Union wants 'presumed' right to work from home, as Labor weighs new law
The Australian Services Union (ASU) has told the workplace umpire there should be a legally binding presumption towards approving requests for remote work in the admin sector unless there are "reasonable business grounds" for refusal.
The proposal obtained by the ABC is part of an ongoing Fair Work Commission (FWC) process to better reflect the modern reality of working from home in the legal award for clerical workers, seen as a test case for other workers in the award system.
Business group Ai Group has proposed to the FWC that working from home be agreed between employers and employees and that penalty rates, overtime and other standard perks should not apply to workers who can choose when and where they do their work.
The process is playing out in the context of mounting expectations that the federal government will legislate a work-from-home right for all workers.
While that plan is still in its early days, it looms as the next frontier for Labor as it seeks to build on the sweeping workplace reforms of its first term, when it ticked off several items on the union wishlist, including the right to disconnect over business objections.
Treasurer Jim Chalmers said on Wednesday that working from home was "important to provide the kind of flexibility which is key to a modern economy" but signalled a desire for flexibility and consensus-building.
"Obviously, it needs to be within reason, it needs to work for employees and employers and the best place for that to be worked out is at the workplace level," he said.
"This is a good example, I think, of where the union movement and employers can work together to make sure we are creating and nourishing the kind of labour market which is so important to a dynamic, modern economy like ours."
The tussle over the clerical award suggests little prospect of consensus between business and unions over any legislation, with the two poles apart.
The ASU suggests employers be required to "genuinely try" to accommodate any request to work from home and refuse only for reasons such as cost, practicality, security or health and safety risks, with a dispute mechanism for workers unsatisfied with refusal.
AiG's proposal, first reported in The Australian and obtained by the ABC, said any agreement on work from home should be voluntary and without "coercion or duress".
The proposal was provided on the basis that it was "strictly confidential and without prejudice" in order to facilitate discussion.
While the issue will be led by newly appointed Employment Minister Amanda Rishworth, who has also promised a consensus-building approach, it will also spill over to Treasurer Jim Chalmers's productivity agenda.
Mr Chalmers will shed more light on his plans for a productivity round table when he addresses the National Press Club on Wednesday.
The round table, scheduled for August, will have a tight agenda and a tight invite list, to be held in the cabinet room and focus on a set of policy areas.
Senior business and union leaders are likely to be involved in what Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has framed as an exercise in building a case for economic reform.
Mr Albanese told the press club last week that Labor wanted "consensus" from the forum, but business groups will enter with scepticism after the similar Jobs and Skills Summit in Labor's first term set the stage for workplace changes they opposed.
Mr Chalmers said he expected that working from home would be raised and was also open to tax reform proposals.
"We've made it really clear already that productivity is the primary focus of the round tables but not the sole focus," he said, adding budget sustainability and economic resilience would also be discussed.
"I welcome tax being an important part of the conversation [and] the ideas that people raise at the round table in the second half of August.
"I think it would be hard to come at these sorts of issues … without people raising their ideas when it comes to tax."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Advertiser
an hour ago
- The Advertiser
Risk of higher US tariffs looms despite beef deal
Australia's move to lift restrictions on US beef is unlikely to shift the dial on tariff negotiations, as the nation's products face the possibility of even steeper duties. The Albanese government will allow access to US beef that has been raised in Canada or Mexico but processed in America, following a safety review. Australia is subject to a baseline 10 per cent tariff applied by the Trump administration and has been keeping an eye on the trade negotiations of other countries. AMP chief economist Shane Oliver said Donald Trump's flagged higher tariffs might include the nation's exports. "The risk for Australia is that we may be lucky to hang on to 10 per cent, which could actually turn out to be higher," he told AAP. "This (beef decision) might help us hang on to 10 per cent or avoid a worse outcome, but I don't think there's any guarantees of that." American beef was banned from Australia almost two decades ago following an outbreak of mad cow disease. Mr Trump has pressured the government to ease restrictions as Labor argues for an exemption from the tariffs as part of the US president's deepening trade war. Former ambassador to the US Arthur Sinodinos said while biosecurity investigations can take a while to finalise, it was a "sensible outcome". "The challenge here is it doesn't look like we're putting together a package deal," he said. "It'd be better if there was a package approach to this if we're seeking to gather an overall trade outcome with the US." Australian Farm Institute executive director Katie McRobert said the cattle industry has been "extremely nervous" about biosecurity traceability from different parts of the north and South America regions. "We wouldn't expect a significant impact on Australian producers from the potential to import American beef ... because we already produce far more beef in Australia than we can possibly eat," she said. Trade Minister Don Farrell said he didn't have any meetings scheduled with American counterparts after last meeting US trade representative Jamieson Greer on the sidelines of an OECD ministerial meeting in Paris in June. Senator Farrell said Mr Greer didn't raise beef concerns at that meeting. "We believe that America should lift those tariffs on Australia, there's no justification whatsoever for the United States to apply tariffs to Australia," he told reporters in Canberra on Thursday. "We have a free trade agreement, that agreement makes it very clear that it's a tariff free arrangement." Senator Farrell also denied the move was to create a bargaining chip. The Philippines and Japan recently struck agreements with the US to lower their tariff rates, but both are still above the 10 per cent baseline. Australia's move to lift restrictions on US beef is unlikely to shift the dial on tariff negotiations, as the nation's products face the possibility of even steeper duties. The Albanese government will allow access to US beef that has been raised in Canada or Mexico but processed in America, following a safety review. Australia is subject to a baseline 10 per cent tariff applied by the Trump administration and has been keeping an eye on the trade negotiations of other countries. AMP chief economist Shane Oliver said Donald Trump's flagged higher tariffs might include the nation's exports. "The risk for Australia is that we may be lucky to hang on to 10 per cent, which could actually turn out to be higher," he told AAP. "This (beef decision) might help us hang on to 10 per cent or avoid a worse outcome, but I don't think there's any guarantees of that." American beef was banned from Australia almost two decades ago following an outbreak of mad cow disease. Mr Trump has pressured the government to ease restrictions as Labor argues for an exemption from the tariffs as part of the US president's deepening trade war. Former ambassador to the US Arthur Sinodinos said while biosecurity investigations can take a while to finalise, it was a "sensible outcome". "The challenge here is it doesn't look like we're putting together a package deal," he said. "It'd be better if there was a package approach to this if we're seeking to gather an overall trade outcome with the US." Australian Farm Institute executive director Katie McRobert said the cattle industry has been "extremely nervous" about biosecurity traceability from different parts of the north and South America regions. "We wouldn't expect a significant impact on Australian producers from the potential to import American beef ... because we already produce far more beef in Australia than we can possibly eat," she said. Trade Minister Don Farrell said he didn't have any meetings scheduled with American counterparts after last meeting US trade representative Jamieson Greer on the sidelines of an OECD ministerial meeting in Paris in June. Senator Farrell said Mr Greer didn't raise beef concerns at that meeting. "We believe that America should lift those tariffs on Australia, there's no justification whatsoever for the United States to apply tariffs to Australia," he told reporters in Canberra on Thursday. "We have a free trade agreement, that agreement makes it very clear that it's a tariff free arrangement." Senator Farrell also denied the move was to create a bargaining chip. The Philippines and Japan recently struck agreements with the US to lower their tariff rates, but both are still above the 10 per cent baseline. Australia's move to lift restrictions on US beef is unlikely to shift the dial on tariff negotiations, as the nation's products face the possibility of even steeper duties. The Albanese government will allow access to US beef that has been raised in Canada or Mexico but processed in America, following a safety review. Australia is subject to a baseline 10 per cent tariff applied by the Trump administration and has been keeping an eye on the trade negotiations of other countries. AMP chief economist Shane Oliver said Donald Trump's flagged higher tariffs might include the nation's exports. "The risk for Australia is that we may be lucky to hang on to 10 per cent, which could actually turn out to be higher," he told AAP. "This (beef decision) might help us hang on to 10 per cent or avoid a worse outcome, but I don't think there's any guarantees of that." American beef was banned from Australia almost two decades ago following an outbreak of mad cow disease. Mr Trump has pressured the government to ease restrictions as Labor argues for an exemption from the tariffs as part of the US president's deepening trade war. Former ambassador to the US Arthur Sinodinos said while biosecurity investigations can take a while to finalise, it was a "sensible outcome". "The challenge here is it doesn't look like we're putting together a package deal," he said. "It'd be better if there was a package approach to this if we're seeking to gather an overall trade outcome with the US." Australian Farm Institute executive director Katie McRobert said the cattle industry has been "extremely nervous" about biosecurity traceability from different parts of the north and South America regions. "We wouldn't expect a significant impact on Australian producers from the potential to import American beef ... because we already produce far more beef in Australia than we can possibly eat," she said. Trade Minister Don Farrell said he didn't have any meetings scheduled with American counterparts after last meeting US trade representative Jamieson Greer on the sidelines of an OECD ministerial meeting in Paris in June. Senator Farrell said Mr Greer didn't raise beef concerns at that meeting. "We believe that America should lift those tariffs on Australia, there's no justification whatsoever for the United States to apply tariffs to Australia," he told reporters in Canberra on Thursday. "We have a free trade agreement, that agreement makes it very clear that it's a tariff free arrangement." Senator Farrell also denied the move was to create a bargaining chip. The Philippines and Japan recently struck agreements with the US to lower their tariff rates, but both are still above the 10 per cent baseline. Australia's move to lift restrictions on US beef is unlikely to shift the dial on tariff negotiations, as the nation's products face the possibility of even steeper duties. The Albanese government will allow access to US beef that has been raised in Canada or Mexico but processed in America, following a safety review. Australia is subject to a baseline 10 per cent tariff applied by the Trump administration and has been keeping an eye on the trade negotiations of other countries. AMP chief economist Shane Oliver said Donald Trump's flagged higher tariffs might include the nation's exports. "The risk for Australia is that we may be lucky to hang on to 10 per cent, which could actually turn out to be higher," he told AAP. "This (beef decision) might help us hang on to 10 per cent or avoid a worse outcome, but I don't think there's any guarantees of that." American beef was banned from Australia almost two decades ago following an outbreak of mad cow disease. Mr Trump has pressured the government to ease restrictions as Labor argues for an exemption from the tariffs as part of the US president's deepening trade war. Former ambassador to the US Arthur Sinodinos said while biosecurity investigations can take a while to finalise, it was a "sensible outcome". "The challenge here is it doesn't look like we're putting together a package deal," he said. "It'd be better if there was a package approach to this if we're seeking to gather an overall trade outcome with the US." Australian Farm Institute executive director Katie McRobert said the cattle industry has been "extremely nervous" about biosecurity traceability from different parts of the north and South America regions. "We wouldn't expect a significant impact on Australian producers from the potential to import American beef ... because we already produce far more beef in Australia than we can possibly eat," she said. Trade Minister Don Farrell said he didn't have any meetings scheduled with American counterparts after last meeting US trade representative Jamieson Greer on the sidelines of an OECD ministerial meeting in Paris in June. Senator Farrell said Mr Greer didn't raise beef concerns at that meeting. "We believe that America should lift those tariffs on Australia, there's no justification whatsoever for the United States to apply tariffs to Australia," he told reporters in Canberra on Thursday. "We have a free trade agreement, that agreement makes it very clear that it's a tariff free arrangement." Senator Farrell also denied the move was to create a bargaining chip. The Philippines and Japan recently struck agreements with the US to lower their tariff rates, but both are still above the 10 per cent baseline.
Sydney Morning Herald
an hour ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
Economic summit in danger of becoming a bureaucratic gabfest
The Albanese government's upcoming economic reform roundtable should seize the opportunity to reset Australia's future agenda. Instead, it looks in danger of turning into a bureaucrats' jamboree with the usual suspects pontificating on a system they are by and large responsible for creating. We know that tax will be the big ticket item at the August 19-21 summit and the heavily curated roundtable invitees certainly know their taxes, budgets and politics. And economic resilience, productivity and budgets are on the agenda. But Prime Minister Anthony Albanese's refusal to consider changing the GST is already tying one of the government's hands behind its back and the exclusion of those major players in taxation and deregulation, states and territories, is a further handicap. As the Herald 's senior economic correspondent Shane Wright has pointed out, it is not tax that will lift living standards and Australia's ability to pay for goods and services – it will be technology. The telephone, the internal combustion engine and the lightbulb were three of the most transformative pieces of technology. Now 150 or so years later AI is poised to change lives. Yet, there are no scientists or creative minds invited to the roundtable. Rather, Wright says participants are policy wonks reared in a culture that believes problems deserve a 'policy' solution when the real and most far-reaching solutions come from people who think differently. Adding some variety to the mix, the Productivity Commission is expected to release a series of reports on productivity that will provide data and ideas to the summit outside tax issues. And business has established an umbrella organisation to put forward recommendations, including on investment, innovation, reducing red tape, planning and approval processes, tax, education and employment. While incoming Coalition governments stay well clear of such talkfest, this is the fourth stab Labor has had at post election summits. The first, Bob Hawke's April 1983 economic summit, discussed economic strategy, the approach to unemployment and inflation, and a prices and incomes accord and was deemed an extraordinary success. Twenty-five years later, prime minister Kevin Rudd's talkfest, when 1000 of Australia's better thinkers gathered to ponder the future, is generally considered to have amounted to little and is mainly remembered for Rudd's awkward love-in with actors Cate Blanchett and Hugh Jackman. That said, good ideas came out of both the Hawke and Rudd summits, but more went missing in action at the hands of compliance. The challenge facing next month's roundtable is to ensure that the reforms are not lost in bureaucracy. After a tepid first term record on policy innovation, including a 2022 jobs and skills summit that stampeded business with its union-friendly re-regulation of the workplace system, we would have thought the Albanese government could afford to have been more adventurous with its roundtable summit. Labor is unlikely to enjoy such a massive mandate again. In such circumstances, timidity is not an option and the Albanese government cannot hide behind bureaucracy but should use the summit to promulgate wide-ranging and much needed reforms.
West Australian
2 hours ago
- West Australian
Rebecca Tomkinson: WA miners get productivity and the State deserves a seat at Chalmers roundtable
For every 308 people on this planet, just one is Australian. There simply aren't that many of us. Which makes it all the more remarkable that the 0.3 per cent of humanity lucky enough to call this country home operate the world's 13th biggest economy. Generating that kind of output, and the prosperity that flows from it, would not be possible without the minerals and energy that account for two thirds of all Australian exports. The Australian success story is grounded firmly in two things: access to international customers and cost-competitive products to sell them. And it's grounded firmly in WA. Which is why it is so important WA is strongly represented at Treasurer Jim Chalmers' economic reform roundtable. Of the 24 invitations issued to date, just one has been delivered this side of the Nullarbor. The balance seems questionable when you consider that without the commodities produced in WA, Australia's productivity woes would have forced a reckoning years ago. Instead, the resources sector has papered over the cracks, helping disguise the economic drag of an outdated and ill-equipped tax and regulatory system. The irony is that our miners and energy producers have only been able to perform this act of sorcery through a laser-like focus on maximising productivity in their own operations. Capital deepening — improving the equipment and technology available to workers — has been an essential driver of those gains. But it hasn't come cheap. Tens of billions of dollars have been invested in ports, rail, roads, machinery and automation to improve efficiency and drive down costs. Securing that level of investment doesn't happen by accident. It requires a sustained focus on delivering fundamentals that attract businesses with no shortage of global options for their capital. There is an important lesson here. The crux of the challenge facing the national budget is this: our tax base is narrowing as the proportion of working Australians shrinks, while demands on government spending for health, aged care, infrastructure and defence continue to rise. Shifting to a more equitable and sustainable tax system is a significant piece of the puzzle — and at this point it is worth highlighting the Prime Minister categorically ruled out any new resources taxes during a visit to WA ahead of the recent election. But just as important as tax reform is improving the productive output of every Australian worker. That doesn't mean forcing everyone to work around the clock. Far from it. It means equipping the workforce with the technology, training and tools they need to get more done in the same amount of time — and then sharing the spoils with them. It means identifying Australia's most productive sectors (that's easy, they're the ones paying the highest wages) and supporting them to thrive through a generational energy transition. And it means fostering the conditions needed for those sectors to unleash a new wave of productivity-enhancing investment. For the resources industry, those conditions are sadly heading in the wrong direction. Energy costs, historically an Australian advantage, have skyrocketed at the precise time access to cheap electrons has become perhaps the most important factor in global industrial competitiveness. One of the primary obstacles to building out the transmission lines and low-emission generation required to bring energy costs back down is a complex and protracted assessment system that leaves projects in limbo for years. Approvals can be both efficient and rigorous. Cutting unnecessary waiting times, which are hurting investment in both resources and energy, must be a national priority. Equally important is incentivising businesses, through grants and tax rebates, to explore and prove up the new processes and technologies — such as green metals and low-carbon fuels — that will be critical to decarbonisation. Damaging recent industrial relations reforms will harm rather than promote productivity. Carve-outs for the resources sector, in line with the original intent of the workplace changes, would restore some much-needed confidence. Artificial intelligence has the potential to supercharge output across the entire economy. It's vital that potential is given space to flourish and not suffocated by yet more rules and regulations. Many of these suggestions aren't new. But Australia doesn't need more productivity sermons. It needs action. If we want our economy to keep punching above its weight, we must unshackle the sectors that already do. That means looking west. The WA resource sector isn't just a passenger in the Australian economy. It's the engine room. Ensuring WA's voice is heard in economic reform discussions can't be a courtesy. It's a necessity. Rebecca Tomkinson is Chief Executive Officer of the Chamber of Minerals and Energy of WA
