Mary Fisher (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations, Minister Ludwig. Will the minister guarantee that the Rudd Labor government’s award modernisation process, already underway, will not increase business costs and will not disadvantage employees?

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

I thank the senator for her question. It seems we are having dorothies today. The commencement of modern awards from 1 July 2010 will achieve a very significant national reform, one which evaded the Howard government—despite its attempts. Modern awards will simplify and reduce more than 2,400 old state and federal awards and instruments. Modern awards will be easy to find and read and to apply in the workplace to provide a fair and modern award safety net for the future. I am aware—Senator Fisher is obviously aware of the same concerns and I ask her not to listen to the chattering classes—that there are ongoing concerns that wage costs may increase in the states which previously had a different state award applying. For example, in the hospital industry more broadly or the restaurant and catering industry, some states have different penalty rate structures and it is important that on 26 February 2009 the minister met with Mr John Hart, CEO of Restaurant Catering Australia. The government’s award modernisation request to the Australian Industrial Relations Commission states that ‘the creation of modern awards is not intended to disadvantage employees or employers’.

The Workplace Relations Amendment (Transition to Forward with Fairness) Bill 2008, passed in March 2008, provided for a transition period of up to five years in relation to the award modernisation process. If you juxtapose those, it is designed to move us to an award modernising system which is fair and balanced to employers and to employees and ensures that there is a process over five years whereby these matters can be introduced with both affected parties—the employer and the employee.

Mary Fisher (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. Given that unemployment recently rose in my home state of South Australia to 5.8 per cent, will the minister guarantee that the Rudd Labor government’s award modernisation process, already underway, will not cost one Australian job?

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

You need to listen to the answer I am providing. It is always encouraging to get help from the opposition. The fundamental issue is that this government has started an award modernisation process through the Industrial Relations Commission, which the opposition were unable to do. We have also taken into account its impact across the economy by ensuring that the transitional arrangements will ensure that there are five years for the award modernisation process to run. Also, in the supplementary submission on award modernisation, the government urged the AIRC to use the full scope of transitional arrangements in relation to significant remuneration entitlements because we are aware of the global financial crisis. (Time expired)

Mary Fisher (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. In light of the minister’s failure to provide either guarantee, why is the minister ignoring his government’s own changes already made to the Workplace Relations Act requiring modern awards to be economically sustainable and why is the minister paying lip-service and lip-service only to his Deputy Prime Minister’s direction to the Industrial Relations Commission that awards not increase costs for employers?

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

It does seem that you have at least heard part of the answer to the question but not the full part of it. The government has urged the AIRC to utilise and set out transitional arrangements because it is imperative that parties have sufficient time to become familiar with the content of modern awards before their commencement on 1 January 2010. As I stated in the supplementary submission to the AIRC, it is also particularly important in light of the global financial crisis, with businesses requiring certainty regarding their costs. That is why this government has put forward a plan to ensure that there are transitional arrangements and there is the full five years. We urge the AIRC to use those to be able to deal with it. I am sorry that the opposition wants to make faces about this. This is a serious matter. It is unfortunate that the opposition does not understand the global financial crisis impacts upon us across the economy. (Time expired)