Agriculture industry says workplace laws impact ‘unknown’ as businesses brace for industrial relations chaos

Australia’s agricultural industry is scrambling to determine how the Albanese Government’s workplace laws will affect the $80 billion sector as businesses warn the new legislation will result in a return to 1970s industrial relations chaos. WA rugby union star-turned ACT Senator Dean Pocock, who holds the balance of power in the Senate, agreed to back the workplace legislation overhaul and enshrine multi-employer bargaining in a deal cinched on Saturday night. It means Federal Labor will have its Christmas wish of refashioning the nation’s workplace legal framework by the end of the parliamentary year, with unions celebrating the hard-fought political victory. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, who is at odds with most major employer groups in the country about the introduction of the controversial Secure Jobs, Better Pay Bill, insists its introduction would mean stagnant wages should rise. “Today is a huge day for working people and the decision of the crossbenchers to back Labor’s Bill — which will guarantee more secure work and better pay — is the right one,” he told the media on Sunday. WAFarmers president John Hassell travelled to Canberra last week to meet with the National Farmers Federation for a member council meeting, with both bodies concerned about the “long road ahead”. “We are concerned this is heading us back to the 1970s, with strikes and an incessant drive for more wages and no additional productivity,” he said. “Agriculture-wise this will drive up the cost of all of our operations at a time when we also have massive increases for all of our inputs. “This will just make it harder to get labour and harder to keep it.” However, Mr Hassell stopped short of agreeing with NFF’s support of new laws designed to stamp out sexual harassment in workplaces. From next year, as part of the legislation, employers will need to take reasonable steps to end sexual discrimination and harassment in their workplace and achieve gender equality. “There is zero room for any sexual harassment in agriculture. . . I have women in my business and my daughter operates a machine better than I do, but I would never say I wanted a female worker specifically,” Mr Hassell said. “I think if we start putting gender quotas on agriculture. . . we don’t need it. It is already hard enough to find staff, I want the best person on the job and it doesn’t matter what their gender is.” Pastoralists and Graziers Association of WA president Tony Seabrook said it would be a tragedy if poorly considered industrial relations laws added to farmers’ economic problems with suppliers set to be most affected. “This may backfire. . . people think agriculture and small business will be exempt, but it wont, we use so many materials from the manufacturing base that will be affected by these new laws,” he said. “This is just making it impossible to run a business in Australia and it does not encourage people to invest in Australia and it will see people say ‘it is too bloody hard’. “Every single one of us will wear the impact of this. In the end it will backfire on the people it is supposed to represent.” Senator Pocock extracted a raft of concessions which arguably grant greater protection to small businesses from one of the primary aims of the Bill — the introduction of multi-employer bargaining. This will allow workers from disparate businesses — linked by a “common interest” test — to band together and push for better wages and conditions. He succeeded in raising the threshold for small businesses affected by the changes from 15 to 20 workers. It will also be easier for businesses with fewer than 50 employees to opt out of multiemployer bargaining, while the minimum bargaining period will be increased from six to nine months. In another change to the Bill, the Government will receive independent advice on the adequacy of welfare payments — including Jobseeker, parenting and other payments — before every Federal Budget. National Farmers Federation president Fiona Simson said acknowledged the concessions but warned the consequences for the food supply chain remained largely unknown. She said it was disappointing the Federal Government was “so disinterested” in employers’ concerns. “Employers and business groups have been at the table since the election, engaging constructively on pathways to improve wages and make the industrial relations system fairer,” Ms Simson said. “When push has come to shove, the Government has chosen to ram through an agenda that nobody fully understands the impact of, with minimal effort to achieve consensus. “What does seem clear is that this bill will add cost and complexity to the system, and potentially widen the reach of industrial disputes. This will make it harder and more costly to get food from paddock to plate.” Ms Simson said the agricultural industry was fearful multi-employer industrial disputes could cause chaos to the food supply chain. “Depending how it’s interpreted by the court system, this Bill could still see whole segments of the food supply chain descend into multi-employer industrial disputes at once. That’s the exact risk we wanted more time to discuss and avoid,” Ms Simson said. Australian Industry Group chief executive Innes Willox said the deal would result in an industrial relations system “riddled with conflict, complexity and uncertainty”. “The primacy of the enterprise agreement system which has underpinned much of our economic success over the past four decades has now been shattered . . . we now face the prospect of more strikes and fewer jobs,” he said. The legislation will be reviewed after two years — ahead of the next election — rather than three years as proposed by Senate inquiry.