Adam Bandt (Melbourne, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

It has become apparent in recent times that there are a number of problems with the industrial relations system in this country. In the context of the amendments to the Fair Work Act, which will hopefully flow when the government responds to the independent review, it will provide us with a great opportunity to fix some of those problems. That is what this bill will do. Firstly, one of the problems that we noticed, especially in my home state of Victoria, is that we have disputes in the public sector that are being unnecessarily prolonged by powerful employers who—certainly, according to leaked cabinet documents—when it came to the nurses in Victoria, said that their strategy was to hold out in the negotiations, provoke the nurses into taking industrial action and then hope that, when the matter went to Fair Work Australia, it would be resolved on favourable terms because, under the laws as they currently stand, there are some matters, like nurse-patient ratios, that cannot be arbitrated by the independent umpire.

So you have this arrangement where one party—in this case the employer, the state public sector employer—has a head start, knowing that if they hold out long enough and if a matter goes to Fair Work, it is almost certainly going to be determined on terms favourable to them. This bill would close that loophole by saying to an employer, 'You can't come here and seek our assistance to get the matter to arbitration unless you can convince us that all matters are going to be settled.' In other words, this bill will promote full settlement of these disputes and remove the incentive that some have, particularly public sector employers, to string out disputes, hoping that they get to Fair Work Australia, where for legal reasons there are some matters that simply cannot be determined, even though they might be genuine matters that the workers are genuinely claiming and entitled to.

Another thing that we have seen in recent times is tactical actions taken by powerful employers in an aim to get themselves a step further in the legal process in Fair Work Australia. I have in mind here the actions taken by Qantas, where they grounded the whole fleet, essentially held a gun to the travelling public, and said to the government and to the public, 'Now, look at this amazing chaos that has resulted. The only thing that can solve this is if we go to Fair Work Australia and have it arbitrated.' Then, of course, when it went to Fair Work Australia and it was arbitrated, because of the threat that was posed from shutting down a nation's airline, Qantas well knew that they were going to get a more favourable outcome, because—as any industrial lawyer will tell you—the issue of job security, which the workers were bargaining about, is one that the industrial tribunal was never going to grant them. So Qantas always wanted to get to a workplace determination in Fair Work Australia and knew that the only way they could get there was by grounding the fleet themselves, because the employees and the workers were not going to do it. Then, of course, the government obliged and stepped in, and finished off the last bit of Qantas's plan for them.

This bill will give Fair Work Australia the power to say to employers like that, 'Look, if we think that part of the reason you are taking these extreme actions is for tactical reasons, to give yourself a leg up in the process, we are going to send you back for more bargaining. We are going to stop the industrial action, the planes will get back in the sky, but you will go back for more bargaining. Don't you ground the fleet and then come running here complaining about the consequences of it, in the hope that you will get a favourable outcome.' It will do a number of other things too that will enhance job security and also require the greater giving of notice before industrial action is taken. Some of these issues were canvassed in the Fair Work review. I note that it has been some time since the review's report was handed down, and the government is yet to respond. There are a very wide range of recommendations in that review, some of which will take away the rights and protections that workers currently enjoy.

I note in this context that Senator Abetz, representing the coalition, has said, 'We're happy to implement the review holus-bolus, bar one recommendation, so the government should get on and legislate now.' What I would say is what I have saying for some months—and we are yet to receive a response from the government—which is that the government have to decide, in implementing the review's recommendations and responding to it, whether they are going to work with the coalition or the Greens. We have made the offer to work with them. The coalition have put their cards on the table. The government just need to decide whom they want to work with.

Tony Windsor (New England, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned, and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next meeting.