Trish Crossin (NT, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise this evening to talk about the impact of Work Choices on families. Two weeks ago the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission released an important report called It’s about time: women, men, work and family, which is the result of two years research and national community consultation. The report details a framework for reform which acknowledges the always changing family and carer responsibilities across the life cycle, and outlines the support Australians need in order to give themselves real options with regard to balancing paid work and care. As you will hear, Work Choices clearly does not provide this.

Undoubtedly, workplace relations impact on family life, so it is vitally important that when creating workplace legislation all aspects relating to it are carefully considered. This is not what the current government did when it pushed the Workplace Relations Amendment (Work Choices) Bill 2005 through parliament. Stories have been arising all over the country with regard to Australian workplace agreements taking away workers’ rights and entitlements, and more are coming out each day. The first and only set of statistics released by the Office of the Employment Advocate showed that 100 per cent of AWAs cut at least one protected award condition; 63 per cent of AWAs removed penalty rates, the compensation shiftworkers receive for working weekends and public holidays—valuable time that is spent away from their families; 50 per cent of AWAs took away shiftwork loading; and 22 per cent of AWAs contained no pay increases over the life of the agreement. There have been no further statistics released and no indication that there ever will be. Recently, the Australian Bureau of Statistics released data showing that people on AWAs actually earn less and work longer hours than those on collective agreements. How can this be supporting families?

The HREOC report acknowledged that there is clear community concern regarding the impact of Work Choices on family life. While the government is trumpeting the so-called flexibility that Work Choices gives families, HREOC discovered that one of the biggest concerns in the submissions they received was:

• the prospect of loss of control over working hours and its effect on the ability of employees to balance paid work and family/carer responsibilities;

There was also concern about:

• the prospect that minimum wages will be reduced over time because of the changes to wage setting;
• the lack of protection and possible discrimination in workplaces with less than 100 employees due to the removal of the unfair dismissal laws for businesses that fall within this category; and
• the reduced role of unions to bargain for family-friendly provisions or the right to have those provisions regulated through awards and collective agreements.

Various groups also expressed concern over the possible implications of the legislation for women, particularly the prospect of an increase in gender pay inequity over time, and its impact on the choices men and women can make in relation to balancing paid work and care.

HREOC’s concerns went much further. They commented that Work Choices could potentially impact on the protection of workers with family and carer responsibilities, pay equity between men and women and the protection of employees in vulnerable and lower skilled positions in the Australian labour market. Workers with carer and family responsibilities have been identified by HREOC as particularly vulnerable, and there is much concern that these workers, in particular women, will be trading off wages in order to receive family-friendly employment conditions when in an individual bargaining environment. Acknowledging these concerns, HREOC stated, in recommendation No. 20:

That HREOC, in consultation with the Office of the Employment Advocate, develop community resources to assist women with workplace negotiation and individual bargaining.

I hope that that will be done and maintained through the network of working women centres, at least the couple that currently remain and are funded by the Office of the Employment Advocate. It would seem that at least recommendation 20 is a good case for this government to continue funding the working women centres and I look forward to seeing that continued funding in this year’s budget.

In order to help protect these workers, HREOC also stated, in recommendation No. 4, that legislation be introduced:

... to provide protection from discrimination for employees with family and carer responsibilities and a right to request flexible work arrangements.

Obviously, the current legislation does not provide sufficient protection for these workers.

Currently the government has refused to let the Office of the Employment Advocate analyse and release data relating to AWAs. A very good point was raised by Mr Kevin Rudd during question time in the lower house on Monday, 26 March. Minister Hockey has previously claimed that there is no way of comparing AWAs with employment arrangements prior to the introduction of AWAs, yet, as Kevin Rudd rebutted, the government is constantly telling anyone who will listen that workers are better off under this new system and especially under AWAs. How is this possible? Is it not a contradiction?

Amongst other recommendations, HREOC put forward recommendation No. 11:

That the Office of the Employment Advocate be required to monitor and publish annually information about the wages and employment conditions in Australian Workplace Agreements with a particular emphasis on gender differentiated data.

That is something which the Howard government appears to be against, because they know it will demonstrate what the Work Choices laws really do: provide no choice, especially for those who are vulnerable, particularly women in the workplace.

There is quite clearly a concern amongst the Australian population that Work Choices is not supportive of families, no matter how much positive spin the government attempts to put on it. The HREOC report stated:

This paper has found that the current legislative framework is not adequate for supporting employees to meet their current and future care responsibilities.

Their final paper actually makes 45 recommendations aimed at helping Australian working families strike a balance. No doubt their report is a welcome contribution to this important debate. But the simplistic response of Joe Hockey and the Howard government is that Work Choices and Australian workplace agreements are the answer to the work-family struggle. This government have failed to provide any evidence to prove their claim that AWAs are in fact delivering flexibility for working families.

The Bureau of Statistics released data last week that showed people on AWAs actually earn less and work longer hours than those on collective agreements. Research released in early March showed that Australians are working long and unpredictable hours—20 per cent of the people in this survey worked more than 50 hours a week; 30 per cent had to work on weekends; and some two million Australians worked more than six hours every Sunday. The only statistics that this government has ever released showed that 100 per cent of Work Choices AWAs removed at least one protected award condition.

Until this minister provides the data, he cannot continue to claim that working Australians and their families are better off. The Labor Party calls again on Minister Hockey to come clean about what AWAs are doing to Australian working families and calls on this government to respond properly to the HREOC paper and to respond to it promptly. We welcome this significant contribution to the work-family debate from the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission. The balance of work and family is a key part of the modern industrial relations debate. Families are the cornerstone of our society and without families there is no foundation for anything else. Family life needs to be protected and Work Choices clearly does not do this. If families are not protected then I think our future is gravely at risk. The Labor Party is actually committed to an industrial relations system which helps Australians balance work and family life. We will consider the recommendations contained in the HREOC final paper. I want to place on record that the Labor Party believe the HREOC paper is a significant contribution to the current debate, and we look forward to this government’s thorough, prompt and proper response to this important contribution to the Work Choices debate in this country.

Ian Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I want to briefly comment on the unmitigated stupidity of the Labor Party’s attacks on Work Choices. Whilst I have a great deal of sympathy for the people that Senator Lundy mentioned—those who were injured on a work site—to try and associate a tragic workplace accident with the workplace relations laws is just absurd. Senator Lundy acknowledged that when she cited the two examples, one of which occurred more than a year ago—long before Work Choices was ever introduced. It just shows the absurdity and hypocrisy of the Labor’s attack.

Paul Calvert (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The time allotted for the debate has expired.