agreements and contracts can provide for meal or rest breaks. The proposed amendment would require an employer to provide a rest break in the following circumstances: a 30-minute rest period for each six hours worked; an 11 hour rest period in every 24-hour period and a 24-hour rest period in each seven-day period. These proposals limit the ability of employers and employees to negotiate arrangements that best suit their needs at the enterprise level. Senator Siewert, coming from Western Australia as she does, and Senator Murray would undoubtedly be aware of the situation that exists within the mining sector, where people work 14 days on and then have one week off.

That is by way of arrangement, whereas that which Senator Siewert is proposing would make that sort of arrangement impossible. That is why we as a government once again say that when you try to impose what you think from your office desk is a good, fair system, it might not necessarily take into account the needs of a particular enterprise or indeed the wishes of the workers. That is why we say these things need to be carefully balanced. They are matters that we say are important but, if people want to trade these things away on the basis of fair compensation, then they can. Often workers and their employers have come to arrangements that suit both sides and, as a result, assist the productivity of the country and the wealth that we are able to create and then share with our fellow Australians.

Question negatived.