Roger Price (Chifley, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I move:

That the House:

(1)

recognises the adverse affects of the federal Government’s Workchoices legislation;

(2)

take immediate action to protect working Australian men and women;

(3)

take specific action to address the uneven nature of the bargaining position and pressures on young Australians entering the workforce for the first time;

(4)

take note of the Howard Government’s agenda to drive down wages;

(5)

condemns national employer JetStar for its practice of charging job applicants for the application process; and

(6)

take action to prevent other employers from adopting similar practices.

It is a pleasure to move this motion standing in my name concerning the Work Choices legislation in general.

A resident of Blacktown, Tony Jansson, got in touch with me about an article he had read about Jetstar. The article said that people who wanted a cabin job with Jetstar were required to pay $40 for a personality test and $49 for a security check—in total $89. Tony asked me a very simple question, and I could not answer it. He said, ‘Is it legal for job applicants to be charged by employers to apply for a job?’ It seems a simple proposition, but at the time I just did not know the answer. I have now checked and have found that there is absolutely nothing in Commonwealth law that prevents an employer charging applicants a fee to apply for a job. There were thousands of applicants in this instance, and some 200 were selected.

One may say that, given the current level of employment, it is not a problem. I disagree. I think the principle is wrong. I do not think employers should be able to charge a prospective employee to apply for a job. I do not believe that is Australian. I do not believe that that is fair. I do not believe that that is providing a fair go. Any downturn of commodity prices or any hardening of the economic arteries in America or China will put enormous pressure on Australia. There is already speculation that commodity prices will ease—if not fall—significantly over time. What this means, particularly for young Australians—the class of 2006—is that, when the employment queues grow, employers will be able to be very choosy, even more choosy, and they will have the opportunity under this federal government to levy a charge on job applicants. It is un-Australian, it is unfair and it should be stopped.

In my electorate we have had the case of Spotlight. Spotlight opened a new store and, under the new AWA for Spotlight, new employees were asked to give up penalty rates, overtime payments, rest breaks, incentive based payments and bonuses, annual leave loading, public holiday pay rates, rostered days off, first aid allowances, meal allowances and uniform allowances—all for an extra 2c an hour. There was a huge reaction in my electorate about this outrage. In fact, lots of citizens spontaneously went to Blacktown’s Spotlight store and threw their Spotlight card at the employers there. They wanted to demonstrate how disgusted they were.

The Prime Minister defended it all on the basis of, ‘This is what you get when you are unemployed,’ and ‘This is what you get when you get a full-time job with Spotlight.’ What he did not say was that no-one was being offered full-time jobs at Spotlight. I have spoken to some of the workers at Mount Druitt and they were absolutely beside themselves because they were being offered casual work only and their AWA got rid of so many of the award conditions.

I feel for the class of 2006—that graduating body, mostly from year 12 and some from year 10—and worry about the sort of working world they are entering. They will have no choice, they will have no bargaining position and they will have to sign AWAs or go without a job. That is the only choice they will have. Also, they will be on second-class rates. I value each and every job a person in my electorate gets, but why should they give away so much? Why should it be so unfair for young Australians when they enter the workplace? (Time expired)

See this speech in context