Page 1119 - Week 04 - Thursday, 21 May 2020
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
and obligations. These include the labour operator meeting a suitable person test and being able to demonstrate a history of and ongoing compliance with workplace laws and industry standards.
The aim of the scheme is to better protect the rights and entitlements of workers. This is a goal with which the Greens strongly agree. The scheme will impose a level of regulatory burden and administration and will require labour hire providers to pay a licence fee. This is not something we want to impose without good reason because, ideally, businesses could operate free from red tape and costs. But regulation is important to protect from problems that can arise, like the exploitation of people or environmental damage. I think this bill gets the balance right.
In the case of labour hire operators, the Greens agree that it is appropriate to require licensing. For many years, and over many investigations and inquiries, the labour hire industry has been implicated in the poor treatment of workers. This includes issues such as underpayment, failure to provide entitlements and poor working conditions.
There have been various inquiries into labour hire and insecure work, including an ACT Assembly committee inquiry. These inquiries have recommended the establishing of labour hire licensing authorities and the licensing of labour hire operators. However, these inquiries have not been unanimous and have highlighted a political divide whereby the coalition or Liberal Party members do not wish to license labour hire operators. They generally regard them as contributing to the economy via the provision of flexible employment. Some of these dissenting reports have been used essentially to attack unions, reflecting a longstanding political divide that we also see here in the ACT Assembly.
For the record, the Greens believe the rights of workers are very important and need improved protections. We recognise the problems that regularly arise with labour hire and insecure work. There was a large amount of evidence presented to the various inquiries which revealed significant problems with labour hire. For example, labour hire workers may be effectively used as long-term employees, but without the protections and entitlements usually afforded to employees. This means, for example, that a whole workforce can be sacked essentially overnight and replaced with workers from another labour hire firm, even if the sacked workers had been working in the role long term. This is a situation that unfortunately does occur. This is not how working people should be treated. Maybe it makes business easier or makes a few extra dollars, but people are not tools to be exploited for economic ends. We need to maintain a society that looks after workers and recognises the important and meaningful role that work has in a person’s life.
I also want to emphasise some of the concerning impacts that insecure work has in the community more generally. This is reflected in submissions to the Assembly inquiry from groups such as Legal Aid, St Vincent de Paul, and the Women’s Centre for Health Matters. These submissions highlight that insecure work exacerbates issues faced by disadvantaged groups, and these organisations see it daily. It also causes wider negative impacts across society, such as reduced wellbeing and negative impacts on mental health. For those who insist upon the economic merits of insecure
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video