Press Conference, St Francis Xavier College Canberra

SANDRA DARLEY, PRINCIPAL OF ST FRANCIS XAVIER COLLEGE: ...Minister Murray Watt, the Minister for Workplace Relations to a meeting with us today with Carol Matthews from the IEU, to the members who are here to talk to her today and representatives from the college who will be here to speak to her today. We’re delighted as well that Catholic Education is represented today by our Executive Director, Ross Fox, and our head of HR, Natalie Harper. So we welcome all of you to St Francis Xavier College today.
 
MURRAY WATT, MINISTER FOR EMPLOYMENT AND WORKPLACE RELATIONS: Well thank you very much, Sandy, for giving us a very warm welcome here on what people tell me is a warm Canberra’s day. But being a Queenslander, I might disagree with that! It’s a great pleasure to join you, your staff, representatives of the Independent Education Union and my good mate Dave Smith, who’s just turned up, the Member for Bean, one of the local electorates here as well. Terrific to have you here for an important announcement today, Dave.
 
The reason we’re here today is that today we see some important changes to Australian workplace law which are really about trying to bring back work-life balance to Australians’ lives. We all understand the benefits of technology - the mobile phones, the text messages, the emails, but we do need to recognise that sometimes they have a downside, especially when it comes to the intrusion that technology can have on people’s private lives outside their working hours.
 
The reason we’re doing this press conference at St Francis Xavier College here in Canberra is that this school, along with many other Catholic Education colleges around the country, have adopted practices which respect the fact that when their staff clock off for the day their private time is their own and that they don’t need to be expected to be constantly monitoring their phones, monitoring their emails and responding to things hours after they’ve clocked off for the day.
 
So from today in Australia, employees of businesses of greater than 15 employees have a new workplace right – the right to disconnect. And what that right is all about is making sure that employees are not expected to be monitoring and responding to phone calls, emails, text messages and other contact from their employer outside their paid hours unless if it were to be unreasonable for the worker to not respond.
 
Now, I’ve seen a lot of scare campaigning already from some of the employer groups and Coalition figures who are saying that this will be the end of the world, it’s too complex, it doesn’t recognise the benefits of technology. Well here is a school in Canberra that is already adopting it. And I just saw kids and staff walking around getting ready for the school day. The world has gone on and actually workplaces that are adopting these types of practices are reaping the benefits in happier employees, they’re keeping retention of their staff, and that’s a good thing for productivity.
 
So we’re encouraging employers and workers to have a conversation, just like this school has done, about the role that technology can play but making sure that Australian workers aren’t racking up hours of unpaid overtime by having to remain chained to their desk, responding to emails, responding to phone calls hours after they have stopped being paid.
 
Now I’ve noticed that even this morning we’ve seen federal Coalition figures in the media, including Senator Jane Hume, saying that if the Opposition is elected at the next election, they will abolish this new workplace right. So what they are effectively saying is that they think that employers should be able to contact workers at all hours of the day, get a response no matter what time of day it is, and despite the fact that the worker isn’t being paid at that time of day. So I think this is a very good example of the contrast we will see at the next election when it comes to workplace relations policies. Under Labor, what we’re about is delivering better pay and secure work for people, and what we’re seeing from Peter Dutton and the Coalition is that they want people to work longer for less. People will have a very clear choice at the next election about what kind of Australia they want, what kind of workplaces do they want – do they want cooperative places that respect people’s rights as well as making sure that employers get good productivity from their workers, or do they want the kind of world where people are constantly at their employers’ beck and call, whether they’re being paid or not.
 
I’m happy to take questions, but first of all I might introduce some the other people here today, starting with Carol Matthews, who’s the New South Wales and ACT Branch Secretary of the Independent Education Union, which has campaigned hard for these rights across their workforce. So over to you, Carol.
 
CAROL MATTHEWS, NSW & ACT INDEPENDENT EDUCATION UNION SECRETARY: Thanks, Minister. Look, we really welcome these changes. As the Minister said, in Catholic schools there’s already been, for some time, a recognition of the importance for staff to clock off at the end of the day. Of course, they still might do their own work, but they shouldn’t be available at the beck and call of both students and parents, their employer. So there have already been changes in this area towards this direction. But there is still a way to go, not all employers have taken this approach. We hear from members in a range of schools, early learning centres, that this will really make a difference to them. Our members are really excited about this change because they see for the first time it means they have the right to draw the line. They can say, ‘I’ll get back tomorrow. I don’t have to read that email and respond to that email today’.
 
So we think that having the law in place will give the framework which will make it easier for school communities to comply with this new approach. So even though it’s been in place before in some sectors, having it as a legislated right really makes it a lot clearer to everybody that it is a right. And we think it will make a material difference to our members.
 
Of course, the teacher shortage is a feature in all parts of Australia, so anything which can reduce to some extent the pressure on teachers from our point of view is really welcome, and certainly welcomed by our members.
 
ROSS FOX, DIRECTOR OF CATHOLIC EDUCATION ACT: My name’s Ross Fox, I’m the Director of Catholic Education in the Archdiocese of Canberra-Goulburn. We strive to be a model employer. We pride ourselves on a strong relationship with all of our employees, our teachers, our school staff, our system leaders, and our relationship - our strong relationship - with the Independent Education Union. It’s critical to us that there are reasonable expectations on all our staff. It’s really important that we manage the expectations for contact outside of school hours, outside of normal working hours. And so that right to disconnect, to set those boundaries, is critical to us being a great place to work, teach and lead for all of our staff.
 
We’re very focused on workload reduction for all of our staff. Recently our staff in large numbers have said we’ve saved them 6 to 10 hours a week by virtue of our initiatives to reduce workload. We find that promising, but we always want to do more, and we’ve been able, in light of these initiatives, to provide permanency to literally hundreds of staff across our schools and our system. So we are committed to be a great place to work, teach and lead, striving to be a model employer and having reasonable expectations for the dedicated teachers that we have, for the dedicated staff, is great and has worked very well. And I’m proud that that’s been acknowledged by the Independent Education Union and many of our staff.
 
MURRAY WATT: Thanks Ross.
 
JOURNALIST: Can I ask Ross a question?
 
MURRAY WATT: Sure.
 
JOURNALIST: How does it work in practice? Like, what is set out in that they – you know, if you get an email after 5pm you don’t have to respond? How does it work?
 
ROSS FOX: So we’re going to hear from one of our teachers in a minute, but I’ll give some context to that. Our schools are dynamic communities. At the centre of what we do is the child, so it’s natural that if something happens at school and the parent finds out about it or hears after school, they might be desperate to make contact, send an email. Obviously, that can be late into the evening. So we need to be reasonable and say that where it’s 24-48 hours, we don’t know the work pattern of the staff member. They might be part time, they might have other commitments, they might be on class for the entire time that they’re trying to be contacted. So we’ve just got to be reasonable. So we’re working with our principals, with our leadership teams, with all of our staff to make sure there’s a reasonable expectation for when particularly contact from students or parents will actually be responded to. We’ve got to be accountable. The care of the students is our absolute focus. The responsiveness is very important to us, but it shouldn't come at a cost of family life. It shouldn’t come with unreasonable expectations far into the night. That’s not the sort of workplace we want to be providing.
 
MURRAY WATT: Thanks, Ross. Jacob?
 
JACOB BETTS, TEACHER: Yeah, these changes are actually a really welcome change for us as teachers in schools. The right to disconnect actually allows us to sort of separate and, like, really let us have our own personal life and be able to, like, do the things we want. We have our friends, our families. And so, the right to disconnect, what it allows us to do is make sure we actually look after our wellbeing. And, at the end of the day, once we’re looked after and our wellbeing is looked after, we will do a great job for these kids.
 
So that’s always at the forefront of our minds. We work with really passionate staff, really committed staff doing these things. But just not being at the beck and call constantly and not having to respond to emails in that expectation of the constant thing, most of us do work outside of hours, but it’s just to be able to put on to paper that we don’t have to respond to certain things is really good.
 
It did exacerbate a little bit after the pandemic when we actually went to a lot of online systems. So, a lot of those things with, like, emails, phone calls, things like that, it became more common place, and it’s really nice to actually take a step back and realise that, you know, this is a great thing for us and our members.
 
We’re lucky to be at a really supportive school here. We actually, you know – we implement these sort of things quite often. And it’s good to be supported in the workplace, but there are, of course, people in other workplaces or school systems that don’t actually have that benefit as well.
 
MURRAY WATT: Do you want to just give your name and your title?
 
JACOB BETTS: I’m Jacob Betts, I’m the Science Coordinator here at St Francis Xavier College and also an IEU delegate.
 
MURRAY WATT: So why don’t we do questions on this first and then we can do other things.
 
JOURNALIST: The Business Council has said today that by adding extra red tape you risk holding back productivity at a time of, you know, really bad productivity, making the situation worse. What’s your response to that?
 
MURRAY WATT: Well I completely disagree with what the BCA are saying. And you’ve just heard from an employer and workers who’ve talked about the benefits that have come to this workplace and the increased productivity as a result of treating workers fairly and making sure that they work hard while they’re on duty, but they also get a break and a chance to recharge and refresh and be able to come back the next day and perform highly as well.
 
We’ve already seen a number of businesses across Australia already adopt these types of practices without the world caving in for them, and we’re confident that all it’s going to take is some sensible discussions between particular employers and their workers about how to adopt these new laws to make sure that employers get great productivity from their workers but also make sure that employees have their rights respected and that they’re not expected to be racking up lots of unpaid overtime responding to emails at a time when they’re not being paid at all.
 
JOURNALIST: Do you think that puts an onus on business owners to do more themselves and, you know, the flipside of the coin is obviously looking after employees for business owners, small business owners are struggling themselves, they’re going to have to do more themselves and that could risk their businesses’ profitability.
 
MURRAY WATT: Well, the first point on that is that these laws don’t start for small businesses for another 12 months. So what we’re doing is phasing them in. From today the right to disconnect applies to businesses with 15 or more employees. And in 12 months’ time it applies to small businesses. So there is a bit more time for small businesses to get ready for this.
 
But I don’t think it’s much to ask employers to be prepared to have a conversation with their workers about what is reasonable in terms of after-hours contact. And I think it’s important to understand what this right is really about. It’s not saying that employers lose the right to contact their workers after-hours. It’s not about that, which I know is what some business groups are saying. What it’s about, though, is giving employees a right to not have to be monitoring and responding to after-hours contact from their boss at a time when they’re not being paid and that they don’t need to fear being reprimanded or punished by their boss if they don’t respond straight away.
 
We acknowledge that there are always going to be times when a boss needs to get in contact with their workers straight away. It might be a café owner who has a worker who’s called in sick, and they need to find someone to replace that person for that shift. I don’t think anyone would disagree with an employer being able to contact their worker in that situation. But very often what we’re finding is that workers are being contacted by their boss about run-of-the-mill things that could easily wait till it next day. It’s fine for the employer to make contact with them, but they shouldn’t be expecting a response on a weekend or well after-hours from a worker who’s not being paid.
 
JOURNALIST: You say you don’t think it’s unreasonable to ask employers to have a conversation, for example. Are you also expecting under the laws that there’ll be an increase in written agreements, or is it more on a case-by-case basis?
 
MURRAY WATT: Well I would expect that a number of employers and their workers would introduce in enterprise bargaining agreements or particular workplace contracts the right to disconnect as a standard provision now that it is actually going to be part of the law. And particular businesses will work out the best way with their workers about how to apply this new right in their own individual workplace. And, as I say, I’m aware that there are already enterprise agreements in many businesses across Australia that have this as a term of employment.
 
So I would expect that employers and workers are very capable of having conversations about what their workplace is like, what reasonable contact after-hours looks like and what unreasonable contact after hours looks like in a way that that workplace can remain cooperative, can remain productive and have happy, resourced staff who want to keep working there. Right now, we have skill shortages right across Australia. It’s in employers’ interests to look after their staff and make sure that their staff are happy and want to stay working in that workplace, and respecting the boundaries between work and private life is an important way that employers can make sure they have good retention of their staff and have happy, productive staff for a long time to come.
 
JOURNALIST: Can I ask about the CFMEU?
 
MURRAY WATT: Yeah, can we just – any other questions on this bit before we move on?
 
JOURNALIST: Just a couple, thanks Minister. What impact do you think these new laws will have for regional areas, in particular, and what industries within regional areas? And if we can perhaps hear from one of the education reps very briefly on what they think it will mean for regional schools, that would be great as well.
 
MURRAY WATT: Sure. Well, of course, this new right will be applying right across the country, whether we’re talking in big capital cities or regional areas as well. But, again, we know that many regional employers are finding it difficult to attract and retain staff. And a great way for regional employers to be able to attract and retain staff is to make sure that they treat their staff respectfully, look after them and respect their boundaries between work and private life. So I think that this is potentially a way of employers in regional areas being able to attract staff on the basis of the conditions that they’re offering and keep those staff happy so that they want to keep turning up for work the next day, the next year and even the next decade. But happy to let one of the other people have a say on that too, if you like.
 
CAROL MATTHEWS: Look, I’d agree with the Minister. I think obviously the change applies across the board, including in regional areas. In our industry, regional schools – some of them – have also already started to introduce rights of this type. So it won’t be a big change. But there are other employers who will be possibly small businesses who will have 12 months to get used to it. But, for example, early learning centres where directors and teachers are close to the parents of the children who attend their services. And I think they will be very pleased to see that they’re not required to respond to emails out of hours unless it’s a genuine emergency. So as the Minister said, staff shortages, skill shortages are a feature across the workforce, but early learning centres and schools are particularly affected by shortages. So I think it will reduce the pressure on teachers and support staff in both of those areas.
 
JOURNALIST: Thank you, Carol.
 
MURRAY WATT: Any other questions on this part? All good?
 
JOURNALIST: On the CFMEU, Minister, John Setka has claimed that there was some kind of secret deal with either your predecessor, the government as a whole, the ACTU. What do you know about a deal that – with him going and the union would stay intact?
 
MURRAY WATT: Well, this is just a ridiculous claim from John Setka in that quite bizarre interview he did last night. I've checked in with Tony Burke and he’s reminded me that within two days of John Setka resigning Tony Burke was on the Insiders program on the ABC saying that John Setka resigning from the CFMEU was a good start, but it was only a start and that all options remained on the table for how to deal with that union. At that point in time, I know that Tony Burke as the minister was considering all options from administration to deregistration of the union while he took advice from his department. So this idea from John Setka is utterly ridiculous, and it’s another desperate attempt from John Setka to distract attention away from the problems he has caused for his union and its members.
 
JOURNALIST: So his claims that they double-crossed him are just an outright lie?
 
MURRAY WATT: Absolutely fanciful.
 
JOURNALIST: Does Zach Smith remain the National Secretary of the CFMEU?
 
MURRAY WATT: Yes, he does. Under the scheme of administration that was determined by Mark Dreyfus, the Attorney-General, Zach Smith remains as the National Secretary of the union.
 
JOURNALIST: And why?
 
MURRAY WATT: You really should be putting questions, with respect, about the details of the administration scheme to Mark, as the decision-maker. I delegated the decision around sending the union into administration to Mark as another step to ensure that the process that we’d adopted was legally robust. I think if you have a look at it what you’ll find is that the scheme of administration that Mark has determined essentially copies and pastes the scheme that was attached to the application made by the Fair Work Commission General Manager. That application did not apply to office bearers of the Western Australian or ACT branch. Mark Dreyfus has adopted that scheme but also put those branches into administration and given the administrator the power to vacate other roles if he chooses to and to terminate other roles if he chooses to. So those sorts of decisions will now be in the hands of the administrator.
 
JOURNALIST: But he’s from the ACT branch but he’s the National Secretary. The whole union has been placed into administration.
 
MURRAY WATT: That’s right. And, again, what I’d suggest is that Mark Dreyfus is probably the appropriate person within government to give details about the basis of that decision.
 
JOURNALIST: What do you know about the incidence that Setka says in the lift that left the Prime Minister shaking like a leaf?
 
MURRAY WATT: I think it’s just laughable. I mean, it’s just John Setka, you know, trying to beat his chest and be the tough guy, which is what he’s been doing his entire career. Any of you who have met the Prime Minister, Anthony Albanese, know that he’s not afraid of taking on a fight. Within weeks of becoming the Labor leader Anthony Albanese arranged for John Setka to be kicked out of the Labor Party. Anthony Albanese isn’t scared of John Setka. Nobody in our Government is. John Setka can keep talking it up as much as he wants.
 
JOURNALIST: And what about Setka’s claims that the CFMEU isn’t infiltrated by bikies, isn’t run by [indistinct]?
 
MURRAY WATT: Well, I think – I saw the interview last night and John Setka admitted that there probably were bikies within the union and the construction industry. I think that was a really telling admission and it backs up some of the reporting that we’ve seen from journalists in recent weeks. And that’s exactly why our government is taking the strong action that we are. Unfortunately, this union- which is important to have in the construction sector, construction work is hard and dangerous work and people who work in the sector deserve a strong and effective union, but they also deserve a clean union. And unfortunately, it’s become clear that the construction union and the industry has been infiltrated by organised crime and bikies, and that’s got to change. That’s what we want to change through this administration process, to get back to having a strong, effective but clean construction union that puts the interests of its members first.
 
JOURNALIST: You’re heading to WA next week for the Ministry’s [indistinct].
 
MURRAY WATT: Yes, I will.
 
JOURNALIST: Are you going to have meetings with resources sector bosses over there to talk about the impacts of IR changes?
 
MURRAY WATT: Yes, my office has actually started work on this in arranging meetings for me while I’m in Perth, both with union representatives and employer representatives. And I expect that that will include some representatives of the mining industry.
 
JOURNALIST: Minister, back on the CFMEU, the CFMEU’s ACT branch will be protesting here tomorrow. Do you still stand by the decision to put the union’s ACT branch into administration given there haven’t been any allegations of criminality the likes of which we’ve seen in other states?
 
MURRAY WATT: Yes, I do. I mean, the legislation that we passed last week quite deliberately placed the entire Construction Division of the CFMEU into administration, including the Western Australian and ACT branches, which weren’t originally in the application brought by the Fair Work Commission General Manager. Our view is that, you know, there are different severity of allegations across different state and territory branches. But we have seen widespread corruption allegations, allegations of criminality and violence across the union as a whole, and we think it’s important that the administrator has the ability to look under the bonnet of the union as a whole and work out exactly where the problems lie. Of course, he has the power to release – the administrator has the power to release individual branches from administration at an earlier stage if he gives them a clean bill of health. But we think from a starting point it’s important to have a good look at the union as a whole.
 
JOURNALIST: Will the Government be cracking down on wrongdoings from construction employers, and, if so, do you have a timeline for that?
 
MURRAY WATT: Yes, one of the points that I’ve made throughout this process is that just as it is important to take action against the allegations that surround the CFMEU construction union, it’s also important to take action against employers who have done the wrong thing. And the easiest way to put it is that if there are allegations that CFMEU officials have taken bribes, then an employer has paid those bribes. And it’s important to be even-handed in this process and make sure that we weed out the corruption and criminality, whether it’s on the union side or the employer side as well. Now, I am aware that already Tony Burke, my predecessor, referred a number of these allegations that have surfaced to the AFP for investigation and the Fair Work Ombudsman for investigation. I am aware that they are investigating those allegations, including allegations against employers. And we’re serious about throwing the book at bad employers who have done the wrong thing and have been involved in this criminality.
 
JOURNALIST: Just a couple more from me, Minister. Are CFMEU officials that have still been kept in their jobs been unbanned from speaking out to media? Do you have an understanding on whether that’s an issue or not?
 
MURRAY WATT: Look, I’m not aware of that so I couldn’t comment on it.
 
JOURNALIST: Sure. And are social media posts advertising rallies by the CFMEU being removed? The CFMEU ACT has also allegedly been ordered to remove theirs.
 
MURRAY WATT: Again, sorry, I’m not aware of that, and I couldn’t comment on that. What I’ve already said publicly is that I’m aware that there are plans for protests in a range of states tomorrow. I recognise that Australians have got a right to process, whether they’re construction workers or anyone else. But it doesn’t change the Government’s resolve to get this administration working quickly so that we can clean up this union once and for all.
 
JOURNALIST: And is Zach Smith’s position as the National Secretary still tenable given that he would have had time in the role oversighting the union as these allegations would have presumably been manifesting, so to speak?
 
MURRAY WATT: Yeah, again, it’s probably best for me to leave those sorts of questions to Mark Dreyfus as the decision-maker to answer. But what I would point out is that the administrator continues to have the power to vacate office-bearing roles if that’s what he chooses to do or to terminate people’s employment if that’s what he chooses to do.