‘A compliance obligation on the compliant’; HR Institute speaks on NES

There needs to be a consolidation of the National Employment Standards before expanding entitlements, the Australian HR Institute has said.

Yesterday’s (10 June) public hearing as part of the standing committee on employment, workplace relations, skills and training’s ongoing inquiry into the operation and adequacy of the National Employment Standards (NES) featured the Australian HR Institute (AHRI) as a witness in its discussion of the existing employment framework and potential recommendations for change.

As outlined in its submission, AHRI had three main recommendations for the committee to consider when it comes to ensuring the NES is fit for purpose.

Chair of its national ER and IR panel, Jonathon Woolfrey, explained the institute’s position on the NES as overwhelmingly in favour and support of, but in need of clearer interaction between the NES and modern awards and enterprise agreements.

This includes improved clarity of the interaction and a general simplification of the instruments themselves, which, Woolfrey said, would do more for everyday compliance than any single change or new standard.

In addition to this recommendation, he identified the need for consolidation of the standards so they remain “a clear and usable floor of fundamental entitlements” and addressing coherence and overlap between standards “as a primary purpose, before or perhaps in conjunction with considering the expansion where evidence may support expanding entitlements”.

Woolfrey explained that the HR profession has matured significantly over a number of years, often requiring employers to have specialist expertise. Legislative reform, he said, did contribute positively to organisations regarding wellbeing and job security, but at the same time, added to workload, both through trying to make sense of reforms and actively implementing them.

He said: “This is not just with HR practitioners, but all those involved in the workplace, whether that be managers or employees that are trying to understand what they are obligated to do and what they’re entitled to as part of them.”

Referencing a survey of AHRI’s members, Woolfrey clarified: “What our members describe is not a problem with the level of entitlements, but more accumulative complexity, and in some cases, a certain level of detail that the system provides in those entitlements.”

He also observed that organisations overwhelmingly want to do the right thing, but can be affected by a small portion of bad actors when it comes to compliance.

“Regulation is sometimes framed about fixing challenges, closing loopholes, or addressing bad actors in the employment relationship. And there’s obviously a role for that. Sometimes trying to address those bad actors … sometimes creates a compliance obligation on the compliant majority as well, and that needs to be considered,” he said.

Want to see more stories from trusted news sources?
Make HR Leader a preferred news source on Google.