Don Farrell (SA, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Special Minister of State) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Fair Work Amendment (Supporting Australia's Jobs and Economic Recovery) Bill 2021. I welcome the opportunity to lead for the Labor Party on this bill, which we very strongly oppose in its totality. This bill is dangerous and it's unfair. Rather than doing what its title says, it will in fact hurt workers, cut their pay and conditions and make jobs less secure, not more secure. Ultimately it will hurt the Australian economy. It's nothing more than a cynical and opportunistic attack on workers' rights and conditions at work, all under the guise of the COVID-19 pandemic.

It could have all been so different if only the government had been genuine in its rhetoric about wanting to improve our industrial relations laws in ways that would create jobs and leave no worker worse off. But, as always, the government talked the big game and made the big announcements but, in a so utterly predictable manner, failed to deliver anything like it. We've seen it so many times with this government—all announcement and no delivery. But, when they do deliver, of course, it's pork-barrelling and rorts or just delivering for their mates.

As our country and the world have grappled with the enormous health and economic challenges presented by COVID-19, Labor has provided the government with all the necessary cooperation to ensure financial assistance reached businesses, workers and families as quickly as possible, to help them get through this terrible pandemic. The measure Morrison and Frydenberg so loudly proclaim as their big success—the wage subsidy, or JobKeeper, as it has been branded—was originally put forward by Labor and the unions but rejected out of hand by this government. The Prime Minister actually said it would be 'dangerous' to implement what became JobKeeper.

We put forward the idea, and when the government finally decided to do it we supported it, even though it left a million casual workers behind; ignored university workers, people in the arts and entertainment industry, the sporting industry and of course the tourism industry, which I've been familiar with; and left loyal aviation workers completely out in the cold. Nevertheless, we were constructive. Similarly, the union movement worked with employers and the Fair Work Commission to ensure that changes to awards could be made quickly to allow businesses to keep operating in the most difficult and unique of circumstances. If anything, what was achieved showed that the current system was already flexible enough to respond to and manage unforeseen issues. And despite the fact that Labor was not invited to the negotiating table, when Scott Morrison announced his industrial relations working groups we were prepared to considered agreed measures that came from those groups. The unions were invited and were involved with that process, and they were represented in every working group. So, if there was agreement coming out of that process, we would be open and willing to consider those changes.

But what we have before us is not the result of anything that came out of those working groups—and this is an important point. We cannot be deceived by employer groups or media reports that the legislation represents consensus from any of the Attorney-General's working groups, because it does not. Even the wage theft provisions in the bill, which at least contain some positive measures, override existing stronger legislation in both Queensland and Victoria. This was not supported by unions, so it's fair to say that there was virtually nothing to show for the 32 working group meetings over a period of 10 weeks, taking up around 150 hours. When the working group process was gradually announced by the Prime Minister back in May last year, it was all about breaking away from the old arguments and finding new ways for employers and unions to work together to come to an agreement around improving our industrial relations system. The Prime Minister tried to portray himself as a Bob Hawke of the day, forging a new way forward. Well, I knew Bob Hawke, and Scott Morrison is no Bob Hawke.

But nobody bought the idea. As my colleague the shadow minister for industrial relations pointed out, when Hawke negotiated the first prices and incomes accord with the trade union movement he brought universal health cover to the table. Scott Morrison, on the other hand, simply brought the table. There was never going to be any give in this, only take. And that's what we're left with in this legislation. Just ask the union movement, who, in good faith and in the spirit of cooperation, participated fully in every one of those 32 meetings. But, I'm afraid to say, it was all for nothing. With what we have before us here in this legislation, it is actually as if the union movement were not even in the room. I'll say that again, Madam Deputy President, because I know you're surprised, but it's as if the union movement were not even in the room.

Just read the opening summary to the ACTU's submission to the Senate inquiry on the bill:

This Bill, if enacted will cut the wages, conditions and rights of Australian workers. Working people have either been the essential workers supporting the country during the pandemic or have already suffered the most from the economic impacts of Covid19. Punishing them with cuts to their rights should not be acceptable to this Parliament.

But that is the outcome of the Prime Minister's and the Attorney-General's working groups: a complete failure or, as was expressed in so many other submissions, a lost opportunity. We shouldn't pretend that there's any balance in this legislation so far as the workers are concerned. What we need to understand is that the temptation to use the COVID crisis to drive through a long-wished-for group of antiworker measures was just too great for this government. They simply returned to what they always do; it's in their DNA. That DNA gave us Work Choices over a decade ago. Remember that? Howard finally got his chance, his dream, to implement his own industrial relations provisions called 'Work Choices'—of course it was nothing like work choices—over a decade ago. It was comprehensively rejected by the Australian people in the 2007 election.

Even in the absence of consensus from the working groups on industrial relations reform, Labor set a very simple test as to whether we would support the legislation: would it deliver secure jobs with decent pay? It's a simple question: would it deliver secure jobs with decent pay? The answer to this piece of legislation is an outstanding no. It simply does not deliver secure jobs with decent pay. When we first saw this bill last December, which contained even more extreme provisions relating to a two-year suspension of the better off overall test, we said no. The bill represented an attack on the rights of workers who got us through COVID, the heroes of the pandemic. I will say that again, Deputy President, because I know you're interested in this point: the bill represented an attack on the rights of workers who got us through COVID, the very workers who managed to hold the fort while lots of us didn't turn up for parliament. These workers, like shop assistants, turned up for work every day, serving customers, risking their own health. What reward do they get from this government? They get a piece of legislation that kicks them right in the guts. Their thanks for—

Senator McCarthy interjecting—

It is a shame, Senator McCarthy. You've hit the nail on the head there. Here we have a group of workers—I'm familiar with retail workers and that wonderful union, the Shop, Distributive and Allied Employees' Association, which represents them—who worked through this crisis when heaps and heaps of people in this chamber did not turn up to work. They were working; they were serving customers. They were ensuring that the one thing that people who might have been in lockdown could do was get food on their tables at home to feed their kids and feed their families. What does this government do to them? In what way does this government thank those workers for sticking their necks out, turning up for work every single day—unlike what we were doing here—providing a service to our community in the worst pandemic in 100 years? What reward do they get from this government? They get a kick in the guts. There's no other way to describe this piece of legislation. In fact, those people opposite ought to be ashamed when they come to vote for this piece of legislation, because of the way they want to reward those brave workers. I've just picked out the retail workers because I'm familiar with them, but there are lots of others: there are the hospitality workers that you'd be familiar with, Deputy President, and the people who work in hospitals—nurses and doctors. All of those people who stuck their necks out during the pandemic and continued to go to work, treating or dealing with people who might have had COVID or did have COVID. The way these people opposite, the government, say thank you to them is to reduce their terms and conditions, their bargaining power and their ability to get a wage rise.

When was the last time any of these workers got a wage rise? People in this chamber have had a wage rise more recently than most Australian workers. Have a look at the figures on what's happening with wages, Madam Deputy President; I know you are familiar with this already, but I will tell you again. Basically wages are stagnant in this country. Wages are not rising. So what does this government do? It proposes to set in place a piece of legislation that's going to make it even more difficult for workers to try and recover what they've lost.