|
senate vote 2020-09-01#5
Edited by
mackay staff
on
2020-09-25 11:02:37
|
Title
Bills — Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Jobkeeper Payments) Amendment Bill 2020; in Committee- Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Jobkeeper Payments) Amendment Bill 2020 - in Committee - Prevent tiered payment system
Description
<p class="speaker">Mehreen Faruqi</p><p>by leave—I move Greens amendments (1) and (2) on sheet 1011 together:</p><p class="italic">(1) Clause 2, page 2 (at the end of the table), add:</p>- The majority voted against [amendments](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2020-09-01.20.1) introduced by NSW Senator [Mehreen Faruqi](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/senate/nsw/mehreen_faruqi) (Greens), which means they failed. Senator Faruqi [explained her amendments](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2020-09-01.20.1):
- > *This amends the Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Payments and Benefits) Act 2020 to prevent the minister from establishing a tiered payment system. While the JobKeeper bill doesn't deal specifically with tiered payments, it does extend the rule-making power which allows the minister to establish tiers. The amendment will insert a new section that specifies that the minister must not create rules for different rates of pay for different employees.*
- ### Amendment text
- > *(1) Clause 2, page 2 (at the end of the table), add:*
- >
- > *(2) Page 33 (after line 21), at the end of the Bill, add:*
- >
- > *Schedule 7—Preventing tiered jobkeeper payments*
- >
- > *Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Payments and Benefits) Act 2020*
- >
- > *1 After section 7*
- >
- > *Insert:*
- >
- > *7A Requirement for rules that provide for jobkeeper payments scheme—no tiered jobkeeper payments*
- >
- > *(1) If the rules provide for a kind of payment that is intended to assist businesses affected by the Coronavirus to cover the cost of wages of their employees (whether known as a jobkeeper payment or otherwise), the rules relating to that kind of payment (the jobkeeper scheme rules) must comply with the requirement in subsection (2).*
- >
- > *(2) The jobkeeper scheme rules, in providing for the amount of the payment under the jobkeeper scheme, must not provide for there to be different amounts payable in relation to employees.*
<p class="italic">(2) Page 33 (after line 21), at the end of the Bill, add:</p><p class="italic">Schedule 7—Preventing tiered jobkeeper payments</p><p class="italic"> <i>Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Payments and Benefits) Act 2020</i></p><p class="italic">1 After section 7</p><p class="italic">  Insert:</p><p class="italic">7A Requirement for rules that provide for jobkeeper payments scheme—no tiered jobkeeper payments</p><p class="italic">  (1) If the rules provide for a kind of payment that is intended to assist businesses affected by the Coronavirus to cover the cost of wages of their employees (whether known as a jobkeeper payment or otherwise), the rules relating to that kind of payment (the <i>jobkeeper scheme rules</i>) must comply with the requirement in subsection (2).</p><p class="italic">  (2) The jobkeeper scheme rules, in providing for the amount of the payment under the jobkeeper scheme, must not provide for there to be different amounts payable in relation to employees.</p><p>This amends the Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Payments and Benefits) Act 2020 to prevent the minister from establishing a tiered payment system. While the JobKeeper bill doesn't deal specifically with tiered payments, it does extend the rule-making power which allows the minister to establish tiers. The amendment will insert a new section that specifies that the minister must not create rules for different rates of pay for different employees.</p><p>On 21 July, the government foreshadowed a number of changes to the JobKeeper program, including the introduction of tiered payments from 28 September 2020. Under the changes announced by the government, the hours worked in the four weeks prior to 1 March 2020 or 1 July 2020 will determine what level of payment workers will receive—specifically, whether they worked more or fewer than 20 hours. This is despite the high unemployment rate during those times.</p><p>In March, the underemployment rate was eight per cent—10.6 per cent for women compared to 7.2 per cent for men. It was 19.1 per cent for young people aged between 15 and 24 years old. In July, the underemployment rate soared to 11.2 per cent. It was 12.2 per cent for women and 19.6 per cent for young people aged between 15 and 24 years old. This government intends to slash payments for underemployed low-income workers in insecure jobs, predominately impacting women and young people, and this sends one resounding message—that the government won't hesitate to kick workers when they're down and throw vulnerable workers off a financial cliff in the midst of a recession in the midst of a pandemic.</p><p>Also of concern is the impact that tiered payments will have on workers who work more than 20 hours across multiple jobs. Someone who works 38 hours a week across two jobs—that's 19 hours in each—will still see their JobKeeper payments slashed. The Greens, of course, support the extension of JobKeeper but not at the expense of low-paid workers in the midst of a recession. I commend the amendment to the Senate.</p> <p class="speaker">Mathias Cormann</p><p>The government will be opposing these amendments. Two tiers of payment under JobKeeper enable employers to more closely align the JobKeeper payment made to eligible employees with the payment they received prior to the public health restrictions being imposed to address coronavirus. This is one of the outcomes and recommendations out of the review conducted by Treasury after the initial three months of operation of the JobKeeper program, and that is the basis on which we oppose these amendments.</p><p>The TEMPORARY CHAIR: The question is that Australian Greens amendments (1) and (2) on Sheet 1011 be agreed to.</p>
|