Page 759 - Week 03 - Wednesday, 29 March 2006
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MS GALLAGHER: I thank Mr Gentleman for his question. As an active member of and activist for the TWU for many years, Mr Gentleman is right to be concerned about the impact of this legislation in the ACT.
Yesterday the Chief Minister and I spoke of the impact the work choices legislation was already having in other parts of Australia. Mining companies like Rio Tinto are worried about how they will deal with their employees under the changes, whilst a Melbourne construction firm has utilised the changes to lay off three workers and offer them jobs at reduced rates. I also spoke of the Salvation Army’s difficulty in negotiating a new agreement with their aged care workers under the changes. Mr Gentleman is therefore right to question whether the comments of the federal minister were accurate.
Mr Andrews suggested that the sky would not fall in. Well, Mr Speaker, we heard on ABC radio this morning that yesterday the sky did indeed fall in for one ACT worker. Boral employee Tim Bollard phoned in to say that his employer had acted immediately upon the commencement of work choices to lay him off on medical grounds. Mr Bollard works hard to support his extended family. He is married with five children, the eldest of whom is married and supporting a small child. Tim lives in a small house with his wife and all five children plus his married son’s wife and child.
Mr Bollard is heavily mortgaged and regularly fears bankruptcy. Only yesterday he purchased $4,000 worth of gyprock from Boral as he is building a home for his eldest son so that he can move out with his family. Yesterday he received a letter from his employer informing him he was being laid off, supposedly on medical grounds. Although Mr Bollard was injured while working for Boral some 12 months ago, he did not miss a single day of work. He had his operation on a Saturday morning and returned to work on the Monday. Since then he has not missed a day’s work due to his injury. It seems a suspicious coincidence that after working with his injuries for 12 months his employer chose the day work choices commenced to lay him off.
After receiving the letter from Boral, Mr Bollard could not sleep. He got to work early to find his fellow workers had rallied around him and were fighting for him to keep his job. The timely intervention of the Transport Workers Union appeared to be a victory for Mr Bollard, with an announcement that he would be reinstated subject to a “meeting with management at 3 pm tomorrow”. However, discussions with Mr Bollard today have revealed that his job has changed. The employer will not disclose what change that will be until the meeting tomorrow. I am conscious that under work choices an employer can change a worker’s mode of employment or position virtually unchallenged, so we will just have to wait and see what type of job Mr Bollard gets and whether he will be demoted by stealth under work choices.
This is an example of the future that ACT workers face under work choices. No matter how many years of service, no matter how many sacrifices workers make, employers can sack them on a whim. Some employers will recognise the moral obligation they owe to workers but those who pay attention only to legal considerations will use this opportunity to save money to cut costs to improve profits at the expense of their work force. I know that Mr Gentleman and the TWU are keeping a close watch on this case, and I thank them for the information that they have provided to my office. We will join them in the fight to ensure that workers like Mr Bollard are not disadvantaged by work choices.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .