Rachel Siewert (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

I move Australian Greens amendment (17) on sheet 5449:

(17)  Schedule 1, item 15, page 40 (line 34) to page 41 (line 6), omit subclause 5(3).

This relates to no variation of AWAs. This bill provides in general for no variation of AWAs, and we support this. However, the bill does provide for AWAs to be varied if they fail the fairness test, if they contain provisions which are discriminatory or if they contain prohibited content. We believe that, for the protection of employees, AWAs that fail the fairness test should not be able to be amended to pass it. This bill introduces a new test for agreements—as we all know, that is the no disadvantage test—and we should ensure that as many agreements as possible are required to pass the new test. There is a significant difference between the fairness test and the NDT, which the minister has pointed out to the chamber, and if an AWA fails the fairness test we think it should be void and the employer required to enter into a new agreement. The bill provides for ITEAs, which are subject to the NDT.

I remind the chamber—but I think the minister pointed this out, and earlier in question time so did Senator Fisher—that there are a lot of agreements currently being processed, around 150,000. That is, there are 150,000 agreements currently being processed that could potentially be unfair. Going on the average statistics for agreements currently failing the test, I would say a good portion of those would fail the test. We believe that if an AWA fails the fairness test, which is not as effective as the NDT, it should not then be allowed to be varied and should in fact have to go through the whole new process that comes into effect with this bill.