Ross Jami-Lee: Employment Relations (Protection of Young Workers) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Ross Jami-Lee: Employment Relations (Protection of Young Workers) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Sitting date: 05 December 2012. Volume:686;Page:7197. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
JAMI-LEE ROSS (National—Botany) 
: 
 Mr Speaker— 
Hon Shane Jones 
: Talking about child labour! 
JAMI-LEE ROSS 
: That guy should go back to watching movies—he is better employed in that area. It never fails to amaze me how many anti-worker provisions Labour can come up with and bring to this House. I say they are anti-worker provisions because they will make it far more difficult for people aged 16 years and under to go out there and get work. The Labour Party wants to change the definition so that it becomes almost impossible for someone under the age of 16 to be employed as an independent contractor. 
I would like to refer to this bill the Employment Relations (Protection of Young Workers) Amendment Bill as an attack on the paper boys out there. It is an attack on the paper boys out there because it will mean that it will be far more difficult to employ paper boys. It will mean that paper boys or paper girls around the country who are out there delivering the papers delivering the junk mail and who are actually happy to earn a bit of money will be deemed to be employees. They will have to be subject to all the provisions of the Employment Relations Act and that will make it far more difficult for them to be employed. 
We know that Labour likes to do things that cost jobs and this is one of those things that will cost jobs for those people out there aged 16 or under who are currently working as independent contractors. They will be joining the 13000 people whom we helped to get a job and who will no longer have a job when Labour changes the 90-day law. They will be joining the 6000 people who will be out of a job when the $15 minimum wage they want to bring in comes in. 
Darien Fenton 
: Yay! 
JAMI-LEE ROSS 
: Darien Fenton is going “Yay!” because people will be losing jobs. That is what she actually did. People will be losing jobs under the employment relations framework that Labour wants to bring in and Darien Fenton is saying “Yay!” about it. Darien Fenton says “Yay!” because paper boys out there any person aged 16 or under who is an independent contractor will end up losing their job under this legislation. That is the face of employment relations in the Labour Party. 
I would like to refer the House to the current section 6 in the Employment Relations Act because I think there are some interesting provisions in there. Section 6(2) talks about what the Employment Court or the Employment Relations Authority can determine at present. I will read it out: “In deciding for the purposes of subsection (1)(a)”—(1)(a) is about the meaning of “employee”—“whether a person is employed by another person under a contract of service the court or the Authority (as the case may be) must determine the real nature of the relationship between them.” 
Section 6(3) states: “For the purposes of subsection (2) the court or the Authority—(a) must consider all relevant matters”. Essentially what that means is that the court or the authority at present can consider all the matters in relation to an employment relationship between a company an employer and a 16-year-old or an individual under the age of 16 and the court can actually at the moment determine that that person who is thought to be an independent contractor is an employee. 
The Employment Court or authority can pretty much investigate the exact nature of the situation. So if the Labour Party or anyone is concerned that an individual is in a relationship that looks and sounds like an employment relationship and is effectively the same as an employment relationship that someone over the age of 16 is in I point out that there is already redress in section 6 of the Act. I do not believe that this bill is necessary. 
This bill will be an attack on those 16 and under who are currently delivering papers and currently are independent contractors. It will mean a loss of jobs and it will be in line with the other proposals that Labour has put forward that will mean a loss of jobs—taking away the 90-day trial and introducing the $15 minimum wage. When Labour abolished youth wages we saw a whole lot of young people losing jobs and now as we are trying to help people with a starting-out wage Labour is opposing that. The proposals that we want will mean more people get more jobs. Everything we come up with to create jobs they oppose. They keeping bringing us proposal after proposal that will cost jobs and that is exactly what this bill will do too.