THE AUSTRALIAN government is introducing amendments to the Secure jobs, Better Pay Bill in Parliament today (Tuesday 8 November).

Discussions about possible advantages and consequences of the bill have been ongoing since employment and workplace relations minister Tony Burke tabled the bill on 27 October.

Despite its intended outcomes for workforces, the bill has received backlash from industry over the perceived potential for more strikes, fewer jobs and centralised decision making.

The government said the amendments build off consultations with business groups, unions and experts over the past week.

The Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Secure Jobs, Better Pay) Bill aims to amend legislation on the workplace bargaining system.

Mr Burke described the bill as an “essential and urgent” means of increasing access to bargaining and closing loopholes “undermining wage growth”.

He expects the bill to get more people on single enterprise agreements, which he said will remain the primary form of agreement.

“We’ve been happy to listen to feedback about how to make sensible improvements to the practical application of the bill,” Mr Burke said.

“After additional consultations the government has drafted a number of amendments we will move in the house this week.”

Firstly, the bill will be amended to require majority support from employees of each employer for a single interest bargaining stream authorisation.

Secondly, it will provide that businesses and workers “cannot be compelled” into an authorisation or single interest employer agreement when they have agreed to bargain for a proposed single enterprise agreement, and a six month grace period where there is a history of effective bargaining.

Another amendment relates to clarification that the Fair Work Commission must be satisfied a minimum period of good-faith bargaining has occurred before moving to arbitrate

Businesses will also be given 12 months to adjust to changes to fixed-term contracts.

The full details of the amendments will be introduced into Parliament on Tuesday.

Challenging the enterprise bargaining system

Jamie Newlyn, assistant national secretary of the Maritime Union of Australia, highlighted the bill’s capacity to prevent unilateral termination of enterprise bargaining agreements.

The MUA, alongside the Australian Maritime Officers Union and the Australian Institute of Marine and Power Engineers, have been engaged in protected industrial action against Svitzer Australia throughout the year.

The towage company in January attempted to terminate an enterprise bargaining agreement with its workers.

Svitzer Australia has said the agreement had led to inefficiencies and limitations on workplace productivity.

However, the termination hearing (initially scheduled for August this year) was pushed to the end of the year after the unions obtained a four-month adjournment.  

“Rogue employers like Svitzer, who’ve acted in bad faith for many years, manipulate the current workplace laws to cancel agreements with their workforce and undermine collective bargaining, Mr Newlyn said.

“A key provision of the bill before the Parliament would finally put a stop to this employer militancy.

“Svitzer pays nearly no tax in Australia and sends hundreds of millions of dollars back to its parent company in Denmark yet wants to slash Australian tug crews’ pay by 47%, casualise their jobs and undermine key safety measures.

“They are only able to do this because of the current state of the Fair Work laws and that must change.”

Shortcomings despite amendments

Innes Willox, chief executive of national employer association Ai Group, welcomed the amendments but argued the bill was still “fatally flawed”.

“The breadth and significance of the changes in this bill reinforce the need for the government to slow down the passage of the bill to enable both Parliament and the community to meaningfully assess its impact,” Mr Willox said.

He said he recognised the government’s willingness to address concerns the group had raised during consultations, but that some “highly technical” amendments needed to be scrutinised.

“While some amendments do make modest improvements to the bill, others introduce new problems,” Mr Willox said.

“A proposed amendment that would empower unions to prevent employers from putting a proposed multi-employer agreement to a vote of their workforces without union consent will hand unions an unreasonable level of control over the content of agreements.”

He said a “major concern” for industry is that the criteria for when a union can seek a multi-employer agreement remains unreasonably loose.

“It would lead to an unjustified expansion of multi-employer bargaining and industrial action rather than encouraging parties to make agreements at the individual workplace level,” he said.

“Indeed, the amendments water down the scant safeguards originally contained in the bill regarding when multi-employer bargaining will be available. It is disappointing that we haven’t yet seen movement on this front.

“Throughout the hurried development of this legislation, government has indicated there is a willingness to work constructively on amendments to the bill, but the real test for the government is whether it is prepared to commit to slow down the passage of the bill to enable this to occur effectively.

“The more we consult and the more employers consider the proposed legislation the more that problems are identified.”