Luke Achterstraat | Labor IT reforms fly in face of employment white paper goals

The release of the employment white paper and the aviation green paper both the followed the Intergenerational Report, whilst a review of competition policy was announced by a parliamentary paper. A review of the privacy act has been tabled whilst a review of the migration system was conducted earlier in the year with its own supporting discussion paper.

There has been no shortage of reviewing, which is not inherently a bad thing.

The employment white paper for example, outlines Treasurer Jim Chalmers' vision for a "dynamic and inclusive labour market" in which "everyone can be beneficiaries of change and thrive."

Aptly titled "Jobs and Opportunities", other stated goals include sustainable wage growth, reigniting productivity, filling skills needs and building our future workforce by overcoming barriers to employment.

There are positive initiatives in the white paper including the concept of a national skills passport, incentives for older Australian to remain work active, and spending $40 million to increase the share of Australians working in areas of high need by expanding TAFE training.

But as always, the nexus between policy announcements and outcomes can easily become a chasm if other policy levers are not being pulled in unison.

In other words, employment policy does not exist in a vacuum. Policy settings such as tax, infrastructure and particularly industrial relations are critical and can make-or-break the aspirational words on a page.

Unfortunately, the goals of the employment white paper will be run roughshod over by a complex industrial relations bill currently before the Senate.

The so-called Closing Loopholes bill is 281 pages in length with a 500-page explanatory memorandum.

It is the most significant rewriting of our workplace system in recent years with expanded power for the workplace minister, greater punishment for employers including prison time and greater licence for union reps to enter the workplace.

Most concerning for small business is the sheer complexity the bill is set to impose in an already tough operating environment.

Casual workers and independent contractors are two well established work cohorts in Australia, accounting for almost 3.5 million Australians or a quarter of the workforce.

For casuals the ability to work flexibly, be it on weekends or in the evenings where permanent staff might not - is a win-win-win for casuals, permanents, and employers alike.

Different lifestyle preferences can support workplace requirements through rostering processes that are best understood by those directly involved.

The current nature of casual employment will be fogged by a new definition comprising over three pages of legislation and the introduction of a new test with 15 different components. For small businesses this will require significant time, cost, and risk - and without the aide of large HR departments.

Meanwhile, for independent contractors such as tradies their ability to be their own boss would become an open question with a new "interpretive principle" more complex than currently stands in the Fair Work Act. This would be coupled with ministerial veto power to made contracts null and void at the stroke of a pen.

It is unclear what problems these measures are trying to solve.

What is clear however is the IR changes will simply undermine Treasurer Chalmers' goals of productivity and wage growth. It is little wonder why an industrial relations policy that creates barriers to employment was glaringly omitted in the employment white paper.

The success of small business helps drive the success of the employment market. Small businesses train almost half the apprentices and trainees in Australia and employ over 5 million Australians in total.

READ MORE:

Concerningly, a recent survey conducted by COSBOA found that almost 90 per cent of small business were less likely to employ if the IR changes proceed.

Here in the ACT greater uncertainty and cost will be felt by over 34,000 small businesses spanning cafes, news agencies, hairdressers, builders, bookshops and more.

Small business needs a whole-of-government approach to support their success, rather than incongruous and inconsistent policies.

The IR changes are a dangerous outlier in the government's stated support for small business and appear unwelcome in its employment narrative.

The government must simply return to the drawing board on IR.

In the meantime, ACT senator David Pocock has sensibly called for the splitting off and immediate passing of some commonsense measures such as support for PTSD victims.

The key to employment policymaking is to gain consensus across stakeholders, yet the only consensus achieved to date has been a unity ticket of employers firmly against the IR bill.

Whether policy proposals are printed on white paper, green paper, or even glossy A3 paper, we need policy aspirations backed up by real actions that are grounded in common sense.