Loading
The proposed changes land between some of the union and employer positions by offering a new legal definition for which workers are casuals,who typically get an extra 25 per cent in pay but go without sick leave and paid holidays.
They restrict casual work to employees who do not know when or how much more work they will get from their bosses,as determined “objectively” by the courts. That aligns with union calls to restrict casual work to only “genuine” casuals and cuts across some employers’ arguments that anyone labelled a casual and paid as such is one.
The changes propose that if an employee declines an initial offer to convert from casual to permanent work,a further right to request will be available every six months,as long as they remain eligible. But an employer may decide not to make an offer or accept an employee's request if they have reasonable grounds not to do so,consistent with arrangements established by the Fair Work Commission.
Staff who have been in the job for 12 months and working a regular pattern of hours for six will get the offer. However,employers have an escape hatch if going to a permanent role would require a significant change to the workers’ hours or be unreasonable for the business.
Business Council of Australia chief executive Jennifer Westacott,who was part of the union and employer negotiations,said it would make an"enormous difference"to the issues she had raised for a long time.
“Nobody ever expected radical reform because radical reform would have been divisive reform. We need to move beyond that,” she said.
Ms McManus said it was a"huge missed opportunity"to begin to make jobs more secure and turn around the number of casual and insecure jobs.
“The proposal makes it almost impossible for casual workers to convert to permanent work as if an employer is unreasonable or does not offer them permanent employment,there is little they can do about it,"she said.
But the union movement’s efforts to speak with one voice about the government’s reforms were dealt a blow on Sunday when one division of the 150,000 member Construction,Forestry,Maritime,Mining and Energy Union launched a blistering attack on another.
Dave Noonan,secretary of the union’s construction division,which is at odds with its mining and manufacturing divisions,suggested mining secretary Tony Maher had done a “secret deal” with Mr Porter to craft new legislation allowing unions like the CFMMEU to split.
“The government will use this bill to divert attention from the Industrial Relations Omnibus Bill it is putting to Parliament next week,which is the beginning of a march back to WorkChoices,” said Mr Noonan,whose block have a majority in the union's national organs.
Mr Maher and Mr Noonan fell out over John Setka,the union’s Victorian construction division secretary,who pleaded guilty to harassing his wife last year and,his supporters believe,did not receive enough support from the mining and manufacturing divisions.
Under law merged unions cannot go back to their previous separate parts after several years as a single entity,which Mr Porter last week announced plans to change.
Mr Maher said disamalgamation provisions should be more workable.
Start your day informed
Our Morning Edition newsletter is a curated guide to the most important and interesting stories,analysis and insights. Sign up toThe Sydney Morning Herald’s newsletterhere,The Age’shere,Brisbane Times’here,andWAtoday’shere.