Page 3989 - Week 13 - Wednesday, 1 December 2021
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
But the reality is that Ms Berry’s amendment changes my motion so dramatically as to change the whole intent of what I am trying to achieve here, which is to refer some pretty serious issues, I think it is fair to say, to the umpire, to the Fair Work Ombudsman.
I am somewhat staggered that the government would not support that and that the Greens, who purport to be staunch supporters of fair work and fair pay, would not support that. The limited referral was to the report from the union. Much of what was said was just an attack on the Liberals and did not quote from some important points that were raised by the union. I am referring to quotes like “in addition to exploiting the hard work and goodwill of teachers, overwork is a serious safety issue”. The report talks about the average hours worked, which far exceeds the maximum weekly hour limit of 38 hours set by the Fair Work Act.
It goes to the point that, in the union’s estimation:
The harsh reality is that ACT public school teachers subsidise the ACT Government’s spending on education to the tune of at least $75 million every year on salaries alone.
The ACTU, in their submission to a Senate committee inquiry, made the point—this perhaps goes to Mr Gentleman’s point—that wage theft goes beyond paying under award wages and includes annualised wages being set and not taking into account additional hours.
I am disappointed but perhaps not surprised. It would seem that this is a government that pays lip-service to its workers. This was an opportunity for Labor members and the Greens members to not just come into this place and say, “Oh, we love teachers; we love what they do.” We all do; parents across this town do. It was an opportunity for them to back up their words with some substantive action. This is an opportunity. They could have done that; they could have said, “Not only do we support what you are doing but we hear what you are saying through your union and we will make sure that the important issues that have been raised get referred to the umpire.”
Instead, what we hear today is mostly lip-service being paid, an attempt to try and say, “The Liberals are to blame for all of this. We blame them.” And then they put in an amendment. It says nothing wrong—it says things that I would 100 per cent support—but it completely removes the referral to the Fair Work Ombudsman.
If this was the private sector—if this was a builder, a bank, an airline or a supermarket—and these issues had been raised about exploitation, about workers essentially subsidising a business by $75 million through unpaid work, can you imagine the outrage we would hear from those opposite? They would be picketing. They would be demanding that the matter be referred to the Fair Work Ombudsman.
And rightly so, to be honest. I do not support underpayment of workers. I do not support wage theft. I do not support people being exploited anywhere. If I saw this in the private sector, I would support referral to the Fair Work Ombudsman. Why won’t you refer it when it is in the public sector, when it is the teachers who we have charge
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video