Wilkinson Kate: Employment Relations (Breaks and Infant Feeding) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Wilkinson Kate: Employment Relations (Breaks and Infant Feeding) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 02 September 2008. Volume:649;Page:18195. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
KATE WILKINSON (National) 
: 
 Again I am delighted to stand to take a call on Part 2 of the Employment Relations (Breaks and Infant Feeding) Amendment Bill. As we have been throughout this process National is supportive of giving meal breaks and rest breaks to workers and National is supportive of giving breastfeeding facilities and breaks in the workplace where reasonable and practicable. I have to say that it is not without some concern of course because the prescriptive nature of the bill does add compliance costs to businesses.  
In terms of the provision in relation to breaks the issue that was raised at the select committee was not the duration of the meal breaks and rest breaks or the provision of the meal breaks and rest breaks; it was the prescriptive nature of the timing of those meal breaks and rest breaks. Although one of the union submitters attempted to suggest that the old awards were far more prescriptive and that this provision was far less prescriptive that was actually proved to be false when we pointed out that the old tearooms award specifically stated that breaks were to be taken “at a time convenient to the employer”. “At a time convenient to the employer” is not the same as the wording in section 69ZE(1AA) in new Part 6D—in clause 5 of the bill—that has been agreed to by the select committee: “Rest breaks and meal breaks are to be observed during an employee's work period—(a) at the times agreed between the employee and his or her employer; but (b) in the absence of such an agreement as specified in subsections (1) to (4).” That amendment is important. It at least acknowledges the ability of the employer and the employee to reach agreement and we will certainly be voting for it. 
I signal at the outset that we will also be supporting Peter Brown’s amendment. It has particular relevance to the transport industry. The transport industry submitters were most concerned about the consequences of this bill for their respective operations. Their hours of work and the timing of their work breaks are covered under separate subordinate legislation such as the work time and logbooks rule and the maritime rules. Mr Peter Brown’s amendment makes it clear that those specific transport-related rules would prevail. We will support that. To not support it runs the risk of there being conflicting rules and confusion as to which rules prevail in relation to the transport industry. 
There is still concern of course about the wording of the bill and in particular about what “reasonable and practicable” means because that term is applied not just to the rest break and meal break provisions but also to the provision of breastfeeding facilities and to breastfeeding breaks. Concern has been expressed as to what “reasonable and practicable” would exactly mean and what it would entail to test it. We were given some guidance that there is some definition or indication of what “reasonable and practicable” means in health and safety legislation but not in the Employment Relations Act itself. Perhaps that health and safety legislation can provide some guidance as to what “reasonable and practicable” means. There is also some comfort—again not a lot of comfort—in the fact that a meaning will be provided in a code of practice that is to be drafted. One can only hope that it will be drafted with sufficient certainty and flexibility to ensure that both employees and employers understand what it means and to ensure that it is fair. With any legislation we have a duty to create good law. Good law requires certainty and not just for businesses; both employees and employers need certainty as to what the wording of the legislation means and what it will entail. That proposed code will need to be drafted with a lot of thought and research. 
We support this bill.