Matt Burnell (Spence, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations. Earlier today this House passed the Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Secure Jobs, Better Pay) Bill. How will the bill help get wages moving? What is the government's response to those who are trying to keep wages low?

Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Spence for the question. He has dedicated his life to secure jobs and better pay.

Today the House made a few decisions. Today the House made a decision to get wages moving. Today the House made a decision to close the gender pay gap. Today the House made a decision to improve job security. In doing those things we also had another vote. There was an attempt for the House to make a different decision. As the debate went back and forth in the House, members often opened by saying that everyone wants to get wages moving. We kept hearing from people on each side of the debate that they want to give people pay rises, yet there are two tests. Are you willing to do anything about it? We ended up with a vote that was designed to do the exact opposite.

In the lead-up to the last election Senator Cash put out a statement saying that there would be no changes to the better off overall test full stop. I presumed that those opposite had abandoned their previous position from the bill they brought in here in 2020, which was about pay cuts. The bill was to redo the better off overall test by getting rid of it altogether for two years. Yet today an amendment moved by none other than the Leader of the Opposition called on us to make 'changes to enterprise bargaining as outlined in the former coalition government's legislation introduced in 2020'. So at the same time that this parliament was debating the need to get wages moving, with people facing higher inflation, those opposite took to a vote an amendment to bring back the 2020 legislation.

What would it mean if back then you suspended the better off overall test? It would mean that a part-time level 2 hospitality worker aged over 21 would have seen their hourly New Year's Day rate slashed from $46 to $20. Instead of earning $375 they would have earnt $166. A part-time level 3 retail worker aged over 21 would have seen their hourly Boxing Day rate slashed from $50 to $22.

At the exact time people are talking about cost-of-living pressures we had a government determined to get wages moving and an opposition that decided that keeping wages deliberately low as a design feature wasn't enough—they actually put back on the table a desire to suspend the better off overall test altogether and deliver wage cuts. If you want to get wages moving, it's the government in this House that's on your side. (Time expired)