Press conference, Adelaide

E&OE Transcript 

MURRAY WATT, MINISTER FOR EMPLOYMENT AND WORKPLACE RELATIONS: Well, it's terrific to be back in Adelaide, and thanks very much for coming along today. Today is a terrific day for thousands of Australian workers in industries like mining, aviation, warehousing and meat processing, because from today these workers will be benefitting from the Albanese Government's Same Job, Same Pay laws. From today thousands of Australian workers, including the flight attendants behind me here, will be getting pay rises of up to 30 to $40,000 per year, because finally, they are not being treated as second class citizens simply because they are labour hire workers. What these laws are about is that for too long we've seen big companies in Australia employ permanent employees at one pay rate and then top up their workforce by bringing in labour hire employees on much lower rates and conditions, and these are people who do exactly the same job, they work exactly the same rosters; in many cases they work exactly the same  wear exactly the same uniforms, but they've been getting paid substantially less money, and obviously that's made life a lot tougher for these people. It's wrong that big companies can try to undercut wages and conditions by using tricky loopholes like labour hire. You know, we've always recognised as a Government that there is a place for labour hire and short term contract work, especially when employers are trying to deal with surge work, that they need to bring in people for short term periods. But there's no excuse for some of the biggest companies in Australia to have used this loophole in our laws to bring in people who are basically permanent workers and pay them significantly less money. So, as I say, these changes to the law mean that these workers will be getting several hundred dollars a week more and at a time when cost of living pressures are so important for people, having those increased wages and conditions is vital for people staying afloat.
 
Now this will be one really big issue at the next Federal Election, because we've already seen Peter Dutton and the Coalition say that if they are elected they will unwind the Same Job Same Pay laws. So that what that will mean is that labour hire workers, like those I'm standing with today, will go backwards and will lose the gains that they've made under the Labor Government. And that's no surprise, because whenever the Coalition has been in power they've brought in policies that have been about driving down wages and conditions for workers, they've voted against every single change to workplace laws we've made as a Government, and what they've already said is that if they win the next election, they will unwind the Same Job Same Pay laws, they'll get rid of the changes we've made to protect casual workers, they'll get rid of the Right to Disconnect, and they've opened the door to make it easier for bosses to unfairly dismiss their workers. As I say, at a time when cost of living pressures are so great for Australian workers, it's hard to think of a worse time for a government to be talking about cutting pay and conditions; that's exactly what Peter Dutton and the Coalition are doing, but from Labor's point of view, we're always going to be supporting Australian workers to have a fair deal, and that's what these Same Job Same Pay laws have delivered. Happy to take questions.
 
JOURNALIST: What's this mean for the future of the Australian labour hire firms?
 
MURRAY WATT: We recognise there is a role for labour hire, there is a role for contract employment, especially when an employer might be having an increased demand for their services or their goods and they bring in people short term that they're not going to necessarily need forever. But what this law is about is the situations where companies have kept people on for years, paying them at lower rates and conditions, even though they're doing the same work, wearing the same uniform, doing the same rosters as permanent workers they're working alongside. So, I expect that we will see a continuation of labour hire for what it was originally intended to do, which was supplementary a permanent ongoing workforce, but it shouldn't be about using this loophole to cut wages and conditions.
 
JOURNALIST: There was obviously a lot of protests and various showings calling for policy. How much did that turn the Government's hand?
 
MURRAY WATT: There's no doubt that the efforts of unions and workers to campaign for this change of the law was instrumental in us agreeing to do so. On a personal level, particularly coming from Queensland, you can imagine I met a lot of coal mining workers who were going through this, particularly in Central Queensland. I remember meeting a bloke who had been engaged as a labour hire casual for eight years, where he'd been doing exactly the same roster week to week all of that time, but because he was treated as labour hire he was getting paid 30 grand less than the guy he was working right next door to who was a direct employee of the company. He wasn't getting any sick leave, he wasn't getting any annual leave, and even after he received the loading that casuals get, he was still being lower paid than the direct employees next to him. So, I congratulate workers and unions who've campaigned for this. It's an important change to benefit working people, and it's great that from today thousands of Australian workers will be better off.
 
JOURNALIST: Do you see less casuals as being hired as a result of this law?
 
MURRAY WATT: Not so much about this particular law. We have made other changes to the law that are about trying to go back to what casual work always was meant to be. You know, with whenever any of us had worked as casual employees, what it's tended to be is when your shift changes from week to week, your hours change, you might get 10 hours a week one week, you might get 30 hours the next. But if someone is working the same roster 20 hours a week, 30 hours a week, 40 hours a week, year after year, it's pretty hard to argue that they're casual employees, and therefore, they should be treated as permanent employees with the job security and the other benefits that come from permanent employment. So, there will always be a role for casual employment just as there will always be a role for labour hire and contract, but as I say, what this is about is stopping big companies from exploiting loopholes to use those sorts of arrangements simply to cut pay.
 
JOURNALIST: Is there a particular industry or profession that's going to see the benefits of this more?
 
MURRAY WATT: So far the main benefits have been in aviation, so the flight attendants that I'm here with today, for example, were telling me that in some cases they'll be getting pay rises of up to $40,000 a year, and that is really just to bring them in line with the direct employees that they work right alongside. It's about being fair; it's about being equal rather than being discriminated against. Aviation and mining would be the two biggest industries we've seen this so far, but we are seeing applications in warehouses, transport and logistics, meat processing as well. These are the industries where we have seen an explosion in the use of labour hire, and not for the right reasons; to cut pay, and that ends today.
 
JOURNALIST: Do you believe the Prime Minister's been a victim of unfair media reporting in terms of the Qantas saga?
 
MURRAY WATT: I think what we've seen is a massive double standard from Peter Dutton and the Coalition on this issue. They have spent the entire week attacking the Prime Minister for upgrades that he declared and made transparent to the Australian public, and now we've found out that the Shadow Transport Minister, Bridget McKenzie, has had to rush around and check what upgrades she's received. I mean she spent the entire week bashing the Prime Minister, Peter Dutton did as well, calling for him to do all sorts of things. The question now for Peter Dutton is what is he going to do about his Shadow Transport Minister who, it would appear, has hidden upgrades that she's received from some of Australia's major airlines. You know, the other question for Peter Dutton is, what exactly did he get out of sharing and using Gina Rinehart's private jet? Peter Dutton only two days ago told the Australian public that he'd never asked to use Gina Rinehart's private jet. Yesterday he comes out and basically admits that he lied about that and says that his office did ask Gina Rinehart for that plane.
 
So I think all Australians are entitled to know what's Gina Rinehart getting in return, Australia's richest person, for Peter Dutton being able to use her plane. We know that there's a lot of similarity between Peter Dutton and Gina Rinehart when it comes to nuclear power. Gina Rinehart has called for lower taxes on companies like hers. What's Peter Dutton's position on that? Has Gina Rinehart talked to him about her views about industrial relations policies, which we know don't support Australian workers. So, I think Peter Dutton has had a massive double standard this week in going after the Prime Minister, and now it's about time he answered some questions himself.
 
JOURNALIST: What do you make of the connection between Albanese accepting the upgrades and the decision to reject Qatar Airways for more flights?
 
MURRAY WATT: Yeah. Look, this has been a complete furphy from day one from the Opposition. I made the point earlier this week that anyone can look at Anthony Albanese's record, both as the Transport Minister and the Prime Minister, when it comes to Qantas. When he was the Transport Minister under the Rudd/Gillard Government and Qantas grounded their fleet and went after unions, Anthony Albanese backed the workers and backed the unions, didn't back Qantas. The only party that has consistently backed in Qantas, when it's gone after its workers, when it's gone after unions, is the Coalition. Now is that because of upgrades that Peter Dutton received, or Bridget McKenzie received? I mean I think they're valid questions to put to them as well. What we're talking about here today, Same Job Same Pay, which is benefitting thousands of Qantas flight attendants, the Coalition voted against those laws. Qantas made very clear that they opposed the Labor Government's Same Job Same Pay laws because it was going to mean that they had to pay their labour hire workers more than what they'd been doing to date, but we did it anyway. The Coalition is the party who backed in Qantas and voted against those Same Job Same Pay laws and is now saying they'll get rid of those laws if they win Government. So, I think anyone can see that time after time Anthony Albanese and Labor have been prepared to take on Qantas regardless of upgrades, regardless of lounge memberships. It's the Coalition who have consistently taken the position of Qantas and other big Australian companies where they've been trying to cut wages and conditions.
 
JOURNALIST: You've highlighted how tough some Australians are doing it. Do you think it's wise to accept upgrades during the cost of living crisis?
 
MURRAY WATT: Look, I think, I mean most of the politicians who have said that they've accepted upgrades, in many cases what they've said is that they've literally been provided with them when they've been walking in the plane or at the gates. So I'm not going to sort of make judgment about people taking those kind of things. But, you know, I think we always have to be sensitive to what the community is thinking about these things. But really, our focus more than anything as a Government is delivering the kind of cost of living relief and the better wages that Australians need to get through these cost of living pressures.
 
JOURNALIST: Are you concerned about the optics of this saga?
 
MURRAY WATT: Oh, look, I'll leave it to Australians and commentators to make their comments. As I say, what I can see is a Prime Minister who has declared everything he was required to declare, and notwithstanding any upgrades he received, was prepared to take on Qantas time after time. What I can also see is Peter Dutton and the Coalition who, it would seem, have not declared all their upgrades in some cases and have taken Qantas' position on a range of disputes when Labor has stood strong against them.
 
JOURNALIST: You touched on it before, but does Bridget McKenzie, does she have more questions to answer?
 
MURRAY WATT: Absolutely. So far Bridget McKenzie has failed to tell the Australian public how many upgrades she received from Qantas and why she didn't disclose them. It's not good enough for politicians to take those kind of gifts and benefits and hide them from the Australian public. And the irony of Bridget McKenzie as the Shadow Transport Minister, who would be in charge of regulating Qantas, now having to scurry around to see whether she's properly disclosed all of her upgrades, that is hugely ironic, and it says something about her standards. So I think Bridget McKenzie has some serious questions to answer. But as I say, so does Peter Dutton, is he going to tolerate a senior member of his team failing to disclose gifts and benefits that she's received? Is he just going to turn a blind eye to that? Based on the standard that he set for the Prime Minister this week, I think he needs to be doing something about that. Okay.
 
JOURNALIST: Thanks, Minister.
 
MURRAY WATT: Thanks everyone.