Senate debates
Wednesday, 9 August 2017
Bills
Fair Work Amendment (Corrupting Benefits) Bill 2017; In Committee
12:27 pm
Doug Cameron (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Human Services) Share this | Hansard source
I move amendment (16) on sheet 8143:
(16) Schedule 2, item 1, page 11 (lines 8 and 9), omit the definition of related party in section 12, substitute:
related party, of an organisation that is a bargaining representative for a proposed enterprise agreement, means:
(a) a branch of the organisation of which employees who will be covered by the agreement are members; or
(b) an officer of a branch mentioned in paragraph (a); or
(c) an entity controlled by the organisation; or
(d) a spouse of a person mentioned in paragraph (b); or
(e) if a person mentioned in paragraph (b) is a member of a committee of management of the organisation or a branch of the organisation—another member of the committee of management;
where committee of management, control, entity, officer and spouse have the same meanings as in the Registered Organisations Act.
This amendment changes the definition of 'related party' in relation to the new requirements to make disclosures during negotiations of enterprise agreements. The bill imposes disclosure requirements during the negotiation of enterprise agreements where a proposed term of an agreement will give either the union or the employer a financial benefit. The bill requires the union to disclose any potential benefits from an enterprise agreement that may flow to a related party, which, as currently defined, is an extended, unreasonable list of people and entities. The amendment defines 'related party' clearly and precisely as the branch or branches of the organisation which the members of the organisation—that is, the bargaining representatives—are members of, an officer of that branch, an entity controlled by the organisation, or a spouse of a divisional committee of management provided that an officer of the branch referred to in paragraph (a) is also a member of such committee. Again this is overreach. The amendment is needed to make this bill consistent with all the expert advice to the committee and the minister.
No comments