Page 1061 - Week 04 - Tuesday, 2 May 2006
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
actually makes the ability to transfer from one type of employment to another a “not allowable matter”. I would like members to consider this restriction in the context of a working mother returning to part-time work.
The federal legislative framework that governs employment arrangements in the ACT should encourage industrial cooperation and facilitate the simple and quick resolution of industrial disputes. Importantly, the legislative framework should also protect the rights of employers, employees and their representatives to negotiate industrial agreements that suit their particular needs or requirements and should provide protections from unfair dismissal. This is what modern working conditions should provide for. WorkChoices does none of these things.
This government opposes a system that will see some of our lowest paid workers struggle even more to balance work and family life and to make ends meet. To date workers have largely favoured and benefited from collective bargaining. Over the past century workers have improved their conditions collectively and have delivered excellent results in both quality and productivity. One of the reasons for these excellent results is the support of the union movement. Unions have fought for generations to build up protections for these workers. It is thanks to the union movement that workers have a voice and decent conditions. I oppose a new system that prevents unions from representing their workers.
The ability of workers to bargain during collective agreement negotiations will be curtailed under WorkChoices. The provisions in the legislation that promote individual contracts based on minimum conditions at the expense of collective bargaining will have a devastating impact on working families. The loss of control over rosters and hours of work through the averaging provisions of the legislation remove all flexibility and thus create unpredictability for families.
The impact of these averaging provisions will provide for a lower take home wage and such variants to working hours and pay that employees may find it increasingly difficult to meet their financial needs or to meet their family and social obligations. The introduction of WorkChoices will leave disempowered workers to negotiate individual improvements in an alleged better bargaining environment on a one-on-one basis with their bosses.
A parliamentary research paper published in 2004 confirms that AWAs are likely to result in increased working hours. The paper states, “AWAs are more likely to be used to extend working hours.” The research shows that in 2004, 93 per cent of private sector employees on AWAs achieved no additional family-friendly rights in their agreements, and only 11 per cent of those AWAs included maternity leave, paid or unpaid. In fact, women fared worse than men on family leave with 14 per cent fewer women having family-friendly entitlements in their AWAs.
The ACT government is particularly concerned about the impact the changes will have on women in the ACT work force. Women comprise 48 per cent of the ACT work force. This is the highest female participation rate in the country. At a time of emerging skilled labour shortages, the ACT government believes that we need to be innovative in our approach to balancing work and family and to maintaining a high participation across our working age population.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .