…
Summary of recommendations
29. Given the above, we oppose the Bill in its current form and recommend it be amended as follows:
(a) The references in the Bill to employees “designated as a casual” by employers should be removed and the statutory model conversion clause should instead apply to “casual employees” as explicitly defined in the Act and in accordance with Skene and common law criteria;
(b) The “substantially the same… or more beneficial” test in s205A of the Bill should be replaced with a “no less beneficial” test;
(c) The Bill should be amended to ensure pre-conversion service counts for the purposes of all NES entitlements; and
(d) The requirement to consult at the workplace in the proposed DSP should not be a civil remedy provision.
Conclusion
30. Various changes to the Bill are necessary in order to: a) avoid undermining the definition of casual employment in the FW Act; b) to ensure a universal standard applies to all employees covered by enterprise agreements and not a lesser standard to some employees; c) to avoid reducing converting employees’ rights regarding pre-conversion service; and, d) to avoid introducing penalties against employees in the National Employment Standards for the first time. Hence, we recommend the above amendments to the Bill.
