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

This coming Monday is a huge day for millions of Australian workers. From 26 August, key parts of the Australian Labor government's closing loopholes reforms come into effect. For the first time in Australian history, gig workers will have access to some of the same rights as every other worker in this country.

Gig workers in food delivery, ride share and the care sector are some of the lowest-paid workers in Australia. They don't have access to minimum wage or unfair dismissal laws, superannuation, insurance, or a right to collective bargaining or representation. These are all fundamental basic rights that many of us take for granted, and we've seen the devastation that takes place as a result of those workers being left in the lurch. The previous government refused to rein in the gig economy, and former attorney-general Christian Porter told the parliament that it was too complicated. Former assistant attorney-general Amanda Stoker said gig workers were just getting 'what they signed up for'.

The Liberals and Nationals stood by and allowed gig workers to get literally torn to shreds on our roads. There have been at least 18 gig worker deaths that we know of. In reality, there have been many more that have been unreported. One tragic death we do know about is that of Burak Dogan. Burak was just 30 years old when he was hit by a truck on 2 April 2020. He was working for one of the major food delivery platforms, and records show that the platform had been sending him job requests at the time of his death. His uncle, Yavus, told me: 'When he was dying, they sent another message three or four minutes later. We had to wrap him up in a plastic bag to keep his body in one piece as we sent him back to Turkiye.' This is the carnage that's taken place in the gig economy over the last decade, while successive Liberal and Nationals governments denied there was any problem, and a number of the workers who tragically died at work were working for the worst offender, Hungry Panda.

Hungry Panda is the worst of the worst when it comes to low pay and safety short cuts. In 2020, Xiaojun Chen was killed while working for Hungry Panda in Sydney. The following year, a New South Wales inquiry found Hungry Panda failed to report Mr Chen's death to Safe Work. In fact, Safe Work only found out a week later, when the Transport Workers Union reported it. It was then forced to reinstate two riders who the Fair Work Commission found had been unfairly dismissed for pursuing fair rates.

When another one of their riders, Joy Wang, made the courageous decision to speak out about Hungry Panda, they sacked her, and Joy told the ABC earlier this year:

I found myself in a desperate situation because of pay cuts, unfair order distribution, a dangerous reward system with unsafe time limits to complete orders, and a lack of rights, like proper injury insurance.

I spoke out about it and tried to talk to the company, to ask for help. I never engaged in unlawful behaviour. I just wanted a fairer, safer job.

I think I will have to probably borrow money to pay next week's rent. If I still don't have any orders, I will probably not be able to afford food.

That's a disgraceful situation, and it's happening on our streets. But, from Monday, because of laws passed by the Labor government, gig workers will have long overdue rights. And it's not just gig workers getting new rights on Monday; every employee in Australia will have a new right to disconnect. Labor recognises that too many bosses are expecting people to work and answer calls and emails outside their working hours without proper respect. We have put a stop to that. There are also new rights for truck drivers to get minimum standards, and there will be new rights for casuals making it easier to get permanent full-time or part-time work if they choose.

The previous Liberal and National government passed laws making it harder for casuals to choose to convert to permanent employment. We promised to scrap those and put in a fair conversion process, and we have. That builds upon the 625,000 full-time jobs this government has created, representing 63 per cent of all new jobs.

I'm also going to go to some of the things those opposites are opposing, if they get to power, including those things we've just talked about—gig workers, the right to disconnect, casual conversion rights to permanent jobs in Australia. The opposition have said they're going to take those away if they win the next election. But it's not only labour rights that are at risk from Mr Dutton; the same Liberals and Nationals are ramping up their attacks on industry super funds.

We all know industry super funds are low fee, are run only to benefit members and have a strong track record on return for their members. On the other side you have the for-profit funds run by the big banks and financial service companies. They run to generate profits for their investors, have consistently higher fees and have consistently generated worse returns. The latest attack line from the bank lobby is they don't want democratically elected worker representatives on industry super boards.

Let's go to the front page of last Thursday's Financial Review and see what it said: 'Growing criticism that it may not serve Australia's best interest for the retirement savings by having tripartisan'. This was effectively what they were talking about. So we're supposed to believe that, rather than democratically elected worker representatives, we should replace those representatives with the directors from the banking sector, the very same backing sector that was raked over the coals at a royal commission just five years ago. And let's not forget the Liberals and Nationals voted against the banking royal commission 26 times in this place. To quote the ABC at the time, 'The final report exposed a culture of capacious greed, of profits and shareholders being put before customers and the law.' These are the same people we're supposed to be putting in charge of people's retirement savings.

What really sums up this ridiculous debate is the man criticising the industry funds on the front page of the Financial Review is none other than David Murray. Mr Murray, for those who have forgotten, was appointed chair of the AMP after the banking royal commission. AMP, which is one of the biggest for-profit super funds, was found to be charging its clients millions of dollars in fees for no service. Rightly, the AMP chair and a number of other directors, when exposed, resigned in disgrace. That shows the calibre of those people who are directors of the financial services sector. But Mr Murray then came in to clean things up, only to resign in disgrace himself two years later. Mr Murray had appointed a new CEO of AMP Capital who, just three years earlier, had settled accusations that he had engaged in serious, persistent and wide-ranging sexual harassment against a female employee. The previous AMP board penalised this executive $500,000 for his conduct. But Mr Murray came in and saw fit to promote him to one of the most senior roles in the company. This is the person whose judgement we are now supposed to trust when it comes to industry super funds.

Of course, Mr Murray and his colleagues on the AMP board are not the only for-profit directors in the financial services sector who have disgraced themselves. I would be here all night if I tried to run through the entire list of the disgraceful conduct covered by the banking royal commission. But it's a bit rich for Mr Murray to be giving lectures about director integrity.

Let's go to Cbus, which has been named as one of the funds of recent times by those opposite, the super fund most directly attacked by My Murray. It picked up a number of awards from leading independent super research house Chant West just a few months ago. Cbus was named specialist fund of the year 2024, the best for member services and the best fund for responsible investment. So on one side we've got the best specialist fund in Australia, which delivers the best member services and the best responsible investment, and on the other side we've got a man who had to resign from his last board role in disgrace and who spends his spare time campaigning against social licences and questioning the science of climate change. Unfortunately, it's just another sorry chapter in a sloppy, bank funded campaign to attack tripartism and industry super funds.