Page 3783 - Week 12 - Tuesday, 18 October 2005

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .


against unlawful termination of employment will also be protected. These matters are being protected by law for the first time.

We are not going to be relying on the Industrial Relations Commission as the be-all and end-all for all industrial matters. People will in fact have the right to join and be represented by a union. This is not about saying unions have got to get out of business and we are going to run them to the corners of the earth; this is about saying we need a modern industrial system that protects certain fundamentals but gives greater scope for flexibility.

I heard recently great debate in tourism over the fact that people should be forced to go on leave and should be forced to spend money and so on. Sometimes those who want to advocate these areas of compulsion in terms of the work force ought to realise that people want more flexibility. When you have young families, going on holidays can be an expensive process.

It may be that in some households there is appeal in making adjustments in relation to leave and taking improved compensation as a result so that they can still achieve their desired ends in terms of holidays and protect their income base. What suits one situation may not apply to another. But the view has always been in the union movement: one rule for all; we want to absolutely have blanket approaches that do not respect or reflect the individual needs of different circumstance and families.

I worked in an industrial organisation in hospitality for 12 years and in that time I saw how people in different circumstances were able to take advantage of a more progressive and changing industrial environment. There were many women, for instance, who sought to go into hotel housekeeping, took advantage of the fact that that work was particularly in demand at certain hours that fitted in with their obligations of taking children to and from school. I saw other situations where students saw advantage in being able to work Friday, Saturday and Sunday nights so that they could focus their efforts on study through the week and they took advantage of those arrangements.

But what is proposed here is that we introduce greater flexibility into the work force but still protect fundamental conditions. And this legislation that is being announced by the Australian government will, in fact, protect by law specific existing award conditions such as penalty rates, overtime and long service leave and the right to lawful industrial action when negotiating agreement. These will be protected by law. Employees cannot be forced to change their existing agreements. What we are going to have is a simpler system, a national system, but one that will ensure that people’s positions are well preserved.

The new workplace relations system will simplify the workplace agreement-making process. So many employers have abandoned the idea of going into these workplace agreements because of the complexity of the process. You have to go and hire specialists unless you are very competent in these matters. Both sides usually have no idea of the finer points of these agreements. We will have, under this system, a method of negotiating employment conditions that is easy to understand—easier for young people who are entering the work force and easier for the self-employed or the small business people who may be on the other side of the table.


Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .