Third series of workplace laws set to drop: What HR needs to know

It’s worth HR professionals keeping a close eye on a number of workplace law changes likely to be tabled by the Australian federal government come September.

Despite several workplace entitlements coming into effect this month, there’s more underway.

The Albanese government is currently consulting industry and employer groups and unions on what will be the third major series of workplace law reforms. The draft legislation, which is not yet publicly available, is on track to be tabled by Federal Parliament in September.

In a recent blog post, Pinsent Masons partner Neil Napper shed light on what he believes will be the big focus points going forward.

“Given the lack of detail so far about the changes and that consultations continue, it is difficult to predict with any accuracy exactly what the new laws will look like and how employers will have to respond. What we do know now is that the changes proposed seem likely to create more uncertainty and to impose further financial and compliance costs on employers,” Mr Napper said.

“Managers, and human resources professionals in particular, will need to be considering what risks the changes pose for their organisations and be ready to respond quickly once the changes become law. Employers need to look out for more information on the latest proposed changes as they come to light; start considering how the changes are likely to affect their operations; and make plan[s] for managing any risks posed by the changes.”

The 3 areas (likely) being looked at

1. Casual conversion

First of all, Mr Napper said the government would likely be eyeing casual employees in its upcoming workplace reforms.

“Currently, casual employees with 12 months’ service who have been working a regular pattern of hours for the past six months have to be offered conversion to permanent employment,” he said.

“Under the proposed changes, and the requirement for employers to offer conversion, casual employees would also gain the right to request conversion every six months. An additional requirement for employers to make further offers seems unlikely to be included. It is anticipated that employers will have the right to refuse the conversion request on reasonable grounds. The government has also indicated that any conversion would be prospective only, with no backpay entitlement.”

If the changes go through, Mr Napper noted it could mean more paperwork and administrative costs for employers, “who are already required to monitor casual patterns of hours and offer conversion”.

“It may also create more opportunities for discord and disputes between employers and employees and their union representatives, particularly when conversion requests are rejected,” he flagged.

2. ‘Same job, same pay’

The slogan is set to pick up speed again, with likely changes set to affect employers who have enterprise agreements and regularly use labour hire.

“To address the concern that labour hire arrangements might weaken workers’ entitlements, changes have been proposed for a national labour hire licensing scheme or a harmonised state system, and ‘same job same pay’ rules,” Mr Napper explained.

“It was suggested that these changes would only apply to labour hire arrangements designed to avoid or weaken workers at sites where enterprise agreement entitlements would otherwise apply; rather than to specialist workforce suppliers or surge and temporary workforce replacement.

“While the government is consulting with industry groups and trade unions on how the same job same pay reform will work, it has indicated that it is considering a ‘multi-factor test’ to separate out legitimate from illegitimate labour hire arrangements.”

3. Gig economy worker rights

Further powers may be given to the Fair Work Commission (FWC) to regulate the terms of conditions of ‘employee-like’ workers. I.e. those engaged in the gig economy and other independent contractors.

According to Mr Napper: “While often not regarded as employees at common law, the government appears to be considering creating a third category of worker between employee and contractor, following the UK’s lead. Proposed changes seem likely to give the commission power to hear disputes about the treatment, rights and entitlements of such workers, with a view to improving their working conditions.

“Criticism of this proposal suggests that imposing traditional employment principles and modern award-like entitlements on these workers will stifle the competitive and flexible nature of the current arrangements.

“How the government intends to apply employee-like terms and conditions to these workers remains to be seen, and consultations continue.”