This bill became law on Dec 6th, 2022.
Work & employment
Building industry employers and workers now deal with the Fair Work OmbudsmanThe regulator that enforces workplace laws and, on this page, takes over building industry enforcement from the ABCC. instead of the Australian Building and Construction CommissionThe former building industry watchdog that this bill abolishes and replaces with the Fair Work Ombudsman for enforcement., and the building sector loses its higher special penalties.
Stagnant wages, insecure jobs, gender inequity and unfair workplace rules left workers with weak bargaining power and protections. The bill expands multi-employer bargaining, limits fixed-term contracts, bans pay secrecy clauses, strengthens flexible work and harassment protections, and shifts building industry regulation to the Fair Work OmbudsmanThe regulator that enforces workplace laws and, on this page, takes over building industry enforcement from the ABCC..
After years of weak wage growth and a bargaining system ministers said had been deliberately tilted against pay rises, 2022 brought sharper pressure as living costs rose, enterprise agreements kept falling, insecure work persisted and gender pay inequity remained embedded in workplace rules. The bill responded by widening multi-employer bargaining, limiting fixed-term contracts, banning pay secrecy clauses, strengthening flexible work and harassment protections, and abolishing the Australian Building and Construction CommissionThe former building industry watchdog that this bill abolishes and replaces with the Fair Work Ombudsman for enforcement. before Parliament passed it in early December 2022 and Royal AssentThe final formal step that turns a bill passed by Parliament into an Act of Parliament. followed days later.
The main case against the bill was that its expanded multi-employer bargaining powers could give unions more leverage, push up costs, trigger wider industrial action and hurt jobs, especially for small business. That criticism was pressed by the Coalition and some crossbenchers, while several independents backed other parts of the package only if bargaining rules were narrowed or reviewed sooner.
Hon Tony Burke MP introduced this bill. In the Senate final vote, support came from Labor, Greens, some crossbench members; opposition came from Liberal Party, Nationals, One Nation, UAP, some crossbench members.
Did it become law?
Yes
Became law 06 Dec 2022
Final passage
Recorded final vote
5 counted final-passage votes were recorded.
Passage speed
40 days
From introduction to the latest recorded parliamentary step
Meaning
Building industry employers and workers now deal with the Fair Work OmbudsmanThe regulator that enforces workplace laws and, on this page, takes over building industry enforcement from the ABCC. instead of the Australian Building and Construction CommissionThe former building industry watchdog that this bill abolishes and replaces with the Fair Work Ombudsman for enforcement., and the building sector loses its higher special penalties.
More workers and employers can bargain across multiple workplaces through easier supported bargainingA bargaining pathway for workers and employers in low-paid or fragmented industries where the Fair Work Commission can help get negotiations going. and single-interest bargaining, with Fair Work CommissionThe workplace tribunal that approves agreements, hears bargaining disputes, and can step in when requests or talks break down. help when talks stall.
Workers get stronger job security and pay transparency because the law limits fixed-term contracts, adds equal pay tools, and bans pay secrecy clauses.
Employees can press flexible work requests more effectively, and workers facing sexual harassment or unpaid wages get stronger ways to enforce their rights.
The federal government must review how these changes are working within 2 years and table the report in Parliament, including any unintended effects and needed law changes.
Restoring fairness and integrity to workplace relations institutions by abolishing the Australian Building and Construction Commission so that the Fair Work Ombudsman is the workplace relations regulator for the building and construction industry and abolishing the Registered Organisations Commission and transferring its functions to the General Manager of the Fair Work Commission.Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Secure Jobs, Better Pay) explanatory memorandum
Remove unnecessary limitations on access to the low-paid bargaining stream (and rename it the supported bargaining stream) and the single-interest employer authorisation stream; and provide enhanced access to Fair Work Commission support for employees and their employers who require assistance to bargain.Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Secure Jobs, Better Pay) explanatory memorandum
Improving job security and gender equity by including both concepts in the objects of the FW Act, limiting the use of fixed term contracts, introducing a statutory equal remuneration principle and prohibiting pay secrecy clauses.Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Secure Jobs, Better Pay) explanatory memorandum
Improving workplace conditions and protections by providing stronger access to flexible working arrangements, stronger protections for workers, including victim survivors of sexual harassment, and enhancing small claims procedures to enable unpaid entitlement recovery.Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Secure Jobs, Better Pay) explanatory memorandum
(3) The review must start no later than 2 years after this section commences.Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Secure Jobs, Better Pay) as-passed bill text
Context
After years of weak wage growth and a bargaining system ministers said had been deliberately tilted against pay rises, 2022 brought sharper pressure as living costs rose, enterprise agreements kept falling, insecure work persisted and gender pay inequity remained embedded in workplace rules. The bill responded by widening multi-employer bargaining, limiting fixed-term contracts, banning pay secrecy clauses, strengthening flexible work and harassment protections, and abolishing the Australian Building and Construction CommissionThe former building industry watchdog that this bill abolishes and replaces with the Fair Work Ombudsman for enforcement. before Parliament passed it in early December 2022 and Royal AssentThe final formal step that turns a bill passed by Parliament into an Act of Parliament. followed days later.
Government says a decade of wage suppression left bargaining too weak
Introducing the bill, the minister said wages had been kept low for nearly 10 years and argued the industrial relations system needed to lift pay and job security.
Hansard ↗Parliamentary debate focuses on rising prices and a failing bargaining system
During debate, supporters said everything was going up except wages and that falling enterprise agreements showed the bargaining system was no longer delivering pay rises.
Hansard ↗House passes the bill
The House agreed to the bill and a large package of amendments, advancing the government's workplace relations overhaul to the Senate.
Parliamentary timeline ↗Senate passes the bill with amendments
The Senate approved further government, Greens and independent amendments, finalising the chamber's changes to the industrial relations package.
Parliamentary timeline ↗Parliament passes the bill
The House agreed to the Senate amendments so both chambers settled the same text and completed the bill's passage.
Parliamentary timeline ↗Royal AssentThe final formal step that turns a bill passed by Parliament into an Act of Parliament. makes the changes law
Royal AssentThe final formal step that turns a bill passed by Parliament into an Act of Parliament. turned the bill into an Act, clearing the way for the new bargaining, job security, pay transparency and building industry enforcement changes to commence.
Parliamentary timeline ↗Legislative route
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
Introduced and read a first time
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Second reading moved
Referred to Committee (27/10/2022): Education and Employment Legislation Committee; Committee report (22/11/2022)
Referred to committee
APH bill page notesThe bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Recorded vote: 80 to 58.
The chamber agreed to the bill at second reading, meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
Second reading agreed to
The chamber considered amendments before the bill moved to the next stage.
Consideration in detail debate
Recorded vote: 80 to 56.
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber. Later message exchanges with the other chamber were still recorded afterwards.
Third reading agreed to
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
Introduced and read a first time
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Second reading moved
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Recorded vote: 32 to 30.
The chamber agreed to the bill at second reading, meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
Second reading agreed to
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The chamber considered amendments before the bill moved to the next stage.
Committee of the Whole debate
Recorded vote: 35 to 31.
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
Third reading agreed to
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The House dealt with Senate amendments or requests so both chambers could settle the bill in the same form.
Consideration of Senate message
Both houses passed the bill in the same form, completing parliamentary passage.
Finally passed both Houses
The Governor-General gave Royal AssentThe final formal step that turns a bill passed by Parliament into an Act of Parliament., turning the bill into an Act.
Key criticism
The main case against the bill was that its expanded multi-employer bargaining powers could give unions more leverage, push up costs, trigger wider industrial action and hurt jobs, especially for small business. That criticism was pressed by the Coalition and some crossbenchers, while several independents backed other parts of the package only if bargaining rules were narrowed or reviewed sooner.
Criticism was real but split between outright opposition and conditional support for changes.
Multi-employer bargaining could increase costs and strikes
Opponents argued the bill's easier path to multi-employer bargaining would let union campaigns spread across sectors, raising labour costs and increasing the risk of disruptive industrial action without clear productivity gains.
Small business could be swept into rules it cannot manage
Several critics said smaller employers could be pulled into bargaining and compliance arrangements designed for larger organisations, creating extra risk, cost and complexity for businesses with limited resources.
The bill was rushed and needed more scrutiny
A repeated reservation was that major industrial relations changes were being pushed through too quickly, with inadequate consultation and too little time to test drafting, carve-outs and safeguards before passage.
Some drafting changes could leave workers worse off
A narrower but concrete criticism was that removing the prospective employee test for enterprise agreements could create a loophole allowing new hires to be paid less than existing workers under grandfathered arrangements.
Further sources
Votes
The chamber-passage votes come first. Expand a vote to see the party breakdown.
Passed 35 to 31. Support came from Labor, Greens, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Liberal Party, Nationals, One Nation, and UAP. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Passed 35 to 31. Support came from Labor, Greens, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Liberal Party, Nationals, One Nation, and UAP. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Passed 35 to 31. Support came from Labor, Greens, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Liberal Party, Nationals, One Nation, and UAP. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Passed 80 to 56. Support came from Labor, Greens, and Katter's Australian Party. Opposition came from Liberal Party, Nationals, and Centre Alliance. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Passed 80 to 56. Support came from Labor, Greens, and Katter's Australian Party. Opposition came from Liberal Party, Nationals, and Centre Alliance. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Earlier bill-stage votes
Defeated 31 to 35. Support came from Liberal Party, Nationals, One Nation, and UAP. Opposition came from Labor, Greens, and minor parties and independents. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Passed 31 to 27. Support came from Labor, Greens, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Liberal Party, Nationals, One Nation, and UAP. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Passed 80 to 58. Support came from Labor, Greens, and Katter's Australian Party. Opposition came from Liberal Party, Nationals, and Centre Alliance. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Passed 32 to 30. Support came from Labor, Greens, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Liberal Party, Nationals, One Nation, and Jacqui Lambie Network. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Amendments grouped by chamber. These cards include amendment outcomes recorded without a counted division.
House
Passed 78 to 42. Support came from Labor, Greens, and Katter's Australian Party. Opposition came from Liberal Party and Nationals. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
The proposed change was agreed.
Passed 79 to 57. Support came from Labor and Greens. Opposition came from Liberal Party, Nationals, Centre Alliance, and Katter's Australian Party. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
That left the bill's second reading motion unchanged and kept the government in control of the debate.
Passed 77 to 59. Support came from Labor and Greens. Opposition came from Liberal Party, Nationals, Centre Alliance, and Katter's Australian Party. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
That kept the bill's second reading motion intact and blocked the opposition's criticism from replacing it.
Passed 80 to 58. Support came from Labor and Greens. Opposition came from Liberal Party, Nationals, Centre Alliance, and Katter's Australian Party. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
This was an opposition second-reading amendment aimed at criticising the bill's bargaining model rather than changing the law directly.
Passed 78 to 59. Support came from Labor, Greens, and Katter's Australian Party. Opposition came from Liberal Party, Nationals, and Centre Alliance. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
That left the government's bargaining reforms and related agreement rules untouched.
Passed 85 to 52. Support came from Labor, Greens, and Katter's Australian Party. Opposition came from Liberal Party, Nationals, and Centre Alliance. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
The proposed change was agreed.
Passed 83 to 54. Support came from Labor, Greens, and Katter's Australian Party. Opposition came from Liberal Party, Nationals, and Centre Alliance. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
That kept the government's smaller business and low-paid bargaining settings in place.
Passed 80 to 54. Support came from Labor and Greens. Opposition came from Liberal Party, Nationals, Centre Alliance, and Katter's Australian Party. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
That preserved the bill's reach over small business and related bargaining rules.
Passed 80 to 53. Support came from Labor, Greens, and Katter's Australian Party. Opposition came from Liberal Party, Nationals, and Centre Alliance. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
That kept the bill's amended drafting moving forward without the opposition's proposed rewrite.
Passed 77 to 56. Support came from Labor and Greens. Opposition came from Liberal Party, Nationals, Centre Alliance, and Katter's Australian Party. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
That stopped another attempt to narrow the bill's bargaining changes through bigger small-business exclusions.
Passed 80 to 56. Support came from Labor, Greens, and Katter's Australian Party. Opposition came from Liberal Party, Nationals, and Centre Alliance. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
That preserved the bill's application rather than carving out the broader business exclusions sought by the crossbench.
Passed 83 to 53. Support came from Labor and Greens. Opposition came from Liberal Party, Nationals, Centre Alliance, and Katter's Australian Party. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
That allowed the House to move on to the final stages of the bill without adopting the proposed change.
The APH progress record says 153 Government amendments were agreed without a counted division being collected by this run.
Carried on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
The House agreed to the amendments made by the Senate, so the bill could pass both chambers in the same form.
Carried on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
Senate
Passed 35 to 31. Support came from Labor, Greens, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Liberal Party, Nationals, One Nation, and UAP. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
This advanced the bill with the government's bargaining and technical changes incorporated.
Passed 35 to 30. Support came from Labor, Greens, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Liberal Party, Nationals, and UAP. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
That strengthened the protections around bargaining after expiry so employers could not use arbitration to strip conditions.
Defeated 13 to 39. Support came from Greens and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor, Liberal Party, Nationals, One Nation, and minor parties and independents.
Those changes would have expanded flexible work access and employer obligations, but they were not adopted.
Passed 39 to 6. Support came from Labor, Greens, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from One Nation and UAP. One cross-floor vote was recorded: Alex Antic (Liberal Party) voted no. Liberal Party and Nationals had split recorded votes. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
This was a gag motion that forced the chamber toward a vote on the bill items still before it.
Defeated 6 to 40. Support came from One Nation and UAP. Opposition came from Labor, Greens, and minor parties and independents. One cross-floor vote was recorded: Alex Antic (Liberal Party) voted aye. Liberal Party and Nationals had split recorded votes. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
The bill did not gain that extra protection against discrimination on the basis of vaccination status.
Passed 31 to 29. Support came from Labor and Greens. Opposition came from Liberal Party, Nationals, One Nation, UAP, and minor parties and independents. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
That procedural vote forced the committee closer to final decisions on the remaining amendments.
Defeated 27 to 31. Support came from Liberal Party, Nationals, One Nation, and UAP. Opposition came from Labor, Greens, and minor parties and independents. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
That blocked the opposition's attempt to rewrite several bargaining rules in the bill.
Passed 32 to 29. Support came from Labor and Greens. Opposition came from Liberal Party, Nationals, One Nation, UAP, and minor parties and independents. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
This limited debate time and advanced the chamber toward the remaining amendment votes.
Defeated 28 to 32. Support came from Liberal Party, Nationals, One Nation, and UAP. Opposition came from Labor, Greens, and minor parties and independents. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
The proposed change was not agreed.
Passed 33 to 29. Support came from Labor and Greens. Opposition came from Liberal Party, Nationals, One Nation, and minor parties and independents. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
That cleared the way for the final amendment votes and report stage.
Defeated 29 to 32. Support came from Liberal Party, Nationals, One Nation, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor and Greens. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
The bill's flexible work dispute and variation settings remained unchanged by that proposal.
Passed 34 to 32. Support came from Labor and Greens. Opposition came from Liberal Party, Nationals, One Nation, UAP, and minor parties and independents. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
That moved the chamber into the last amendment decisions before reporting the bill.
Defeated 31 to 35. Support came from Liberal Party, Nationals, One Nation, and UAP. Opposition came from Labor, Greens, and minor parties and independents. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
That prevented the government from making that additional committee-stage change to the bill.
Passed 35 to 31. Support came from Labor, Greens, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Liberal Party, Nationals, One Nation, and UAP. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
That formally completed the committee of the whole stage.
Defeated 29 to 31. Support came from Liberal Party, Nationals, One Nation, and Jacqui Lambie Network. Opposition came from Labor, Greens, and minor parties and independents. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
That meant the chamber did not endorse the opposition's alternative industrial relations framing for the bill.
Defeated 29 to 31. Support came from Liberal Party, Nationals, One Nation, and Jacqui Lambie Network. Opposition came from Labor, Greens, and minor parties and independents. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
That blocked the opposition's attempt to recast the bill's multi-employer bargaining rules.
Moved by Slade Brockman (Liberal Party). Defeated 29 to 31. Support came from Liberal Party, Nationals, One Nation, and Jacqui Lambie Network. Opposition came from Labor, Greens, and minor parties and independents. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
That left the bill's second-reading wording unchanged and preserved the government's bargaining framework.
The Senate agreed on voices to a large package of government amendments and three Greens amendments during committee consideration.
Carried on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
The Senate agreed on voices to Independent amendments requiring a later review of how the workplace changes operate.
Carried on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
The Senate recorded this proposed amendment as carried on voices without a counted division.
Carried on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
The Senate agreed on voices to Senator Pocock's proposal to give employees a right to a written employer response and limit when an extension of unpaid parental leave could be refused.
Carried on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
The Senate rejected Pocock Barbara's proposal on voices, covering would change the bill text by linking the national minimum wage to 60% of median national hourly wage and phasing it in over time.
Defeated on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
This list includes amendment votes, procedural votes and votes on the bill itself.
The parliamentary record also shows 153 Government amendments, 68 Government, 3 Australian Greens amendments, and 3 Independent amendments agreed without a counted division.
Parliamentary debate
Start here — lead voices
Mr Burke strongly supports the bill and says it is needed to end wage stagnation, improve job security, close the gender pay gap, and strengthen protections against pay secrecy and workplace sexual harassment.
Read in Hansard ↗Dutton opposes the bill and says it should be defeated because it hands too much power to unions, expands multi-employer bargaining, and will raise costs, strikes and job losses without lifting productivity or wages.
Read in Hansard ↗Rice says the Greens support the bill because it should improve jobs, pay and working conditions, but they want stronger action to lift JobSeeker so the reforms actually help workers facing poverty and insecure work.
Read in Hansard ↗Pocock says he will support the bill, arguing that negotiated amendments and safeguards addressed most of his concerns and that it will improve wages and protections for workers.
Read in Hansard ↗All speeches by bloc
34 speakers · 36 contributions · 34 support
Hansard records 2 separate contributions by Carol Brown on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Second reading speech
Carol Brown supports the bill and argues it is needed to lift wages, improve job security and close the gender pay gap. She says workplace laws are out of date and that the reforms should be passed quickly to help workers and families.
“It will take time for this bill to result in improvements in workplaces and pay increases in the pockets of Australians, so we cannot waste a moment in passing it.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Second reading speech
Brown supports the bill and urges the Senate to pass it, saying it will improve bargaining, curb insecure work and ban pay secrecy so workers can win better pay. She presents it as a long overdue fix after years of coalition policy that kept wages low.
“I commend to the Senate the secure jobs, better pay bill and I urge senators to support the bill.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
“The introduction of this bill is about making a choice.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I am proud to be part of a Labor government that is delivering for working Australians. Australian workers deserve fair pay and conditions and they deserve a system that works for them. That is why I wholeheartedly commend the bill to the House. Thank you.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“We need this bill as a strong foundation to continue to build a more equitable and fair system across our country for all of our communities. This is good for workers. It's good for the economy. It will be good for Australia. I commend the bill to the House.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“There's so much good in this bill; it addresses a lot of what's broken in our system. I strongly encourage everybody to reach out to those workers and to find out how it will actually help them. The secure jobs, better pay bill is smart and it is needed. Australia workers shouldn't have to wait to be able to get their rights and fairness in the workplace.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Secure Jobs, Better Pay) Bill is critical, then, and urgent to getting wages moving. It delivers on our election commitments and on the agreements made right across the country through the Jobs and Skills Summit. It promotes job security through new laws with new limits to stop employers from misusing fixed-term contracts. It'll help close the gender pay gap. It'll modernise the wages bargaining system and reform the better off overall test. It will ban job ads that advertise jobs below the legal minimum. I can't believe that it was ever legal to advertise jobs at $10 an hour or $15 an hour and trick people, often vulnerable migrants and students, into working under slave-like conditions.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I don't want to oversell what I think can be achieved. It will take time for this bill to result in improvements in workplaces and pay increases in the pockets of Australians. That's one of the reasons we cannot waste a moment in getting this through our parliament. As the Prime Minister said today, not everyone is going to love everything about it, but we know that this is a great step to getting more secure jobs and better pay for Australians.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I look forward to this legislation being passed in the form it's in and I encourage the crossbench to pause and reconsider.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This bill will deliver those changes to ensure better bargaining conditions and better pay for Australian workers.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Industrial relations reform is not an easy task. This bill is a significant first step for the workers of this country. It's the first tranche of the government's industrial relations reforms, and it is the step towards the necessary reforms that our economy and our workers have been desperate for. With one in four Australians struggling to get by, the workers of this country need wages to move again. They can't wait any longer, and these tough economic times show us the consequences of a decade of stagnant growth. We will get wages moving again. I commend the bill to the House.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Secure Jobs, Better Pay) Bill is an incredibly important bill and an urgent bill. It is about getting wages moving again and modernising Australia's workplace relation system. Australians have been waiting too long for a much deserved pay rise. They've been waiting 10 years, and they shouldn't wait any longer. That's why it's important that we get this bill through. What this bill does is improve job security and gender equity. It improves workplace conditions and protections, and it boosts bargaining and restores fairness and integrity to fair work institutions. It increases job security, which is so important.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I'm pleased to rise to speak in support of this important bill, the Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Secure Jobs, Better Pay) Bill 2022.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Yet those opposite don't come in with any sympathy towards hard-working Australians. They come in with their tired, old union bashing lines, but we don't. We're here. We're proud to set up a strong industrial relations framework. I commend this bill to the House.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This legislation reflects the Albanese government's vision for a fairer, safer and more inclusive Australia. We stood for these things at the last election, and people across Australia voted in favour of them. While this legislation won't on its own fix every problem in our workplace relations system, it is an impressively strong start. I'm very proud of the Albanese Labor government, which is working to get wages moving after 10 years of neglect. I commend the bill to the House.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This bill represents an opportunity for Australia to move beyond a system that's not serving the best interests of anyone and embrace one that serves the common interests of all. The bill will help Australia to climb the ladder for women's economic equality. This bill represents an opportunity for this parliament to match its words with actions. It's easy to say that you support higher wages as a theoretical proposition. The test is, what are you prepared to do? This legislation shows what we're prepared to do as a government. We believe that after a decade of wage stagnation working Australians deserve better than more of the same. They deserve action. They deserve meaningful progress. They deserve secure jobs and better pay. The government's position is clear, and so is our mandate, and I urge the parliament to back these reforms, to boost job security, to improve workplace safety and to get wages moving again. I commend the bill to the House.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Reforming the system is what this bill will deliver, so that we end up, as I said in my maiden speech, with healthy, happy workers who make the economy hum. I commend this bill to the House.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“So when I hear the overheated rhetoric of those on the other side about, 'What's this multi-employer bargaining thing all about?' it's about them. It's about ensuring that these low-paid workers who we entrust with an incredibly important job have the capacity—they're never going to be able to get ahead bargaining directly with their employer, one worksite by another worksite. In fact, their employers support them. They know the only solution is a multi-employer solution, whether it be regional, state based or national based. That's what this is all about, not this other crap that you're going on about. It's animated by the spirit of man like Nando Lelli and the needs of the people 30 metres away from us here.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“You can come into this House and, if you care about fairness, you'll vote for this legislation. If you care about the families in your electorates, you'll vote for this legislation. If you care about gender equity, you'll vote for this legislation. If you care about the egalitarian ideas that this country was founded on, you'll vote for this legislation. If you care about the cost of living, here is part of your solution. Get this country a pay rise. Get these industries a pay rise, and the cost-of-living issues will be reduced without impacting inflation rates.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“With this bill, we're expanding access to enterprise bargaining and multi-employer bargaining. We aren't creating new systems of bargaining. We're varying the existing systems to make them more workable and to get wages moving again.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“As I said, we don't want to waste any more time before making these improvements to the workplace relations system. Australian workers have been waiting for a long time for this bill. This bill will ensure that things are put in place that will increase wages and will give them the respect that they deserve at work and the bargaining powers that they require. Surely, if now is not the time, when? The time is now. I commend the bill to the House.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“That is exactly what this bill will do. The Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Secure Jobs, Better Pay) Bill will help workers and Australian families to get ahead. This bill is essential. This bill is urgent. This bill will help deliver a better future for all Australians.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Labor's secure jobs, better pay legislation will deliver on a range of commitments that we made at the 2022 election and at the Jobs and Skills Summit. Don't be misled by people saying that we did not take this to the election and that we did not take it to the Jobs and Skills Summit. We want our reforms to modernise Australia's workplace relations system, get wages moving and achieve gender equity for Australian workers, because we all know that Australian workers have been doing it tough. For the last 10 years Australians has had a government that has deliberately kept their wages low.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This bill is a about restoring the balance between the power of workers and the power of employers at the bargaining table. It does not set the conditions for economic disruption, for industrial action. But in its rebalancing it demands that employers take a more constructive and responsible approach to bargaining. With profit growth outstripping wages growth so substantially, this bill lays the pathway to a fairer distribution of income from business activities and is ultimately a vehicle for delivery of the real wages growth that our society and our economy so desperately needs.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I am very pleased to stand this evening to speak in support of the government's Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Secure Jobs, Better Pay) Bill 2022. We all know, on this side of the House, that good secure work should be able to pay your bills. It seems like a fundamental principle that we should all be able to support and want citizens to be able to enjoy.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Anyone who's spoken to any low-paid worker in this country should understand that the bargaining system in our country is broken, and we need this bill. We need urgent action to get wages moving. That is why I am proud to stand here as a member of the Albanese government that has brought this bill forward, delivering on our election commitments.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The bill will put a sensible framework around the use of fixed-term contracts, acknowledging that the number of workers who deal with that kind of rolling insecurity has increased by 50 per cent since 1998. The bill also gives immediate effect to the recommendations of the 2019 Migrant Workers' Taskforce, thereby reducing the scope for exploitation and the potential to undermine local working conditions.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Sadly, the opposition have such an ideological hatred of unions that they will oppose anything that might involve them, even if it's good for business. It's a kneejerk, almost Pavlovian, reaction, not one based on the consideration of good, decent public policy. If they don't support this bill, let the record show that Labor sought to address the pain of cost-of-living pressures by getting wages moving again while those opposite continued to stand in the way.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I rise in support of the Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Secure Jobs, Better Pay) Bill. It is nothing short of unconscionable that in 2022 we are here in this place to justify this important legislation to get wages moving, while those opposite are trying to stop pay rises. This bill is about fighting for fair pay and fair work rights for everyone so that no one is left behind.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“To enable low-paid workers to participate in multi-employer bargaining will be life-changing and will make it easier for companies that want to provide good wages and conditions to do so. This bill is about getting wages moving and building a better future for all Australians.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I ask the members of this House—those who are determined to amend this or even to vote it down—to listen to all voices. Listen to the workers who need this legislation as soon as possible. Don't be duped by scaremongers. This is not radical legislation. It is practical, it is workable and it will benefit businesses as well. We know that. Don't tell workers you just can't take it all in. Don't delay their wage rises. Don't delay this bill.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This bill does a number of important things that will provide benefits for all Australians. Specifically, it will get wages moving by modernising what the evidence of the past 10 years shows us to be a broken bargaining system.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The bill before the House today honours the government's commitment to get wages moving and to improve job security. A key part of this reform is boosting enterprise bargaining. For the past 10 years, under the watch of the coalition, Australia's enterprise-bargaining system has been in decline. We know that when the bargaining system is working as it should it lifts wages, reduces wage disparity and leads to lower unemployment, particularly for young people, women and low-skilled workers. Around half as many new agreements were made last year compared to the 2013-2014 financial year. This is the opposite of what we need to see in our economy, and the bill before the House today will address this problem.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I rise to speak in favour of the Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Secure Jobs, Better Pay) Bill 2022. This is an important reform of our industrial relations system, one that works to mend what is broken. These amendments to the Fair Work Act have been flagged and have been on everyone's radar since August this year.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Hansard records 2 separate contributions by Jess Walsh on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Second reading speech
Jess Walsh supports the bill, saying it will deliver secure jobs and better pay by modernising bargaining, lifting wages, and improving pay equity, especially for women and low-paid workers in care sectors. She argues it is needed to reverse years of low wages, casualisation, and a race to the bottom in pay and conditions.
“I rise to speak on the Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Secure Jobs, Better Pay) Bill 2022, a bill that will deliver secure jobs and better pay for Australians, a bill that puts respect for women workers at the heart of our workplace laws, a bill that makes better wages a deliberate design feature of our government's agenda. This bill will modernise our bargaining system, opening up the process of making agreements and expanding access to multi-employer bargaining, making it easier for employers and employees to come to the table and end the race to the bottom on wages.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Second reading speech
Jess Walsh supports the bill and says it will deliver secure jobs, better pay, and a fairer industrial relations system. She argues it is urgently needed after a decade of low wages and because essential workers need better bargaining power and respect.
“Just six months ago, we promised the people of Australia that if they elected Albanese Labor government we would get wages moving and we would deliver secure jobs. That's because we know that good, secure jobs mean better lives. We know that after 10 years of falling wages we can't afford wait another day. I'm proud that today we are getting on with the job: fixing a broken system, getting wages moving and delivering on our promise to deliver a better, brighter future based on good, secure jobs for all Australians. Thank you.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
33 speakers · 34 contributions · 31 oppose · 1 mixed · 1 unclear
“That all words after "That" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words: ."The House declines to give the bill a second reading and calls on the Government to:”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Omit all words after "That", substitute "the bill be withdrawn and the Senate calls on the Albanese Government to:”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“But, of course, this bill is designed to smash small business. Labor hates small business. They always have. They've always hated the idea that no union officials are on these sites. This is designed to try and turn the clock back, not to try and create jobs. It's certainly not designed to create a higher wage environment. If they wanted to do that, they would have made the super system voluntary in some form. This is about ensuring that there is a role, relevance, and funding for their greatest cash cow, the unions.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“It is clear to me that insufficient work and time have been put into the preparation of this legislation, and I fear the consequences for our economy.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I rise to speak on the Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Secure, Jobs, Better Pay) Bill 2022. What we have before us today is a bill that in the very short time which we have had to examine it as the Senate, has been exposed as an absolute shambles. Those on the other side don't seem to understand that governments do not create jobs. Employers do. Businesses do. Industry does. What governments do is put in place frameworks under which employers have to operate.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“As shadow minister for infrastructure, transport and regional development, I think this is an appalling bill, and we will not be supporting it.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Unfortunately, the minor amendments between Senator Pocock and Labor do nothing to allay the concerns of small and family businesses across Australia. These businesses will still be forced to bargain against their will as part of the supported bargaining stream. Businesses with more than 20 staff will still be able to be dragged into multi-employer agreements with their much larger competitors. We've seen the modelling: the regulatory impact statement reveals how much that bargaining costs will impose on small and medium and large businesses.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This bill actually isn't about higher wages, which we all support. This bill is about the Labor Party government giving a return on the investment that was put into the election of a Labor Party government by the unions. That is what this bill is all about. It is an acknowledgement that the Labor Party, which is defunct on the ground, won the election due to the campaigning strengths of the union movement as a political and campaigning movement. For that, the Labor Party has to return a favour to the union bosses, and that's what this bill is all about. It is about empowering union bosses. It's about empowering union thugs to go into small businesses across Australia and intimidate business owners, intimidate workers and threaten them, because that is the business model of the union movement.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Hansard records 2 separate contributions by Slade Brockman, including an amendment-moving contribution. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Second reading speech
Brockman opposes the bill, saying it is really a union-driven overhaul that will burden businesses rather than deliver secure jobs or better pay. He argues the government rushed the legislation, failed to explain key parts, and will increase uncertainty and unemployment.
“Before I begin my contribution, I will just foreshadow that at the end of the second reading debate I will be moving the amendment on sheet 1772. It will come as no surprise to those in the chamber and those listening that I do not support this bill. This bill, the Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Secure Jobs, Better Pay) Bill, simply put, is a union business model. That is what it is all about.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Moved amendment
Brockman opposes the bill and moves a second reading amendment that would strip out the provisions letting trade union donors veto agreements and tighten the common interest test for the single interest employer stream.
“At the end of the motion, add ", but the Senate calls on the Government to:”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
“I rise to make my contribution to this piece of legislation. The reason that this legislation is so contested is that it will have a significant impact on the IR landscape in Australia—quite frankly, in a negative way. We have already had small businesses and medium-sized businesses saying that they've got unions on their doorstep and they're being threatened by the unions. This bill isn't about the workforce and workers in this country, as the Labor Party spin machine would have us all believe. It's a union life-support bill. It's about providing power back to the union movement. With private sector union membership sinking to somewhere around 10 per cent or less, unions are seeking a way back, and the government is providing it to them through this legislation.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This bill is a disgrace. It has no balance and it puts more strain on already stressed small-business owners. It will cause more job losses and Australian workers will be worse off. If this Labor government understood business and the economy, they might actually get this.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“'Above all, we're seriously concerned that business organisations such as the Launceston Chamber of Commerce were not consulted at all or engaged with during the drafting of this legislation.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I would encourage the government to consider trying to advance the non-contentious parts of the bill and spend some more time consulting with the business community across Australia, including in my electorate of Bass.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This reverses three decades of bipartisan support for enterprise level bargaining. This goes against the long-held objective of boosting productivity. And, as the single case that I described shows, this will have a detrimental impact on productivity at a time when we need to be delivering major projects in infrastructure, in defence and energy, building our nation through this period of a cost-of-living crisis. The government has handed over control to dominant unions.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“But this bill is riddled with so much conflict, complexity and uncertainty. Industry is extremely concerned; they don't want to be dragged into multi-enterprise bargaining.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This bill delivers the worst possible news that Australian small and medium enterprises could get, on top of the mess this government is making with the Australian economy.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This is a very bad bill, which will lead to more strikes and job losses, as we saw in the 1970s, and which will allow unions into small businesses that have never had to deal with them before. It will undermine competition so Australians have fewer choices but face higher costs or will force up prices and increase the cost of living and unfairly target small businesses because these changes will be complicated and expensive, and small businesses don't have human resources departments that can wade through complex changes. Business groups—small, medium and large—across Australia are united in their opposition to the changes, particularly to multi-employer bargaining. I want to highlight, in my contribution, several troubling aspects of this bill.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“If this government wants to help workers and raise their standard of living, it should be tackling the cost-of-living crisis and not adding to inflationary pressures. It should be tackling affordable energy, but instead this government is driving up gas and electricity prices with flawed policy. This is a bad bill. It's bad policy and I cannot support it.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This takes time. I say to those opposite: stop trying to charge this legislation through. You've got even more challenges in the Senate than you do in the House of Representatives. These are big changes. They're difficult changes. We've seen industry come out and absolutely attack you, which is really unusual. The fact that they are all lined up and oppose these changes should say something to the Labor Party—that this is not the right decision.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Any broader system of multi-employer bargaining must be voluntary and cannot lead to another layer of ill suited industry-wide terms and conditions. It is critical we avoid any changes that could result in increased industrial action, supply chain bottlenecks and unsustainable wage pressures, and that is what this bill does.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“So, this is not a good bill. It should be rejected. I haven't even touched on the abolition of the ABCC. In the past, when it was last abolished, that led to an increase of 56 per cent in disputes with the construction sector. For that, as well, the bill should be rejected. But overall it's not a good bill. It sets Australia back. It puts us back decades in terms of our industrial relations system and should be firmly rejected.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The only things that this legislation will increase are strikes and job losses. The two major flaws in this proposed legislation are multi-employer bargaining and the abolition of the Australian Building and Construction Commission.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“For these and for many other reasons, I join with my colleagues on this side of the House in opposing this legislation. And I do implore the government to go back to the drawing board and to rewrite this unfair bill, which will only compound and worsen the serious economic issues our nation is facing.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This is bad legislation. It is bad for inflation, it is bad for productivity and it is bad for jobs. With those comments, I will complete my remarks.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I want to see real wages increase. This side of the chamber wants to see real wages increase. Of course we do. We want what is best for all Australians, and that's why we oppose this legislation. This bill is about the Labor government reimbursing their union masters, who have given them over $100 million—yes, over $100 million. In doing that, this reckless government is trying to rush through the most radical reforms to industrial relations in recent memory without listening to the Australian people, without allowing for a sufficient scrutiny process and without consulting with the business community. I haven't even had time to consult with my constituents or the businesses in my electorate that this will impact.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I well remember that, when the pandemic was at its height and when many Australians were very fearful of the loss of their jobs, the member for Rankin gave us the goal—the ambition—to keep unemployment down and to keep the doors of business open. We not only met that goal and that ambition; we beat it big time because we actually created jobs—”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This is not about workers. This is not about gender pay equity or anything like that. This is about giving back relevance to the union movement and helping the union movement rehabilitate their membership by triggering a new war in workplaces between employees and employers—which neither want. The only people that want that are the union movement, and we saw in the seventies what the economic outcomes are of that. And they are not good for employees. They are not good for employers. They are not good for our economy. But they are good for the union bosses. And we in this chamber need to do a lot better than pass laws that are not about the people of this country but are about a vested interest like them, and that is why I implore the House to defeat this bill.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“We know that the Labor Party doesn't have regard for business or the jobs it creates. But surely it must have been important to get the numbers right. This bill, in the very short time we've had to examine it, has been exposed as an absolute shambles, hastily conceived, designed only for their union paymasters. The coalition senators' dissenting report is the most accurate portrayal of this bill and what it will do to Australian businesses and the people employed by them. This dissenting report recommends that the Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Secure Jobs, Better Pay) Bill 2022 is not passed by the Senate.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“It is important that all legislation that comes before the House gets reasonable scrutiny. I know this will now go to the Senate and to a Senate committee where it will be reviewed. But the opportunity is now; give the parliament a chance to address some of the issues that have been raised. The No. 1 issue that has been raised is: this bill hasn't been thought through far enough. There will be unintended consequences from this. It will damage small businesses who will be caught up in a net they don't to be caught in. They don't have the HR and all the things that back it. They have organisations. We were part of the Australian Retail Association. They did the negotiations, they set the award, we paid the bills, and we generously paid them. There were other benefits that employees get that are not heard of in this legislation. I admit there are some employers who are totally inappropriate with their staff. They do not pay the appropriate amounts because there are rogues in every area of life. There are people who do not perform in the way they should perform. Having said that, I know the next contribution from this side will be a class act, so I'll stop there to allow the next speaker to make a very good proposal on this matter.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This is a bad bill which is going to make a tough situation for all Australians, which this government has done nothing to address, even worse. And let's be very clear: it is flawed legislation based on deception before the election, when the government made very clear it would not look at going anywhere near the type of multi-employer bargaining that the government is now introducing.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Those members opposite did not run any reference whatsoever during the campaign to pattern bargaining. There was no reference to pattern bargaining—”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“In the very limited time that we have left, I can only urge Senator Pocock: please have a dramatic change of heart. Allow this bill to be properly considered. Do not pass this bill this week without much further work. I absolutely condemn this bill in the strongest terms possible.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“For all of those reasons and all of the reasons that my colleagues here have said in great detail why this is such bad legislation, I would urge those opposite that it is not too late, because this is not in the best interests of Australian workers.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
7 speakers · 6 support · 1 oppose
“To wrap up, as my colleagues have indicated, and as I said at the beginning of my speech, the Greens are supporting this bill. We will also continue to actively advocate for an increase to the rate of JobSeeker. If the government's commitment as part of those negations leads to meaningful change, we will welcome it, but it cannot be an excuse for inaction. We will continue to push for a guaranteed liveable income so that there is genuine support for everyone who needs it.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I rise to support the Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Secure Jobs, Better Pay) Bill 2022. There is much to like in this bill. It helps to deal with some of our big work challenges. It makes a good start, and there is more to do.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“You say, 'Is this about the Labor Party?' It is, because you're in government. You're in government. You could pass a bill right now that gave back to workers their right to strike. But you're not—much like with the gas industry, much like with big corporations and much like having a budget that forces ordinary working people to pay for an inflation crisis caused by big corporations such as gas corporations. The previous speaker talked about education. Well, why not fully fund public education and get it up to 100 per cent of the schooling resource standard by taxing big corporations such as gas corporations? But you don't, because ultimately, as happens so often in this place, we have both sides, the coalition and the government, acting broadly in the interests of big corporations and not in the interests of ordinary working people. If you did, you would give back to workers their right to strike. You would give them the capacity to organise solidarity strikes. Under this bill it is still illegal for workers to go out in solidarity with another group of workers.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“We raised these issues with the government and we see that a number of those matters have been addressed in the amendments that have been circulated. On the basis that a number of the issues the Greens have been raising for some time being included in this bill and also the fact that a number of the issues we raised with respect to the original drafting being addressed, the Greens will support this bill and the amendments in this House.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“In conclusion, I commend the work of Greens leader Adam Bandt and our new and very capable Senator Barbara Pocock in negotiating improvements to this bill that will not only help women but will better protect workers, particularly lower paid workers. The Greens commend this bill to the chamber.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“But for now we're going to stare down the rhetoric, the attacks and the inflated, angry response from the coalition and their few billionaire mates who are opposing this legislation and we're going to legislate this bill. We are going to take that first serious step towards making work fairer in this country.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I rise to speak on the Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Secure Jobs, Better Pay) Bill 2022, which the Greens are pleased to support with the changes secured through our negotiations with the government. Industrial relations in this country have been firmly stacked against workers for too long, so it's good to see some movement in the right direction to give workers more power to organise, particularly in lower-paid industries. Workers haven't seen a pay rise in real terms for a decade. People on low incomes are being forced to endure inflation on essential items and housing costs and are being hit hard by interest rate increases while corporate profits continue to skyrocket.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
2 speakers · 2 oppose
“This is a spit-and-hope bill. When the Australian Building and Construction Commission was introduced, there were months of consultation. When it was abolished, there was none. The same should apply to the whole bill. It needs debate. It needs to be deferred and considered properly. Who pays for this mess? The people: union members, small businesses, workers, communities and the nation.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“One Nation cannot and will not support this bill. And why I ask the bureaucrats—wonderful bureaucrats, know everything, read it in the textbooks, learnt it from universities—come in here and start telling the ministers, who don't even know their own jobs and then start going along with everything the bureaucrats say. What should have happened with this whole thing is a sensible debate and a consultation process to understand it, because you have not proven to me that there is going to be an increase in wages. You have not proven your point here. And that's what it's all about. The mining industry should never have been tied up in this. Most of the mining industry pay above the award wages with anyone to do with this Fair Work. It's ill thought out.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
12 speakers · 2 support · 5 oppose · 5 mixed
“I would urge and ask the government in future to allow more discussion and scrutiny on big pieces of legislation. This has been rushed. Big changes do warrant more scrutiny. I've made that clear throughout. As I said, I moved a motion to push the reporting date back. That was unsuccessful. So I've made do with the time allocated, and I will be supporting this bill.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“As it currently stands, I cannot in good conscience support the bill. The policy process has been flawed and the legislation itself is flawed. It will harm our economy and the very workers the government wants to support. This is why I propose amendments and why, if they are not successful, I will vote to oppose the bill and will be encouraging others to do so. I move:”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“My first and foremost concern is the lack of consultation with our communities. We haven't had a chance to consult with our constituents as well. It is not the first time that this government has failed to consult with my community. It's not the first time the diverse and multicultural communities of Fowler have been overlooked. How can we support anything that hasn't gone through the appropriate checks and balances to ensure the mum-and-pop corner shops, the banh mi bakeries, the family noodle shops won't be affected? In fact, after speaking to representatives from Cabramatta Chamber of Commerce and Liverpool chamber of commerce, both informed our office that they haven't received any substantial information on the bill. I, like many crossbench colleagues, have raised the fact that a bill this complex requires more consultation, and this has fallen on deaf ears. I support Senator Pocock's request to pass through the more agreeable parts of the bill by the end of the year and to allow for further consultation and amendments on the more contentious parts of the bill. This is a sensible approach to any bill of such importance and stature. But, as I understand it, the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations is reluctant to do so, and for that I question why. It's clear that this bill has been rushed through to avoid proper scrutiny, and it makes me concerned that the government are forcing us into voting on something that could have unintended consequences for both workers and employers.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I'm concerned that the speed with which these further amendments have been drafted will lead to unintended consequences, and I would ask the government to consider splitting this bill in two, in line with the second reading amendment moved by the member. Splitting the bill would allow for substantive progress to be made on the areas where we know there is solid agreement and would allow for greater thought and consultation to be given to the more contentious and less-well-formed sections of the bill.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Finally, I'd like to reiterate the danger in the speed at which some of these measures have been pursued. I support the inclusion of the review period, but think that a five-year review period is far too long and this should be shortened to two years at the most. I would encourage the government to take a collaborative and constructive approach to the review, keeping a watching brief on the implementation of the bill. In the words of a constituent of North Sydney, 'Develop a plan that makes Australia more productive, equitable and happy.' I'd like to work with the government to develop that plan, which needs to go well beyond the scope of this current bill.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Given the speed with which they have been drafted and the lack of consultation and testing of these amendments, I have concerns about potential further unintended consequences. I reiterate that I'm supportive of the intended goal of this bill—to get wages moving—in these difficult economic conditions. But its complexity and far-reaching consequences for business mean that I won't be supporting it in its current form.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The government are being sneaky and dishonest. They said they needed this bill to do that, but they didn't. They held back the wages of low-paid workers, and they did it on purpose. They're doing a whole lot of things with this bill that they haven't properly explained to us, and that's why I've circulated amendments to take those parts out. The government can bring these parts of the bill back next year, once we have had time to consider the impacts properly. I'm not going to wear the responsibility of making mistakes with this one. The government of the day can do that. God help you if, this time next year, people are in absolute crisis, they're not getting their pay rises and there are union strikes all over the country, because I say this to you: that will leave you about a year and a half out from an election, and I don't see that cleaning up very quickly.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Several of these concerns are addressed in this bill. I wholeheartedly support the provisions for supported bargaining for care industries. This would help give agency to these largely feminised industries where, in many cases, currently, hours are too short and shifts are irregular, precarious and changeable.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“There are many elements of this bill that I do support, and I know that I'm not alone in forming the view that the government should split this bill in two. The parts I do support comprise parts 4 through to 10, parts 12 to 14, parts 16 and 17, and parts 24 and 25. However, with respect to pay secrecy, I must say I am concerned that the intended outcome will not be achieved and that it may simply result in employers choosing not to pay more to staff that they find to be of greater value to the business—for fear of accusations of unfairness or an onslaught of requests from other employees who, quite simply, may not perform or be as valued.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Despite all of this, I will be voting to pass this bill. It's clear that we need to support our lower paid workers better, especially those in the feminised industries—child care and aged care.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“In all probability, I will support this legislation because I know the enormous cost-of-living rise that ordinary people have had to sustain. But I will most certainly be aggressively supporting the efforts by the crossbench to eliminate small business from the ambit of this legislation. I will most certainly be strongly supporting those moves. I would take them myself, but other people have taken them and I will support them.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I'm sorry to say it, but this whole process has been a bit of a mess. Why didn't the government just try to get this right the first time? If the government took the time to draft this legislation well, if it gave us time to consider these changes in detail, maybe I wouldn't be standing here saying I'm going to be abstaining. I cannot, in good conscience, endorse a bill that has been amended in terms I haven't seen—that I haven't been given the chance to see. I don't want to block this bill, but I wish we had a government that would work with us to find a path to back it—all of it, not just 85 per cent.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Record
House · Introduced and read a first time
Introduced
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
House · Second reading moved
Second reading opened
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
House · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House · Second reading agreed to
Recorded vote: 80 to 58.
Second reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at second reading, meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
House · Consideration in detail: amendments considered
Amendment packages agreed
The chamber considered amendments before the bill moved to the next stage.
House · Third reading agreed to
Recorded vote: 80 to 56.
Third reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
Senate · Introduced and read a first time
Introduced
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
Senate · Second reading moved
Second reading opened
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Senate · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Senate · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Senate · Second reading agreed to
Recorded vote: 32 to 30.
Second reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at second reading, meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
Senate · Committee of the Whole debate
Committee of the Whole debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Senate · Committee of the whole: amendments considered
Amendment packages agreed
The chamber considered amendments before the bill moved to the next stage.
Senate · Third reading agreed to
Recorded vote: 35 to 31.
Third reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
House · Message from Senate reported
Message from Senate reported
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House · Consideration of Senate message
House agreed to Senate amendments
The House dealt with Senate amendments or requests so both chambers could settle the bill in the same form.
Parliament · Finally passed both Houses
Passed both houses
Both houses passed the bill in the same form, completing parliamentary passage.
Assent · Assent
Assent
The Governor-General gave Royal AssentThe final formal step that turns a bill passed by Parliament into an Act of Parliament., turning the bill into an Act.
Education and Employment Legislation Committee; Committee report (22/11/2022)
Referred to committee
Referred to Committee (27 Oct 2022): Education and Employment Legislation Committee; Committee report (22 Nov 2022)
APH bill page notes
