Brendan O'Connor (Gorton, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Hansard source

The Fair Work Amendment (Protecting Take Home Pay) Bill 2017 would have two effects: firstly, it would stop retail and hospitality workers' wages being cut as a result of the decision handed down by the Fair Work Commission last month, and, secondly, it would stop the Fair Work Commission cutting award wages and penalty rates in other industries, by constraining the discretion of the commission. That is why this bill is so important.

This is a time when wage growth in this country is at an all-time low, at least since records began in 1998—at least that long. It is also a time when more Australians are feeling cost-of-living pressures: the difficulty in making ends meet; the difficulty in paying bills and in paying the mortgage, in paying the rent and in putting food on the table and petrol in the car. These are real life experiences happening now to thousands and thousands of Australians, and they will be made worse if we allow the effects of the Fair Work decision to occur.

Of course it is also a time when the Prime Minister and the government want to give corporate tax cuts to big business and to banks. We have this most bizarre contrast in this place where, on the one hand, you have a Prime Minister wanting to see a pay cut of up to $77 a week for retail and hospitality workers and workers in pharmacies and, at the same time, allowing for a $17,000 tax cut on 1 July. We have a situation where we will see real cuts that will cause real damage to the social fabric of this country by cutting workers' wages and yet we have a government that wants to give a $50 billion tax giveaway to big businesses. It is an absolute shame, and the government must consider a different view. We have invited the Prime Minister to join Labor and support this bill, the effect of which would mean that the decision would not hurt so many Australians.

There are other issues, too, that have not been fully aired in this discussion, and it is such an important discussion. Firstly, today, there was the revelation from the Australia Institute that hundreds of millions of dollars will be lost in revenue as a result of the Fair Work Commission decision. How that would happen is that people's wages will fall—people who currently have some social benefit, which may well be a family tax benefit, paid to them as a result of the level of their income—and, if you cut the level of their income, you will see increased reliance on social welfare payments. These hardworking Australians in this country have to suffer the indignity of their Prime Minister and this government wanting to cut their wages, making them rely more on social welfare. At the same time, there is going to be a hit to revenue for this government, which of course begs the questions: why is it that Treasury made no modelling in relation to the effects on employment? We have to rely on the spurious claims from those who say it is going to be a great boon to employment. And why is it that, in estimates, Treasury could not indicate the loss to revenue as a result of the intersection of the wages that these workers are reliant upon with some of the social welfare payments they receive? This is an important bill. It will help redress inequality in this country, which is at a 75-year high. It seeks to redress the difficulties people are confronting every day when dealing with cost-of-living pressures.

I also want to touch on one other matter. Labor made clear when the decision was handed down that this would be the thin edge of the wedge, that this would be the beginning of an assault on workers' wages. The Prime Minister said that was an absurd proposition. In fact, he called it a lie. Well, what we have seen as result of the decision is that three further awards will now be subject to potential arbitration and further cuts. Hairdressers and beauticians, those who work in clubs and hotels and those who work in restaurants will now also be subject to consideration as to whether their penalty rates will be cut, and they may well join retail workers and hospitality workers in losing real income. This is a very important bill. We would expect Malcolm Turnbull, if he had any concern for Australians, if he were not so out of touch, to support this bill today and look after these workers in this country.

See this speech in context