Woodhouse Michael: Injury Prevention Rehabilitation and Compensation Amendment Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled 
Woodhouse Michael: Injury Prevention Rehabilitation and Compensation Amendment Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled 
[Volume:660;Page:9181] 
MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National) 
: 
 I am delighted to take a call on Part 2 of the Injury Prevention Rehabilitation and Compensation Amendment Bill. In particular I want to concentrate on clause 58 “Abatement of weekly compensation” because if there was ever an example of not letting the facts get in the way of a good rant it was from the Labour members this morning. Actually this is an extension of the irrational—in fact ill-informed—rant that started in the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee and is continuing today. 
One of the more disappointing aspects of this is that Labour members were prepared to sit by while submitter after submitter complained about things in the bill that just were not there. So what I want to do is take the members on the other side through a couple of pieces of legislation. I know that is difficult for some because it involves reading the law so I will go very slowly. It is quite appropriate I think that the Minister of Labour is in the chair at the moment because it actually relates to the Holidays Act 2003. Who passed the Holidays Act? Oh it was Labour. That is right. So for the benefit of the members on the other side who do not understand and have never employed staff I am going to work very slowly through it. Under section 16 of the Holidays Act every employee is entitled to 4 weeks’ annual leave. That entitlement to annual leave accrues even though the employee— 
Hon Ruth Dyson 
: Everyone’s wrong except Michael. 
MICHAEL WOODHOUSE 
: See is it not amazing how Labour members cannot listen and talk at the same time. They think they can but they are actually listening with their mouths not their ears. That really prevents a bit of learning. The entitlement to annual leave includes when people are on maternity leave when they are on volunteers’ leave and when they are on weekly compensation. When the anniversary of their entitlement to that annual leave clicks over that 4 weeks is banked. It is calculated on their ordinary earnings and is paid out. 
When an employee’s contract is terminated the provisions of sections 23 24 and 25 of the Holidays Act apply. I have to accept for the benefit of Darien Fenton that she was correct; I misunderstood this aspect of the law. The officials clarified it for me. What is really interesting about this is that employers are actually paying out holiday pay at a level greater than their requirements under the Holidays Act specify. I know of a number of employers who pay that proportion out notwithstanding the fact that they do not have to because the definition of gross earnings as set out in the earlier definition in the Act and which is applied in sections 23 to 25 does not include weekly compensation. So here is the thing: I will run through the scenario of a nurse who suffered a shoulder injury— 
Darien Fenton 
: All those wage claims mounting up! 
MICHAEL WOODHOUSE 
: Opposition members are trying to listen and talk at the same time. It took 2½ years and about three surgeries before it was agreed reluctantly that that nurse would never return to active nursing again and her contract of employment was terminated under the frustration provisions. She had up until the time of her injury accrued annual leave for her work. That is a concern of Mr Parker’s I know. She was on 80 percent weekly compensation and used that annual leave to top up her earnings so that she was getting the same take-home pay as she would have if she had not been injured. Two years passed and the entitlements to annual leave in accordance with section 16 of the Holidays Act clicked over and she was validly entitled to those. That is what we are talking about in terms of the abatement provisions. We actually paid out the balance of the year for which she did not accrue annual leave prior to her termination. I now know that under the law we did not have to. Here is the point: if we do not pay it out it cannot be abated. So that is a red herring as well. What we are talking about essentially is annual leave accrued during the period of incapacity that is then paid out. All this bill does is simply say that we should not pay twice. 
Darien Fenton 
: What about seasonal workers? 
MICHAEL WOODHOUSE 
: Well I will come to seasonal workers if I get a chance; I may not have time. Before the end of my speech I will also quickly touch on the issue of it costing only $3 million or $4 million. The Opposition says that the hearing loss provisions and the Holidays Act issues cost only $3 million or $4 million. Let me tell members that the accident compensation scheme actuaries are provisioning over $1 billion in full-funding entitlements for hearing loss.