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

It will come as no surprise to Senator Abetz that I am not shocked or surprised. We do not accept the government’s arguments on this point. The fact is that these workers are still going to be on AWAs. In view of the late time and the need to progress this debate, I am not going to call a division, but I would like it noted that neither the government nor the opposition supported these amendments. But I am not calling a division.

Question negatived.

by leave—I move Australian Greens amendments (2) and (3) on sheet 5818:

(2)    Schedule 3, item 18, page 29 (line 4) to page 30 (line 7), omit the item, substitute:

18  Individual agreement-based transitional instruments: automatic termination when enterprise agreement comes into operation

(1)    This item applies if:

             (a)    an enterprise agreement (the proposed enterprise agreement) is made that covers the employee and the employer; and

             (b)    the proposed enterprise agreement comes into operation.

(2)    If the employee and the employer are covered by an individual agreement-based transitional instrument, that agreement is terminated when the proposed enterprise agreement comes into operation.

(3)    Schedule 13, item 2, page 166 (lines 9 to 37), omit subitems (2) and (3), substitute:

(2)    The employee is taken, for the purposes of the FW Act, to be at that time an employee who is or will be covered by an enterprise agreement or a proposed enterprise agreement.

These two amendments pick up what we think is a persuasive argument made by Professor Andrew Stuart that new enterprise agreements should automatically replace any individual transitional arrangements. Again, these amendments implement a recommendation from the majority report of the Senate Standing Committee on Education, Employment and Workplace Relations inquiry into the bill. The amendments provide for AWAs or ITEAs to be terminated when an enterprise agreement covering an employee on an AWA or an ITEA comes into operation. Amendment (3) allows for employees on AWAs covered by a proposed enterprise agreement to engage in bargaining for that agreement.

Work Choices AWAs serve two purposes. They allow employers to provide substandard wages and conditions but also to de-unionise workplaces and thwart collective bargaining. The Greens amendments are an extension of the primary role of collective bargaining under the Fair Work Act. We believe that all workers who will be covered by an enterprise agreement should have the ability to participate in the negotiations for that agreement and to have that agreement apply to them. The conditional termination provisions in the bill do not go far enough in achieving this aim. The requirement for employers to agree to a conditional termination where the individual transition instrument has not passed its nominal expiry date means that few of these workers who are stuck on unfair AWAs for the next four years will have the opportunity to collectively bargain.

Both unions and employer groups indicated to the Senate inquiry that the conditional termination provisions would not be effective. We must remember that the workers stuck on the worst AWAs are likely to be the most vulnerable workers. Conditional termination provisions relying on the support of employers are going to be useless for this particular group of employees and workers. The amendments put forward by the Greens are designed to ensure that those workers who have lost the most under Work Choices have the best chance to regain fair conditions of employment. We do not want to see workers subjected to grossly inferior agreements for any longer than is absolutely necessary. I have articulated in this place, in debates on the various pieces of legislation on industrial relations, how Work Choices has impacted most significantly on vulnerable workers, and these amendments are particularly focused on those vulnerable workers. I commend the amendments to the Senate.