Tony Sheldon (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

The minister said, 'We wanted to make sure there aren't different barriers.' The measures that are being proposed are not barriers; they're actually making sure that people have appropriate opportunities, that workers don't simply get replaced. This is not actually an argument about older and younger workers. Yes, that's part of it, but this is also a situation where younger workers can be replaced by other younger workers. The reason they've going to be replaced is that this government has not put in place obligations not to sack those people. The government are doubling down on a ludicrous situation. The party I'm a member of was going to support the legislation if they were prepared to put into it the appropriate safeguards. It's purely because the Prime Minister got caught this morning on his own incapability to have a bill that works—all show, no go.

I've had a few arguments with Woolworths over the years, in my previous life, and I've made a few comments about them in this chamber as well, but Woolworths, to their credit, have said that they will not replace their workers—their casual, young or older workers—with subsidised workers. They've done that by choice. But their competitors, like Aldi, haven't said that. Quite frankly, if Woolworths' board change their mind because their competition isn't doing it, they'll be able to do it, too, because the government is not agreeing to this amendment. Even the scoundrels that I've called out before, companies like Woolworths, have said they're not going to be scoundrels anymore; they're going to turn around and do the right thing. That's to their credit, their absolute credit. I think it's the first time I've given them credit for anything in this chamber! But the government is letting all their competitors off scot-free, and it will be letting the board of Woolworths off scot-free if they change their minds.

Then we go to the situation with Qantas: 2½ thousand workers replaced. 'Don't worry; we've put great conditions in place,' say the government. It's all show, no go! These 2,500 workers are being outsourced after the government gave $800 million to their employer to keep people connected. What are the government doing? The exact same thing. Do you know what they're going to say? 'We spent hundreds of millions of dollars to give young people jobs.' It's so they can have a one-line answer when people say, 'What the hell did you do with a trillion dollars?' This money will be spent in a way that will see hardworking young people replaced and people over the age of 35 discarded. This government, through its own arrogance—just as we saw from the Prime Minister when he doubled down on the incorrect claims he made earlier this month—does not want to accept that it made a mistake about what this program will look like.

I do come to this chamber with a bias. I'm a member of the Labor Party and a very proud trade unionist. But that experience also gives me the opportunity to say I've dealt with many fantastic employers, people who did the right thing when they did haven't to. They did it because they believed it was the way they should run a business: fairly and squarely. Those opposite have just opened up a situation in many decent companies I've dealt with where their employees, among them active union members who participate with their employer to make sure their operation is successful, will be undercut by subsidies from this government. They're going to be throwing out our hardworking Australians; that's the reality.

I've taken cases to court for the reinstatement of casuals, on the off-chance not that the judge was going to make a decision but the employer would be embarrassed enough to say, 'Look, we're rethinking what we did.' I've gone through conciliation on the odd occasion it happens. But, I'll tell you what, I've never been up against a wage subsidy from the government to make it happen or for it to continue to happen. This government has made a decision that will undermine the fabric of hardworking jobs in this country. If you work hard then you expect your employer to look after you. They're going to subsidise that out of every employer they can.

And let's make it one step clearer: we have seen an avalanche of people moving from permanent to casual work—a lack of job security, a lack of capacity to raise a family or to decide when the bills are going to be paid and how they get paid. And now the government is turbocharging not only the dismissal of many, many workers, young and old—to be replaced—but they're also going to turn around and put in the situation where permanents are also dismissed because the incentive is if you're there for over 20 hours. Let's casualise the workforce—we don't have enough casualisation! We don't have enough job insecurity! We've seen it under their watch, where wages have collapsed. We've seen it under their watch, where permanency has declined. And now we're seeing the worst part of it.

They've been running the strategic line about how they would deal with the Industrial Relations Act and the many other wage subsidy programs they misdirect. But they're now actually being very barefaced about it. We don't want barriers to people having decent jobs. We don't want to have barriers where the employer can turn around and sack somebody. That's because it's a lie: you can sack people. Everyone knows that the industrial relations system will not protect those casuals. The employers know it, I know it, this chamber knows it and, by hell, I'm sure the government knows it.

We have the situation here—and I'll go back to the great credit to Woolworths and many, many other companies; I know that many companies would fall into this position—where some companies have said, also leading into Christmas and New Year, that this is a time for them to reward their staff when they've done it so tough. They reward their staff because they know that family incomes are based on the wage cycle of that industry—the income of that industry. It's not about going for a holiday, it's actually about paying your bills and making sure that you have insurance, pay your car repayments and pay your rent. People factor that in, and yet this government is now subsidising every competitor with Woolworths to say, 'If you don't do the same thing you'll be competitively disadvantaged, because we're going to put government money in to make sure you get rid of those people'. That's the effect of what this government has proposed.