Smith Lockwood: Holidays Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Smith Lockwood: Holidays Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:620;Page:16029] 
Dr the Hon LOCKWOOD SMITH (National—Rodney) 
: 
 In speaking to Part 1 of the Holidays Amendment Bill I want to know why the Minister in the chair the Hon Paul Swain does not admit to the Committee something that we all know: that he does not believe in this stuff at all. We know that the Minister does not support the amendments to the Employment Relations Act and we know that he does not support this junk either. We know that the Minister has been rolled by the left-wing faction of the Labour caucus—we know that. 
I have some particular questions for the Minister relating to Part 1 because as I read Part 1 in conjunction with the principal Act I see no exclusions for salaried people from the provisions of the Holidays Act. I see no exclusion based on the level that salaried people are paid. I want the Minister to explain whether members of Parliament who work on public holidays—[ 
Interruption 
] I say to the Minister that this point is quite serious. I ask him whether members of Parliament who work on public holidays—often we have to and sometimes we choose to—will be paid time and a half. 
My second question is whether the Parliamentary Service is exempt from employment law in this country because I wonder when members of Parliament will see an employment agreement. As an employer I have to by law provide an employment agreement for my staff. When will the Parliamentary Service provide me with an employment agreement? Will that employment agreement indicate by 1 April 2005 according to Part 1 of the bill the time and a half that I will get when I work on public holidays? Or is this law something that poor damned employers out there have to comply with but that the Parliamentary Service and all the wonderful outfit around here do not have to comply with? Does the Minister think that dirty nasty employers out there have to comply with it but the Parliamentary Service is above it because the ordinary staff do not work on public holidays in this place although members do? I want the Minister to explain whether members of Parliament every time they have to work on Anzac Day Labour Day or whatever holiday it is will be receiving time and a half and on what basis that will be calculated. I see no exemption here in this bill for members of Parliament or for the Parliamentary Service Commission. 
What is more what happens for employers whose staff are on high salaries in order to deal with all this junk? Such employers actually offer a high salary and leave it up to the employee or the manager to choose when to work. Employers may offer people thousands of dollars a year more than the usual rate so that they can avoid this garbage but under this bill as I read Part 1 they cannot avoid it. Even if an employer offered $10000 more a year in an employment agreement than the going rate for a normal job in order to get out of this junk the employer cannot do so. Part 1 basically states that no the employment agreement has to spell out how time and a half is to be covered and that it has to go through the whole nonsense of the relevant daily rate of pay. I put it to the Minister that many employers have tried to get out of that compliance cost problem by offering far higher salaries than usual in situations where employees have control over when they work. What happens when an employee does have control over when he or she works but chooses to work on a public holiday and then comes along to the employer and says he or she wants to be paid time and a half based on the relevant daily pay rate? That walks all over existing agreements. 
Does the Minister expect employers next time they negotiate an agreement to knock several thousand dollars off a salary package so they can actually then cover the ridiculous bureaucratic junk in this bill? Is that what the Minister expects? That is what will happen if employers are faced with having to pay this sort of thing on top of generous salary packages. I cannot see where this bill exempts people on high salary packages from having to go through this sort of nonsense. I would appreciate the Minister explaining to Parliament whether members of Parliament—who must be employed by someone although I have never seen an employment agreement—are exempt from this legislation.