Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Corporate Governance and Responsibility) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the Senate take note of answers given by the Minister for Fisheries, Forestry and Conservation (Senator Abetz) to questions without notice asked by Senators Wong, Forshaw and Hogg today relating to employment and workplace agreements.

Today we had Senator Abetz spruiking yet again in response to opposition questions what he regards as the ‘wonderful impact of the government’s workplace laws’. The wonderful impact includes an employer being able to give you a take it or leave it contract. The wonderful impact includes jurors being able to be sacked for doing jury service because they have lost their jury service leave and people not being able to serve on juries because they are not entitled anymore to make-up pay. The wonderful impact includes employees being offered AWAs at the Commonwealth Bank which remove no less than 46 entitlements they would otherwise have got, including penalty rates, overtime rates, rostered days off and leave loading. These are some of the wonderful impacts of the government’s workplace laws. The fact is that Senator Abetz is completely unable in his answers to explain why this is good for Australian families.

Why is it good for Australian families to be in the situation where they are told, ‘You can have this job but only if you sign up to an AWA which removes 46 conditions, including your overtime rates, your penalty rates and your leave loading’? Why is it good for Australian families to be in a situation such as that of Mr Goodwin, an employee of Mr Corish, where he worked under an AWA which apparently was not even registered and under which he is claiming around about $70,000 of underpayment? This is hardly an advertisement for the wonderful impact of the government’s Work Choices laws.

The minister made this point. He said, ‘People have a choice.’ The reality is that if you go and talk to most employees they understand what sort of choice they have. They understand what it means. They know what happens if their employer says to them: ‘Look, I’m offering you this job on the basis of this contract. It doesn’t have leave loading, penalty rates, overtime rates and, by the way, because I’ve got under 100 employees, you actually do not get any access to unfair dismissal rights, but that’s the job, take it or leave it.’ That is the sort of choice that the Howard government’s workplace laws give. That is the sort of choice they give Australian workers and their families. Here is a contract which takes away all your overtime rates, penalty rates, rostered days off and leave loading. It does not have an entitlement to paid maternity leave or family friendly workplace provisions—none of those things—but you have to sign it if you want the job. Perhaps the worst thing is that they talk about choice but under their laws all those things can be taken away without anything being given back.

This is the big difference between now and what the minister was spruiking when he talked about the history of the Commonwealth Bank and other employers having previously offered AWAs: previously at least employers actually had to give something back. That is pretty logical: you take something away, you have to give something back. They no longer have to do that. Employees can be handed a contract that says, ‘We take away all these longstanding historic entitlements and we don’t have to give you one cent extra.’ I think one cent was what they got, or was it two cents—

Joe Ludwig (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Two cents.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Corporate Governance and Responsibility) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

at Spotlight. Yes, that was the princely sum Spotlight employees got—we remember that—two cents in return for a whole range of penalty rates and other entitlements. But the reality is that under the government’s workplace laws you can be told to give up all of these entitlements without any requirement for the employer to give you a single cent extra. So the wonderful impact of these workplace laws that Senator Abetz so proudly and triumphantly espouses is that you and your family can be told: ‘You give up your penalty rates, you give up your overtime rates, you give up your shift loadings, you give up your leave loadings, you give up your rostered days off and you know what? I, the employer, do not have to give you a cent extra.’

This is what the government are putting on the Australian people. This is the choice they are giving people. The choice is take it or leave it and get nothing in return. It is choice all on one side and you can spruik it as much as you like, but out there people understand what is happening. They understand what is happening to their kids and they understand what is happening in their own workplaces because they know that when it comes down to it people are not going to sit down with them, as Senator Abetz says the Commonwealth Bank will, and they will not be able to negotiate an additional payment. (Time expired)

Guy Barnett (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is a pleasure to take note of the answers from Senator Eric Abetz, the Minister representing the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations, and to respond to Senator Wong and the other opposition senators. The opposition made two simple claims about Work Choices. They said that jobs would decrease and that wages would be cut as a result of Work Choices. It is not rocket science. They ran a campaign, publicly and privately, using union money. Since 1996, $47 million of union money has been provided to and expended by the Labor Party, and they have been promised another $20 million in the lead-up to the next election. Of course, he who pays the piper calls the tune. We know who your masters are. You are obviously doing the bidding of the union movement. We know it. It is on the public record.

The opposition made those claims about Work Choices in this parliament and outside. And what happened? Let us have a look at what has happened as a result of Work Choices coming in on 27 March this year. There has been a record increase in jobs. We have the lowest unemployment in 30 years, at 4.6 per cent. We have 165,000 new jobs since Work Choices came in. So the number of jobs has not gone down. Why don’t the opposition come in here and admit their mistake and say, ‘I’m sorry for misleading the Australian public,’ and apologise to Australians? In particular, they should apologise to those Australians who have new jobs—those 165,000 people, 129,000 of whom have full-time jobs—and say, ‘I’m sorry; I was wrong.’ You got it wrong. With respect to wages, you said wages would go down. What has happened since Work Choices and what has happened under the Howard government since 1996? I will tell you what has happened: wages have gone up in real terms by 16.5 per cent.

Gavin Marshall (Victoria, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Marshall interjecting—

Guy Barnett (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What happened under 13 years of Labor? Wages went down—d-o-w-n—by 0.2 per cent. The record speaks for itself, Senator Marshall, as you know full well. Let us talk about the facts. I am very happy to have a debate, an argument and a discussion based on the facts. What we do not want to happen is to have a debate based on misrepresentation and untruth—and that is exactly what has been happening as a result of this union-Labor campaign.

What about industrial disputes? Goodness me; according to the Labor Party and the union movement, there was going to be an absolute balls-up as a result of Work Choices. But industrial disputes are now at the lowest level since records came into being. The rate today is 33 times lower than the highest rate recorded under Labor. Who was the employment minister under Labor when those figures were alive? It was Mr Kim Beazley, the Leader of the Opposition. He was minister for employment at the time. Not only do we have that low rate; productivity has also gone up.

What we are talking about here is putting food on the table of working men and women and their families across this country. The Labor Party are trying to deny that. They should accept it, because that is exactly what is happening. What do the Labor Party want to do about industrial relations? They want to deny people choice. They now have a policy, in black and white, which says that they will abolish Australian workplace agreements at a time when people are flocking to have agreements between employers and employees. In my home state of Tasmania we have 24,000 live AWAs, and we have had over one million signed since they came into being under this Howard government.

You want to deny those Australians—the men and women who are earning more money on AWAs—at the next election. We will see. The people of Australia will have a choice. They will have a choice between this government and a political party that wants to cut wages. You want to cut the wages of those on AWAs and send them back to the bad old days. You have got just one way to go, and that is the award system, or the collective agreement. What is wrong with choice? If people want to choose to be on an AWA, so be it. Sadly, the rallies today have not delivered for you. The numbers have not been delivered. (Time expired)

Gavin Marshall (Victoria, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

After that contribution, I am not surprised that this government is really struggling with the issue of industrial relations, because there was only one thing that Senator Barnett was right about—and that is that the Labor Party will abolish AWAs. We do not make any apology for that, because AWAs are unfair. Under this government’s legislation, there is no choice. Work Choices in itself is a lie. The name is a lie because there is no choice. The only choice that is ever given to people under an AWA is: take it or leave it. People do not have the ability to sit down and negotiate with large or even small employers on an equal basis. It is based on a lie. It is a false premise. The employer always has the superior bargaining position and the bargaining power, and employees as individuals do not have the same ability to negotiate reasonable wage outcomes.

The cracks are showing. Senator Barnett really should have updated his own figures before he started talking about wages. Just before I get on to that, the main mantra the government now throws at us is that Work Choices has created jobs. Let me tell the chamber the problem the government has with that argument. The first month after Work Choices, employment actually reduced by 3,000. There has been growth over the period of time that Work Choices has been in place, but we are in a growing economy. Just understand the logic of this: this government would have us believe that, since the introduction of Work Choices, every single new job is a result of Work Choices. Where did the jobs come from before Work Choices? You cannot have it both ways.

We have been in a growing economy for a 15-year period—and what happens in a growing economy? Jobs increase. Jobs will fluctuate up and down, the statistics will bounce around and we will see that Work Choices will actually cost jobs at the end of the day. These are not statistics that any of us can rely on at the moment, because the statistics over a period of time are not there. But for this government to say that every job that has been created since Work Choices is a result of Work Choices is simply dishonest. It is a dishonest argument.

The other thing the government says is that there has been wages growth. What did we see in the last ABS statistics? We actually saw real wages reducing. And where do we see them reducing? We see them reducing in some of the most exploited sectors. We see wages being reduced in the retail and hospitality industries. What have we seen over the last 12 months? With the underlying inflation rate of 3.9 per cent, we saw retail wages grow by only 2.8 per cent—much less than the inflation rate. The real value of those wages is now going backwards. And what did we see in the hospitality industry? With the inflation rate of 3.9 per cent, hospitality wages grew by only 2.4 per cent—again, a reduction in real terms in wages.

Do you know when the biggest reduction has been? It has been in the last two quarters since Work Choices was introduced. We are now seeing people in the hospitality and retail industries who have no bargaining power having their wages driven down. And why wouldn’t that happen? We know from the sample of AWAs taken since the introduction of Work Choices that every AWA has removed at least one protected award condition—or so-called protected award condition.

Jeannie Ferris (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Stop shouting!

Gavin Marshall (Victoria, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have to shout to make you people understand what you are doing to the wages and conditions of ordinary working Australians. Sixty-four per cent of every AWA entered into since the introduction of Work Choices has removed leave loadings; 63 per cent removed all penalty rates; 52 per cent removed shiftwork loadings; 41 per cent did not even contain gazetted public holidays; 31 per cent modified overtime loadings; 29 per cent modified rest breaks; 27 per cent modified public holiday payments; 16 per cent of every AWA excluded every single award condition—every award condition gone; and 22 per cent of AWAs provided for no wage increase during the life of the AWA. This government says that it is driving wages up, when the facts clearly show that AWAs are reducing conditions and reducing wages for ordinary Australians. The ABS statistics on wages are starting to demonstrate that. (Time expired)

Concetta Fierravanti-Wells (NSW, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is very interesting to hear you, Senator Marshall, talking about dishonesty, because the only dishonesty that has been heard is the dishonesty that is coming from state Labor, the union movement and from those on the other side continuing their scare campaign of false, misleading and hysterical claims about Work Choices. They have repeatedly claimed to anybody who would listen that overnight there would be mass sackings, that all wages would fall and that there would be widespread strikes and stoppages. This has already been proven to be false. Seven months after the introduction of Work Choices, we have seen record jobs growth—165,000 jobs have been created and 129,000 of those jobs are full time—and unemployment has fallen.

Gavin Marshall (Victoria, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Marshall interjecting—

Concetta Fierravanti-Wells (NSW, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yes, it has fallen, Senator Marshall, to a 30-year low of 4.6 per cent, and wages have risen strongly. The Australian Fair Pay Commission increased the minimum wage by $27 a week. The ABS labour price index publication reported that total rates of pay, excluding bonuses, increased by 1.1 per cent in the June quarter of 2006 and by 4.1 per cent over the year to the June quarter. Strikes and industrial disputation fell to a record low in the June 2006 quarter—just over 3.1 working days lost per thousand employees. That is the lowest quarterly rate of disputes ever recorded by the Australian Bureau of Statistics.

But, of course, in an attempt to gain public support for their political campaign, the opposition leader and the union movement continue to make misleading and hysterical claims that Australia is changed forever—fertility rates will decline; divorce will increase; children will not be able to go on holidays; weekends will be lost; BBQs will be gone; families will be set against families; and friends will be set against friends. Seven months into the operation of Work Choices, this doomsaying from the Labor Party has been exposed for what it is, and that is pure hysteria.

Jeannie Ferris (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Fraud.

Concetta Fierravanti-Wells (NSW, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That is right, Senator Ferris: fraud. Kim Beazley and his union bosses are about special rights for unions, not about individual rights or the right to get ahead. Australians want a workplace relations system that is about incentive, about being able to have a go, about getting ahead, about giving people the opportunity to earn more and about being able to determine your future. We want incentive built into the wages system so that you can be rewarded for what you are worth and the work that you do. The government has put into place a framework of opportunity that is good for individuals, for family breadwinners, for students and for small and large businesses—and that is good for the Australian economy.

Today we have seen communities around Australia disrupted to aid in perpetuating this political scare campaign. Thankfully, it was not as disruptive as intended, because the numbers were so low. But I want to raise what happened in Wollongong. My electorate office is based in the Illawarra. I will start by congratulating the overwhelming majority of Illawarra workers who did not take part in the political protest organised by the South Coast Labour Council. There are approximately 170,000 workers in the Illawarra region; yet only a very minute number of these marched today, causing disruption for the sake of some cheap political point-scoring exercise for the Labor Party and the South Coast Labour Council. It is a continuation of the scare campaign in the Illawarra, and Wollongong was, once again, needlessly disrupted in this desperate struggle.

How surprised was I this morning to learn that the National Secretary of the CFMEU, Mr John Sutton, came to my electorate office in Wollongong, demanding to speak to me about industrial relations laws when, clearly, this is a parliamentary sitting week! The local union boss was standing outside my office spruiking that I was not there to listen to their claims—and I was at work. Unlike him, I was here representing my constituents in New South Wales. How desperate are they when they have to spruik outside parliamentary offices because we are not there to listen to their— (Time expired)

Helen Polley (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to take note of answers given by Senator Abetz on the issue of industrial relations. Despite what Senator Abetz would have us believe, today we have seen tens of thousands of people around the country gather to march against this arrogant government and its unfair industrial relations laws. Today Australians have vowed not only to fight for their rights at work but to vote for them. We saw more than 60,000 people in Melbourne at the MCG, whilst 40,000 took to the streets of Sydney and 25,000 in Brisbane. There were several thousand here in Canberra who marched through the streets to the forecourt of this great building, where we stand today, to demonstrate their opposition to these archaic and unfair laws.

According to the Prime Minister, this sort of show of opposition to his Work Choices laws could be deemed illegal. I have absolutely no doubt that many more workers would have been present at events around the country but for fear for their jobs. The government has tried to play down the turnouts at today’s National Day of Action, but the reality is the outrage over these laws is not going to disappear, as the Prime Minister, Mr Andrews and even Senator Abetz and others across the chamber would have us believe. No, it is only going to grow. Australian workers are not going to give up until this war is won.

Australian workers and their families know that there is a simple choice to be made at the next election: Mr Howard’s extreme industrial relations laws and wage-cutting AWAs or Kim Beazley’s pledge to rip up these unfair laws and build a modern, flexible system based on Australian values. The Howard government’s extreme workplace laws are no good for Australian families and they are no good for the Australian economy. The Prime Minister is fooling himself if he believes he can treat Aussie workers this way and they will sit down and take it. The proof really is in the pudding. If Mr Howard were really confident in his industrial relations ideology he would have told voters his plan before the last election. But he decided that it was not an important enough issue. Or perhaps he just did not believe that Australians had the right to know what the government they were electing was going to do: to systematically remove all their rights at work—their penalty rates, leave loading and the right to public holidays. You name it, the Howard government has hacked it away.

In contrast to this government, which wanders from arrogance to incompetence to downright deception, all Australians can be confident that they know exactly what they will get from Labor: fair workplaces, built on Australian values. I will repeat that for Senator Barnett’s benefit: they know what they will get from Labor, and that is fair workplaces, built on Australian values. The Prime Minister and his wannabe deputies crossed the line when they began ripping away the rights of Australians and the values on which this country is based and built.

Mr Howard will try to make a few little tweaks to these laws, a few cosmetic changes in the hope of fooling Australians that they are not quite as bad after all. But voters will not be fooled. Australian workers will not be fooled. Only yesterday we debated the arrogant government’s Independent Contractors Bill, which is their latest attack on workers. We know that they will use their numbers in this place to once again attack Australian workers. If we needed any more proof that the government are deadset on hurting those people who need our help the most, then we have it.

This is not a government that cares about Australians. This is not a government that cares about Australian values or cares for the basic principle that a fair day’s work deserves a fair day’s pay. This is a government that stands only for big business and the high end of town. All Australians want is a fair go, and they know that in fighting these laws they are fighting to defend the Australian way of life. At the next election, they will send a message loud and clear to Mr Howard: they do not want your unfair laws and they do not want your government because, not only are their rights at work worth fighting for, they are worth voting for.

Question agreed to.