Amanda Rishworth (Kingston, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On behalf of the Standing Committee on Education and Employment, I present the committee's advisory report on the Fair Work Amendment (Better Work/Life Balance) Bill 2012, incorporating additional comments and a dissenting report, together with the minutes of proceedings and evidence received by the committee.

On 16 February 2012, the House Selection Committee referred the Fair Work Amendment (Better Work/Life Balance) Bill 2012 to the employment and education committee for inquiry and report. The bill was introduced by the member for Melbourne, who was subsequently appointed to the committee for the purposes of this inquiry. The inquiry received 23 submissions from employee and employer groups, carer organisations and others with an interest in flexible arrangements in Australian workplaces. On 23 March, the committee held a public hearing in Canberra to explore some of the themes raised in submissions with stakeholders as well as with the Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations.

The bill proposes substantive and formal changes to the current right to request flexible working arrangements. The substantive changes to the right to request include: increasing the scope of the right to request flexible working arrangements to all national system employees; increasing the scope of arrangements that define a carer in relation to requests for flexible working arrangements; and strengthening the grounds required to refuse a request for flexible working arrangements for the purposes of caring from 'reasonable business grounds' to 'serious countervailing business grounds'. The bill also proposes empowering Fair Work Australia to make flexible working arrangements orders and provides for the imposition of penalties on parties that fail to implement these orders.

Submissions to the inquiry were divided on whether they supported or opposed the proposed extension of the right to request flexible working arrangements. These arrangements are currently subject to a number of reviews outlined in the report. These include an independent review of the Fair Work Act 2009 and a consultation by the Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations on expanding the right to request flexible working arrangements under the National Carer Recognition Framework. Additionally, the General Manager of Fair Work Australia is currently conducting research into the extent to which individual flexibility arrangements under modern awards and enterprise agreements are being agreed to, and the content of those arrangements; and the operation of the provisions of the National Employment Standards relating to employee requests.

I note that, while the majority of members of the committee agreed with the principles outlined in the bill, the committee has recommended that the bill not be considered until the results of these reviews and government responses are released.

As well as extending the right to request flexible working arrangements, the bill proposes to alter the formal status of the right by removing these provisions from the National Employment Standards. Only one organisation provided evidence to the inquiry that supported the proposed removal of the right to request flexible working arrangements from the National Employment Standards. Others either questioned or opposed this element of the bill. I understand the member for Melbourne has provided additional comments on the purpose of such a change. However, there was considerable argument against the proposed removal of flexible working arrangements from the National Employment Standards. That was certainly a concern of government members of the committee.

The National Employment Standards set out clear minimum conditions that must apply to employees and it is appropriate that the right to request flexible working arrangements is included. This was the view held by government members of the committee. The inclusion of the right to request, as a minimum condition of employment, contributes to an awareness that benefits both employees and employers. Removal of the right to request would also mean that agreed individual flexible working arrangements could be overridden by a collective enterprise agriculture agreement—a situation described by the Ai Group as 'counterintuitive'.

In closing, I thank all those who provided evidence to the inquiry for making the trip to Canberra and my committee colleagues for the work they put into it. I also note the work done by the secretariat, in particular Glenn Worthington. I thank them for their input and I commend the report to the House.

In accordance with standing order 39(f) the report was made a parliamentary paper.

Rowan Ramsey (Grey, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the advisory report of the Fair Work Amendment (Better Work/Life Balance) Bill 2012 as proposed by the member for Melbourne. The coalition members—the members for McPherson, Aston and I—of the Standing Committee on Education and Employment support the recommendation of the committee and recognise the views of some, at least, who gave evidence to the committee that they support some action in this area. We were keen to point out that, whilst supporting the recommendation, we do not necessarily endorse the general thrust of the legislation, which is to pass further enforceable responsibilities onto the employers. Further, we are of the opinion that better results will be achieved if employers are encouraged to work in a cooperative fashion with their employees rather than engaging in an environment of confrontation by government regulation enforcing particular outcomes.

To that extent, we took some note of the evidence given by the Australian Industry Group where, firstly, they discussed the conditions in the economy that are affecting business and placing many under strain at the moment. Australian industry perspective business conditions are very tough under the two-speed economy. Mr Callahan went on to say:

Costs of doing business are highly significant at the moment. In the context of this bill before the parliament I think it is important that members take that on board from the perspective of our concern, in particular, that other jobs are potentially under threat at the moment and it is a very difficult time for doing business in Australia.

He went on to say:

The right to request provisions, in their current form, are a very important feature of the act as they encourage cooperation though open dialogue between employees and their employers about achieving meaningful flexibility in the workplace that works on both a personal level for the employee and an operational level for the employer. Unfortunately, the bill as it currently stands would undermine this very important principle and purpose.

The coalition members were concerned that this bill may bring about further confrontation in the workforce and, in that case, be counterproductive to a good outcome. Mr Callahan went on to say:

We believe that the right to request flexible working arrangements as it currently exists under the Fair Work Act is effectively fulfilling the government's intention and we have not identified any problems necessitating a change to the act in this regard.

He also said: 'It would convert a facilitative mechanism that encourages open dialogue at the workplace into an adversarial mechanism.'

We also took evidence from Carers Australia which would somewhat confirm this opinion. In fact, the possibility of this legislation becoming a new point of conflict between employers and employees was conceded by Carers Australia, who showed a preference for a cooperative approach rather than compulsion. They said that, if the legislation is passed, it may become an effective disincentive to employing people from groupings more likely to have caring responsibilities.

We do support the recommendation, because it defers action at this stage, but the driving force behind that is that we do not necessarily accept that this is the correct way to engage with carers, and the people they care for, for the employers. We do not have a special confidence in the Fair Work review. Our concerns with the Fair Work review are that it will not go to some of the things that are affecting conflict in the workplace at the moment in a broader view—not, in particular, with this situation with carers but that the Fair Work review may have some deficiency. But we are more than prepared to wait and see what it says and what the government's reaction to that review is.

Ms Anna Burke (Chisholm, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The time allotted for statements on this report has expired. Does the honourable member for Kingston wish to move a motion in connection with the report to enable it to be debated on a future occasion?

Amanda Rishworth (Kingston, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the House take note of the report.

Ms Anna Burke (Chisholm, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In accordance with standing order 39, the debate is adjourned. The resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. Does the honourable member for Kingston wish to move a motion to refer the matter to the Federation Chamber?